On behalf of the members of the Maine chapter of the National Association of Social Workers and myself, personally, I am taking issue with the Op-Ed posted in the paper last week by the Rev. Bob Emrich.
The National Association of Social Workers, or NASW, is committed to approval of same-gender marriage as a matter of equity. Society provides many advantages to people who marry: tax breaks by the state and by the national government, retirement protection for surviving spouses and surviving children, the right to make health decisions for the spouse when that person is unable to make those decisions alone.
All of these rights exist the hour after the wedding. These are a few of protections married people enjoy.
Emrich does not care to acknowledge that gay and lesbian people already have children. Sometimes by previous relationships or by adoption, they are parents. The children of gay and lesbian parents deserve the same rights and responsibilities as the children of straight parents. Period.
If same-gender couples are not allowed to marry legally, they, and their children, have none of the rights but retain all of the responsibilities as members of our society to support the rights of married people.
How? Gay and lesbian couples pay taxes at the single rate to both the state and federal government. This is patently not fair. If one partner in a gay couple dies, the children, whether by adoption or by being the biological child of one partner, do not get social security support until age 18. That is, unless the parent who died had the legal relationship with the child.
Put plainly, if the dad who died was not the adopting or biological parent, that child gets nothing from the government, although both parents have paid into the system all of their working lives.
By forbidding the legal institution of marriage to gay and lesbian couples, we force them to draw up binding contracts outlining their legal obligations and rights to one another.
They must also buy additional insurance to cover each other in the event of a death and to make up for the lack of social security. Frequently, they and their children cannot be on their partner’s health insurance plan. In a medical emergency, they must produce the documents and go before a judge if anyone challenges the right to make decisions for the partner.
And now for my personal reason for supporting marriage equality: For 25 years I was married to a fine man. He was a good father to our two children. He is still a good father, but we are no longer married.
Why? Because he figured out that he was gay. Was it painful? You bet. It was painful for all of us.
That said, 12 years later I’ve now been married for more than eight years to a wonderful man. Without the loss of the first marriage, I could not have experienced the big love of the second.
In this marriage, I have all of the rights of a spouse. If something were to happen to Stephen, I will get his federal pension. He will inherit my retirement benefits. I am covered by his health care policy. We can make medical decisions for one another in a medical crisis. One of us will make the arrangements to bury the other with no outside interference (that is no small matter in a marriage between a Catholic and a Jew).
Our marriage is recognized by all of society and by our children. When it comes to planning the care for one another in our later years, we call all of the shots. This matters to my husband and to me very much. We made a legal commitment to care for one another when we married.
My former husband is in a long-term relationship. He and his partner enjoy none of these rights, but they still pay the same taxes. Indeed, they pay more taxes than we do because they cannot file jointly.
My adult children know the truth: This is not right.
We live in America. This country was founded on the ideal of equality of opportunity. I look forward to the day when enough states have passed marriage equality that the federal government follows suit and we all have the same rights. I know that day will come during my children’s lifetimes.
My colleagues at NASW Maine and I are working toward that day. In Maine, I believe that day is here.
Susan Lamb is the executive director of the National Association of Social Workers, Maine Chapter, and is a former Maine House member (Susan Dore) from Auburn (1986-1996).
Let us hope–and pray–that Bishop Malone finds time in going to Buffalo and back to Maine to criticize this moving column because it doesn’t agree with his particular religious doctrine.
So, Susan Lamb is speaking for all social workers? I do not believe so! She has obviously carried her personal agenda to her work.
If you don’t believe so and she never said so in the article, why’d you pose the question? She speaks for herself and the group she’s the executive director of. It’s in the first sentence of the letter if you’re confused.
“she speaks for herself and the group she’s the executive director of”??? your quote says it all. So all the social workers are in lock-step with Lamb’s opinion? She seems to be most certainly speaking for all social workers, whether they agree or not. ”
On behalf of the members of the Maine chapter of the National Association of Social Workers and myself, personally, I am taking issue with the Op-Ed posted in the paper last week by the Rev. Bob Emrich. ”
She should be expressing her opinion as her own, without labeling her position as the head of the Maine chapter. Did they have a special meeting to get the opinions of all the social workers in Maine?
Um, she’s the executive director of the group. She directs the group. She speaks for them. Quit screeching about a problem that isn’t there.
like Lepage speaks for the people of Maine? She does not speak for the entire group. She should have the courage to speak for herself without falling back on her somewhat like minded ilk. I seriously doubt that all social workers agree with her stance.
