Gay Cowboy Loses Everything When His Partner Dies

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by NATO AIR, Jan 19, 2006.

  1. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    this is where I can agree with and support the arguments of homosexuals who want a "civil union". I don't want them married, but for pete's sake they do need to be able to have some sort of legal rights.

     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Abbey Normal
    Offline

    Abbey Normal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    4,825
    Thanks Received:
    391
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic region
    Ratings:
    +391
    If he had a second witness signature, the property would have gone to his intended beneficiary. That's not anti-gay; it's simply the consequence of his failure to follow the probate rules in his state. No to mention that fact that had he put his boyfriend's name on the deed, it would have automatically passed to him. Straight or gay, it is not advisable to rely on the state's rules of intestacy to have your property distributed. Too much can go wrong.

    I thought the article was going to say that he wasn't allowed to leave property to his boyfriend. That would be unacceptable.
     
  3. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    Did you see the end?
     
  4. Abbey Normal
    Offline

    Abbey Normal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    4,825
    Thanks Received:
    391
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic region
    Ratings:
    +391
    Yes, I saw it. And that does not in any way prevent anyone, gay or straight, from leaving their property to anyone they choose to. As I said, had that man followed the simple rules of his state for testamentary giving, or taken the simple step of putting his guy's name on the mortgage/deed, all would be well.

    Intended beneficiaries of heterosexual people sometimes suffer because of technicalities too, you know. People who don't know what they are doing should hire a T&E lawyer to draft their Wills.

    This article is a somewhat sensationalist piece trying to engender sympathy based on alleged homosexual discrimination, when in actuality, what really happened here was a technical mistake.
     
  5. 007
    Offline

    007 Charter Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    38,545
    Thanks Received:
    7,907
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +12,129
    Good for Oklahoma.

    Out.
     
  6. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,550
    Thanks Received:
    8,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,176
    Which clearly shows why the article is biased.

    The fact is gays can leave their partners whatever they want in their wills. But if the wills aren't legally done correctly then its sure not biased when you leave it up to intestacy statutes. You are exactly right. Heterosexuals suffer from intestacy laws too when wills aren't made out properly.

    The law isn't anti gay. its simply anti-"anyone too stupid enough not to make a will properly."
     
  7. jAZ
    Offline

    jAZ Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2006
    Messages:
    320
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +7
    In theory, the same argument could be made about heterosexual marriages. Yet the legal purpose of marriage is to define and extend explictly a collection of rights to a pair of people that don't otherwise exist.

    Something that in many cases is unnecessary and duplicate as in this case. Yet still it is done in a blanket fashion for the very practical purpose of providing a clear deliniation of rights from which to start.
     
  8. jAZ
    Offline

    jAZ Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2006
    Messages:
    320
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +7
    Seems like word play to me (the whole idea of drawing a distinction between marriage and civil union), but if people feel its necessary to create such a distinction I have what I believe is a much better solution.

    Civil Unions For All and Marriage for Church

    The idea is simply that (in the spirit of small government) we remove them from the practice of religion. Marriage is a primarily religious thing, that was eventually sanctioned by the state with a corresponding set of property defining laws.

    Well, let's go back to that.

    Let churches define marriage however they choose (liberal ones will "marry" gays, conservative ones won't).

    The government won't "marry" anyone. It will authorize civil unions between any two parties sincerely committing to a lifetime union. And leave the marriage issue to the churches thus putting the protection of the concept of Marriage in the hands of the Churches and their parishioners who care deeply about the term.

    Hell, in the case of same sex partners, they don't even necessarily need to be "gay". It's pretty reasonable that two widowed old war buddies might become roommates and best friends and blood brothers and choose to petition for a civil union in order to formalize that blood bond to always be there for the other.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. manu1959
    Offline

    manu1959 Left Coast Isolationist

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Messages:
    13,761
    Thanks Received:
    1,625
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    california
    Ratings:
    +1,626
    why do people look to the govt. to take care of them.....morons....if you don't put it in your will, in writing, you get what you get....abby is so spot on they knew there were no gay marraige rules in oklahoma yet they don't protect themselves with wills .... they were stupid they get wht they get....however a good probate lawyer would get the one dude still alive the entire gig......
     
  10. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    Nuff said then.

    I still think they deserve the same rights for issues like this, besides the basic common sense issue of having a proper will.

    In the military alone, over 40% of wills are not properly written and authorized... a common problem we continue to deal with every year with new recruits and revised wills.

    It may be sensationalist but it brings up a valid point, i.e. the gays need their basic rights.

    I don't want them to be marrying and crap like that under the laws, but I have no problem with the gays getting their civil union benefits and what not.
     

Share This Page