A couple days ago, everyone was all atwitter about the ads linking AARP to gay marriage, at least visually if not with any real effect. I couldn't see any (direct) connection beyond a strategy to delegitimize AARP by associating them with icky homosexuals.
Today, there was a letter in that free rag, the Metro (almost any city with public transit has 'em). I usually leaf through it and do the crossword puzzle (if I can find a place to sit while I'm on the train). The letter itself doesn't related directly to the AARP flap, but it's certainly an interesting piece of work. Below the fold, I'll reprint the letter. It leaves me with a "What the fuck?" feeling.
Social Security plan benefits gays
President Bush wants to help gay couples! Bush wants to let those of us under 55 take our money out of the Social Security system and put it into the stock market instead. A retirement account in the stock market can be willed by me to anyone, such as my legal (in Massachusetts only) spouse! If left in the Social Security system, my money will never go to my spouse, as the feds limit legal spouses to people of the opposite gender.
Privatization might be bad for the majority of poor and working class people, but it is good for the minority class of same-gender loving people.
Mari Galereave
I really have no idea what to make of this letter. I did a Google search on Ms. Galereave and turned up the following to stories: 1) something she wrote about her baby and being at home in the Universe (or some such thing), and 2) a quote from her in a story about electoral campaigns and same-sex marriage:
Mari Galereave of Bridgewater, who is gay and plans to get married to her partner of nine years, said such ads reinforce the notion that people see marriage as more of a religious union than a civil one.
[snip]
As for having voters decide on the marriage issue, Galereave said, "Civil rights have never been voted in place by the people. The people will always vote for the status quo. The purpose of the court is to provide those constitutional rights for everyone."
So, Ms. Galereave supports same-sex marriage and gay equality, but I'm not sure where she stands on SS reform, to be honest. Her last line leaves me with the feeling that she knows the plan stinks. But, are we seeing the "selfish" side of homosexuality coming out ("Screw the poor folks, let me get mine")? I can't figure it out.
She also seems to miss a very important point. The Government will still be in charge of administering the accounts. My assumption is that it will be administered similarly to the Federal pension program that is the reason some companies are not including married same-sex couples in their benefit plans:
One reason for the refusal is that most employer-sponsored pensions are federally regulated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act said Andrew Sherman, a vice President at Segal.
The act is governed by DOMA which bans the recognition by the federal government of same-sex marriage.
There is nothing to indicate DoMA will not be applied to any new scheme.
This woman is lost.