4a Opinion Wednesday. April 4, 2001 For comments, contact Chris Borniger or Nathan Willis at 864-4924 or opinion@kansan.com Point/Counterpoint Benefits for employees' same-sex partners Our view: Same-sex partners of KU employees deserve same benefits heterosexual couples get Partly because it's a state institution, the University of Kansas does not provide benefits for the same-sex partners of its employees. This contrasts with a nationwide trend that has caused many public and private employers to extend benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of their employees. If the University intends to be a nondiscriminatory institution and remain competitive when it comes to attracting and retaining faculty, it needs to offer benefits to same-sex partners of University employees. Opposition to same-sex benefits is rooted in discrimination against homosexuals. Benefits often account for a large percentage of an employee's total compensation. Denying homosexuals the same benefits that the University offers to its heterosexual counterparts results in unequal compensation. The Village Voice, a New York City-based alternative newspaper, was the first company to offer benefits to the same-sex partners of their employees in 1982. Since then, many companies have followed suit, including Ford, Chrysler and General Motors. In 1997, the city of San Francisco developed a policy requiring that all businesses it contracted with offer benefits to the same-sex partners of their employees. Many universities also offer same-sex benefits, including Carnegie Mellon University, Stanford University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Chicago. The University of Iowa has also extended its benefits plan to include same-sex partners, a remarkable shift in policy for a school in the traditionally conservative Midwest. Without a benefits plan comparable to those offered at other universities, the University has fewer incentives it can use to attract a strong team of faculty and staff. It also risks losing the homosexual employees it has. Southern Methodist University in Dallas is one school that has recognized these disadvantages. Southern Methodist is in the process of writing the policy and procedures to extend benefits to same-sex partners. The extension of its benefits will go into effect at the beginning of 2002. Suzette Ramirez resources director resources uni for Southern Methodist. said that the university perceived the extension of benefits as an important tool to aid recruitment and retention of facultv and staff. Ramirez also noted that the extension of benefits to employees' same sex partners coincided with the school's policy to avoid discrimination in any of its employment practices. "SMU's commitment to equal opportunity includes nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation." she said Extending benefits to these partners is a step that the University should take to remain an equal-opportunity institution with the highest quality staff. Ramirez summed up reaction to Southern Methodist's change in policy as mostly supportive. "While, of course, there are some who disagree with the decision — and that position is respected — the reaction within the campus com munity has been largely positive." Dissenting view: Tinkering with policy blurs traditional standards of legitimate partnership Marriage, defined as the legal union between man and woman, has remained the most stable infrastructure in society for thousands of years. For the University of Kansas to provide benefits to same-sex partners of employees, the legislature must redefine marriage. The liberalization of America has stretched special rights to more and more nontraditionalists in the name of tolerance. Homosexual couples have just as much right to exist, but marriage is a social institution that should not tolerate any waver in its definition. The University is a publicly funded institution and should follow public policy. The laws of most states, including Kansas, do not recognize gay couples as legally married. Therefore, homosexual couples have no right to receive the benefits legally married couples do. The state would have to change its laws to extend benefits to homosexual partners. But marriage laws should not include homosexual couples for many strong, viable reasons. Because there is no official contract binding gay couples, then confusing commitment standards arise in defining a relationship worthy of benefits equal to those heterosexual couples receive. Same-sex couples could claim that they are emotionally bonded,but they have no legal union. It would not be fair for homosexual couples to receive benefits and engaged heterosexual couples to be left out. "Domestic partners" do not deserve special treatment. If the state were to extend benefits to same-sex partners of employees, it would create a confusing standard. The state would have to clearly define who qualifies as a "partner." Otherwise, partners of bigamists and polygamists must also receive the same benefits as gay and straight couples. Legal issues aside, making homo- ual unions legitimate has no basis in historical tradition, nor would it be proper even in our diverse contemporary society. The homosexual community claims sexual equality, just like heterosexuals, because they can't change their sexuality. On the contrary, there are no conclusive scientific studies that show homosexuality has genetic roots. Heterosexual marriage remains the optimal building block in the continuation of societies. When vows are taken, marriage demands