Friday, January 12, 2007

UK “thumbing its nose” at voters, says state family advocacy group

For Immediate Release
January 12, 2007

Contact: Martin Cothran
Phone: 859-329-1919

LEXINGTON, KY. —“UK is thumbing its nose at the General Assembly that passed the Marriage Protection Amendment two years ago and the more than a million Kentucky voters who ratified it,” said the spokesman for a state family advocacy group about a UK committee recommendation to give taxpayer-funded benefits to the live-in sexual partners of its staff.

According to Martin Cothran, senior policy analyst for The Family Foundation, the report contains a recommended affidavit that domestic partners would be expected to sign to indicate that they were really in a “long term” relationship. “This report also shows that UK thinks it can just ignore the 75 percent of voters who just two years ago approved an amendment to the Kentucky Constitution prohibiting the creation of a legal status similar to marriage,” said Cothran.

“A couple of things are pretty clear now,” said Cothran. “The first is that this report shows UK has its priorities mixed up. The second is that proponents of domestic partner benefits can’t add too well.”

The report, authored by the “Work-Life Committee,” argued that such benefits were needed to make UK a top research university. “This report shows that there are people in leadership at UK who really believe the ludicrous idea that giving taxpayer-funded benefits to live-in sexual partners is going to make them a top 20 school. As the guy in the beer commercials likes to say: ‘Brilliant!’”

But the report also gives ammunition to opponents of the plan by admitting that it will cost hundreds of thousands of university dollars. “This report shreds the argument that this plan won’t cost taxpayers any money by admitting that this will cost the university hundreds of thousands of dollars, and that taxpayers will be expected to contribute—whether they like it or not.”

###

at

No comments:

Post a Comment

You are welcome to post at this blog. You are asked, however, to refrain from the following:

1. Name-calling;
2. Questioning the motives or integrity of people you have never met just because you disagree with them;
3. Using obscenities or other expressions not appropriate or necessary to civilized discussion;
4. Taking disagreement personally;
5. Demeaning or insulting remarks.

The host will attempt to abide by the same rules and only asks that you not provide him with the temptation to do so in return by violating them.

Failure to comply with these rules can result (depending solely on the arbitrary and inscrutable will of the host) in the deletion of offending posts and suspension of posting privileges. Such measures are more likely if you post anonymously.