Editorial:

Faculty Council resolution fails to be inclusive

Published March 12, 2010

Faculty Council passed a resolution to allow benefits for domestic partners — only same-sex domestic partners, to be exact.

The thing about being inclusive or embracing diversity is it shouldn't mean excluding another demographic. Good job. You have discriminated against one group while trying to give rights to another.

Faculty Council's reasoning for this is ridiculous as well. It said if opposite-sex domestic partners really want these benefits, they could just get married. By saying that, the council implied couples only get married for the financial benefits.

It also assumes all opposite-sex domestic partners who are not married have no reason not to be. It seems unfair to force opposite-sex couples to get married because they can or because they want benefits. Is that really the idea behind the institution of marriage?

Did Faculty Council look at Columbia's domestic partner registry system before deciding upon this? It has a system — one that is all-inclusive — that works. Not using Columbia’s model as a resource was irresponsible on the council’s part.

You don’t have to alienate one group by extending rights to another.