Equality: an idea that is indoctrinated into the head of every Clayton student from almost the first day of Kindergarten. Regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation or any other defining characteristic, students are told that we are all “equal.”
This school district teaches students that they are free to show the world who they are and that they can be whatever they want to be.
Although this message has good intentions, in essence it is a lie. Gay citizens of the United States are not equal; they are second-class citizens.
It may seem that the gay rights movement is simply a distant debate intertwining intense religious, moral and political discussions that in the end have no real affect on the already liberal community of Clayton. However, the inequality the gay community suffers from is present in the Clayton School District every day.
According to the District’s employee non-discrimination policy the district only refuses to discriminate on the following bases: race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, all of which are categories mandated by federal law.
This leaves a gaping hole in the policy: sexual orientation. By policy the school district can fire, not hire and discriminate against staff members that are gay.
Granted it is unlikely for gay teachers here at Clayton to feel discriminated against or are in fear of losing their jobs because of their sexual orientation. However this policy sets a frightening principle: we all are not equal.
While the school district does not actively practice discrimination, the policy of the district should reflect its belief of equality.
This policy just sets in stone that even in one of the most liberal school districts in Missouri equality is not a reality, merely a hope for the future.
In addition to the non-discrimination policy, there is a more tangible form of inequality that exists in the district.
Teachers and staff of the Clayton School District are allowed to buy health insurance for spouses from the school districts plan. Additionally, when teachers pass away, they can allocate the remainder of their retirement funds to a living spouse.
However, in the state of Missouri gay marriage and civil union are unavailable, thus blocking gay teachers and staff from these two benefits.
It is for this reason that when gay Missouri State Highway patrolman Dennis Englehard was killed in the line of duty last Christmas, his domestic partner of almost 15 years received no benefits from the state of Missouri, even though the spouses of officers that die in the line of duty are entitled a lifetime of benefits totaling $28,000 per year.
It is tragic injustices such as these that call for the district to close this gap of inequality.
Although federal and state marriage laws are difficult to change, the district can take matters into its own hands.
The school district can grant benefits to domestic partnerships. By doing this, the school district would allow for insurance and other benefits to be applied to any committed couple who applied for domestic partnership through the district’s guidelines. These guidelines would most likely include a requirement that the couple live together, that their finances are intertwined, and that the couple has been with each other for a certain duration of time.
Furthermore, this policy would not be limited to same-sex couples.
Although it would be no easy task implementing these two policies, it is time the district put forth the effort to begin the process to bridge the current gap of inequality.
Across the nation numerous corporations have implemented these policies. Even locally the city of St. Louis now offers both an amended discrimination policy and domestic partnerships.
Even though no Missouri public school holds either of these policies yet, there is no reason Clayton can’t be the first to implement them.
As a leader in Missouri education, this school district should be on the frontier of equality.
What type of message does the district send forth when it preaches equality but does not even provide equality for its own staff?
In a district that so adamantly teaches of equality, this is the least the district can do to make our community a more accepting place.
It is time this district lives up to the words it teaches that “we all are equal.” It is time for change.