if the perks are given to straight couples, they should be given to gay couples

if the hard-pressed employers can't afford to treat all employees equally, the CEO's should take a few million less in bonuses

They loop-holed around it.
The company covers married couples but homosexual "marriage" i.e Civil Union's are nor considered "Marriage" so its ok for them to kick it.

Supporters of gay rights already believe that gay couples are committed. The entire debate is about securing equal benefits for committed gay couples. The government should not deny to gay couples what it gives to straight couples.

I would be surprised if you do not understand this debate by now, so are you trying to pretend that we were never asking for equal benefits or something? If so, then your words are intentionally deceptive and have no place in intelligent debate.

The company excepts the term 'married spouses' only in their union contracts. UPS gives spousal benefits to SSM couples in Massachusettes that are unionized, because the termonology in Massachusettes is 'same sex marriage', which legally means that the same-sex couple are 'married spouses' which is in compliance to the UPS union wording/contracts.

In the case of New Jersey, the termonology is different though. Referring to the couples in NJ as being in a 'civil union', which isn't covered in the union contracts there. Which means that as the contract is seeing it, isn't giving the wording as 'married spouses' under those terms.

Bascially UPS is saying 'call it marriage for our same-sex employees, not civil union so we can give them the insurance benefits under the conditions that our contracts have worded it.' In otherwords, UPS itself is saying that referring to legal relationships for same sex couples as 'civil unions' isn't equal to their clients in Massachusettes that are married under 'same sex marriage' laws.

Basically, UPS will insure their clients if the laws in the state call it 'marriage', not 'civil union'.

Well said, Jaxian, but I would take it one step further.

NO ONE should be allowed to legally deny to gay couples in a civil union (or a civil marriage) what is legally given to straight couples in a civil marriage.

This is particularly true in New Jersey, where the government has defined civil unions as legaly equal to civil marriage.

UPS is in clear violation of NJ state law.

Well, I waited a day, and not one person took up my challenge.

I take it from your collective silence that:

1. you agree that the actions of UPS are indefensible

2. you admit that civil unions have now been demonstrated to NOT be legally equal to civil marriage, even when legally defined as such by the state

3. you now empathize with and support gays who are fighting for civil marriage, and nothing less

I'm curious.

What's the difference between a civil union and a 'marriage'?

My sister was married in her brother in law's home by a justice of the peace. Is that considered a 'civil union' or a 'marriage'? I was married by a non-denominational minister in a hall, am I really married?

I don't believe that the difference comes from the ceremony - but, rather, whether you were granted a marriage license or a civil union application from your local government.