Not quite. For example, joint state income tax returns can be filed in *some *states. But regardless of state on the federal level they must file independently. Also an attorney cannot setup durable power of attorney for two couples that are not in a marriage contract. Wills for unmarried couples can be challenged, while for a married couple the spouse gets highest priority. Visitation rules vary from one hospital or jail to another, but in general relatives and spouses have less restrictions than outsiders. For all of the items that you’ve highlighted in red these are either things not available to homosexual couples or the closest thing available to them is less durable than what is available to heterosexual couples.
The lesser or total unavailability of these contracts and benefits to gay couples is the inequality that has been spoken of so much.
As you might be able to tell I’ve got no objection to gay people being able to engage in legal marriage contracts with each other.
Yes, I said that tax returns cannot be filed jointly, I also pointed out that filing jointly can also create problems for couples, as it essentially puts the lower earner in the higher earners tax bracket, and you would only do so if you will have enough on-going deductions/credits (itemization, house purchase and/or several children, which homosexual couples would on the whole have less of). Oh and you have to have some mad assets for the death tax to be applied to you, and I personally have no issue with taxing the really wealthy homosexual couples (if we are going to keep the death tax). Also they could fund a trust and give the money that way to avoid taxes, if you are that rich you can certainly do that.
I have never heard of a jurisdiction that did not allow you to choose any person you want to have a durable power of attorney. I would like a cite for that. Because you can give a friend or a bank a durable power of attorney. In fact if you don’t trust your spouse with money or financial items (those in your own name) you can name a POA that is not your spouse to protect your assets. That is what it is there for.
All wills can be challenged. Those of homosexual couples no more than those of people who married late in life, or those who give their end of life caregivers large sums of money. If there is no will it is true that a spouses have the favor of law, it is called intestate statutes and they get a portion depending on who else survived the deseased (and they cannot be disinherited by will, just like minor children). But why should homosexuals get this benefit? These were primarily for the protection of women, who did not have to opportunities as men. Also even when they did, they often gave up careers and earning potential to stay at home with children.
If you give your partner a healthcare POA, then specific hospital visiting rules, do not matter, the hospital has to let that person in. Now if you don’t trust that person enough to give them a Healthcare POA, then maybe there are other issues.
The point is, is that people should not be entering or leaving serious (co-habitating) relationships without the advice of an attorney, this includes heterosexual couples who are living together and sharing assets as well.
All this whining about benefits is mostly an ignorance of the law. The big ones are federal taxes (both income and death tax) which only apply to a very small subset of another small subset. And Social Security benefits (perhaps adoption rights, but not in all jurisdictions, but I have no problem denying these to homosexual couples).
There is no reason why homosexuals should not have their own legal relationship with equal rights and with its own title which is clearly distinguishable from the heterosexual relationship of marriage so that there is no conflict, confusion or discrimination. To demand the same title seems to be a case of overcompensation for the injustice endured by homosexuals in the past. It is absurd to attach so much importance to a word!
You do realize that most of this can be accomplished without marriage right? I have highlighted the ones in red that either depend on the state or cannot be accomplished through other means. The * is for ones, where there is variation, but really not much. See prison visitation rights (they might not get conjugal visitation rights, but they still can visit, unless the prisoner is under tighter security, which case a spouse wouldn’t be able to see them anyways.
