Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds State’s Marriage Protection Amendment!

High Court unanimously affirms the state’s marriage amendment is constitutional

Madison – “Marriage and the will of the people are the clear winners in this decision,” said Julaine Appling, President of Wisconsin Family Council. “When Wisconsin voters passed the marriage amendment in 2006 by almost 60%, they recognized the purpose of the amendment was clear and simple: to protect the institution of marriage. The Wisconsin Supreme Court reinforced that purpose in their decision.”

Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) filed an amicus, or “friend of the court,” brief on behalf of Wisconsin Family Council in this case.

“Once again, activists tried to use the courts to force something on the people that they have repeatedly and overwhelmingly rejected.” said ADF Litigation Counsel Jim Campbell. “We should be strengthening—not undermining—marriage, which is one man and one woman.”

McConkey v. Van Hollen, in which Prof. Bill McConkey claims the amendment deals with two subjects rather than one as required by the constitution, began at the trial level in 2007 where Dane County Circuit Court Judge Richard Niess upheld the amendment’s constitutionality in 2008, stating in his decision that the single purpose of the amendment is “the preservation of the unique and historical status of marriage.”

McConkey appealed the decision to the District IV Court of Appeals. In early 2009, the appellate court opted to move the case up to the Wisconsin Supreme Court without acting on it; and in May of 2009, the Supreme Court accepted the case. Last November, the Court heard the oral arguments from McConkey’s attorney and the State Attorney General’s office.

Today, the Supreme Court released its opinion, stating:

…The two propositions contained in the marriage amendment plainly relate to the subject of marriage. And as the text of the amendment and context of its adoption make clear, the general purpose of the marriage amendment is to preserve the legal status of marriage in Wisconsin as between only one man and one woman. Both propositions in the marriage amendment relate to and are connected with this purpose. Therefore, the marriage amendment does not violate the separate amendment rule of Article XII, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution. Rather, the marriage amendment was adopted by the people of Wisconsin using the process prescribed by the constitution, and is properly now part of our constitution.

“The lawsuit’s accusation that the marriage amendment addresses multiple subjects was just a sneaky attempt to tear down what the voters clearly wanted,” said Appling. “The very reason we passed the marriage amendment was to protect marriage in our state from redefinition by judicial fiat. The court was right to reject this baseless lawsuit. Judges and politicians should never toss aside the will of the people in order to impose a system that intentionally deprives children of a mom and dad. Which parent doesn’t matter: a mom or a dad?”

WFC and ADF remain committed to protecting marriage in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Family Council is a statewide, not-for-profit organization advancing Judeo Christian principles and values in Wisconsin by strengthening and preserving marriage, family, life and liberty.


30 comments on “Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds State’s Marriage Protection Amendment!

  1. AliciaC says:

    This is great news! Thanks for keeping us informed. Your team is great!

  2. Marla says:

    Thank you for calling this what it is. It seems like every other media outlet is saying that the ‘gay marriage ban was upheld’. That’s not what the amendment was.

  3. William N. Platta says:

    Praise the LORD! We’re far from done, though. It will go to the US Supreme Court where we’ll face Sotomyor, the “charming and witty” Kagan (for sure), and the left over hippies of the ‘old (red) guard’. We will win in the end, we’re assured, but it will test us all! Keep looking up. It’s the only way.

  4. Gordon Jennings says:

    Marla, this is NOTHING but a ban on gay marriage. The state can’t protect marriage among straights when over half of them end up giving up on marriage themselves.

    The so-called “marriage protection act” is a smokescreen to deny CIVIL RIGHTS, not religious rights but civil rights, from a group of people on the basis of religious grounds.

    A religion, ANY religion, can define marriage however it wants, but when a government uses it as a basis to deny some of its citizens civil rights, that law will eventually be overthrown.

    Make no mistake, you will not “win in the end” as William Platta says above, you have already lost. Every minor victory the states have will eventually force the federal government to redefine civil rights to include gays, so please keep it up–it’ll come faster the harder you fight.

