Wisc. Supreme Court may review anti-gay marriage amendment

[WillParkinson]

Wisc. Supreme Court may review anti-gay marriage amendment


(Madison, Wisconsin) A Wisconsin appeals court has asked the state Supreme Court to review a constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriage.

In sending the case to the justices, the appeals court said the issue was a matter of significant public interest and had statewide implications.

The high court has not indicated if it will take up the case.

The amendment to the Wisconsin state constitution was passed in 2006 by 59 percent of voters. The lawsuit was filed the following June by University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh political science instructor William McConkey.

McConkey, who describes himself as a “Christian, straight, married” father of nine and grandfather of seven, said in the lawsuit that the question put to voters was illegal because it contained two questions - one regarding marriage and a second involving civil unions. Wisconsin law requires only one question be put to voters at a time.

http://www.365gay.com/news/wisc-supreme-court-may-review-anti-gay-marriage-amendment/

[LeftHander]

1. it is two questions....

QUESTION 1: “Marriage. Shall section 13 of article XIII of the constitution be created to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state and that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state?”

Notice the AND

this and how to create two seperate questions from the one RUN ON SENTANCE above.

Shall section 13 of article XIII of the constitution be created to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state?

Shall section 13 of article XIII of the constitution be created to provide that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state?


The harm caused to voters was because you could have two answers....for the one statement. Saying NO to the second forces a NO to the first. Saying NO to the first, likewise...

[WillParkinson]

2. Originally....

When the amendment came into question, Wisconsinites seemed to favor a civil union while not wanting outright gay marriage. That was part of the reason this gentleman filed the suit in the first place.