So tonight there is news that Obama, acting pursuant to some unknown legal authority (I truly mean unknown–at least to me), will issue an executive order granting certain governmental benefits to the same-sex “partners” of federal employees.
Unless this policy is radically unlike the policies adopted by corporate America, the policy would amount to subsidized sodomy, and arbitrarily discriminates against persons share a residence with someone else, and who have a deep friendship and love with such a person, but for whatever reason, do not think that friendship, that love, will somehow be more “deep” by engaging in sodomy, mutual masturbation, and the like.
I strongly suspect that the policy will (1) discriminate against relationships based on consanguinity or (2) relationships that do not involve an actual or presumptive homosexual relationship. For example, some large corporations, in extending these “domestic partnership” benefits, require the applicant employee to sign a statement certifying the existence of a “romantic relationship.” Close sisters, close friends will NOT be eligible to enjoy these benefits. Why not? Why is the homosexual character of the relationship such that it entitles the participants to a governmental benefit?
The policy discrminates, then, on the basis of an immutable characteristic, consanguinity, and on the basis of an arguably immutable characteristic, sexual orientation, and otherwise denies a benefit on an arbitrary basis. And as such, it is unjust, and possibly unconstitutional.