“Shall section 13 of article XIII of the constitution be created to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state and that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state?” (Exact wording of the Nov. 7th statewide referendum regarding the Wisconsin Marriage Protection Amendment)On Nov. 7, Wisconsin’s state Legislature will issue a referendum to voters to decide whether or not the noted passage above should be included as an amendment to the state’s constitution, effectively banning same-sex marriages and all civil unions without marriage licenses.
The ban, which has been passed in the state’s legislative branch twice, will go into effect and become law if Wisconsin’s majority votes “yes.” If the referendum fails, the question of whether or not its predominately conservative supporters will push to try again is up in the air.
Wisconsin currently has no definition of a marital union that can apply to same-sex couples, civil unions or heterosexual “domestic partnerships.” The latter are essentially unmarried couples, gay or straight, who live together but have not been joined in traditional civil or religious ceremonies. Civil unions are similar, except a legal proceeding has taken place to give the couple certain rights and benefits otherwise reserved for traditionally married couples. New Mexico and Rhode Island are currently the only other states in the country that have an “unknown or undefined” set of rules to either recognize or to deny non-traditional partnerships. Seven other states will issue an amendment referendum like Wisconsin’s in November.
Eighteen states have passed full constitutional amendments like the proposed Wisconsin one, and 24 others ban civil and same-sex unions with statues. Just five states and the District of Columbia recognize domestic partnerships, while two – Connecticut and Vermont – allow civil unions.
Massachusetts alone recognizes same-sex marriages, following a State Supreme Judicial Court decision in 2003. The “full faith and credit” clause of the U.S. Constitution, however, throws the Massachusetts decision into a controversial limbo; the clause requires states to accept and enforce the judicial proceedings of other states. However, the Defense of Marriage Act, signed during Clinton’s presidency, allows states to refuse recognition of same-sex marriages in other states. The discrepancies between DOMA and the clause, therefore, make it impossible for a state denying civil unions (i.e. Alabama) and one upholding them (Massachusetts) to find common ground. In simpler terms, if two men legally joined in Boston moved to Alabama, the state of Alabama – citing its own laws and DOMA – would consider their Massachusetts marriage license nothing more than a piece of paper.
Scholars believe this issue will be in question until a national standard for marriage is set or the U.S. Supreme Court tries a case of precedence. The issue has become as much of a legal debate as it has a moral one. The beliefs of Fair Wisconsin, an anti-amendment group based in Madison, are perhaps best expressed by their motto: “A Fair Wisconsin Votes No.” According to Fair Wisconsin’s Web site, they maintain that the constitutional addition “hurts loving and committed lesbian and gay couples who live in every part of Wisconsin” and “endangers existing legal protections for all unmarried couples.”
The organization has received a great deal of help spreading their “Vote No” campaign message at Marquette, with a chapter being established as an official student group on campus just weeks ago.
Pro-amendment groups include the Family Research Institute of Wisconsin and Vote Yes for Marriage, both of which also support a nationwide marriage referendum. Vote Yes for Marriage asserts that the “traditional one-man-one-woman marriage is good for men and women [and] is the best environment for children.”
FRIW, in defending its stance, cited a July 2006 UW-Madison Survey Center statewide poll, which found that about 53 percent of those surveyed supported the amendment while 44 percent said they were opposed. WisPolitics.com and Diversified Research conducted a more recent poll, released in early October, that showed 53 percent of respondents in favor of the amendment and 39 percent opposed.
The Catholic Church in Wisconsin encourages the population to vote in favor of the amendment, calling it “the prudent thing to do in light of judicial and legislative actions in other states.” The bishops listed both secular and religious reasons for their views, but stressed their desire to remain respectful and sensitive to both homo- and heterosexual couples of all types. In their open letter to Wisconsin’s Catholics, the bishops articulate their stance: “Our support of this amendment has as its only motive the strengthening and defense of marriage, and should not be interpreted as hostility to any group.”
Although the Law School hosted a debate on the topic in early October, Marquette’s administration has not yet issued an official university statement regarding the amendment.
Both sides have urged students to voice their opinion on Nov. 7.
Popularity: 12% [?]
