Wisconsin's Marriage Amendment Outcome In the Balance
by Jeff Johnson
November 6, 2006
(AgapePress) - - Wisconsin is one of eight states considering constitutional amendments to protect traditional marriage -- but the outcome there is not as predictable as in some of the other states.
Along with two of the other states voting on marriage amendments -- Colorado and Arizona -- Wisconsin is showing no consensus among political observers regarding the fate of a marriage amendment appearing on tomorrow's (Tuesday's) state ballot. The other states where voters are voting on marriage amendments are Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Virginia.
Judith Brant with the group "Wisconsin Vote Yes for Marriage" says the outcome in the Badger State will be determined by which side does the best job motivating their supporters. "The challenge for us is to get our people to the polls," says Brant. "[W]e're convinced that if everybody who supports one-man, one-woman marriage in Wisconsin were to vote, we would have absolutely no trouble."
According to Brant, the amendment in Wisconsin is somewhat unique in that it does more than just protect marriage in name. "It's one sentence with two parts," she explains. "The first defines marriage as one man and one woman; the second part says that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state."
In essence, she says, the second part of the amendment would prohibit judges or the legislature from creating same-sex "civil unions" or domestic partnerships that would provide the same benefits to homosexual partners -- something that other states are having to contend with. Arkansas, for example, already has a constitutional amendment declaring marriage in that state to be the legal union of only one man and one woman. But the issue of civil unions has cropped up in the attorney general's race there.
Democratic candidate Dustin McDaniel is on the record as supporting Arkansas' ban on homosexual "marriage." But he has also told Associated Press that "marriage is different from civil unions and other areas where protections can be applied without intruding on our traditional values and definition of marriage."
McDaniel's campaign manager, Melissa Moody, told American Family Radio News that McDaniel does not support same-sex civil unions or domestic partnerships. But his opponent, Republican Gunner DeLay, disputes that.
"After the story was printed, he tried to back-track and say he just thinks gay couples ought to be able to have access to medical records and visit each other in the hospital and be able to transfer property upon their death," says DeLay. "Well, all the things that he allegedly is concerned about, you can do without the formality of same-sex civil unions."
DeLay believes McDaniel is part of a concerted effort by Democrats to provide special rights to homosexuals. "There's an agenda here," says the Republican candidate, "and they're going to keep nibbling away and attacking this thing until they eventually win out." He feels they are "a long, long way from doing that in Arkansas," but remains convinced that "they have a game plan" -- and that McDaniel is "part of that plan."
DeLay says he would fight to protect Arkansas' marriage protection amendment from any challenges in federal court, including any attempt by judges to create civil unions or domestic partnerships in The Natural State.
Jeff Johnson, a regular contributor to AgapePress, is a reporter for American Family Radio News, which can be heard online.
