Comments on: Lambda Legal Sues Arizona To Block Elimination of Domestic Partner Benefits.

By: Eddie89

Eddie89 — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:03:26 +0000

Bruno wrote:

Arizona replaced Napolitano with a real sh*thead, didn’t they?

Actually, Gov. Jan Brewer became Gov. of Arizona when Obama named Napolitano secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

Prior to that Gov. Brewer was the Secretary of State, which was an elected position.

Unfortunately, the SOS takes over as Governor should something happen to the existing Gov.

By: Jose

Jose — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 06:38:37 +0000

Good. The advocates of the domestic partner benefits for state workers have analyzed this many times and have clearly pointed out that the cost to the state of providing these benefits is miniscule. As an Arizonan, I hope they end up spending 10 times as much on legal fees and court costs defending this idiotic piece of stealth legislation by the Christaliban Republicans as it would have cost them to just leave it alone. Then these Republicans can go before the voters and try to explain why they increased the state budget deficit.

By: Chris McCoy

Chris McCoy — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:26:22 +0000

As a 15 year AZ resident, We knew they would do exactly this when the proposition was put on the ballot.

They did the same thing in Wisconsin when that state passed a similar measure which refused to acknowledge any relationship as similar to marriage.

The writing was on the wall. They just had to wait untill gay-friendly Janet Napolitano left office to get the ball rolling.

By: Bruno

Bruno — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 00:27:30 +0000

Arizona replaced Napolitano with a real sh*thead, didn’t they?

By: Burr

Burr — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:57:48 +0000

I’m glad they’re on top of this. Hold those bastards back into keeping their word, and call more attention to the fact that “separate but equal” will always be abused to not mean equal in reality.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:06:07 +0000

This discriminatory elimination of vital health benefits denies equal pay for equal work to a small, politically vulnerable group of dedicated public workers who perform valuable services and pay equal taxes.

Actually, that is inaccurate. Gay employees with vital health benefits pay more taxes than their co-workers. The federal government taxes gay employees on the heath coverage for their partners but does not tax heterosexual employees for the exact same benefits.

By: Ben in Oakland

Ben in Oakland — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:35:49 +0000

i like this. Equal protection before the law.

now, if they can start talking about animus, and making that a part of their legal strategy, we might start getting somewhere.