Tuesday at the Capitol more than 300 people registered to speak while spectators crowded the hallways at a contentious committee hearing regarding a proposal that would ban same-sex marriage in Wisconsin.
The Joint Committee on Judiciary, Corrections and Privacy Assembly heard over seven hours of testimony on Assembly Joint Resolution 67, which would create a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman in Wisconsin. The resolution would also prohibit any identical or substantially similar status to marriage between unmarried individuals. If passed, it would appear before voters in November 2006.
State Sen. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, and state Rep. Mark Gundrum, R-New Berlin, the lead sponsors of the amendment, defended the resolution and stressed its necessity.
'[The resolution] would protect Wisconsin from activist judges and over-zealous county clerks,' Fitzgerald said.
Fitzgerald also said the resolution would not prevent the granting of legal benefits to same-sex couples, but it would prevent same-sex couples from attaining legal status identical to marriage.
State Rep. Frederick Kessler, D-Milwaukee, questioned the wording of the resolution and expressed concern that the resolution could threaten benefits such as insurance for same-sex couples.
'I substantially dispute your contention. There is nothing in the amendment that creates an exception for [receiving insurance],' Kessler said.
State Sen. Fred Risser, D-Madison, said having children is no longer the sole reason for marriage and questioned the motives behind the resolution.
'How is society hurt by same-sex marriage'? Risser asked.
Gundrum answered that marriage is integral to the upbringing of children and same-sex couples are 'incapable of providing gender balance.' He also said allowing same-sex unions would be a 'deception for society.'
'Youth will be raised in a society [where they're] taught that this is acceptable,' Gundrum said.
UW-Madison professor of pediatrics Paul Grossberg said supporting children in same-sex families is the right thing to do, and the amendment 'will hurt real families [and] real kids.'
Teresa Collett, law professor at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota, testified in favor of the resolution. Collett said children flourish when raised by heterosexual married couples and went on to stress the importance of the resolution going to a ballot.
'Isn't it the right of citizens of the state to answer this question'? Collett said.
Rev. Curt Anderson of the First Congregational UCC of Madison testified against the resolution.
'Christians should oppose this amendment,' Anderson said. 'Jesus said we are to do unto others as they do to us, [and] none of us believe in discrimination.'
Marquette University political science professor Christopher Wolfe favored the resolution, saying it is the 'clear will' of the people of Wisconsin to favor heterosexual marriage.
'Equality is not an absolute principle,' Wolfe said.
