The Supreme Court needs to smack this crap down. "Equal protection" prohibits this type of discrimination. If same sex sodomy cannot be outlawed, the university cannot discriminate based on the sex of the unmarried live-in.
I believe "they" (employers etc) should stop offering benefits to the recreationally joined. (lets be honest, if you just live together as a same sex couple or otherwise couple, it is just for recreational sex.)
IOW society as a policy rewards the institution not thin individual. An individual participating in sex for recreation is no a benefit to the longterm of society an thus should not be entitled to a reward.
So, if I have a same sex roommate who has better ins. than I do, I can just get on that policy, and dare the employer to prove I am heterosexual.
Or haven't they noticed that a lot of people who don't make much money do get same sex roommates for strictly financial reasons?