superpunk

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,003
Reaction score
0
A Texas man says he and his partner were together for 34 years but his partner’s sister has now forced them apart, taken their home, and his partner’s finances — and done it legally because they weren’t married. For the last six years his partner, Jim, who is older, suffered from Alzheimer’s. Jim’s estranged sister, Lon Watts writes on Facebook, was able to take their home and Jim’s finances through the courts by filing for guardianship — despite Lon having power of attorney.


“She put him in a Nursing Home and had criminal trespass orders against me to keep me away from him,” Lon Watts writes:

I’LL NEVER BE ABLE TO SEE HIM AGAIN! She got his bank account from Social Security Disability and sold his house out from under me. I had 2 weeks to vacate uur home of 12 years. [sic]

If we were EQUAL in the eyes of the law we would be together till the end. But as it stands in Texas, a money hungry greedy relative was able to steal our life and toss me out as trash to pad her pocketbook. I pray God has mercy on her soul for her evil deeds. I am content knowing the world is coming around to acknowledge that ALL HUMANS ARE CREATED EQUAL and SHOULD HAVE EQUAL RIGHTS.

Lon’s story has been shared almost 3000 times on Facebook and has more than 3000 likes. Sadly, Lon and Jim’s story, and others like it, are the exact reason why marriage must be extended to all same-sex couples across the entire nation.

Anyone who claims needs and rights of same-sex couples can be protected through some legal forms is not only mistaken, but wholly wrong and spreading false information.

One Facebook commenter notes:

Power of attorney is only for medical decisions. In the state of Texas all of the following must be obtained :

Cohabitation/Property Agreements
Name Changes
Second Parent Adoptions
Medical Record Releases
Wills
Trusts
Guardianships
Living Wills
Powers of Attorney
Probate

Power of Attorney in not enough!

When it comes to inheritance, distribution of property and personal effects, medical, financial, and burial decisions, no one who is not your legal spouse or blood relative has any rights to act on your behalf. Gay marriages and civil unions are not currently recognized in Texas. Therefore, it is essential for the Texas LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community to have comprehensive and thorough planning that is tailored to protect themselves and their families.

While another writes:

No that is incorrect! POA does NOT cover medical decisions in Texas!! You must have a medical power of attorney to handle medical issues. Please consult with an attorney before assuming what each document does. I handle these matters for the LGBT community and it is so important to have the right things in place. You must be sure to express each need to your legal practitioner and then make sure you understand what each document you have covers and what protection it provides for you.

All of which merely expose the fact that not only does each state handle LGBT issues differently, there’s a great deal of confusion even within the LGBT community.

Even then, same-sex couples have to fight with hospitals and courts to make certain our wishes are followed — when we are at our most vulnerable, sick or unable to do so for ourselves.

Opposite-sex couples don’t have to worry about any of this — they just get married and get over 1100 rights, automatically.

We’ve reached out to Lon, who shared his story with the excellent Gay Marriage USA Facebook page, to see how we can help.

If there’s anyone who can offer legal advice or assistance please contact Lon directly through his Facebook page.
 

jnday

UDFA
Messages
2,680
Reaction score
0
All men are created equal...... That's bullshit. Just.some more of that feel-good stuff that makes people feel better about themselves.
 

superpunk

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,003
Reaction score
0
So what's her story?

?

not sure what you're asking but I'm sure whatever it is she had a perfectly valid reason for seizing control of her brothers assets and kicking his partner of 34 years out of the house if that's what you're driving at.

and so we're clear I'm not going to get into an argument about whether she is justified (there's almost no way she was) the reality is it's a shame that this is even a possibility. Even if the surviving partner was a huge **** he's still the guy her brother chose to spend 34 years with. So get that thought out of your head.
 

ScipioCowboy

Practice Squad
Messages
487
Reaction score
0
I ask because this is very similar to a situation in which my great uncle and his daughter found themselves. He had a number of serious medical conditions, and she'd been living with him and caring for him for many years. Then, one day, another family member appeared, involved the authorities, and had her separated from him on grounds that she was abusing him.

She wasn't, obviously. But despite having all the rights that a family member would have under the law, she had to get a lawyer and expend considerable financial resources to be able to see and care for him again. Without knowing more facts and allowing ourselves to think certain "thoughts", we can't know if legalizing gay marriage would have any impact whatsoever on this situation.

If your goal is helping these people, we need more facts, such as her story.

If your goal is using these people solely to further some political agenda, go ahead and forget everything I've said and don't bother with the critical thinking.
 
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
0
and the 2nd amendment too!!!

Funny how some, only tout the amendments that fit their argument.

{Staring hard at everyone in the Boston marathon thread}

To be fair I don't think SP ever said anything about banning guns. He and I were questioning the purpose but hey let's keep on topic here, this is BS.
 

superpunk

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,003
Reaction score
0
Sorry there wasn't enough info in the article to make furthering the agenda of human rights sound like a good idea scip.
 

iceberg

In the Rotation
Messages
824
Reaction score
0
Funny how some, only tout the amendments that fit their argument.

{Staring hard at everyone in the Boston marathon thread}

To be fair I don't think SP ever said anything about banning guns. He and I were questioning the purpose but hey let's keep on topic here, this is BS.

well, you can't use just "part" of the constitution or other founding papers when it fits your own goals and want to repeal those you don't like. it was made for all of us, not just some.

i also find it funny (not really knowing the punk) that SP trots this out and when asked about the other side of the story, he couldn't care less. how can you claim to be unbiased when you only care the part of the story that pushes your own agenda.
 
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
0
well, you can't use just "part" of the constitution or other founding papers when it fits your own goals and want to repeal those you don't like. it was made for all of us, not just some.

i also find it funny (not really knowing the punk) that SP trots this out and when asked about the other side of the story, he couldn't care less. how can you claim to be unbiased when you only care the part of the story that pushes your own agenda.

My point exactly, those arguing against SP in the gun thread (where he never advocated banning guns that I recall) were all about shredding the constitution when it came to due process for the Boston Bomber. Also some of those same folks also seem to advocate treating some citizens as second class not to be afforded the same rights as others.
 
Messages
8,660
Reaction score
0
My point exactly, those arguing against SP in the gun thread (where he never advocated banning guns that I recall) were all about shredding the constitution when it came to due process for the Boston Bomber. Also some of those same folks also seem to advocate treating some citizens as second class not to be afforded the same rights as others.
Be careful painting with that broad brush.

If you'll find my posts in the threads in question, I'm generally Pro-2nd Amendment, pro-due process and pro-gay rights when it comes to equal protection.
 

iceberg

In the Rotation
Messages
824
Reaction score
0
Be careful painting with that broad brush.

If you'll find my posts in the threads in question, I'm generally Pro-2nd Amendment, pro-due process and pro-gay rights when it comes to equal protection.

and i stayed out of that argument.
 
Messages
2,450
Reaction score
0
Be careful painting with that broad brush.

If you'll find my posts in the threads in question, I'm generally Pro-2nd Amendment, pro-due process and pro-gay rights when it comes to equal protection.
My apologies you were not one of those I was talking about. Should have used the word some not a broad term like those (indicating all) that wasn't the case.

I also said everyone a post earlier that was more hyperbole and me trying to be funny. You didn't quote that post in your response to me but I thought I should address it.
 
Top Bottom