The American Spectator

p> I’ve always wondered (somebody tell me if they know) how health insurers deal with domestic partners and dependent benefits. The potential for fraud is staggering. Some gay person who is unemployed (or otherwise has no health insurance) needs say a heart transplant, AIDS cocktails, or other expensive medical treatment. Any other gay person, not necessarily even a lover, who is employed by government or a large corporation, says: Hey, no problem: I’ll just go into HR tomorrow and put you down as my domestic partner/dependent. Viola! Instant, unlimited, free health care. Maybe some gays are even selling such benefits. And maybe not even necessarily to other gays. What’s to keep two straights from entering into such an arrangement as long as the one who is employed doesn’t mind misrepresenting his/her sexual orientation to his/her employer? br> — Ty Knoy br> Ann Arbor, Michigan /p>

As Justice Clarence Thomas writes in his new book, My Grandfather’s Son:

“Every time the government uses racial criteria to ‘bring the races together,’ someone gets excluded, and the person excluded suffers an injury solely because of his or her race.”

p>I think this could be adapted to James Thunder’s marriage discrimination argument, also. br> — Jack A. Summers br> Detroit, Michigan /p>

Marriage used to be a pretty good institution before the lawyers got a hold of it. This brings to mind the line that Tom Hanks said in the movie Philadelphia: “What do you call 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea?”

p>”A good start.” br> —