The proper role and scope of government

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Not if they work for the Federal Government, they do not have to follow those rules, regardless of what state they work. And it is being challenged in every state in one form or another, for or against.

Challenged, and lost, in states like Vermont. And I'm specifically referring to religious institutions like hospitals or schools, not federal institutions.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Good question. I believe they still provide benefits since the only place I know that you are identified as the second or more wife is in the military. But it does not effect your ability to get benefits. There is a huge difference here when you try to isolate the desire of same sex people to get "married" and the desire of the Federal Government to infringe a rule passed down by the Feds on a Religious organization.

but IF the catholic hospital knew you had been divorced, should they LEGALLY be ALLOWED to deny insurance to your new spouse? I say, no, they shouldn't. Because the civil institution of marriage (LIKE the civil institution of defining "basic health care coverage") outweighs the selective and exclusionary definition they use. I think CHURCHES, actual proper CHURCHES, can define marriage, or deny birth control, whatever way they want, and if you work for a CHURCH you surrender your rights to having civil institutions recognized, but if you work for a hospital or a college, your employer should be held to the same civil standards as any other secular institution.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

No.

So why is a catholic hospital in Vermont being "forced" to cover gay spouses legitimate, but a catholic hospital being "forced" to cover birth control illegitimate?

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Frankly they just need to change the laws to state all civil unions are subject to the same rules and benefits of a "marriage". Then the radicals who want to tell people who and cannot be married won't get their feelings hurt.

I would argue that's another "separate but equal" principle, and unconstitutional unless civil unions were the ONLY institution the government recognized.