lifelong commitment, fidelity and an openness to life. Homosexual couples cannot reproduce without resorting to extraordinary scientific procedures requiring an egg or sperm from the opposite sex. Biologically, gay couples do not deserve the rights of heterosexual marriages. In marriage, sex is the physical expression of love and commitment. Heterosexual union is a reflection of God's genius in creation. Recognizing gay marriages would be a sacrifice to a large number of Americans. From a religious standpoint, marriage is a sacred union between a man and woman and is a full expression of God's plan for a loving family unit. This is common in most religions, which have vigorously defended their stances. Moreover, the public backlash against the University would divide Kansas communities. Most of the citizens of this profoundly conservative state certainly would not approve. About 70 percent of Nebraskans voted for a ban on gay marriage in that state last fall. There's no reason to think similar numbers of Kansans would think differently. Kate Williams for the editorial board The laws defining marriage have sustained our nation since its beginning and should remain unchanged. Perspective Even religious groups deserve student funding Kyle Ramsey /KANSAN As a member of the American Civil Liberties Union, I often find myself defending the organization from conservative attacks alleging that we are essentially anti-Islamic liberty. As Fred Phelps once said, "The ACLU is nothing but a bunch of antichristic sodomites, tyrannical bulls, hedonists, and smut peddlers whose Luciferian beliefs of hate God is blasphemous, hypocritical, and satanic." But I always felt like I was fighting the good fight because the ACLU has always stood for the constitutional rights of any group, religious or not. However, it is statements such as the one from Alexis Vanasse, president of the KU chapter of the ACLU ("Committees approve religious bill," March 29) and advanced by columnist John Audlehelm ("Student Senate, religious groups must stay apart," March 29) that give conservatives justification to attack rights' defenders on religious grounds. Vanasse erroneously commented that "the ACLU is David Mitchell guest columnist opinion@kanan.com completely against giving state money to religious organizations." The legislation Student Senate will consider tonight, however, is based on the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions in Southworth v. Grebe and Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia. These cases stated that universities must distribute student fees to student organizations in a "viewpoint neutral" manner to protect free expression of ideas. Student Senate's bill is an attempt to abide by these decisions. The KU ACLU is opposing the Southworth decision because it approves funding for religious groups. But the national ACLU halled the decision as a "victory for free speech on campus." applaud the legislation? Three guesses. Vanasse's comment and the stance of KU ACLU are directly against the right to free speech and the group's national organization. Both of these positions conflict with the KU ACLU's mission. Audlehue's conclusions are also ripe with misconceptions. First, all student groups have administrative costs — postage, copying, etc. Senate provides funding to student groups to cover these. If a religious student organization were to use this money for religious purposes, it would violate the regulation and would have to forfeit the funding. It also would be nearly impossible to use the money for religious purposes because often, Senate money barely — if at all — covers these costs. Second, there is nothing in the bill's language that indicates that student senators would be "empowered to decide which religions get money," as Audlehelm states. I believe it would actually prevent this. If it provides senators such empowerment, it would violate the "viewpoint neutral" clause from the Southworth decision. Audlehme's conclusion is hopelessly wrong. Senators do not need to "realize that the only fair way to finance religious groups is not to finance any of them." This is discriminatory. The correct conclusion is that Senate needs to abide by the principle of viewpoint neutrality. Those on the left need to realize that religious groups are student organizations as well and deserve the same consideration of administrative funding as any other applicant I never thought I would find myself doing this, but I must say that some of my liberal colleagues need to get a grip and understand that defending rights means defending everyone's rights, including those of religious groups. I agree that any proposal to require religious groups be sufficiently nonexclusive, nonpartisan, and broad-based would be flawed and discriminatory. However, such a requirement is unnecessary to abide by the Southworth decision. Mitchell is a Hays senior in political science, history and geography. callers have 20 seconds to speak about any topic they wish. The Kansan reserves the right to edit submissions, and not all of them will be published. Slanderous statements will not be printed. For more comments, go to www.kansan.com. I am outraged. The nasty column yesterday about the VOICE coalition was not only untruthful but unprofessional. Who made Andrew Marino the expert on VOICE? 图 I was just wondering if the Kansan was on the Delta Force payroll. Because if not, they gave them quite a plug today. For students, local politics start on campus. After you vote for City Commission, go to the Student Senate debates. 