Skip to comments.UT faculty senate to consider extending benefits to employees' partners
Posted on 03/11/2012 6:29:56 AM PDT by HogsBreath
UT faculty senate to consider extending benefits to employees' partners
Wendy Bach pays more for health care for her family than most of her co-workers at the University of Tennessee do.
The law professor moved here from New York City in 2010 with her partner of 19 years and their 8-year-old daughter. And while Bach's daughter is included on her employer health insurance, her partner is not.
Instead, their family pays for a separate insurance policy for her partner, a longtime educator who hasn't been working since they moved to Knoxville.
(Excerpt) Read more at knoxnews.com ...
Just go back to Sodom and get your coverage there.
It would be nice to see them call “partner” what it really is, “female paramour.”
What if she were living with her sister? That’s “family” isn’t it? - but no, that would not be coverable.
Flukin’ idiot knew the benefits when she took the job. Deal with it.
The rot spreads.
Oh, the hugh manatee.
These people imagine they can move in and impose their views on others.
No, because I don’t my government pretending that homosexuality is normal.
Another liberal that goes to a college knowing fully well it wont give what she wants.
Uhhh... it's because they CAN. Watch this "university" cave (as many of the faculty were waiting for just such an incident to give them cover) in the name of fairness. The local news will trumpet the decision, will interview a few professional radicals disguised as students who love it, and we'll accelerate down that slippery slope even faster...
The division of the company where I work (well, up until recently, “worked”) was recently purchased outright by a much, much larger company. Company ex would cover your significant other under their health/dental plan. The now-new employer, the big outfit, will ONLY cover your significant other IF he/she is the same sex as you.
IOW, your significant other is only covered if you’re gay. Sucks. I pointed out the discriminatory nature of this to the guy from HR while going over my formal offer letter to “come across” to the new company. He agreed. Nonetheless, it’s the reality, I knew it coming in, and I opted to take the offer....meaning separate insurance will have to be purchased.
You either live with the terms of your new employer or you don’t when you’re deciding to take an offer. This woman knew her significant other would not be covered, took the job, then demands they cover her. It just doesn’t work that way unless you’re eaten up with an entitlement mentality.
She probably wants her contraception paid for also, oh wait....
The lifestyle in this case is perverted, however there is something to be said for coverage because you still are PAYING for the partner.
This is why Vermont went to Civil Unions instead of "Marriage." Legally it's justified. As much as I think the life style is convoluted my intellectual honesty says Civil Unions are equitable.
Not contraception, maybe... but sex toys. Are you and Rush Limbaugh going to say she doesn’t have the right to spend your money on her sex toys. Are you actually going to try to fight that battle?
It would be interesting to know if she was intentionally recruited as a test case.
Are they married “partners”?
Should be Indoctrinators.
This is the latest trend I’ve been seeing....lib agitators moving out of their big city bastions and taking jobs either in rural settings or smaller, more Conservative areas (like Knoxville), where they quickly become aggrieved and file a lawsuit to get their way and force their atrocious lifestyles on everyone else. It’s very much like a cancer that is metastasizing in the country.
Progressives are deliberately targeting conservative states...
Now this “injustice” is sure to stir up the people of Knoxville who will demand that justice be done. Knoxville, when did it turn liberal?
Teachers are also referring to themselves as ‘co-parents’...
God given diversity is beautiful, whole and very rewarding, such as diversity in a male female family with children.
Man and women made diversity is deadly, destructive,and especially it has hi-jacked our educational systems, and our Universities!
They are saying let us make the U.S. another modern Sodom and Gomorrah.
We are making ourselves a nation of: “every man [and woman] does that which is right in their own eyes.” (Judges 21:25)
Let us not forget: “There is a way that seemeth right unto a man[and woman], but the end thereof are the ways of death.” (Proverbs 14:12 and Proverbs 16:25)
The lesbian law professor was offered a position by the school.
This is no surprise that she would now seek to have her position accommodated.
This is how they do it from the slut at Georgetown to this bimbo.
It wrong and its disgusting. But I bet she wins the day.
I wonder why the “partner” can’t land a job that either provides healthcare or the means to purchase it? This whole homosexual partner movement falls right into the Left’s plans to provide “free” healthcare to all by making everyone a government dependent.
The key word here is “family”. The prof and her daughter (biologic/adopted) are a family. Of sorts. The other woman is a friend, at the end of the day.
Words mean something. Two lesbian women are not a family. They may be lots of things, but they are not a family in the sense of the word for the last several millenia. That is why the other woman has to get her own insurance.
My gold plated insurance package (with teeth and eye care)cost ~ $25k/year, 40 plus years I have paid in over ONE MILLION DOLLARS in today's dollars!
Very healthy family, I doubt we have used up two years payments!
Is that fair¿?
Do not forget the interest return on the payments!
Yes, they do seem to be deliberately targeting “red” areas. Some effective strategy needs to be developed to both combat this and to do the same to their formerly safe blue areas. They push and push and push and eventually it is too expensive to defend “no” in courts and in the media. What is to be done about this? It is the Rosa Parks strategy: just purposely go to the place where the behavior is not accepted and park yourself there and then go media and courts route. For our side this means going into the Hollywood, entertainment, culturally elite areas as Breitbart was doing I think.
Why should MY tax dollars support something I consider to be gravely morally wrong?
To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. ... Thomas Jefferson
“. . . if the law indeed be concerning things that lie not within the verge of the magistrate’s authority . . . . men are not in these cases obliged by that law, against their consciences.” .... John Locke
Actually, the faculty at UT Knoxville is pretty liberal.
So, the point of this article is what? That we must have homosexual marriage because of cases like this?????
Well, in this day and age, in the liberal worldview, two lesbian females are a family. That’s what they are pushing here. They are pushing at how unfair society, this university, and the state of Tennessee are, for not recognizing them as a married couple with all the benefits involved with marriage. Any who disagree are branded as homophobic, so that debate and discussion are shut down.
I would not be surprised in about 10-20 years, if a discussion like we’re having now would be banned as hate speech.
This was the plan the whole time. Go somewhere that doesn’t recognize gay partners and demand coverage.
There is another way of looking at this, which is seldom considered, because everyone assume that this is just a homosexual-rights issue.
If you allow a policy of extending the coverage to a partner of some sort, it changes the composition of the pool! The whole insurance system depends on some sort of statistical predictability.
If they do include partners, then I think that any single employee should be able to designate a partner (or maybe several) of any kind. Maybe I could designate some poor person in Africa as a partner (maybe a pen-pal). This would be a very generous thing for me to do, but would help bankrupt the insurance system.
Don't tell me this whole b.s. wasn't a set-up.
The Board should immediately replace the President/Chancellor ~ the point being that the hiring action involved a fraudulent misrepresentation of what this puke was going to cost the school if they hired him. He didn't negotiate in good faith.