Featured Image

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 22, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) – In the years before the Supreme Court constitutionalized same-sex “marriage,” homosexuals fought for married benefits in what came to be called “domestic partnerships.” 

Now that the Obergefell decision has mandated gay “marriage” throughout the United States and homosexual “unions” are legally recognized, the State Department will, over three years, phase out its same-sex domestic partner benefits.

Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy told gay newspaper The Washington Blade that since Obergefell, “federal spousal benefits … became available equally to married opposite- and same-sex couples. Because married same-sex couples are now able to receive a wide array of benefits available to any married couple in the federal government, the original justification for the SSDP program no longer exists.”

But gay activists want tax dollars to continue paying married benefits to unmarried homosexuals.

Gays and Lesbians in Foreign Affairs Agencies (GLIFAA), the State Department's group for homosexual employees, protested to the State Department, pointing out that some countries do not recognize gay “marriage,” and so homosexuals remain unmarried.

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.

The State Department made a provision for Foreign Service personnel who are stationed in a country where homosexuality is illegal, giving them ten days of administrative leave to travel to a country or jurisdiction that will “marry” them so they may receive spousal benefits.

This provision does not satisfy GLIFAA. “Rather than focusing on rollback, the Department should work to ensure all Americans can represent their country overseas, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity,” the GLIFAA website states.

“LGBT+ employees continue to face significant hurdles in finding a posting abroad where they can safely and effectively serve with their families,” the website continues. GLIFAA supports “having protections available for families that have different needs.”

Pro-marriage organizations have long charged the gay agenda with wanting the federal government to redefine the notion of family in every way, and even subsidize the gay lifestyle.

“The legal and financial benefits of marriage are not an entitlement to be distributed equally to all,” explains the Family Research Council's website. “If they were, single people would have as much reason to consider them 'discriminatory' as same-sex couples.”

“Society grants benefits to marriage because marriage has benefits for society – including, but not limited to, the reproduction of the species in households with the optimal household structure, i.e., the presence of both a mother and a father,” FRC's website explains. “Homosexual relationships have no comparable benefit for society, and in fact impose substantial costs on society.”