The debate over same-sex partner benefits: as more colleges extend coverage, others continue to deny it. (Update).

A district judge upheld the Montana University system decision to deny health insurance benefits to same-sex partners, saying the school's policy was not unconstitutional. The policy "is based on the marital status of employees, not on their sexual orientation, and that is a reasonable and objective standard for determining who qualifies for employment benefits," Judge Thomas Honzel said in November.

"I find it interesting that a judge would think marital status is an objective standard, since the fact that gay people cannot get married anyplace in this country means they are forever prohibited from access to these benefits," says Kim Mills, education director of the Human Rights Campaign in Washington, D.C. "I don't see how marital status can be objective. It's a fairly subjective standard. If you took at American families today, the marriage rate has been declining, and many people are not living in neat 'Ozzie and Harriet' households."

An increasing number of colleges and universities ore instituting same-sex domestic partner benefits, Mills says. "I'm aware of 177 colleges and universities currently offering such benefits. As recently as 1996, that number was 57 colleges and universities, so it is increasing at a pretty steady rate."

The University of Minnesota enacted same-sex domestic partner benefits in 2001, after years of debate. The university had previously used the state's insurance plan--with limited domestic partner benefits--but the Board of Regents severed ties with the state's plan to create a new self-insurance system.

"There are creative ways of obtaining these benefits for employees if the employer feels it is important enough," Mills says.