I agree it's unintended, but I do think it's fair. The only justification for providing same-sex-partner benefits, but not non-spouse-opposite-sex-partner benefits, was that gay couples can't marry. It was an attempt by the private sector to in some way mitigate a social wrong to which the legislatures/courts hadn't yet caught up.
If MA passes that constitutional amendment, I hope they will reinstitute them.
Question - would the MA cons. amend. invalidate gay marriages legalized during this window, or just prevent any future ones?
