Quantcast

«

»

Feb 13 2013

DOMA and Military Survivor Benefits

As the Pentagon reportedly prepares to offer some benefits to same-sex couples in the military, this article shows both why such benefits are important and why the Defense of Marriage Act needs to be eliminated, either by Congressional repeal or judicial overturning.

Charlie Morgan didn’t get her last wish.

On Sunday morning, the New Hampshire National Guard soldier succumbed to Stage IV breast cancer after a long battle against the disease and a federal law that now leaves her widow with none of the benefits a grateful nation bestows on its straight warriors.

As I wrote here on Thanksgiving, Morgan, who came out as a lesbian on MSNBC in September 2011, the day the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy became history, hoped she would outlive the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The Clinton-era law forbids Karen, her legally married wife, from receiving the survivor benefits other military widows get.

That money would have gone a long way toward helping raise their young daughter Casey. Just like the death benefits Charlie’s mother got when her soldier husband died in an accident during the Vietnam War went to pay for food and a roof for young Charlie.

These issues aren’t abstracts, they affect real people in very important ways. And this military widow should be treated no differently than any other.

5 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    magistramarla

    Casey deserves to have a share of Charlie’s legacy.
    Our gay military members put their lives on the line and their families sacrifice no differently than my family or any of the other families of military members.
    It’s time for this country to recognize that.

  2. 2
    Wes

    What’s a realistic time frame on the courts overturning DOMA? Could it happen in one year? Two? I know these things take a long time, but it feels like they’ve been litigating it forever with nothing happening. And I figure as long as the Republicans control the House, we can’t put our hopes in Congress doing anything about it.

  3. 3
    sillose

    LOL everybody knows lesbians dont exist. that would require women to have sexuality, and want things. like people. good one ed! but on the off chance youre serious; we dont really do that.

  4. 4
    jameshanley

    That money would have gone a long way toward helping raise their young daughter Casey.

    But family values don’t allow that. Sigh.

    @Wes, The Supreme Court accepted a challenge for this term, so it’s possible–likely even–that we’ll have a ruling on it by June. You can follow it’s progress here. I can’t comment on the likelihood of the decision being to overturn it.

  5. 5
    Wes

    @Wes, The Supreme Court accepted a challenge for this term, so it’s possible–likely even–that we’ll have a ruling on it by June. You can follow it’s progress here. I can’t comment on the likelihood of the decision being to overturn it.

    Thanks. :)

Leave a Reply

Switch to our mobile site