MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Wednesday, December 24, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 35.0° F  Overcast
Collapse Photo Bar

How about gay marriage in Dane County?

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Should we?

Yes
30
79%
No
8
21%
 
Total votes : 38

How about gay marriage in Dane County?

Postby Yeti » Fri Feb 20, 2004 1:17 pm

Well, given that San Francisco has already done it, and others are considering it, should we direct Joe Parisi to start offering licences to gay couples?

Disclosure: As I am an ordained minister, and this could mean a boost in business for me, I'd like to be recorded as abstaining.
Yeti
 

Postby ShaneDog » Fri Feb 20, 2004 1:22 pm

I can't give any details yet but there is a group in Madison working on this, though you probalby have never heard of them.
ShaneDog
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4296
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 2:46 pm
Location: E Wash

Postby Michael Patrick » Fri Feb 20, 2004 1:31 pm

Why should gays and lesbians be deprived of the chance to be shackled with a ball and chain, er, I mean to experience the bliss that is married life?
Michael Patrick
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3970
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 8:56 am
Location: Around here somewhere

Postby pulseCzar » Fri Feb 20, 2004 1:59 pm

ShaneDog wrote:I can't give any details yet but there is a group in Madison working on this, though you probalby have never heard of them.

Gard, Panzer and cronies will be in such a tizzy! :lol:
pulseCzar
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 843
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:21 pm
Location: Trapped in the Overture Jello Mold

Postby FaeryGurl » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:00 pm

It would be a shame if Madison/Dane County didn't get in on this one early on... if for no other reason than to protect our crazy liberal reputation.
FaeryGurl
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 2:35 pm
Location: out of sorts

Postby Daisy » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:05 pm

I think to do so would be stupid and short-sighted.
Daisy
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:51 am
Location: New York, NY

Postby kurt_w » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:07 pm

Now a county in New Mexico is apparently going to begin issuing marriage licenses to all couples:

http://www.wkrn.com/Global/story.asp?S=1656147&nav=1ugFKy8S
kurt_w
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5408
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:11 pm

Postby white_rabbit » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:09 pm

The times, they are a changing.
white_rabbit
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 7487
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 11:44 pm

Postby Steve Vokers » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:10 pm

Daisy wrote:I think to do so would be stupid and short-sighted.


Yeah, standing up for those whose civil rights are being violated is SO stupid and short-sighted.
Steve Vokers
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1171
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:58 am

Postby ShaneDog » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:14 pm

Daisy wrote:I think to do so would be stupid and short-sighted.


I understand why you would say that but I have a feeling your judgment is affected by your close relationship with the mayor who would be stuck in the middle of this if something like what happened in San Francisco happened here.

The thing is, gay marriage is a civil rights issue. I'm sick of politicians abdicating responsibility for this issue and avoiding all responsibility by saying that they have to wait for the courts to decide.

I'm sick of people like Jim Doyle, who take the progessive vote for granted and do things like veto an anti-gay marriage bill by saying that it's not necessary because state already has a law prohibiting gay marriage. He could have said, I'm against this because gay rights are civil rights but instead he was ambiguous as possible about his support of gay rights.

I don't care how supportive of gay rights any politician is in the privacy of their homes. It's time for politicians to say whether they're for or against gay marriage, and to do whatever is in their power to change the system.

No movement ever got anywhere by simply reacting to people taking away their civil rights. The successful civil rights movements have always been proactive and progressive, forcefully pushing change upon a society that resists it.
ShaneDog
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4296
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 2:46 pm
Location: E Wash

Postby Daisy » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:29 pm

Steve Vokers wrote:Yeah, standing up for those whose civil rights are being violated is SO stupid and short-sighted.
I'm not arguing about the goal, which I completely support.

I have a huge problem with local officials respecting only those laws they happen to like. Such a precedent may come back to bite us on the ass in ways we may not like.

I don't want some redneck judge in Alabama thinking he's at liberty to pick and choose the laws he finds convenient and turn his courtroom into a Baptist revival.

I don't want some homophobic DA in Wyoming feeling like he can opt out of prosecuting gay bashing to the full extent of the law.

I don't want a pro-life cop feeling like he doesn't have to extend the full protection of the law to an abortion clinic.

I don't want the city of Madison passing progressive ordinances (which they presumably want developers etc to respect) while making it obvious through its actions that it considers following the law optional.

Before we go for the ends justifying the means, I submit such an approach would result in a net loss among the things important to us.
Daisy
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:51 am
Location: New York, NY

Postby ShaneDog » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:35 pm

Daisy makes some valid points. Personally I think that civil disobediance has played a huge role in expanding civil rights for opressed groups and I believe that it will continue to be a useful tactic in the future. There needs to be a conversation about civil disobediance.

That said, I don't see why the city of Madison couldn't sue the state over laws violating Madisonians civil rights and I feel that it would be appropriate for the city to do so because of the large gay population here.

In my other messages I didn't mean to imply that civil disobediance is always the best tactic, but it may be neccessary in some cases, including this one, after other avenues have been exhausted.
ShaneDog
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4296
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 2:46 pm
Location: E Wash

Postby Daisy » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:39 pm

ShaneDog wrote:That said, I don't see why the city of Madison couldn't sue the state over laws violating Madisonians civil rights and I feel that it would be appropriate for the city to do so because of the large gay population here.
I'm down with that. It would certainly put Lautenschlager into an interesting position.:)
Daisy
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:51 am
Location: New York, NY

Postby Steve Vokers » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:41 pm

Daisy wrote:
Steve Vokers wrote:Yeah, standing up for those whose civil rights are being violated is SO stupid and short-sighted.
I'm not arguing about the goal, which I completely support.

I have a huge problem with local officials respecting only those laws they happen to like. Such a precedent may come back to bite us on the ass in ways we may not like.

I don't want some redneck judge in Alabama thinking he's at liberty to pick and choose the laws he finds convenient and turn his courtroom into a Baptist revival.

I don't want some homophobic DA in Wyoming feeling like he can opt out of prosecuting gay bashing to the full extent of the law.

I don't want a pro-life cop feeling like he doesn't have to extend the full protection of the law to an abortion clinic.

I don't want the city of Madison passing progressive ordinances (which they presumably want developers etc to respect) while making it obvious through its actions that it considers following the law optional.

Before we go for the ends justifying the means, I submit such an approach would result in a net loss among the things important to us.


Well, maybe if you'd put it that way to start... :wink:

I guess there is a difference between civil disobedience (actions by the people) and, uh, municipal disobedience. But I also think that Shane has a good point, that the City could pursue relief through the courts.
Steve Vokers
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1171
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:58 am

Postby Marge » Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:47 pm

ShaneDog wrote:Daisy makes some valid points. Personally I think that civil disobediance has played a huge role in expanding civil rights for opressed groups and I believe that it will continue to be a useful tactic in the future. There needs to be a conversation about civil disobediance.

I think also there's a big difference between individuals breaking laws in the name of civil disobedience and a state, city, or county breaking laws in the name of civil disobedience. I am all for the former and have reservations about the latter.
Yeti wrote:should we direct Joe Parisi to start offering licences to gay couples?

Maybe a middle of the road option would be for people to continue to apply for, and be denied, same-sex marriage licenses, and for a person like Joe Parisi to publicize how much revenue in license fees this is costing the city?
Marge
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1328
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 12:57 pm
Location: Corporate Hellscape

Next

Return to Headlines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar