Kentucky universities provide insurance to unwed couples

Kent Ostran­der of The Fam­i­ly Foun­da­tion is sound­ing the warn­ing that two major Ken­tucky uni­ver­si­ties are rec­og­niz­ing and val­i­dat­ing homo­sex­u­al mar­riages, despite a 2004 Ken­tucky con­sti­tu­tion­al amend­ment which rec­og­nizes mar­riage as only being between a man & a woman.

What appears to be going on is that these uni­ver­si­ties are allow­ing mem­bers of their staff to add homo­sex­u­al (or oth­er con­sti­tu­tion­al­ly invalid mar­riage) part­ners to their health insur­ance plans.

Kent says, “And it’s in direct vio­la­tion of our state con­sti­tu­tion, which we passed — the mar­riage pro­tec­tion amend­ment in 2004, say­ing that only mar­riage would be one man and one woman, and that noth­ing iden­ti­cal or sub­stan­tial­ly sim­i­lar would be val­i­dat­ed or recognized.”

That “noth­ing iden­ti­cal” part is curi­ous. What is iden­ti­cal to a mar­riage between a man and a woman, if not a mar­riage between a man and a woman?

Ignor­ing that appar­ent blun­der, it does not seem as though the uni­ver­si­ties are vio­lat­ing the con­sti­tu­tion. It’s not as though they are claim­ing the invalid mar­riages are real mar­riages. It’s not as though they’re grant­i­ng them mar­riage licens­es or any­thing of that nature.

They are sim­ply offer­ing insur­ance ben­e­fits. As a busi­ness, they can offer their ser­vice to any­one they please. Should Ken­tucky gas sta­tions stop serv­ing fuel to homo­sex­u­al cou­ples? I’m sure some would say yes, which is pret­ty sad.

The bot­tom line is, if it is so ter­ri­ble that the uni­ver­si­ties (and by exten­sion, the health insur­ance com­pa­nies) are offer­ing insur­ance to such cou­ples, why not stop giv­ing them your busi­ness? Yet the arti­cle does­n’t even name the com­pa­nies involved, so con­cerned cit­i­zens don’t even know who they should­n’t be supporting.

It’s stu­pid “activism” like Ostran­der’s that make it seem as though the “bat­tle” is all eco­nom­ic. Busi­ness can serve only cer­tain peo­ple, which isn’t great­ly unlike the seg­re­ga­tion imposed against Blacks ear­ly in the 20th Century.

It isn’t enough to dis­agree with homo­sex­u­al mar­riages. I myself agree that a mar­riage, bib­li­cal­ly defined, can only be between a man and woman. But that isn’t enough. We must also make sure that homo­sex­u­al “life part­ners” are blocked at every turn when try­ing to do busi­ness, even if there isn’t a Chris­t­ian involved in the whole lot.

Chris­tian­i­ty is not about con­trol­ling peo­ple. It isn’t about impos­ing our moral­i­ty onto those who are dead in their sins, blind to the Light of Jesus Christ. In oth­er words, you are more like­ly to teach a dol­phin to dri­ve a back-hoe than you’ll ever be in get­ting unbe­liev­ers to embrace King­dom prin­ci­ples. (Heck, it’s hard enough to get Chris­tians to embrace them…)

Read­ing down through the com­ments left on the arti­cle at, I am ashamed to be asso­ci­at­ed by name (“Chris­t­ian”) with some of these peo­ple. Take for instance this gem from Ter­ry Gabrich (empha­sis mine; spelling & gram­mar errors his):

We need to re-estab­lish Jesus Christ in our sys­tem of gov­ern­ment again, and also in our edu­ca­tion­al sys­tem. We need to go by his laws and­not con­trive our own. We are under God’s judge­ment. Homo­sex­u­als will die and be slaugh­tered, just like blacks and his­pan­ics. We need to estab­lish the tra­di­tion­al fam­i­ly val­ues that can only come about through estab­lish­ing Jesus Christ as the head of our gov­ern­ment, com­mu­ni­ty, churchs, and society.

That is not Chris­tian­i­ty, and it is a shame that allowed the com­ment to pass through mod­er­a­tion with­out offer­ing a response. I don’t care if they are a news source and it gen­er­al­ly isn’t their place to edi­to­ri­al­ize users’ com­ments, but for a site which few would deny is “Chris­t­ian,” they ought to care about truth enough to speak up about it.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Use your Gravatar-enabled email address while commenting to automatically enhance your comment with some of Gravatar's open profile data.

Comments must be made in accordance with the comment policy. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam; learn how your comment data is processed.

You may use Markdown to format your comments; additionally, these HTML tags and attributes may be used: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Rick Beckman