Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

 

What the bloody !@#$? That, all around, is completely retarded. MA paying a "gay stipend" to gay couples married under MA law because Federal law doesn't recognize MA law in an issue the Federal government has NO business being in in the first place?

 

Where the !@#$ does any of that even BEGIN to make any sense? :wallbash:

Posted

I guess my sarcasm isn't being felt today.

 

Or, as I suggested earlier, maybe you just suck at it.

 

 

(I did get it this time, though.)

Posted

Or, as I suggested earlier, maybe you just suck at it.

 

 

(I did get it this time, though.)

 

Well, I guess there still is hope for me.

Posted

I can't tell from this article, since the author was only interested in same-sex couples, but what about opposite-sex domestic partners, are they covered by this new policy too? I'm pretty sure those folks don't get the dependent tax break on the medical premiums either.

 

Regardless, while I don't necessarily agree this is the best way to highlight the issue, there is a legitimate complaint here that this policy is addressing. The IRS policy is clearly discriminatory.

×
×
  • Create New...