|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
||||||
|
Candidates
|
Voters will decide definition of marriage By Shalena Janis, Hudson Star-Observer
Wisconsin legislatures have turned to the registered voters, allowing them to make a constitutional amendment regarding the definition of a legal marriage recognized by the state.
On Nov. 7, registered voters will choose whether or not two sentences will be added to the constitution.
The Wisconsin Legislative Council proposes to amend it by adding the following provision: “Section 13 of article XIII of the constitution is created to read: [Article XIII] Section 13. Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state.”
In order for an amendment to take place, two legislative bodies that are concurrent with each other must approve a resolution, said Rep. Kitty Rhoades.
“It’s a very prolonged and intense process,” she said. “As it should be.”
The amendment was proposed first in the 2003-04 legislative year and again in the 2005-06 one.
Now the voters must approve the change in a statewide referendum.
The reason the change went to the voters, Rhoades said, was to give them the opportunity to provide their input on this very important issue.
It is the attorney general’s job to write the descriptive prose of the definition of marriage, which was not done objectively, she said.
Sen. Sheila Harsdorf voted for a change to the definition of marriage in the Wisconsin Constitution.
“I did vote to preserve traditional marriage,” she said, “because of my belief that a marriage is intended to be between a man and a woman.”
Vote ‘yes’
If voters check the “yes” box on the ballot, it means they want to add the two sentences to the constitution.
For three years, the Family Research Institute of Wisconsin educated and campaigned about the issue of preserving the marriage between a man and a woman across the state, said Julaine Appling, CEO.
The organization’s mission is to forward the Christian values to strengthen life, and it’s very educational in nature for the voters.
A vote “yes” will mean a preservation of marriage, and a “no” vote says the voters do not care if it gets redefined, Appling said about what each decision means.
The organization has hundreds of thousands of pieces of research it has conducted, over 5,000 churches and about 2 million supporters across the state.
“We’ve crunched our numbers,” Appling said. “Our goal is to stand as close to them as we can.”
On Nov. 7, she said, people will speak very loudly that they want to preserve a marriage between one man and one woman.
“The average voter understands that it is not just benefits,” Appling said. “It’s about the definition of marriage and leaving fatherless and motherless homes.”
Vote ‘no’
If voters check the “no” box on the Nov. 7 ballot, it will mean they do not want to add the two sentences to the constitution.
Fair Wisconsin, an organization dubbing the amendment to be a gay marriage ban, wants to educate and campaign about the issues of healthcare, pensions, hospital visitations and retirement plans.
Many of the benefits are given to the significant others in gay relationships and straight couples that never marry, but will be terminated if the change is allowed, said Rachel Strauch-Nelson, press secretary.
The organization is particularly concerned about the second sentence that will be added if a vote “yes” wins on the ballot.
Many public employers in Wisconsin allow domestic partner benefits to couples who are not married and even allow civil unions.
According to a Fair Wisconsin memo, “Its broad language will jeopardize any form of legal protections for unmarried couples — whether they are gay or straight.”
“We are trying to educate the voters about the second sentence,” Strauch-Nelson said. “Every other state that has passed an amendment like this has seen serious damages like the ones we are trying to show the voters.”
|
|
||||
|
|
||||||
|
||||||