BREAKING NEWS: Marquette University to offer domestic partner benefits

[ROTC90]

You don't get the difference between two committed partners expressing their commitment and multiple people forming some sort of union?

Snarky reply "Sure Relativist. Society doesn't approve of bigamy, but if it did, you & MU would be all for it."

It should be about natural law. right/wrong not expediancy & practicality.  Our Faith demands some absolutes.

[HoopsMalone]

Snarky reply "Sure Relativist. Society doesn't approve of bigamy, but if it did, you & MU would be all for it."

It should be about natural law. right/wrong not expediancy & practicality.  Our Faith demands some absolutes.

I don't get what your snarky reply is supposed to mean or how it addresses the issue. 

The trouble with the natural law concept is who defines it.  I can certainly fit marriage equality into a concept of right in absolute sense.

[wyzgy]

what if i were to have another guy for a roomie, strictly platonic, i work for MU and he(my platonic roomie) works where the benefits are minimal.  we walk hand in hand to the human resource people, and i sign him up.  how do you prove you're partners??  how long does MU carry the other person??  we get mad at each other and break up.  is there some kind of divorce.  this is just too weird.  why can't the two people, as a couple, just go and buy a policy, medical, dental, start their own 401k all that stuff, wear rings the whole ball of melting wax.  but why should MU pay for it??  do the two involved in the relationship have a commitment such that when the commitment is over,(like the next morning) steven calls his h.r. person and shuts off the bennies?  i'm sorry, but fr. wild is not the smartest bulb in the jesuit residence.  he messed up big time with the faux hiring, the warrior nickname, and now this??  yeah, he's leaving this summer, throwing this grenade out there for someone else to handle??  you've got to be kidding me. here ya go buddy, handle this hot potato, good luck.  whoa.  all you defenders of this sit there holier than fr. wild knocking any dissenter down from your perch. you guys are a bunch of elitist liberals feeling all fuzzy over this, but sometimes, some things are just wrong. i'm not even getting in to the issues of homosexuality, but to extend the benefits-it's bad business policy-buy your own benefits    

[HoopsMalone]

Alumni that oppose this move with such aggression make me disgusted and embarrassed in parts of the tradition of Marquette.

Particularly when referencing the catechism of the Catholic Church and disregarding the teachings of the foundation of Christianity, The New Testament. Anybody that argues that Jesus would discriminate against anybody is no Christian.

Regarding political correctness, grow up and accept it. The world progresses, try to keep up.

I agree that Jesus' message does not allow for discrimination.  But I don't think that you have to have a certain POV to be Christian.  I think you can have a different POV than Marquette and we can all be Christians/Catholics.  

[HoopsMalone]

all you defenders of this sit there holier than fr. wild knocking any dissenter down from your perch. you guys are a bunch of elitist liberals feeling all fuzzy over this    

how are people who favor inclusion "elites"?  Wouldn't an elite think that he or she is better than others and that others should not have the same rights?

[wyzgy]

Alumni that oppose this move with such aggression make me disgusted and embarrassed in parts of the tradition of Marquette.

Particularly when referencing the catechism of the Catholic Church and disregarding the teachings of the foundation of Christianity, The New Testament. Anybody that argues that Jesus would discriminate against anybody is no Christian.

Regarding political correctness, grow up and accept it. The world progresses, try to keep up.

get over yourself ryno-you sound like another liberal eitist: just shut up about it and get with the program right?  that argument will carry you far young man

[wyzgy]

how are people who favor inclusion "elites"?  Wouldn't an elite think that he or she is better than others and that others should not have the same rights?

 this is not a RIGHT, it's a PRIVLEDGE.  you guys think everything is a right.  a right according to who?  you guys think everything you want is a right.  you all know this is a big sloppy good bye kiss and make-up to all those that went apoplectic when he corrected his error on the lib arts hire.  as far as inclusion goes-you libs sure are generous with other peoples money 

[GGGG]

MU has openly homosexual faculty. They offered this benefit as a matter of fairness, not to advocate for the homosexual lifestyle. Do people want MU to fire all of those who are homosexual?  Or are they going to support different points of view in an academic environment even if they don't agree?

[Coleman]

what if i were to have another guy for a roomie, strictly platonic, i work for MU and he(my platonic roomie) works where the benefits are minimal.  we walk hand in hand to the human resource people, and i sign him up.  how do you prove you're partners??  how long does MU carry the other person??  we get mad at each other and break up.  is there some kind of divorce.  this is just too weird.  why can't the two people, as a couple, just go and buy a policy, medical, dental, start their own 401k all that stuff, wear rings the whole ball of melting wax.  but why should MU pay for it??  do the two involved in the relationship have a commitment such that when the commitment is over,(like the next morning) steven calls his h.r. person and shuts off the bennies?  i'm sorry, but fr. wild is not the smartest bulb in the jesuit residence.  he messed up big time with the faux hiring, the warrior nickname, and now this??  yeah, he's leaving this summer, throwing this grenade out there for someone else to handle??  you've got to be kidding me. here ya go buddy, handle this hot potato, good luck.  whoa.  all you defenders of this sit there holier than fr. wild knocking any dissenter down from your perch. you guys are a bunch of elitist liberals feeling all fuzzy over this, but sometimes, some things are just wrong. i'm not even getting in to the issues of homosexuality, but to extend the benefits-it's bad business policy-buy your own benefits    

Ugh. As for your first scenario, its for civil unions or domestic partnerships. I'm sure insurance companies have very specific requirements for who gets coverage. They know how to avoid fraud. This is what they do.

The rest of your post doesn't merit a reply.

[HoopsMalone]

this is not a RIGHT, it's a PRIVLEDGE.  you guys think everything is a right.  a right according to who?  you guys think everything you want is a right.  you all know this is a big sloppy good bye kiss and make-up to all those that went apoplectic when he corrected his error on the lib arts hire.  as far as inclusion goes-you libs sure are generous with other peoples money 

I am not sure what you mean by "you guys" or libs or your generalizations about me.  I was talking about Marquette and not the world in general.  

But, you brought up elitism.  I am not sure how it is different if something is a right or a privilege.  If you give a privilege and only allow some people to have it based on an immutable trait, you are still discriminating.  If you think that is the best thing, then fine.  

But how are people who think that privileges should pertain to every like-situated person elitists? To me, it is the polar opposite of being an elitist.

[Coleman]

But how are people who think that privileges should pertain to every like-situated person elitists? To me, it is the polar opposite of being an elitist.

+1

Some pretty bad logic going on here guys. Did you really all graduate from Marquette? Guess that core of common studies isn't doing the trick...