As Massachusetts Goes...

Dafydd at Big Lizards calls attention to a lawsuit in Massachusetts.

A number of Massachusetts same-sex couples, not content with their judicially decreed right to marry in that state, are now suing the federal government to force them to offer the same benefits to same-sex couples -- income-tax filing status, Social Security, federal pensions, and suchlike -- that they offer to opposite-sex married couples.

....

Lost in the non-debate is any nuance. For example, I strongly support the second policy change attributed to Obama above -- allowing gays to serve openly in the military and in combat; but I adamantly oppose SSM. Yet according to the elite media, I don't exist.

There are two classes of people, as seen from Liberalville:

• Positive people who support omnibus legislation to remove each and every policy, public or private, that treats same-sex couples differently than opposite-sex married couples or gay men and women differently than heterosexual men and women... from marriage to adoption to renting a room to military service to being a Scoutmaster in the Boy Scouts of America;

• Negative people who hate anybody who is different, want to see all gays killed, think gays are all going to Hell, are violent bigots, are probably racists and sexists as well as being homophobes (a given), and are vile, disgusting people who should be locked away for the good of America.

No room for Mr. In-Between!

....

Most liberals and Democrats oppose all of these principles in principle, though there are of course exceptions: They scoff at marriage and take every opportunity to undermine it; they support what can only be described as a culture of death (which may be why they find Islamist terrorists so congenial); they oppose individualism in general and individual liberty in particular -- except the "liberty" to be a libertine; they support naked socialism (as we see in the economic policies of President Obama and the Pelosi/Reid axis); and they believe in brazenly abusing due process to achieve their political goals.

Including suing the federal government to force it to de facto recognize SSM -- knowing full well that the Obama Department of Justice is very likely to throw in the towel, since it supports the underlying policy, SSM, anyway, and to hell with any precedent that might set. That's justice and due process... liberal style.

And as I commented in Dafydd's post:

 

That move was almost inevitable. Once you define a right to same-sex marriage, the obvious next step is to erase any differences in treatment anywhere in the country.

Dennis Prager testified before the Senate in favor of a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman. Many Senators who oppose SSM didn't see the need for such an amendment. What they didn't realize, and couldn't be made to see, was that as soon as SSM is legalized (or judicially mandated) in any one part of the country, the rest of the country will inevitably be forced to recognize SSM, despite the wishes of the legislatures or people of the other states.

Massachusetts has legalized SSM. Now, same-sex couples are suing for idental treatment as opposite-sex couples on a federal level. The next step is to erase any differences at the state level outside of Massachusetts. Once state laws quit distinguishing between same-sex and opposite-sex couples from Massachusetts, one can argument can be made that we shouldn't insist on seeing that same difference between couples from any other state, either.

And before too long, it will be so -- legislatively or judicially.