Does it make you feel good to smear people and refer to them as “ilk”?
Sad to say, it’s obvious how much pleasure anti-gays take in posting hate speech and lies.
Susan Lamb never said she was speaking for all social workers. That’s why her article is posted on the ‘Opinion’ page. 4lifeandfreedom? You should tack on, ‘except gays’ to the end of your screen name. Obviously your personal agenda is biased.
please refer to her very first sentence…she does presume to speak for all social workers.
From the byline:
Susan Lamb is the executive director of the National Association of Social Workers, Maine Chapter.
Since she explicitly states “The National Association of Social Workers, or NASW, is committed to approval of same-gender marriage as a matter of equity”, and she is executive director of this organization, I do believe she is speaking for that organization.
A quick Internet search shows that the NASW has supported same sex marriage since at least 2004: http://www.socialworkers.org/diversity/lgb/062804.asp
Now, you can confuse that with “speaking for all social workers” if you want, but reading comprehension makes it clear she is voicing the official position of a professional association, which is different from claiming to speak for everyone in a given vocation.
Susan Lamb and her ilk think they know what is best for all. seems like social workers have turned into a SSM love bunch. one can disagree but not without being attacked by those who have “evolved”.
You complain about the exact behavior you engage in — that’s called hypocrisy. Don’t screech about being attacked when you’re the one running around doing quite a bit of attacking yourself.
Susan writes: “Society provides many advantages to people who marry”
Why? You want ALL people to have these so-called rights? Why don’t single people get a tax break or special rates on car insurance? Why does being married equate to any “right” at all? This entire premise is flawed.
Separate issue.
If everyone got a tax break then there would no longer be tax breaks-it would just be that rate over all.
That would be real equality.
Exactly my point. Thank you.
So what are you doing to achieve that?
Good point, Joe. Sorry, Archer, you won’t achieve your claimed goal of equal taxation by trying to force your fellow Americans who are LGBT to pay more.
If you are a single person, what benefits of marriage are you being denied? All of the benefits I know of are only applicable to couples in a relationship, not single people.
Thank you for this contribution, Ms. Lamb.
Sure, as long as they realize they can now also feel the pain of divorce and child custody fights and shared financial responsibility in the case of bankruptcy and all the other little perks when things go bad. I get a kick out of all these marriages that are presented with such ballyhoo when first legalized in the states that have done so only to see the divorce news a year later. It’s not a picnic, it takes work.
It does take work. And I absolutely agree that our fight for civil marriage entails the good and bad aspects of civil marriage— we want to be treated equally under the law, and that includes the possibility of messy divorce should a relationship not work out.
I honestly don’t see that happening with my partner and I, we have been together decades already, and have weathered our ups and downs with true commitment toward each other.
Yeah, I don’t think that any of us think that marriage is all roses and rainbows all the time. Many of us have divorced parents and, heck, many of us have divorced a spouse already.
Massachusetts, the US State with marriage equality the longest, has the lowest divorce rate of any US State. Sorry that your hope that same gender couples will experience bad things isn’t working out for you.
I’m so sick of close mindedness hatred and inopportunity against the human race! Why would ANYONE want to argue from an IRS standpoint?? Although it does prove a point its redundant! There really is NO need to argue from a monetary point or religious point or any other point other than ALL MEN WERE CREATED EQUAL!
HOWEVER since religion is the main cause for such ignorance in the LGBT community, FOR ALL of you hiding behind religion let us not forget that Jesus loved ALLLLL no matter what their lifestyle and expects us to do the same PERIOD! ALL of us will answer to the lord NOT MAN! The rules and stories and lessons youre reading in that bible of yours were written BY MAN not God! AND YOU ALL need to get off your high horses before its too late for you because YOU ALL will be answering for treating your brothers and sisters so shamefully. PERIOD!
Gay people didnt make the choice to be gay anymore then any straight person makes the choice to be straight! This is so ridiculous and i’m beside myself that history has taught you bigots and hypocrites nothing about ignorance, and hatred! THIS NEEDS TO END so that people EVERYONE can begin to live their life with “unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE!
PS Im straight married with 4 children! Just in case you were wondering if I was Gay NOT that its any of you darn business!
have some anger issues, do we?
Have some obsession issues with gay marriage do you? lol
Thanks for blaming religion. You might have a point if our state was part of the Bible belt, but it’s not. According to recent surveys, Maine is one of the LEAST religious states
in the USA, but Mainers STILL voted down gay marriage. Sounds like you need a new scapegoat.
