Got feedback on the new design? We're Listening! Send us Feedback

Legal Challenge to WI Anti Gay Amendment Going to Trial »

Posted by: david_nwpa 8 months, 3 weeks ago

7 Comments Report this Story

7.0

Scale of 1 to 10

Read: 21

Propped: 60

Comments: 7

Click Prop It to Raise Score
Prop it

A judge has rejected a motion from the state of Wisconsin to dismiss a lawsuit challenging a constitutional amendment that bars same-sex marriage and blocks the state from recognizing civil unions. The amendment to the state constitution was passed last year by 59 percent of voters.

Read Full Story at 365gay.com

Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 7
  • 0%
    david_nwpa8 months, 3 weeks ago

    The voter has been harmed in Wisconsin. The people were asked to settle two matters with one Amendment. If their law explicitly says that each Amendment can address only one issue at a time, then the law was violated. Voters have a right to seek redress as McConkey has done.

    Reply
    • 0%
      jordan118 months, 3 weeks ago

      So the foolish state tried to block redress for a bill that broke its own state law. Quite a waste of time, I'd say.

      " Wisconsin law requires only one question be put to voters at a time.">>

      Seems pretty clear to me. Are the state's attorney's stupid, or what?

      Reply

      2 Replies

      • 0%
        lvrofwolves8 months, 3 weeks ago

        Sounds very underhanded if you ask me, voters getting screwed.

        Reply

        1 Reply

    • 0%
      Harbeas8 months, 3 weeks ago

      I agree with the above comments. They should have had the voters vote on each issue separately. They might find the results a little different.

      Reply

      1 Reply

      • 0%
        kxjoe8 months, 3 weeks ago

        I must agree. The questions were "Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state."

        The first one is already a state law, but they wanted it permanent by making it an amendment. The second pretty much bans civil unions of all sorts. Most experts thought the second part went beyond what the average person wanted to inflict against homosexuals. However, the first was so powerful to the Christians that it dragged the second along with it.

        Reply
      Next 25 comments

      You must be signed in to post a comment. Sign in »

      Submitted By:
      david_nwpa

      Hello folks, First, allow me to thank you all for your kind words, thoughts, prayers, and concerns. I am having surgery on September 19 to ...

      Also submitted:

      Related Articles:

      Why not submit a story?

      Also Propping This Article

      view all »

      Groups Watching This

      No groups are watching this story. Why not share it with your group?

      Advertisement