More info on Res 30:
Legal analysis of the amendment (pdf)
Why the Civil Unions and Marriage Ban is Wrong
Just a note -- if you are in a committed but unmarried relationship of any type, same gender OR NOT, this amendment affects you, esp. if you live in an area where companies are currently required to provide health insurance for non-married partners and their children, or where you are currently allowed to visit your dying partner in the hospital and be the executor of their living will regarding their health care if they are incapacitated. It's not just an attack on the status of gay people as citizens of the state, it's practically a salvo in a war on singles regardless of their gender or hard-wired preferences.
Something I find particularly disturbing (quote from one of the links above):
Quote:
|
The experience of other states that have passed similar bans provides real-life evidence. The national Human Rights Campaign has compiled a report that details far-reaching consequences in these states. For example, Ohio judges have dismissed domestic violence cases involving unmarried heterosexual couples because the victims were not married to their alleged abusers. Even though the women were not gay, the judges ruled that the state's new ban prohibits legal recognition for any unmarried couples--even when it comes to domestic violence.
|
I'm apalled that this ever even made it so far as a ballot. If it passes, don't be surprised when they have to find a replacement webmaster for this site because I will not stay in Wisconsin. The very question is so vile, so disgusting, that I'm a little ashamed to live here.