What you fail to comprehend is that 31 states have voted against SSM including very liberal states like California. It’s not because people “hate” homosexuals. It’s not because of religion either. People just don’t want the meaning of marriage to change. PERIOD!
Denying same-sex couples the benefits of civil marriage is wrong, though. Why should we not allow all Maine families to protect the lives they build together, and the children they raise together?
The Maine Ethics Commission caught anti-gays RED-HANDED violating our campaign finance and disclosure laws. If homophobia was as all-fired popular as anti-gays claim, why did they have to CHEAT and THROW the vote?
Thank you Susan Lamb, and thank you NASW for your continued support.
For those who are unaware, this organization publicly supported same-sex marriage before it was legal in any state (2004).
and that is something to brag about?
It doesn’t appear that she’s bragging, simply making a statement.
How about this sue:
I’m a single man who pays taxes at a higher rate than my married friends. I get none of the benefits of married couples. Additionally I must pay for their children’s schools, help pay their doctor bills, and pay for their incarceration when they get in trouble, I pay for head start, domestic violence intervention, and extra insurance premiums because parents can’t keep their children off my property, out of my gravel pits, and away from my swimming pool.
Then when the marriage breaks up and the woman winds up with three children she can’t support, I pay for their welfare, food stamps, heating assistance and other services.
Civil marriage and the benefits which accompany it should follow the dinosaur to extinction. If people feel moved to marry they should use a church, or preform their own ceremony.
Oh yeah, I’m not a big fan of social workers either.
maybe she is just bitter because her first husband left her for a man. Not a big fan of majority of social workers either. Group think, not individually thinking, and following whatever is “current”……homosexuals have taken the word “gay” from us, rainbows now represent their movement and are now trying to hijack marriage….call it a civil union and be on your way.
Wow, you sound pretty oppressed. They can’t get married and you can’t say the word gay anymore. You clearly got the short end of the stick on this one.
The new movements (like occupy, and the gay collation) are downright dismissive regarding the concerns of others.
Try talking to people as if they count, as if their issues are valid, and perhaps your message will resonate with folks who are not as concerned about your pet projects as you.
The gay rights movement is new? It’s a pet project? When they started their involvement in politics it was a crime to be gay in some states. You could be fired for being gay throughout the country. That’s not a pet project.
Heed your own advice, maybe? Not being able to say the word gay isn’t a real concern. So yeah, I’m going to dismiss that. It’s ridiculous.
This pet project has been going on for over 40 years.
I just came back from talking to people about marriage equality and why allowing gay people to marry the person they love is important. The campaign does listen to the concerns of others and is respectful of those concerns. We do treat them as valid and we address them in a respectful way.
Some people have dealt with discrimination, animosity, and downright hatred for so long that it’s hard, sometimes, to keep cool. But understand that, just like with any other group, there is a range of personalities.
And let me make it clear that calling this a “pet project” is quite dismissive.
WHY all the quibble about marriage and benefits of such? I am a WIDOW, after being married 33 yrs. GUESS WHAT??? I get next to nothing. There is no protection for widows. Why isnt’ this organization helping us? It is all about the gays. And that is ok, but why, oh why, is no one in this society concerned about the widow?? I know many widows now, middle aged and up, for the most part,and we are truly society’s baggage, to be throw out the window and forgotten. Maine in particular discriminates against widows because of some of the laws, such as the windfall tax. Being a retired teacher, with a grand pension of $17,000 per year (try to live on that), disallows me of my husband’s social security. Since half the state works for the government, and most teachers are women, none of us will get much, and in my case, no social security. I make too much money. Try getting a job at 60. Hah! No one is interested in employing 60 yr old women. Try just about anything in life, and the widow is invisible. It is about time organizations such as this one, start helping the widow.
I am sorry that you are in that situation. My grandmother was also a widow who got next to nothing because of the way my grandfather had things set up. The little social security she got was not much.
You are right, though, that this is all about the gays because that is what it’s about. It’s about marriage equality for those Mainers, like me, who are gay and want to be able to marry the person that they love. We don’t think that marriage is the solution to all the ills that face a couple, but we do know that in many ways marriage helps. The social security that my grandmother got was based on my grandfather’s income, which was much more than what she got working at Filene’s for a few years. Without marriage, she wouldn’t have had even that little bit of money.
I don’t know how it works in your situation and I wish I had an answer for you.
Did you collect the death benefit for burying your husband from Social Security, horse lady? Even those American same gender couples who are legally married are denied that right you got.
You will never elevate yourself by trying to put down and hurt your fellow Americans who are LGBT.