NKU

We've all had a chance to see the good news from NKU by now and below is a nice editorial from The Enquirer. I've seen at least one e-mail from a fairness supporter that questioned the goodness associated with NKU's actions. No, NKU's plan does not use any state appropriated funds, but rather it simply makes an opportunity available for individuals to take out such plans on their own dime. The individual pointed out that a quick check of Humana's site shows that someone can "sign up for insurance for a comparable amount without going through their NKU partner." So, the individual asked what benefit is this recent action? I tend to disagree and see it in a way similar to this editorial below. What do you think? Is making the option available through one's employer not the smart and progress way to go even if it is at the employee's expense?

~Jody


NKU offering the right benefits option
Editorial - The Enquirer

We applaud the decision of the Northern Kentucky University regents to offer health-care benefits to domestic partners as a practical, humane and economically viable approach to the reality of employment relations.

The proposal, approved Monday, will allow employees to add family members or others to their health plan even when a spouse is not covered. Those covered would have to live in the employee's household for at least a year and be "financially interdependent" with the employee. The cost of the extra covered person would be paid by the employee, not the university.

This plan takes into account non-traditional family groups that are common in today's society. The plan could cover a sibling or an adult child. Obviously, family groups also include same-sex couples, which prompt negative reactions in some quarters, including from some members of the state legislature. State Sen. Damon Thayer, R-Georgetown, supported an unsuccessful bill this year that would have banned state universities from offering benefits to same-sex partners.

But the regents are not supporting any particular lifestyle with this action. They simply recognize such benefit packages as a necessary in the competitive environment for top-notch faculty. The University of Kentucky and the University of Louisville already offer such plans. The University of Cincinnati adopted a similar plan last year.

Enabling employees to provide for the health coverage of all members of their "family" group is a humane approach to benefits coverage. Why should an employee not be allowed to provide coverage for a financial dependent, especially when the cost of the extended coverage is being paid by the employee, not the taxpayers? Worrying about how a family is constituted should not be the concern of the university or the state.

Presbyterians review case on gay marriage

Have you been following the happenings with the Presbyterian minister? I've heard from both a Presby minister in rural western Kentucky today and a Disciples of Christ minister from central Kentucky... both say this case is huge. What are your thoughts on it? What ramifications will it have for the larger community? ~Jody

Presbyterians review case on gay marriage
By Jim Niemi
JNIEMI@HERALD-LEADER.COM

LOUISVILLE --A Presbyterian minister sat Friday to be judged by the denomination's highest court, which will decide whether she violated church law by performing marriages for same-sex couples.
The Rev. Jane Adams Spahr, retired after 30 years in the ministry, was charged in California two years ago with officiating at the weddings of two lesbian couples in 2004 and 2005. Routinely, disciplinary cases in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) are heard by a Presbytery, a larger body to which the church belongs.
In 2006, the Redwoods Presbytery court affirmed her ministry and ruled that same-sex marriages are not "outside of, or contrary to, the essentials of the Reformed faith as understood by the Presbytery of the Redwoods."
But that ruling was challenged by those who prosecuted Spahr, and was appealed to the next-highest church court, the Synod Permanent Judicial Commission. The synod court overturned the presbytery decision and ordered Redwoods Presbytery to censure Spahr, but recommended the minimum penalty, a rebuke.
Spahr then appealed to the denomination's highest court, the General Assembly Permanent Judicial Commission, which heard the case Friday at the Presbyterian Church USA Center in Louisville.
Spahr, 65, believes the Presbyterian faith should be inclusive, that all humans are acceptable to God. But she contends the church has refused to recognize all its members on an equal footing.
"In this church, lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgendered people are marginalized, they cannot fully participate," said Sara M. Taylor, an attorney representing Spahr.
"We, as LGBT people, are equal in the eyes of God," Taylor said. "She (Spahr) acted pastorally in the eyes of Jesus Christ."
Taylor contended that the synod overstepped its authority because the authority to discipline lies with the presbytery. "We believe the presbytery has the right to make the decision," she said.
But Stephen L. Taber, attorney for the synod, made the case that the Book of Order, a manual of policies that govern Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), specifies that marriage is reserved as a covenant between a man and a woman.
The church "does not permit disobedience to standards set by the Book of Order. A person can protest ... but cannot disobey," Taber said.
In reaching a decision, which is expected next week, the top court will have to sort through some thorny issues:
• California, where Spahr performed some of the marriages, does not recognize same-gender ceremonies. Is it possible for a couple to be married ecclesiastically but not legally?
• The Presbyterian Church USA recognizes two sacraments: baptism and communion, which LGBT people are allowed to receive. Is it rational to allow people to receive the sacraments in the church but to deny the right to marry in the church?
• While the church does not recognize same-sex marriages, it does allow ministers to bless same-sex unions. Is it proper for a minister to bless a same-sex union that might be interpreted by others as a marriage?
Throughout Friday's hearing, Spahr was characterized as a person of deep faith and an abiding love for all people. "We are not prosecuting a malefactor," Taber said.
In an interview after yesterday's hearing, Spahr said she had performed "hundreds" of marriages but did not distinguish between same-sex and opposite-sex ceremonies.
"I'm just hoping that this is about real people's love for one another," she said.
Spahr is worried that continued marginalization of segments of society undermines the quality of life for all people.
"We're not second-class citizens. Second-class status perpetuates violence," she said. "We're here to stop the violence.
"How can we have healthy relationships in a fractured culture?"

E-news Coming

Hey, folks:

I apologize for not writing the past two weeks. I've had a lot on my mind. Look out for an e-news pretty quickly... as I understand it one will be coming out shortly.

~Jody

WKMS Interview Today

Hey, folks:

I was on the npr station, WKMS, here in western Kentucky today. I talked about the event I'm co-hosting on April 12th in support of fairness. We also chatted about some other stuff. Give it a listen... http://www.wkms.org/programming/news31.cfm

~Jody