I just cannot believe this, but a bill in Minnesota has to do with medical visitation rights and whether or not gay and lesbians should have these rights when their partners are ill! Good God, this really pisses me off to no end. And this is why I absolutely HATE, yes, hate, the anti-gay views of some people. A man named Tom Prichard, the "president" of the Minnesota Family Council was against me being able to see Doug in the hospital (while I don’t live in Minnesota, I am still going to put a personal spin on this because this will affect real people, and not those nameless ‘homosexuals’ that these people hate).
This is some of what Prichard had to say:
"The concerns we have with the bill is that it would create a family redefinition… If the state begins writing in alternative, marriage-like statuses it will make our marriage law more vulnerable in court."
How hateful and spiteful can you be to block people who love each other from seeing them while in the hospital? How on earth does this affect their sad little lives (I mean the Prichards of this world)? This Minnesota Family Council is yet another one of these junk, pseudo-family organizations that exists only to fill the pockets of their founders. They too have an ‘action alert.’ Here is one from the other day, which they are asking their members to contact their legislators and block:
- SF 1369 would require state and localgovernment to provide benefits to same-sex couples and redefines marriage (domestic partnership) to include persons of the same sex. (This bill may be buried in an omnibus "catch all" bill.)
- SF 960 would allow local government to provide benefits to same-sex couples.
And why do they oppose these things?
Six reasons why mandating homosexual domestic partner benefits for state and local employees is a bad idea:
1. Homosexual domestic partner benefits are marriage by another name.
2. Homosexual domestic partner benefits are unfair and discriminatory towards existing families.
3. It would provide homosexual partners of state and localgovernment employees special benefits and treat them better than married spouses.
4. Domestic partner benefits are part of an “incremental” strategy tolegalize [sic] homosexual marriage in Minnesota.
5. Domestic partner benefits would undermine Minnesota’s current marriage law.
6. Passing domestic partnership legislation is not an acceptable compromise to same-sex marriage advocates and will not end the debate.
Saying that giving domestic partners benefits is ‘unfair and discriminatory’ is like saying giving minorities voting rights is unfair and discriminatory to the majority.
Clearly whoever made up this list cannot, or will not, think straight. They complain that giving gays and lesbians rights is like making these partnerships marriage, but in #3, they state that they would actually get better treatment than ‘married spouses.’ Of course, they don’t explain because these are lies. Here is their official reason for supporting #3:
- State law requires a married person to financially support his or her spouse. It’s reasonable for the state to provide health benefits to married spouses and their children because the employee has a legal duty to care for these persons financially.
- A homosexual domestic partner, however, has no such legal duty. Granting homosexual employees these domestic partner benefits means they would receive a special benefit. They would receive benefits from the government without any legal responsibility to care for their partners.
Makes sense, no? No, it does not. Why? Because these very same fundamentalists have voted to not allow gays and lesbians to get married, thereby making them legally responsible to ‘financially support his or her spouse.’ So because of the efforts of people like Prichard and his money-making hate group, gays and lesbians have no such legal duty. How convenient for them to state this as they did. This is just like some groups like Exodus who are against Hate Crime legislation to include gays and lesbians, and yet they still quote Hate Crime legislation to show that most hate crimes are not against gays and lesbians! They work to keep us out, and then use skewed statistics to show that we don’t need protection, because there are not that many crimes against gays and lesbians!
You can also look up this hate group at Guidestar.org. They are a 501(c)4 group, meaning they can use their money to lobby. For some reason their last Form 990 was from 2004. Not sure why 2005 has not been submitted…Anyway, they are a small organization, which only received a little under $170,000 in 2004. And they had a loss of nearly $40,000! Tom Prichard, the guy who still runs the show, paid himself a little over $21,000, while the CEO received a bit. However, their 2004 tax returns show that they spent almost $100,000 total on compensation for officers as well as ‘other salaries and wages.’ So they pulled in $170,000, and spent $100,000 on themselves. You have to wonder if the people that are sending them the cash know that they are just lining the pockets of a few and receiving little results??? I’m telling you, I am so close to starting my own 501(c)4 and/or 501(c)3…
And of course, they do have their own little non-profit 501(c)3, called the Minnesota Family Institute. They received a bit more money, nearly 1/2 million as stated in their 990 (which is information that is free to the public at Guidestar.org). But like their 501(c)4, they paid a total of just over $300,00 to their directors and to other salaries! And guess who the president of this non-profit is? No other than Tom Prichard, who paid himself just over $60,000. This is pretty good, considering that in 2003 his salary was just over $40,000! And what warranted just a jump in his salary? In 2003, they reported a little over $424,000 in gifts, grants and contributions received. In 2004, the number was about $458,000, a difference of $34,000. So of that, $20,000 went directly into Mr. Prichard’s pocket. So $80,000 isn’t too bad a salary on milking the public for funds. I’m sure Peter LaBarbera is just so jealous…
Now getting back to the issue of partner visitation rights: I remember clearly when Doug called me and said he was in an accident. I also remember the horror when I called him right back and the paramedic answered his phone and said they were on their way to the emergency room. I also remember getting to the hospital before the ambulance even got there and wondering if they would let me in to see him, since I am ‘only’ his partner of 13 years (at that point). Luckily there were no problems (I live in California, thank God!), and I have to say that I am not a violent person at all, but there is no one on this earth that would have stopped me from seeing Doug. No one. They would have to arrest me to keep me from going into that emergency room.
People like the Prichards of this world need to have their greed and hate exposed. They set up and/or take over these non-profit and 501(c)4 groups, and then live off the money that they get people to send them.