US military plan to extend same-sex marriage benefits met with concern

[Eugene]

Source: The Guardian

US military plan to extend same-sex marriage benefits met with concern

Karen McVeigh in New York
theguardian.com, Friday 9 August 2013 17.54 BST

Campaigners for equality in the military have raised concerns about a draft Pentagon plan to extend partner benefits to gay couples, saying it would force service members to get married even if they are stationed in one of the 37 states where same-sex marriage is illegal.

A draft memo from Chuck Hagel, the defence secretary, proposes that gay or lesbian service personnel must be married in order for their partners to qualify for benefits. If they live in states where gay marriage is illegal, the plan suggests they be granted 10 days leave to travel to a state where it is permitted.

An earlier proposal, announced before the decision by the supreme court in June to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act (Doma), would have required gay and lesbian couples to sign a declaration that they were committed partners.

Hagel's memo said that the supreme court decision on Doma, which lifted the ban on federal recognition of same-sex marriage, eliminated the need for the earlier proposals, which were published in February. No final decisions have been made on the proposals, details of which were published by the Associated Press on Wednesday.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/09/us-military-gay-marriage-benefits

[Stargazer09]

1. Honestly

That seems fair. Service members in hetero relationships can't get spousal benefits without being legally married, and now that federal recognition is legal, Hagel's plan will help keep the peace. I know there are quite a few military members who are still angry about LGBT members being allowed to serve openly, and giving same-sex partners spousal rights without marriage would have caused some nut to challenge the policy and demand that the same rights be given to his/her current girlfriend/boyfriend.

[dlwickham]

2. you're exactly right

if you want the benefits, get married

[theHandpuppet]

4. I have no problem with that premise

But the logistics could be a real problem for many.

[MNBrewer]

3. Who has to pay for the cost of traveling to a marriage-equality state?

Will the couple be reimbursed if they have to pay the cost? Seems only fair, as hetero couples can get married anywhere with no travel at all, including on military bases.

[Stargazer09]

6. Not a good idea

Last edited Sat Aug 10, 2013, 03:04 PM - Edit history (1)

Granting 10 days of leave is enough. Nobody is forcing people to get married, regardless of orientation. The military should not be involved in paying for weddings. (Edit, not wedding ceremonies, just the actual joining of two people in a legal manner.)

As the old adage goes, "If the military wanted you to have a spouse, they would have issued one to you."

[MNBrewer]

8. I strongly disagree with you

If the military is requiring homosexual soldiers to travel to a different state to obtain what heterosexual soldiers can obtain where they are based (even ON base) then it is placing an unequal, and inherently unjust burden on the homosexual soldiers.

And please note that contrary to what you implied, *I* did not suggest that the military pay for the wedding, just the costs that are incurred in getting to the location where it can be performed legally, per military dictate.

[Stargazer09]

9. I respect that

I guess I don't understand why the military should pay for anyone to get married.

Ten days of paid vacation is a tidy sum of money, regardless of rank, and heterosexual members do not receive that when they get married. I think it works out fairly.

[MNBrewer]

11. Perhaps.

Perhaps I don't understand how leave works. If you're living paycheck to paycheck, having time but no extra money to get to a marriage-equality state does little to help the soldier and his/her fiancee.

[Stargazer09]

12. It would be the same sort of thing

For a hetero couple, actually. You wait to get married until you can afford it.

A lot of people join the military while leaving their lovers back home. The military does not pay to have your girlfriend or boyfriend join you wherever you go, nor do they pay for you to go home on leave, regardless of the reasons. They will grant you vacation time, subject to job requirements, etc., but they do not pay for your trips.

Like I said before, the military doesn't owe anyone a spouse.

I'm not trying to sound harsh. This lack of nationwide marriage equality is a bad situation right now, but I don't believe that the military needs to be paying for service members to get married. Paying for a trip to a marriage equality state would count as a payment for a couple to get married, and that is not done for any military member. I can't think of any employer in this country that pays the costs associated with employees getting married, regardless of circumstances.

[MNBrewer]

15. A hetero couple can wander over to the base chapel and get a military chaplain to marry them

A same sex couple can't. I don't think you're viewing this very seriously. There are 13 states that have marriage equality, only 2 between the coasts. Your solution is "just save up for it"?

[Stargazer09]

16. I am taking it seriously

The crux of my argument is that equality means equal treatment.

Same sex couples are not entitled to more pay and benefits than hetero couples. You are asking the military to pay for people to get married, and that is not one of the benefits the military provides to anyone.

No matter how much they say they support couples and families, the truth is that the military would rather have members who are not distracted by domestic issues. You're allowed to get married, and now you're allowed to marry any consenting adult you choose to marry, but the military is not going to pay for you to get married.

It's not my "solution." Equality does not mean preferential treatment, and even though same sex couples have limited options, the military is not responsible for anyone's decision to marry.

Given my experiences as a female in the military, I can practically guarantee that there will be trouble over that special leave program.

I understand your frustration. I'm not your enemy. But I'm really having trouble understanding why you think that same sex military couples should be paid extra to get married. Do you expect all employers to pay for their employees to get married?

[RKP5637]

5. This makes sense to me? If benefits are for those married, then it makes

sense to me those receiving the benefits should be married? It also, to me at least, further drives the need for recognition of gay marriage across all states and this nonsense of state-by-state ended.

[Stargazer09]

7. I agree

Sooner or later, marriage equality should be much more prevalent.

[okasha]

10. Why not empower service chaplains

to perform marriages? Military bases are federal property, only selectively subject to state law.

[Stargazer09]

13. They are limited by state law

Service members have some limited protections while on active duty, and they can usually maintain their selected state of legal residence, but they are still subject to the local and state laws of their duty station when it comes to most civil matters.

If you are stationed in Oklahoma, for example, then you must abide by Oklahoma's laws if you choose to get married or divorced within their state. Chaplains who perform military marriages are required to follow state law, and if they are not legally allowed to marry people within that state, their hands are tied.

Likewise, military lawyers cannot get involved with the civil affairs of military members. Their jurisdiction is very limited.

I'm sure these restrictions exist for a reason, but I don't know why they are there. Just relating my experiences as a veteran.

[Creideiki]

14. This doesn't just affect military members

It affects all civil servants.

My boyfriend and I have to go from Colorado to a state that allows marriage to get the benefits that my colleagues take for granted. Then we have to come back to Colorado and get a state civil union to get the state tax benefits.

And there's still no word on whether or not we'll be able to file federal income taxes as a married couple. The IRS hasn't updated their page since before the court decision, so I don't know if I'm going to have to try to get my boss to approve me as a virtual employee and then move to another state. That would really suck because I love the Front Range.