By
Change has to start somewhere, and thanks to the University of Louisville Trustees, it started in July 2006 when they moved to begin offering health benefits to unmarried domestic partners of faculty and staff members.
The motion supports the university’s stance on diversity by affording all faculty and staff members the same benefits, regardless of whether or not their partners fit the cookie-cutter definition of marriage.
Providing domestic-partner benefits is also a move that supports education and research at the institution. Many of the university’s best teachers, researchers and support staff may not be married to their domestic partners, and offering benefits for these people and their partners helps ensure that they’ll be around to support the school for years to come. The benefits package also helps the university lure prominent researchers, regardless of their marital status or sexual orientation.
In fact, the decision to offer domestic-partner benefits is right in line with the goals state lawmakers set for U of L when the Challenge for Excellence was issued a decade ago. The Challenge’s final goal called the university to “be recognized as a national leader for linking its resources to the needs of its community.” Faculty and staff members, including LGBT individuals who cannot legally wed, need the benefits and the university is obviously trying to meet that need.
Providing health coverage options like this for faculty and staff members also helps set the university apart from other employers and institutions around the state. The move not only elevates U of L to the level of employers like UPS, Ford Motor Company and other regional companies who already offer domestic-partner benefits, it paves the way for the rest of the state schools around Kentucky that do not. U of L is the first school in the state to extend the domestic-partner benefits option to its workers.
But State Rep. Stan Lee (R.-Lexington), who filed legislation last month that would bar state schools from offering benefits to unmarried domestic partners, hopes to change that. And for this, he should be criticized. After all, how can Lee, who represents several areas around Lexington, possibly know what is best for the University of Louisville community?
The creation of this proposed law would be a definite push in the wrong direction. The LGBT community exists; one in 10 people identifies as LGBT, and taking away their liberties is not a message higher education institutions should send to their students. Supporting Lee’s legislation would send a message of discrimination and anti-progressiveness that every individual – student, faculty, parent or otherwise – should be ashamed to embrace.
U of L has always been a role model for other colleges and businesses. The school has long been a leader when it comes to cutting-edge medical research, and is building a national reputation for exceptional graduate and other professional programs. It seems only right that a progressive institution fight the battle against closed-mindedness and set an example for other employers and learning institutions around the state and country.
While Rep. Lee certainly has the right to introduce legislation like the bill he proposed, he and other state lawmakers should think hard before making any decisions. Meanwhile, students and staff alike should not hesitate to call lawmakers and voice their concerns about the issue. Let your representatives and senators know that discrimination is not something you support.