    • William N. Platta says:

      Friend–Do you see what’s happening all over America? This Godless assault on our values is all but finished. Look what’s happening to your ‘champion’. Mr. Obama is plummeting in the polls. America is waking up to the enormous deception that has been foisted on it. There will be nothing left of this administration’s assault on our country’s values, morality and traditions but the dust. You can stay with this loser or leave him. It’s up to you while there is still time!

  5. Gordon Jennings says:

    Who’s talking about Obama? This is a post on Wisconsin denying civil rights to a minority, which the courts will overturn–that’s the job of the courts by the way, to check the majority’s control over minorities in this country and overturn oppression from the other branches of government. That’s not “activist,” that’s the system of checks and balances that our forefathers put in the constitution. One of our country’s values.

    As for our country’s “values, morality and traditions,” let’s take a look. Before 1967 interracial marriage was still outlawed in 17 states. Before 1937, marijuana was legal and hash bars dotted the American landscape. Jim Crow laws, poll tax, segregation, lynchings, red lining, women not being able to vote, back alley abortions that could be fatal (I guess social shame and fear of death helped out our wives’ and daughters’ “morality,” but they were still going on), non-whites restricted to low income neighborhoods, and on and on.

    We really have lost our “moral sense” from the 1950’s, haven’t we?

  6. Gordon Jennings says:

    Let me show what I mean:

    Click on this link to see a map of which states allowed women to vote before the Ninteenth Amendment passed in 1920.

    Click on this link to see a map of which states allowed interracial marriage until the Supreme Court’s decision in 1967.

    One was done by legislation, one was done by the courts. Both are now legal and considered “moral” by most people.

    In fifty years, there will be another map online, showing which states allowed same-sex marriage before the courts or congress passed a national law. Count on it.

    Morality changes, it can’t NOT.

  7. William N. Platta says:

    Mr. Jennings, Mr. Jennings–

    Pull back from your microscope for a second! You seem to have too tight a focus on this. Did you know there were “sinners” back in George Washington’s day, when the laws and Constitution for our country were first drafted? There has been a battle betwen morality and immorality since, I don’t know, how about the BEGINNING of time (almost).

    Has the battle “changed” much? No, not really. the outward forms do seem to change with the times. But the fundamental battle between right and wrong is as perennial as Springtime. Does “right” triumph? Always, even though sometimes it looks like it won’t.

    Marriage is not of human origin. Though we try our best to deal with it in our human laws (it’s unavoidable) traditionally supporting it for its vast benefits, we have never improved on it. It stands on its own, whether we recognize its intrinsic value and good for our lives or not. It was never simply a “good social program” we could alter and experiment with to suit our tastes and satisfy our whims.

    Whether or not this generation “succeeds” at altering the social/political “definition” of marriage, it will not change its fundamental nature. It will always be good for us and it will endure–unchanged–as it has for close to 6,000 years or so, roughly the time man has inhabited this planet

  8. Gordon Jennings says:

    From the last line, it appears you’re a fundamentalist.

    So, where did God create marriage? Can’t find that passage. I see the “be fruitful and increase in number” part (Gen. 1:22), but no mention of marriage there.

    • William N. Platta says:

      I thought you’d never ask! Read first Matthew 19: 1-12. It is where Jesus addresses the Pharisees who are trying to trap him by getting Him embroiled in a discussion over a popular controversy over divorce. Instead, as He always does, He takes them right back to the “Fundamentals”. (Good observation, by the way. I am indeed a fundamentalist!) Anyway, He shows them the original “Plan for Marriage”, right there in the O.T.–“their” book! (They were supposed to be the “experts”, you see.)
      If you can find a good commentary or study Bible, it will tell you Jesus is referring them to the “ideal” found in Genesis 1:27 and 2:24. Yes, “be fruitful and multiply”, but look at HOW He wanted it done. The joy and fulfillment implied in those instructions is beyond belief! It is something we have LOST touch with, tragically, in our modern world; worse, probably, than at any other time in American history.
      Just give it some thought. You may get it.

