Wisconsin high court to rule on gay m...

Wisconsin high court to rule on gay marriage ban

There are 5 comments on the TwinCities.com story from Jun 29, 2010, titled Wisconsin high court to rule on gay marriage ban. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

The Wisconsin Supreme Court is expected to rule this week on whether the 2006 constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and civil unions is valid.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

Frank Stanton

Saratoga Springs, NY

#3 Jun 29, 2010
Well I hope we homosexualize that state too !

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#5 Jun 29, 2010
This week?? Yikers!!

Too bad it won't legalize marriage equality if it gets struck down, but it'll certainly help if it does.

If the hate-mongers want to do it again they'll have to bring multiple amendments before the voters, which will be way harder to do and much more difficult to lie about.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#6 Jun 29, 2010
We now have strong evidence that voters consider these issues to be separate: AZ turned down a ban on both institutions then approved a ban on marriage only. WA banned marriage, but voters approved civil unions. It is no longer reasonable to argue that these constitute a single issue in the minds of the electorate.

“Married as I can be!”

Since: Jun 07

Las Vegas

#7 Jun 29, 2010
Confusing. "The state already defines marriage as being between one man and one woman," but isn't that because of the constitutional amendment that is being held up for judicial review? And if the high court finds that amendment to be unconstitutional, because of the way it was presented to voters, doesn't that mean that the amendment is voided? I'm not getting this.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#8 Jun 30, 2010
ltndncr59 wrote:
Confusing. "The state already defines marriage as being between one man and one woman," but isn't that because of the constitutional amendment that is being held up for judicial review? And if the high court finds that amendment to be unconstitutional, because of the way it was presented to voters, doesn't that mean that the amendment is voided? I'm not getting this.
I believe the argument is that the amendment was invalid because it covered two different subjects: Marriage and civil unions. This claim has, up until now, been unconvincing to state courts. But I think AZ and WA change the landscape.

It's like if you had a petition to ban pedophilia and masturbation. Many would sign the petition to ban pedophilia. Perhaps few would be willing to go on-record supporting masturbation. So you end up sanctioning something that the voters weren't really paying attention to.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Dane County Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News St. Croix County continues to lead state growth (Mar '07) Jul '16 Vandeta 2
News Artists transform Madison with murals (Jan '16) Jan '16 BRENT 3
News Former Eau Claire County DA sentenced in forger... (Aug '09) May '15 Hawk 2
News U.S. Supreme Court case could change law enforc... (Apr '15) Apr '15 uss liberty 1
News Scott Walker Loses Education Control Fight in C... (Feb '15) Feb '15 Cordwainer Trout 2
News Obama picks federal prosecutor as attorney general (Nov '14) Nov '14 Matt Mikkelsen 1
News Madison attorney receives jail sentence for sex... (Sep '14) Sep '14 CJBrant 1
More from around the web