Wisconsin Assembly Passes Amendment Against Gay Marriage

[rodbarnett]

MADISON, Wis. (AP) - The state Assembly approved a proposed amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution on Friday to prohibit same-sex marriages or civil unions.
After meeting on the issue all night, the lawmakers voted 68-27 to back the proposal and send it to the state Senate. More approval from lawmakers and voters would also be required for it to become law.

Wisconsin statutes already define marriage as a contract between a husband and a wife and do not recognize gay marriage. But backers fear a judge would overrule that.

<snip>

Democratic Rep. Tom Hebl said the amendment's 43 words were among the most spiteful ever put on paper.

"It's liberty and justice for all unless you're gay and lesbian," Hebl said.

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGAFISKFGRD.html

comment : they already had a law but they stayed up all night to do the ammendment..... seems a little obsessive, dosen't it?

[WillParkinson]

1. Not at all...

Gays and Lesbians aren't people. They don't deserve to be happy. They don't 'love'. They're only out for sex. Why should their lifestyle 'choice' (and it IS a choice don't you know) be held against the majority?

Oh, wait, I know. Because WE ARE PEOPLE DAMMIT! We DESERVE the respect that is supposed to be shown to ALL people of the United (STRAIGHT?) States of America.

I'm ashamed to live in Wisconsin.

On edit: I can't get the link to work.

[salin]

2. The argument you use - it what has been used in Indiana

by the house democrats to stand down a lastminute grandstanding effort by house republicans on the issue.

The House speaker refused to put the amendment on the docket. Repubs walked out.

Note Indiana has a two year term with a "long session" and a "short session" - we are in a short session year - and last week the House repubs pulled all work to a grinding stop. Can't say that the house dems were standing on a principle of holding up rights for gay marriage - as a law (like the one cited in this Wisconsin story) has already passed. So the dems are using the "there is a law on the books, this in unnecessary" line as their defense, and have - for the most part - made the republicans whose main charge is "This is THE most IMPORTANT issue facing Indiana" - when the state has a taxproperty problem (state supreme court ruled the system unconstitutional and required it to be changed = and the state house didn't want to deal with it for three years until they had to - and now they are trying to deal with some of the fall out.) - a major budget crisis - and most of the public realize that these issues are more important and are being held up by the house Repubs - for political grandstanding. Appears to be working against them (the gop).

[eyesroll]

3. My response for the Wisconsinite

Welcome to Alabama!

(with sincere apologies to Alabamans)

I guess all us breeders need to thank our lucky stars for Mark Gundrum and the other 67 good, God-fearing representatives for passing that amendment that will protect my sacred, heterosexual union that we got in Vegas because I knocked her up while still technically married to what's-her-name from all them there marriage-sanctity-ruining ho-mos who want to invade our churches and our home-sweet-homes and tell us what to do with their "gay agenda."

Oh, wait.


This will do nothing of the sort. If this passes the Senate (which it's expected to), and passes both houses again next session (which it might), and then gets approved by voters (which it could), it will not only prevent my gay friends from getting married -- it will outlaw civil unions, too. This could invalidate all city domestic-partnership laws, and perhaps prompt many companies to drop health-insurance coverage for same-sex partners of their employees. This could (and yes, I'm aware of the slippery-slope fallacy, but humor me) actually result in an invalidation of the sexual-orientation protection in Wisconsin's employment and housing statutes ("What! This person got married in Massachusetts and now he's living here and wants to teach my children! Gay marriage is illegal here! These men are breaking the law! And we don't have to hire teachers who break laws!").

This will become the most restrictive law in the country. This is more restrictive than Alabama, and they still have people smarting about the loss of their miscegenation law five years ago.

I wonder exactly what Mark Gundrum fears from allowing two loving people to settle down. I wonder why he doesn't want to allow a man to visit his critically ill partner in the hospital. (Don't tell me -- "Won't someone think of the children?" Oh, that's right -- this amendment could be used as ammo in custody cases, too! If the biological mother of a child dies, will the other mother be allowed to raise the kid, or will the grandparents who disowned their daughter for being a lesbian be able to come in and claim the kid, the house and the CD collection as their rightful inheritance?)

As for the "we're-not-imposing-our-religious-views-of-course-we-aren't-but-marriage-was-ordained-by-God-and-we-can't-piss-Him-off" crowd, well, thank you very much for declaring your religion has more validity than others. Church and state aside -- for in no state does a church have to recognize any civil marriage -- some religions do recognize same-sex marriage. What then?

For the record, I was raised a Reform Jew, and I still identify very strongly as culturally Jewish. And guess what? Reform Judaism recognizes same-sex marriage. As does the United Church of Christ, the Unitarian-Universalists, some Episcopalians, and lots of others. These are hardly the "fringe" sects opponents claim.

Want to preserve marriage? Let's start with all of the people who have messed it up in the first place. I wonder how many of those 68 have committed adultery. I wonder how many are divorced.

I wonder if any of them got married in Vegas because of a pregnancy resulting from an adulterous affair. Could be fun to find out.

In the meantime, hand me a barf bag. I wish I could say "I can't believe this happened in Wisconsin, a former progressive mecca," but I can't. I'm ashamed today to be a Wisconsinite. I'm ashamed at how low we've sunk.

[htuttle]

4. Governor Doyle is going to get writer's cramp...

...from having the veto all the whacko right-wing bills coming out of the legislature this term.

On the bright side, thanks to the Good Ol' Boy from Elroy, the Governor has plenty of veto power in Wisconsin.

I wonder if Doyle could use that old line-item veto to just change the bill from saying 'may not' to 'may'.

:evilgrin:

[RetroLounge]

5. Just another reason to work locally to get rid of Repugs

http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/mar04/212454.asp

THis pisses me off to no end, that a once progressive state like Wisconsin is now a bastion of Neanderthal Repugs.

Lets hope Gov. Doyle can veto this one too...