  9. Gordon Jennings says:

    Are you clean shaven?

    • William N. Platta says:

      Of course not! I’m a Hassidic Jew who hasn’t touched his hair in 20 years. (Not really…but I do have a stache.)

  10. William N. Platta says:

    Not exactly, but lead on…

  11. Gordon Jennings says:

    Is any clothing you wear made of more than one kind of material, like cotton/polyester, or cotton/rayon?

    Eat seafood like shrimp, crab, lobster?

    Have you ever thought bad thoughts about your parents?

    Do you enjoy bacon, ham, pork chops, or spam?

    Those are all sins in the bible.

    –“Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.” (Leviticus 19:27)

    –“…Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material.” (Leviticus 19:19)

    –“But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you.” (Leviticus 11:10)

    –“For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him.” (Leviticus 20:9)

    –“…and the swine, though it divides the hoof, having cloven hooves, yet does not chew the cud, is unclean to you.” (Leviticus 11:7)

  12. Gordon Jennings says:

    Good news though. Here’s what you CAN do:

    You can own slaves if you wish:

    –“Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.” (Leviticus 25:44-45)

    If you don’t mind marrying the woman (and she’s not another man’s property) you can rape her:

    –“If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.” (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)

    If you have a daughter, you can sell her:

    “When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again.” (Exodus 21:7-8 NLT)

  13. Gordon Jennings says:

    But here are some things you MUST do–no waffling, now!

    If your wife tries to intercede in a fight between you and another man, you MUST cut her hand off:

    “When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him, and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets: then thou shalt cut off her hand, thine eye shall not pity her.” (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)

    Be sure to kill all witches, including fortunetellers:

    –“You should not let a sorceress live.” (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

    –“A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death.” (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

    Don’t worry about just making gays not able to marry—you have to KILL them:

    –“If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

    Also, you must kill all adulterers (including Newt Gingrich, Michael Duvall, John Ensign, Mark Sanford, and probably John Boehner–the story is just coming out–to name just a few “family values” conservatives):

    “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death.” (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

    Oop! You have to kill me too, I’m a non-believer in your eyes!

    –“… everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.” (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

    Guess you’ll have to kill my sons too:

    –“Make ready to slaughter his sons for the guilt of their fathers; Lest they rise and posses the earth, and fill the breadth of the world with tyrants.” (Isaiah 14:21 NAB)

    And last but most, you must follow every word above, or no heaven for you:

    “Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation…” (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

    “It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17 NAB)

    “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven…” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)


    Please tell me you don’t believe all that. You say you’re a fundamentalist who believes in all the words of the gospel. Do you really believe all the stuff I’ve posted above is the word of God that should be followed?

  14. William N. Platta says:

    That is such a mess I wouln’t touch it with a 10-foot pole (or a 6-foot Hungarian, as an old girlfriend used to say). You, if I may comment, are obviously not a “disinterested party” seeking objective answers. You are taking your “talking points” and trying to pretend to carry on a reasoned discussion. When you are willing to look for the TRUTH, without preconceptions, you WILL find it. (Hint: you will not find it in People Magazine.)

  15. Gordon Jennings says:

    Whoever claimed I was a disinterested party? Not I. We’re both here with agendas — you with using the Bible to justify your discrimination, and me with calling you on it.

    The original point of my post was that morality changes. And we can certainly see from what’s shown above (rape is okay if you marry her, cut off your wife’s hand), that the Bible helps me prove my point.

  16. William N. Platta says:

    NO, NO, NO Mr. Jennings–
    I do not have an agenda except to get you to get over trying to “make your point”! It is quite meaningless to me to discuss the Bible with you in terms of how it treats you unfairly. It is really quite childish and uninteresting. We are all judged equally by the Bible. Your own lack of appreciation of its grandeur is just a symptom of this age and, frankly, disgusts me.

  17. Gordon Jennings says:

    Dude, the bible is just a book. It doesn’t judge anyone, that’s God’s job.

    And I’m a Christian, and a straight man.

