Same-Sex Spouses Get ID cards Sept. 3

August 29, 2013 | Terry Howell

Reposted news from Air Force Public Affairs:

Same-sex spouses of Air Force military members, eligible civilian employees, and military retirees may be enrolled in the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System by their sponsors and get their dependent identification card beginning Sept. 3, Air Force Personnel Center officials said today.

Following a June 26 Supreme Court decision finding Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional, Defense Department officials announced the plan to extend benefits to same-sex spouses.

“We’ve had a lot of interest from Airmen on this topic,” said Karen Bennett, DEERS/RAPIDS Operations branch chief. “While many military personnel sections take walk-in customers, Airmen who walk in without an appointment may experience longer wait times, so we want to encourage folks to use the online appointment scheduler to make an appointment for DEERS enrollment and ID cards.”

To make an appointment, contact the nearest military personnel section or go online to https://rapids-appointments.dmdc.osd.mil.

For information about benefits available to spouses, visit the myPers website at https://mypers.af.mil and enter “ID Cards,” or “DEERS” in the search window.

by Debbie Gildea
Air Force Personnel Center Public Affairs

 

About Terry Howell

Before becoming the Managing Editor for Military.com, Terry served 20 years in the U.S. Coast Guard as an Aviation Electrician’s Mate and aircrewman. In his final role in the Coast Guard, Terry served as a Career Development Advisor, where he provided career, finance, education, and benefits counseling to servicemembers and their families. Since retiring from the Coast Guard, Terry has authored the book, The Military Advantage, managed the content for TurboTap, the DoD's online transition program and VAforVets, the VA's transition assistance website. Terry earned both his Bachelor's and MBA at Corban University using Military Tuition Assistance and his GI Bill benefits to help cover the cost.

Comments

  1. Glad I retired in 07….what a travesty.

  2. Austin John says:

    In California opposite sex registered Domestic Partners and registered same sex partners are treated “as married” for tax purposes, as in many other states. Why isn’t the military recognizing and following these laws with respect to Registered Domestic Partnerships versus Marriage ? They both have similar rules.

    • Similar is not equal. All we are asking for is equal rights and protections under the law. A marriage is a social contract between two consenting adults, always has been, even before the bible that most people quote so frequently (even though it says nothing about gay marriage).

      • Austin John says:

        In California A Registered Domestic Partnership is a Legal Binding Contract & is treated "As Married". There is no such statute that mentions a "Social Contract". Whatever lifestyle you want to pursue is your business. Every "Gay" friend i;ve had in my lifetime have all died of aids ; but while alive were happy with their "Domestic Partner Contracts" It gave them the same rights; but not the title of "Married".

  3. So wrong…20 years of my life was given so this can start destroying our once fine military.

    • Our God and Country are being insulted. May He forgive us.

      • I guess it's a good thing god and country are separate under law.

      • former captain says:

        God has alot to forgive us on, but honoring and loving another person will not be one of them – how about our screwing up this incredible planet and our continuing to use death and destruction to take care of human problems –

    • former captain says:

      and how many gays and lesbians have given their ALL for our country – they’ve ALWAYS been in the service – only now they can be just another couple serving our country –

  4. We have served right along side of many of you, for just as long, and with just as much honor, strength, and courage.

    We're entitled to the same active duty and retired benefits as everyone else or is our service not as valid as yours?

    • Austin John says:

      James- I commend & thank you for your service & finally us Veit Nam Vets are being recognized for ours. (Talk about discrimination & scorn). I am upset because my Legally Registered Opposite Sex Partner of 36yrs cannot partake in my retiree benefits. Where is the outrage on that?

  5. Let's bow down to less than two percent of our society. I am glad that I retired before all of this. Another sign of the decline of our society and our military.

    Thanks Liberals!!

    • Try more than 9 million adults identifying as LGBT, and even more having a LGB 'experience' in their lifetime. Hardly less than 2%…

    • You are SOOOOOO welcome. If "liberal" means following the Constitution, then I'm mighty proud to be a liberal, almost as proud as I am to have served this great country that has finally gotten it right.

  6. Austin John says:

    Retired CPO- Navy. Registered Opposite Sex Domestic Partner in Calif. She is Catholic and cannot remarry. We are 72 & 73 yrs old.-together for 36yrs and she can't travel or stay with me at government facilities nor use military establishments. I can't put her on my insurance or any other of my retiree benefits and the "GAYS" Think they are treated unfair.

  7. Does this mean that my live-in girlfriend and for more than a year can get her ID card as well?

  8. I'm glad you retired, too. Your service sounds like that might have been the travesty.

  9. Austin John says:

    Dana-might I suggest that you actually read the Constitution. It does't make any reference to the separation of Church and State. Mention of it was made in the Federalist Papers which are not the law of the land. The Constitution says "Congress shall make no laws regarding the establishment of a religion". I also believe if one joins an organization or church one should abide by the "laws" of that group-NOT just the ones they agree with! A Catholic may only remarry as the result of death of the spouse or by paple annulment; which renders children of that marriage "illegitimate" in the eyes of the church.

    • Austin John,

      First Amendment to the United States Constitution

      The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …." and Article VI specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

      • Austin John says:

        Charles-So re-assuring to know that you have read our founding documents(Kudos to you); but Dana obviously has not! Enlighten me–how does Article VI have anything to do with ones "Right to the Pursuit of Happiness" as cited by many minority groups to "Justify" overturning the will of majority through "Activists Courts".