Just to clarify, I definitely didn't say I think it's fair for the Boston Globe to stop providing domestic partnernship benefits. I said quite the opposite regarding entire companies taking away domestic partner benefits.
I did say something during the interview about how I don't think it's particularly fair for couples who can marry to do things like get domestic partner health insurance at work but then use "single" status in order to get low-income status. Couples in different-sex marriages don't have that right to have it both ways.
I absolutely think the Globe (and every other company) needs to continue providing domestic partner coverage until all people are allowed to marry. I did point out that marriage isn't an option for everyone, since a person in the military can be discharged and require to pay back their education costs for marrying a person of the same sex. Same thing with someone who works for an organization such as the Boy Scouts, where they can legally be fired if they marry. I do think that domestic partner benefits aren't necessary for different-sex couples, because they have the option of legally marrying.