Story originally printed in the Tomah Journal or online at www.tomahjournal.com

Published - Monday, October 09, 2006

Editorial: Marriage amendment casts gays from society's mainstream

For as long as homosexuality has been a political issue, gay men and women have been condemned as filthy, sinful and abnormally promiscuous.

It’s against this backdrop that many gays and lesbians yearn for the mainstream values embodied in faithful, lifetime relationships. Gays who embrace this lifestyle should be encouraged, not discouraged, which is why Wisconsin voters should reject the marriage amendment on the Nov. 7 ballot.

The constitutional amendment is more than discriminatory, divisive and mean-spirited; it’s illogical. It’s true that legal recognition of same-sex couples would alter the idea of traditional marriage, just as repealing laws against inter-racial marriage did 40 years ago. But if recognition of same-sex couples challenges one tradition, it fortifies another: monogamy.

The most offensive argument against same-sex unions is the slippery slope. Amendment supporters argue that once same-sex couples unite, it’s only a matter of time before the government recognizes polygamy, pedophilia or bestiality. That’s ridiculous. Recognition of same-sex unions serves as a restraint on sexual behavior. Lifetime, monogamous relationships work for opposite-sex couples, and gays are simply asking to be part of an institution that encourages a lifetime commitment between two people and discourages multiple sex partners.

Obviously, there are religious objections to same-sex relationships, but state-sponsored marriage has long ceased to be a religious function (atheists and agnostics are allowed to marry). Besides,it’s not necessary for the state to use the religious term “marriage” to recognize same-sex couples. Vermont pioneered the workable concept of civil unions, but backers of the Wisconsin amendment specifically foreclosed that option. The amendment’s second sentence clearly takes civil unions off the table.

Even if the amendment passes, same-sex couples could still hire an attorney and hammer out many of the legal rights and obligations that opposite-sex couples receive free of charge. But why should the state erect roadblocks against any couple that’s ready to make a lifetime commitment of love and fidelity? Gays and lesbians only desire a place in society’s mainstream, and there’s no legitimate reason to deny them rights and privileges everyone else takes for granted. The marriage amendment has no place in an increasingly bloated state Constitution. It deserves rejection Nov. 7.

All stories copyright 2006 Tomah Journal and other attributed sources.