Vet Sues After Burial With Gay Partner Is Denied

[IDemo]

A U.S. Navy veteran filed a civil rights lawsuit Monday after the Idaho State Veterans Cemetery refused to allow her to be buried with the ashes of her late wife. Seventy-four-year-old Madelynn Taylor filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Boise after she tried to make advance arrangements last year to have her ashes interred with Jean Mixner, whom she met on a blind date in 1995 and married in California in 2008 when gay marriage was briefly legal.

Though federal veterans cemeteries allow the spouses of gay veterans to be interred with their loved ones, Taylor said she was surprised to find the Idaho cemetery — which is owned and operated by the state — does not. Taylor's lawsuit contends that Idaho's anti-recognition laws violate the due process and equal protection guarantees of the U.S. Constitution.

Taylor's situation is "among the most extreme examples of the harm caused by state laws that deny respect to the marriages of same-sex couples," said Craig Stoll, a senior attorney with the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which is representing Taylor. Todd Dvorak, a spokesman for Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden, said Wasden hasn't reviewed the lawsuit and couldn't comment on the case.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/vet-sues-after-burial-gay-partner-denied-n150251

[PumpkinAle]

1. Two people who loved each other

are being denied a place together - shame on Idaho and shame on those who feel that by denying someone a small piece of earth they are upholding "marriage" - a man-made institution.

I hope Taylor and Mixner can be united in death, when the time comes, and that no one stops this.

[irisblue]

2. sue those asses sister

much respect Ma'am.

[xfundy]

3. Scared of mixing ASHES.

The fear runs deep as the stupidity and as the superstition.

[Behind the Aegis]

4. How trivial!

We can't even be BURIED together?! What the FUCK! The level that some hate us is so goddamned deep they have to torment us even in death!

[merrily]

7. That's what the Windsor case was about:

Whether the widow of a gay married couple had to pay the federal inheritance tax that would be applicable if she had inherited from a stranger, rather than from her spouse.

The Obama administration was not fighting the case, so Scalia said there was no Article III "case or controversy" that federal courts had jurisdiction to decide--Catch 22. Yet, it was an issue of federal law involving big bucks.

Every time I see his face, I get so mad.

[Behind the Aegis]

8. Scalia makes my skin crawl!

It is amazing how far some go to belittle us. There was a case way back in the day, which inspired me to be a GLBT activist, where the judge decided against a lesbian's right to care for her severely disabled partner because she might sleep with her, and then said she (the suing partner) might not be affectionate with her partner, therefore causing her undue stress. WTF?! If she showed affection she was a "pervert," but if she didn't, she was "emotionally distant."

Some people really hate us.

[merrily]

9. Good grief. What a perve that judge was!

And what convoluted "reasoning."

I almost feel sorry for him or her, being that twisted.

[joshcryer]

5. This is the most dumbass thing I've ever seen in my life.

I am seriously beyond words.

[merrily]

6. Don't military regs require equality. If not, why not?

If so, they would take precedence.