WFA Responds: WI Supreme Court Recognizes Uniqueness of Marriage

State High Court Says Same-Sex Domestic Partnerships Not Like Marriage

Today, the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the Badger State’s domestic partnership registry as “constitutional” in a landmark decision that defied the will of Wisconsin’s voters.

Wisconsin Family Action president, Julaine Appling, is not discouraged, though, as the ruling defined what we already know to be true – marriage is a unique institution and remains so in the state of Wisconsin.

Read the full press release from WFA below:

MADISON— Today the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the same-sex-only, statewide domestic partnership enacted by Governor Doyle through the state budget in 2009, does not violate the Marriage Protection Amendment approved by the voters in 2006. This is in spite of the fact that the Amendment prohibits any “legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals.”

“While we are disappointed that the Wisconsin Supreme Court did not agree with us, what’s important is that marriage remains between one man and one woman in Wisconsin and that even in this ruling, the court recognized that marriage is unique and nothing like relationships formed by same-sex couples,” said Julaine Appling, one of the plaintiffs in the case and president of Wisconsin Family Action.

Many years ago (1959) the legislature wrote the following statement into Wisconsin law. Marriage is the institution that is the foundation of the family and of society. Its stability is basic to morality and civilization, and of vital interest to society and the state. . . . . Under the laws of this state, marriage is a legal relationship between 2 equal persons, a husband and wife, who owe to each other mutual responsibility and support. (Wis Stats 765.001(2))

Plaintiffs led the effort to ratify and defend Wisconsin’s Marriage Amendment to protect that institution. Our concern was that Ch. 770 creates a relationship that is substantially like marriage and dilutes its public meaning and significance.

Appling noted, “Although the court today ruled against us, it also recognized that the Marriage Amendment affirms what the legislature recognized long ago. Marriage is a unique relationship between one man and one woman, and it is the only relationship so indispensable to children and society that when husband and wife agree to marry, they may not unilaterally end that relationship. The state itself will step in and enforce duties of mutual obligation and support.”

Wisconsin Family Action will continue defending Wisconsin law and the uniqueness of marriage between one man and one woman.

Advertisements

WFA President Appling on SCOTUS Religious Freedom Ruling “Good News, but ‘Telling'”

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby and others in a momentous case that upholds religious liberty and protects the conscience rights of business owners.

>>>>>read more HERE

Image

 

Wisconsin Family Action president Julaine Appling responds, “This is certainly good news for Hobby Lobby, Conestoga Wood Specialties and other similarly situated family-owned and run companies. It is telling, however, that the Court made it clear that this ruling does not provide, as they say, a “shield” for employers trying to cloak discrimination as religious belief.  This tells me we must stay very much on guard to protect religious freedom.”

SCOTUS Expected to Rule on Marriage TOMORROW

The Supreme Court of the United States is expected to hand down opinions on DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) and Proposition 8 (same-sex marriage) tomorrow, 6/26, 2013.  Wisconsin Family Action will post the decision as soon as it is announced.  Check back for updated information.

40 Years Ago – Roe v Wade – The Tide is Turning

40 YEARS AGO this month, the Supreme Court handed down the great “abortion rights” decision, Roe v. Wade.  Image

Insight from Star Parker:

The number forty has great significance in the Bible.

Perhaps best known is the forty years that the Israelites were condemned to wander in the desert before being permitted entry into the Promised Land.

Maybe this mystical quantity will bear significance as we note, this month, the fortieth year since the Roe v Wade decision legalized abortion in America.

Forty years we have lived with the silent, and sometimes not so silent, holocaust in our midst as the lives of 55 million innocent and unborn children have been killed, plucked from their journey to enter this world.

Who were they? Who would they have become?

>>>>>read the rest of the article HERE

WFA Issues Press Release, Resolves to Defend Wisconsin’s Marriage Amendment

Press release issued 12/21/2012 via Julaine Appling, President, Wisconsin Family Action:

Wisconsin Court of Appeals Upholds Statewide, Same-sex-only Domestic Partner Registry

WFA will continue to defend marriage, the constitution and the will of Wisconsin voters

MADISON—“We are disappointed with the Circuit Court’s opinion, but once again it does not weaken our resolve to defend Wisconsin’s Marriage Amendment,” said Julaine Appling, President of Wisconsin Family Action (WFA) and plaintiff in Appling et al. v. Doyle et al. “The people of Wisconsin have strongly affirmed the lifelong, faithful union of a man and a woman as the fundamental building block of civilization. Our system of government serves no purpose if politicians can ignore the will of the people with impunity.”

Today, a 3-judge panel from Branch 4 of the Wisconsin Court of Appeals released an opinion upholding the decision of the Dane County Circuit Court that the statewide, same-sex-only domestic partnership registry is constitutional. The plaintiffs, all of whom are WFA board members, and their attorneys intend to appeal to the Wisconsin State Supreme Court.

Gov. Doyle and Democratic legislators put the statewide, same-sex-only domestic partnership registry into the 2009-2011 state budget. WFA board members, through Alliance Defending Freedom and its allied attorneys Mike Dean of First Freedoms Foundation and Richard M. Esenberg, filed a petition for original action with the State Supreme Court, which the court denied in late 2009, sending WFA back to the trial court level. WFA filed a brief in the Dane County Circuit Court on August 18, 2010. In June 2011, the Circuit Court ruled the registry was constitutional. Shortly thereafter WFA board members appealed to the Court of Appeals.

“The people of Wisconsin recognize that marriage provides a strong foundation for a thriving society. That’s why they approved a constitutional amendment that specifically protects marriage from all imitators. Politicians and activist groups should not be allowed to get around that,” said Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks. “We will appeal this decision because this domestic partnership scheme is precisely the type of marriage imitation that the voters intended to prevent.”

“In November of 2006, over 1.25 million Wisconsin voters approved the referendum prohibiting any ‘legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals,’” noted Appling. “We stand by the will of the people of Wisconsin, and we will continue to defend marriage and the constitution. That defense will now include an appeal of this opinion to the Wisconsin State Supreme Court.”

Reading the Heart & Mind of Supreme Court Justices

“God save the United States and this Honorable Court.”

From Julaine Appling:

Who can really read the heart, mind, and political position of a Supreme Court Justice—ahead of a decision?  We learn something about all of these, and of course, their view of the Constitution, after decisions are rendered–decisions made by these black-robed, lifetime political appointees on matters that affect our culture and our government often in dramatic ways.

We learned late last week that for the first time in our nation’s history, our highest court will hear cases related to the definition of marriage. In the next 6-8 months we will learn something about the heart, mind, political positions, and view of the Constitution of the majority of the court on this matter.

The court will be considering one case related to the federal Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, a measure passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996. DOMA basically says that federal law recognizes marriage only as the union of a man and woman.  That means that federal tax laws and benefits related to marriage are exclusively for marriage between a man and a woman. Same-sex couples who have so-called “marriage” in a state where marriage has been redefined may get the protections and benefits afforded by state law, but they cannot get any provided by federal law.

 

>>>>>continued HERE