Constitutional Amendment Would Ban Faculty Marriages, Civil Unions (Winter 2004)
While President Bush’s effort to champion a constitutional “Defense of Marriage” amendment has been the subject of national headlines, much less attention has been given to a related piece of legislation – UCI’s very own “Faculty Defense of Marriage Act.” The bill was first proposed by members of the Ayn Rand society on Feb. 18 at a colloquium entitled, “Argument by Binary Opposition: Is it Right or Wrong?”
According to Rand spokesman Dagny Taggart, the Faculty Defense of Marriage Act is intended to prevent faculty members, post-docs, and advanced PhD candidates from marrying and possibly receiving unfair benefits from joint appointments. It would also nullify all currently existing faculty marriages.
Outraged English and Comparative Literature faculty members including Markisa Goblekin, Jone Newsmith, and Andrechael Szelenderson worry that the act would deprive married faculty of equitable legal and medical treatment. Taggart defended his position by stating, “Faculty marriage compromises the sanctity of the institution of marriage and presents a general social threat. Frankly, these people should not be allowed to fraternize, much less fall in love and possibly reproduce.” Taggert cites biochemical research which suggests that in a normal, healthy gene pool, the mutant “nerdosomes” carried in faculty DNA would be rapidly de-selected.
“I think I speak for all students when I say that the mere thought of two faculty members having sex, or even making meaningful eye contact, is morally, aesthetically, and viscerally repugnant.” Advocates of the act also cite the potential dangers of faculty love turning sour. Says freshman John Galt, “Acrimonious faculty divorces could plunge any department, say for example the English department, into a maelstrom of bickering and internecine strife. We wouldn’t want that to happen.”
Constitutional Amendment Would Ban Faculty Marriages, Civil Unions (Winter 2004)