Vote No in November
Wisconsin voters will face two referenda when they go to the polls next Tuesday, November 7, both initiated by Republican legislators. Here is why both should go down:
1. Marriage
The proposed Amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution would not only declare that marriage is limited to one man and one woman, but also prohibit State recognition of any legal status similar to marriage, such as civil union or domestic partnership.
Of course the idea that two men or two women could "marry" each other is a mockery of the concept of marriage as it has been understood for thousands of years in societies across the globe.(1)
The homosexual ("gay") community wants same-sex marriage for two reasons: to lend respectability to their activities and to obtain spousal benefits from government and employers who designed such benefits for traditional married couples. There is no good reason why the people of Wisconsin, or any other state, or the federal government, should change the definition of marriage to please them. People who wish to affirm their mutual love and commitment are free to do so in religious or secular ceremonies, without State approval.
However, the second clause of the proposed Amendment would ban civil union as well. Civil union, unlike marriage, does not imply sexual activity between the partners----it is a purely economic arrangement, and does not obligate employers or government to confer spousal benefits. As noted in our March 13, 2006, posting, civil union is legal in Wisconsin right now under contract law. If this Amendment is ratified, the courts could use it to strike down all civil unions, which would be detrimental to any couples that want to form a single household, but either cannot marry legally or do not want to do so.
2. Death Penalty
Wisconsin abolished this form of punishment in 1853, and nothing that has happened since then has justified bringing it back.
If capital punishment would save lives by reducing the number of murders, I would be for it, even though occasionally an innocent person may be executed by mistake. Actually, Wisconsin has fewer murders per capita than the average death-penalty state, and interstate serial killers have not been attracted to our state by the lack of this penalty.(2)
Every effective measure to prevent wrongful executions has the effect of lengthening the appeal process and driving up state legal costs. Especially strict scrutiny of these cases by various courts and the Governor, although necessary for the sake of justice, reduces whatever deterrent effect the death penalty might otherwise have.
Although the Torah authorizes the courts to execute people four ways (all of them much more cruel than lethal injection), the Talmud tells us that Sanhedrin imposed such onerous requirements for its use that it was rarely carried out. (3)
Most industrialized nations today have abolished the death penalty, following Wisconsin's example over a hundred years later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) However, the Roman Emperor Nero, already married to a woman, also married another man. (Twelve Caesars by Suetonius)
(2) Wisconsin has had a few notorious native serial killers, such as Ed Gein (1958) and Jeffrey Dahmer (1991). However, those who committed their crimes in other than their native states, have not come here to avoid the death-penalty. For example, Seattle-native Ted Bundy killed people in Texas and Florida (rather than Wisconsin), even though those states are first and second respectively in annual executions in the entire US. Florida electrocuted Bundy in 1997.
(3) The Talmud recalls that the son of the great Rabbi Shimon ben Shotach was executed on the basis of perjured testimony, which the witnesses recanted.
1. Marriage
The proposed Amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution would not only declare that marriage is limited to one man and one woman, but also prohibit State recognition of any legal status similar to marriage, such as civil union or domestic partnership.
Of course the idea that two men or two women could "marry" each other is a mockery of the concept of marriage as it has been understood for thousands of years in societies across the globe.(1)
The homosexual ("gay") community wants same-sex marriage for two reasons: to lend respectability to their activities and to obtain spousal benefits from government and employers who designed such benefits for traditional married couples. There is no good reason why the people of Wisconsin, or any other state, or the federal government, should change the definition of marriage to please them. People who wish to affirm their mutual love and commitment are free to do so in religious or secular ceremonies, without State approval.
However, the second clause of the proposed Amendment would ban civil union as well. Civil union, unlike marriage, does not imply sexual activity between the partners----it is a purely economic arrangement, and does not obligate employers or government to confer spousal benefits. As noted in our March 13, 2006, posting, civil union is legal in Wisconsin right now under contract law. If this Amendment is ratified, the courts could use it to strike down all civil unions, which would be detrimental to any couples that want to form a single household, but either cannot marry legally or do not want to do so.
2. Death Penalty
Wisconsin abolished this form of punishment in 1853, and nothing that has happened since then has justified bringing it back.
If capital punishment would save lives by reducing the number of murders, I would be for it, even though occasionally an innocent person may be executed by mistake. Actually, Wisconsin has fewer murders per capita than the average death-penalty state, and interstate serial killers have not been attracted to our state by the lack of this penalty.(2)
Every effective measure to prevent wrongful executions has the effect of lengthening the appeal process and driving up state legal costs. Especially strict scrutiny of these cases by various courts and the Governor, although necessary for the sake of justice, reduces whatever deterrent effect the death penalty might otherwise have.
Although the Torah authorizes the courts to execute people four ways (all of them much more cruel than lethal injection), the Talmud tells us that Sanhedrin imposed such onerous requirements for its use that it was rarely carried out. (3)
Most industrialized nations today have abolished the death penalty, following Wisconsin's example over a hundred years later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) However, the Roman Emperor Nero, already married to a woman, also married another man. (Twelve Caesars by Suetonius)
(2) Wisconsin has had a few notorious native serial killers, such as Ed Gein (1958) and Jeffrey Dahmer (1991). However, those who committed their crimes in other than their native states, have not come here to avoid the death-penalty. For example, Seattle-native Ted Bundy killed people in Texas and Florida (rather than Wisconsin), even though those states are first and second respectively in annual executions in the entire US. Florida electrocuted Bundy in 1997.
(3) The Talmud recalls that the son of the great Rabbi Shimon ben Shotach was executed on the basis of perjured testimony, which the witnesses recanted.
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 11:08 AM
1 Comments:
I have read numerous articles about what these amendments say and mean but I have not seen the ammendments thmselves. Considering that everyone has a different interpretatioo of the the results of the amendments, you (as well as all who comment on it) should have listed the amendments so we can see for ourselves what it says and how it says it. Maybe the outcome will be different from what you say because the wording is not exactly as you depict it to be. Some have suggested that the gay marriage one will have no effect either way.
Post a Comment
<< Home