图 第 I want to thank Andrew Marino for his editorial about the VOICE coalition. I think it was very good and hit the nail on the head, and I just wanted to congratulate the Kansan for a good job reporting. I am in theVOICE coalition.I am not greek, along with more than two-thirds who are not as well. What difference does it make if the VOICE coalition is new or not? Walker and Marshall still won when their coalition perpetrated the 图 campaign violation last year. Tim Lang, dissenting I was wondering when I could hook up with the chancellor to hang at his crib and, you know, smoke some weed and drink some 40-ounceers. You know what I mean? You, chancellor, give me a call when you get my message, all right? Because you know you down with DDB, so I'm down with you. If you students would stop whining and start voting in the local elections, then maybe your issues might be taken seriously. But you won't. You never do. 图 What does McColm Hall have against us taking hot showers? Turn the freakin' water on. For the person who called in about his low salary and inability to get financial aid. That is why we have a union. As a GTA, I feel your pain and sympathize. Solidarity. This is about Drew Gooden. Tell him to leave. I'm upset that during the One Shining Moment highlight reel after the championship game, they didn't show any KU highlights, and they didn't even show Stank 'em the monkey. The only thing I'm happy about is that they didn't show Eric Chenowith. Hilptops on Monday were the greatest articles ever written by the University Daily Kansan. I especially liked the 'Ol' Dirty Bastard and chancellor article. - For all the people who love mulettes: this just in. Mullet bartender at the pool hall defeated several fraters Friday night. Mulletude is everything. - Free for All should be renamed Whine for ALL - I think using a credit card to purchase your education is much better than all the other things you can buy with a credit card. Did the circus come into town today? Was I the only one who noticed the KU campus smelled like a big pile of elephant poop? Whoever stole my burrito outside of Saturday morning lab in Malotty, you better know; I'm out to find you. Yeah, there's this girl on the 23rd and Naimshim bus who always wears headphones, and she always sings really loud to whatever music she's listening to. The thing is, I don't know if I should admire her for having that much self-confidence or if it should be, like, shut up. We can all hear you. I just wanted to say that that chancellor article with ODB is one of the funniest things I've read for awhile. Good for you. I can eat an entire box of fruit snacks without hesitation. I hope that all those people who voted they would stop eating meat realize that foot and mouth disease doesn't affect humans. My roommate is stupid. She thought they were actually going to put us all in hamster cages. Imagine that. I love my philosophy tutor. He is so hot. He makes me really want to learn about the mind and body. Letters: Should be double-spaced, typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and hometown if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions. How to submit letters and quest columns Guestcolumns: Should be double-spaced and typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run. All letters and guest columns should be e-mailed to opinion@kansan.com or submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stuffer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right edit, cutto length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Chris Borniger or Nathan Willis at 864-4924. If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4924. Editor ... Lori O'Toole Managing editors .. Mindie Miller ... Matt Daugherty News editors ... Chris Borniger ... Sara Nutt ... Amy Randolph ... Jason Walker Readers' reps. .. Leita Schultes Warisa Chulindra Opinion .. Chris Borniger Associate opinion Nathan Willis Sports .. Shawn Hutchinson Associate sports .. Shawn Linenberger News editors editor@kansan.com or 864-4854 editor@kansan.com or 864-4854 864-4854 864-4854 864-4854 864-4854 readerwrap@kansan.com or 864-4810 opinton@kansan.com or 864-4924 sports@kansan.com or 864-4850 Campus... Jay Krall. ... Kursten Phelps Features... Kristi Elliott Jayplay ... Erinp R. Barcom The University Daily Kansan Online... Katie Moore Associate online ... Chris Hopkins ... Andrew Vaupel Photo... Selena Jabara Design, graphics .. Kyle Ramsey Wire .. J.R. Mendoza Special sections .. Sara Nutt General manager Jayplay ...Erinn R. Barcomt General manager writer@kansan.com or@64-810 features@kansan.com or@64-824 jayplay@kansan.com or@64-810 webeditor@kansan.com or@64-810 864-4821 864-4812 864-4810 864-4810 tablein.kansen.com teblen@kansan.com and news adviser.. Tom Eblen Business ... Trent Guyer Retail sales ... Cecily Curran Marketing ... Anika Entwistle Campus ... Adam Lampinstein Regional ... Angie Boley National ... Chris Davenport Online sales ... Katie Mariani ... Mark Rund Online creative ... Jeremy Gaston Creative ... Erin Endres or 864-4462 864-4458 064-4358 064-4358 064-4358 064-4358 onlineads@kansan.com or 064-4358 064-4358 064-4358 or 864-7667 addresns.com kansner.com or 864-4014 retailers.com kansner Advertising managers Production ... Rebekah Gaston ... Emily Knowles Classifieds ... Jared Thurston Zone ... Nik Reed Zone ... Jenny Moore Zone ... Chrissy Kontras Zone ... Kelly Feuille Sales and marketing Matt Fisher 864-4475 classifieds@kansan.com or 864-4358 864-4358 864-4358 864-4358 864-4358 mfisher@kansan.com or 864-7666