For a state with \forward"" as its motto, Wisconsin is miles behind on gay rights.
While some of our congressmen are trying to institutionalize discrimination with an anti-gay marriage amendment to the Wisconsin constitution, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and the Massachusetts Supreme Court have actually furthered humanity by affording civil rights to all.
Newsom has handed out marriage licenses to same-sex couples for over a week now, extending benefits to all of San Francisco's citizens despite an impending lawsuit. The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that a ban on same-sex marriages violates the equal protection and due process requirements of their constitution, which, by the way, is the foundation for the U.S. Constitution.
On the other hand, some Wisconsin senators are proposing a mean-spirited amendment to permanently give members of the LGBT community second-class status. Wisconsin currently defines marriage as between a husband and a wife, a gender-neutral definition. The proposed amendment will define it as between a man and woman, which means that until such an amendment is passed, gay marriage should be considered legal in Wisconsin.
Opponents of Newsom have accused him of ""transcending law,"" because California defines marriage as between a man and a woman. But since Wisconsin's law is gender neutral, the Dane County Clerk would simply be disavowing de facto discrimination. Although Wisconsin congressmen have tried in the past to define marriage as between a man and a woman, they have failed-a sign that marriage does not have to be considered a gender-biased system.
Members of the gay community wants to be recognized as equal citizens by the state. They want to be allowed to visit a sick partner in the hospital or rent a car together. A loving, same-sex couple that has been together for 25 years wants the same rights that are afforded to heterosexual newlyweds.
The LGBT community has not demanded that same-sex marriage be recognized by various religions, only by their representatives in the government. Newsom is not the one acting unlawfully in this debate; the congressmen that are letting religious interests determine policy are violating the First Amendment edict of the separation of church and state. When conservatives want to defend the sanctity of marriage, they should do it at church. They should address the 51 percent divorce rate in Wisconsin, not the union of two people who want to be together.
Thankfully, Rep. Mark Pocan and Sen. Fred Risser, both Democrats from Madison, have introduced bills to end the discrimination and formally allow same-sex civil unions. Madison can be proud that two of its congressmen have realized that the fight for civil rights did not end in the '60s.
