1. Brad says

    This is what NOM, AFA and FRC mean when they say they are “protecting families” but fighting against marriage equality. What they’re really doing is endangering thousands of families who don’t fit the mold they demand. It’s disgusting that they are allowed to be called pro family groups.

  2. Mark says

    I am so sick and tired of the NOM and the AFA. I get nausea when I even hear their acronyms. Here, a seemingly legitimate (and apparently diagnosed) medical condition is denied benefits because inequality and because of the hate NOM sells.

    Well, everyone, here is the unbridled truth. The NOM, the AFA and all of the other “family values hypocrites” are adulterers, alcoholics, drug addicts and closeted homosexuals.

    They have sin within their ranks just as all of us do. We were created no less equal than they were. We are all equal and we have the rights to those rights that they have enjoyed down through the ages.

    Those rights are a constitutional entitlement, and I positively will not stop fighting for those rights until the day comes when all of the rights are doled out equally and fairly throughout this nation.

    Right now (thank God in my lifetime) the tables are turning and gradually it is actually becoming unpopular to use the LGBT issue in political discussions. Finally, I am feeling as though at least some of the people who are running for public office aren’t using what I do in my private life as some kind of a whipping boy in order to get their hateful votes.

    The boy needs his benefits, and he is entitled to them. Someone needs to do the right thing and correct this. Quickly.

  3. ToThePoint says

    Welcome to South Carolina, one of the most, if not the mos,t bigoted state in the nation. Our good governor supports allowing civil rights to be unconstitutionally legislated by back-woods voters. Hopefully, our federal government and supreme court justices can see the injustice of these laws created by our ignorant population and ignorant governer. Whom, she herself, would be discriminated against by her own constituents is she allow her civil rights to come up for a vote. She is, after all, of East Indian descent AND a woman. She is a dispicable example of leadership for our state and hopefully, soon will be gone from taking our state back, yet another, notch from humanity.

  4. Mark says

    Why would they move to South Carolina? Did they have family or a support system there? Why move anywhere in the south? I lived there for a while and it is the worst place I can imagine living, gay or straight. If they wanted a warm place to live for their son they could have moved to California, or Maryland, or Delaware, all states that recognize our relationships. I’m not saying SC doesn’t need to share the blame, but it seems to me that if the parents are going to relocate for the health of their child, the FIRST thing they are going to investigate is the financial security of his medical treatment payments.

  5. Chitown Kev says


    That’s what I was thinking.

    Now cost of living could have been a consideration and there are a lot of gay families in the South for exactly those reasons but if you must move to…say…South Carolina or Georgia then you need to check everything and do the necessary paperwork to protect him.

  6. NY2.0 says

    Who in their right mind would move to SC? Surely this couple would’ve known it is not a welcoming state for LGBTs. I understand the weather can be harsh in NY but is the warm climate in the south worth losing your dignity? Try New Mexico.

  7. Rawn says

    @mark Seriously. I feel bad for the kid, but this sounds like the plot to a bad sitcom where two not-so-smart people trying to do the right thing make obviously bad choices that make a mess of their lives. South Carolina? Seriously? I hope they’re better parents than their extremely poor decision making skills would have us believe.

  8. 604brian says

    South Carolina may have had friends or family and maybe other reasons that they chose that warm state. And it sounds like staying in NYC was not an option due to the health of the child.
    This is the kind of story that needs to make national news to show the families that are hurt by the likes of groups claiming to protect families.

  9. says

    It doesn’t particularly matter, imo. This sounds like great fodder for a court case in combination with a benefactor organization covering the cost of the child’s medical needs.

    Here we have a state that is denying federal benefits to a couple that the federal government legally recognizes as married.

  10. Anthony says

    There is information missing here. First of all Social Security Does not pay living expenses. Second if he is under 18 he only qualifies for SSI under his disability and his parents income which would mean the parents were impoverished. Social Security Does not rely on a State Data base, they simply would have reported that they moved., and unfortunately then been turned off anyway as Social Security requires you to be living in a state that recognizes your marriage.

Leave A Reply