    And don’t be so hard on yourself; your conversation may or may not be childish but it’s hardly uninteresting.

  18. William N. Platta says:

    Ah, the surprise revelation! I’ve been talking to a Christian all along. Well, how’d I ever miss that? It seems so obvious now. Your understanding of the Bible is so clear and your respect for it undeniable. Where do you go to church?

  19. Gordon Jennings says:

    I was raised Catholic and Episcopal, and am currently a Unitarian Universalist And in your sarcasm, you haven’t answered my question. But I guess you’re not a fundamentalist, because you’d believe that all those quotes are true.

    Here is the bible that I choose to believe in. See if you can find the word in common in each of these quotes.

    So if you do pick and choose which words of the bible to follow, why not choose love instead of hate? You use two passages to condemn homosexuals, when there is so much more of the words of our Lord that says: Love your brother. And what’s easier? Love, cause it carries none of the baggage.

    In any event, you won’t sway me from what I know is the right path, the path of love.

  20. Gordon Jennings says:

    For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. – John 3:16

    I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. – Galatians 2:20

    Know therefore that the LORD your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commands. – Deuteronomy 7:9

    For the LORD loves the just and will not forsake his faithful ones. . . – Psalm 37:28

    I love those who love me, and those who seek me find me. – Proverbs 8:17

    This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. – 1 John 4:9-11

    And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him. – 1 John 4:16

    We love because he first loved us. If anyone says, “I love God,” yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. – 1 John 4:19-20

    This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother. – 1 John 3:10

    No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money. – Matthew 6:24

    So be very careful to love the LORD your God. – Joshua 23:11

    I love you, O LORD, my strength. – Psalm 18:1

    Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ – Matthew 22:37-39

    A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for adversity. – Proverbs 17:17

    Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. . .And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love. – excerpts from 1 Corinthians 13:4-13

    My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. – John 15:12-13

    ‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against one of your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD. – Leviticus 19:18

    Hatred stirs up dissension, but love covers over all wrongs. – Proverbs 10:12

  21. William N. Platta says:

    Why are you attacking marriage–Biblical marriage–if you’re a Christian? (Unitarian whatever doesn’t count.)

  22. Gordon Jennings says:

    I’m not attacking biblical marriage. Let whoever wants to get married do so according to the bible.

    How do you feel about Muslim marriages, or Shinto marriages (that’s in Japan), or Bhuddist? Do you feel those aren’t marriages?

  23. Gordon Jennings says:

    And what about divorce? All those marriages out there that end in divorce (about HALF) are doing way more to tarnish marriage than I ever could.

    The bible also says, “no divorce unless there is adultery,” so why not outlaw divorce? That’s a biblical marriage, too — no divorce. But I don’t see anyone crusading to end divorce and “save biblical marriage” here.

    I want MORE marriage, as many marriages as there are people who want to get married. I’m actually kind of conservative: I would love for all kids to be raised by two parents who are married to each other, it’s a much more stable way to raise children.

  24. William N. Platta says:

    Look, you’re not listening to me and I am surely not listening to you. Why don’t we just end this discussion here? It is becoming quite absurd and I don’t have the time to waste. You can carry on, and I’m sure you will. You have an endless supply of arguments, I am learning, and I don’t have any more patience for them. Good luck in your endeavors, Mr. Jennings. See you when all the words will be ended and Someone Who can finally decide this matter–for GOOD–arrives. I, personally, am waiting for that day.

  25. Goron Jennings says:

    But I am listening — you asked me a question and I answered it.

    I can respect that you feel I’m wrong. I can understand that our upbringings are different and you feel you shouldn’t have to put up with this argument. I’m more than happy with you having whatever belief you want, no matter what your religion states.

    But this is the point of this post, and this forum, and this website: You and this organization are NOT “waiting for that day,” as you put it, you’re taking on the job of persecution of others yourselves. You’re denying civil rights to a group of citizens based on YOUR religion. No one’s attacking you. You’re attacking others.

  26. Gordon Jennings says:

    Aww?! This is just getting good!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s