Anti-Gay Marraige Amendment Passes in WI

[MasterJedi]

I haven't seen anybody post this on here yet so I guess I'll do it. And hell yeah, thank God it passed and now I'll be voting for it!

MADISON, Wis. -- The state Assembly approved a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and civil unions on Tuesday night.

The controversial amendment would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman in the state constitution.

The Republican-dominated Assembly's approved the amendement by a vote of 62-31.
 
The voters will have a chance to weigh in on the constitutional change this November. The referendum will appear on the same ballot as Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle's bid to get a second term in office.

A majority vote from the referendum would add 43 words to the constitution declaring the state recognizes only marriage between one man and one woman and doesn't grant a similar legal status to unmarried individuals, such as civil unions.

Supporters of the ban contend that the amendment would defend marriage from legal challenges seeking to grant same-sex couples the right to marry, such as one that was successful in Massachusetts.

Opponents of the amendment argue that the state already limits marriage to a man and a woman, and that the question of whether to recognize civil unions should be considered separately.

Source: http://www.themilwaukeechannel.com/newsarchive/7543279/detail.html

[Ebowed]

Boo.

[© tweed]

They're all going to get struck down in the courts eventually.  You should have a decade or two, however.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Boo.

^^^^^

[MasterJedi]

Right now polls (including the one on that site) have it passing between 60-65%.

[WalterMitty]

when did the state of wisconsin become so hateful and intolerant?

wisconsin has a proud progressive tradtion.  oh well.  now they can join mississippi and the like in passing  hate-filled legislation.

[ian]

Boo.

^^^^^

^^^^^

[Speed of Sound]

Boo.

^^^^^

^^^^^

^^^^^

[Jake]

Freedom Fighters

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

when did the state of wisconsin become so hateful and intolerant?

wisconsin has a proud progressive tradtion.  oh well.  now they can join mississippi and the like in passing  hate-filled legislation.

Some Americans don't define "progress" by condoning immorality.

[°Leprechaun]

when did the state of wisconsin become so hateful and intolerant?

wisconsin has a proud progressive tradtion.  oh well.  now they can join mississippi and the like in passing  hate-filled legislation.

Some Americans don't define "progress" by condoning immorality.

I can't think of anything MORE immoral than supporting such an anti-freedom anti-human and 100% unAmerican ammendment as this.
It is nauseating, disgusting, and very disturbing. It is a contemptable thing to do.  I certainly would never condone such an immoral act, but will always CONDEMN it in the STRONGEST words possible.
Oh by the way, what is 'marraige'?

[MODU]

Marriage is a state-recognized union.  In WI's case, they are clearly identifying it as a union between only a man and a woman, as it has been for centuries. 

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

when did the state of wisconsin become so hateful and intolerant?

wisconsin has a proud progressive tradtion.  oh well.  now they can join mississippi and the like in passing  hate-filled legislation.

Some Americans don't define "progress" by condoning immorality.

I can't think of anything MORE immoral than supporting such an anti-freedom anti-human and 100% unAmerican ammendment as this.
It is nauseating, disgusting, and very disturbing. It is a contemptable thing to do.  I certainly would never condone such an immoral act, but will always CONDEMN it in the STRONGEST words possible.

I don't believe they care what you think.

[afleitch]

when did the state of wisconsin become so hateful and intolerant?

wisconsin has a proud progressive tradtion.  oh well.  now they can join mississippi and the like in passing  hate-filled legislation.

Some Americans don't define "progress" by condoning immorality.

I can't think of anything MORE immoral than supporting such an anti-freedom anti-human and 100% unAmerican ammendment as this.
It is nauseating, disgusting, and very disturbing. It is a contemptable thing to do.  I certainly would never condone such an immoral act, but will always CONDEMN it in the STRONGEST words possible.

I don't believe they care what you think.

And many don't care about what you think. That's the joy of being a free country.

[°Leprechaun]

Well, I think we need to all remember the following poem..

i before a, except if you're gay

[Ebowed]

Marriage is a state-recognized union.  In WI's case, they are clearly identifying it as a union between only a man and a woman, as it has been for centuries. 

Inter-racial marriage was also prohibited for centuries until about 40-50 years ago.  Who cares how it's been for centuries?

[°Leprechaun]

Marriage is a state-recognized union.  In WI's case, they are clearly identifying it as a union between only a man and a woman, as it has been for centuries. 

Inter-racial marriage was also prohibited for centuries until about 40-50 years ago.  Who cares how it's been for centuries?

People who are still living in the Dark Ages.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

And many don't care about what you think. That's the joy of being a free country.

Still working on Romans chapter 1, are you?

[afleitch]

I've got it if you want it. But maybe you dont deserve it

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Marriage is a state-recognized union.  In WI's case, they are clearly identifying it as a union between only a man and a woman, as it has been for centuries. 

Inter-racial marriage was also prohibited for centuries until about 40-50 years ago.  Who cares how it's been for centuries?

Murder and incest have also been prohibited for centuries....but hey, who's counting?

[Ebowed]

Marriage is a state-recognized union.  In WI's case, they are clearly identifying it as a union between only a man and a woman, as it has been for centuries. 

Inter-racial marriage was also prohibited for centuries until about 40-50 years ago.  Who cares how it's been for centuries?

Murder and incest have also been prohibited for centuries....but hey, who's counting?

I didn't say that tradition was inherently bad, only that it is not inherently good.

[jokerman]

when did the state of wisconsin become so hateful and intolerant?

wisconsin has a proud progressive tradtion.  oh well.  now they can join mississippi and the like in passing  hate-filled legislation.

Some Americans don't define "progress" by condoning immorality.

Yeah, I don't like the hijacking of the word.  According to one definition of the word progress means more peoples' lives ruined because of drugs and the breakup of the family and the economic downturn that results from all of this.  That's not progress.  I, personally, take a more pragmatic, utilitarian view of the word.  Progress is simply -that- progress.  It's when you improve the lives of the people and create a more just and stronger society.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Marriage is a state-recognized union.  In WI's case, they are clearly identifying it as a union between only a man and a woman, as it has been for centuries. 

Inter-racial marriage was also prohibited for centuries until about 40-50 years ago.  Who cares how it's been for centuries?

Murder and incest have also been prohibited for centuries....but hey, who's counting?

I didn't say that tradition was inherently bad, only that it is not inherently good.

In other words, you had no point.

[Ebowed]

Marriage is a state-recognized union.  In WI's case, they are clearly identifying it as a union between only a man and a woman, as it has been for centuries. 

Inter-racial marriage was also prohibited for centuries until about 40-50 years ago.  Who cares how it's been for centuries?

Murder and incest have also been prohibited for centuries....but hey, who's counting?

I didn't say that tradition was inherently bad, only that it is not inherently good.

In other words, you had no point.

No, I think what had no point was the defense of banning gay marriage because that's the way it's "been for centuries."

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No, I think what had no point was the defense of banning gay marriage because that's the way it's "been for centuries."

Actually, I didn't see him as offerring a defense of the law based on human tradition.  We don't need to point to tradition to name murder as being wrong.  He was simply saying this action is not a change of the law.  This is a defensive action.