Reply #50: I'm gay and in Montana!

[Ediacara]

I have insight!

Actually, a lot of posters don't really understand what this ruling entails.

In Montana, it is illegal for gays to marry, both in civil law, and recently amended to the Constitution by voter initiative.

This has nothing to do with gay marriage despite what Jim Rice says.

This lawsuit was three years in the making. Two couples where one partner was employed by the University of Montana sued the Montana University System (MUS) so their partners could get health insurance. Soon after filing the lawsuit, one of the couples had their house broken into, the door barricaded from the inside, and then the house was set on fire. They got out ok, but the Missoula police were very hesitant to call it a hate crime, even though it was clearly an arson where the occupants of the house were meant to be stuck inside.

Then Fred Phelps' mob showed up. They were outnumbered about 50 to 1. They were not on University property, but instead standing on the sidewalk in front of a private home. The homeowners threw eggs at them. I laughed a lot (then I got a parking ticket :-( ).

Anyway, long story short, this ruling is ONLY about the MUS extending benefits to gay partners. One can make the logical assumption that this will probably involve all state employees eventually, but so far as I know, it's technically just the MUS at this time.

This doesn't have anything to do with gay marriage, which is still illegal, no matter what Jim Rice thinks.