Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  mia

How Come Nobody Can Find Wisconsinites Who Oppose Domestic Partnership Rights?

We keep hearing from regular Wisconsin folks, many of whom are signing up for the just-instated domestic partnership registry, who are simply elated to receive some marriage rights despite the state’s constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Every media report we see, there’s a new gay couple wishing to share their love story with the world, like these folks, and them, and these two. But when it comes to hearing from the other side — those opposed to giving gays any rights — the only talking heads that anyone can seem to get on the record are those from the Wisconsin Family Action, the anti-gay group that filed a lawsuit hoping to invalidate Gov. Jim Doyle’s domestic partnership effort. For all the million folks who voted for the constitutional amendment in 2006, where are they now? How come no reporter can find these people? Surely they are out there, and surely not every reporter is too lazy to find them, right? Where are local professors? Small businessmen? Local community activists who want their name and photo in the paper so history can write them down as bigots?

Maybe you guys are better researchers than we: Have you found anyone in Wisconsin besides Wisconsin Family Action — and its chief Julaine Appling, seen in the above report — who is taking to the press to buttress the anti-gay push? This is beginning to resemble the National Organization for Marriage, the most out-spoken, though entirely lonely organization that can’t even get conservative groups to join the fight.

Hell, one report even notes how, at county clerks offices, there were no protesters. Come out, come out wherever you are.

By:           editor editor
On:           Aug 4, 2009
Tagged: , , ,

  • 10 Comments
    • M Shane
      M Shane

      There are two things: the most important, and I get tired of harping about this is that they asked for and got “Domestic Partnership’ and not ‘marriage” rights.

      The people who are persistent about calling what they get ‘marriage’ are going to get opposition.

      The other thing is that,I live inthis part of the country and most people are Northern European(scandinavian& German0 Lutherans . They prefer that people would all be relatively uniform and to not stick out as a uniquly gay community would. They would be horrified by something like urban gays from S.F or NYC. and would as some keep everyone mainstreamed as possible. Same in Minnesota or probably Iowa.

      Aug 4, 2009 at 11:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Alex
      Alex

      I think it’s just an upper-Midwestern thing. A very large proportion people in the Upper Midwest seem to be to be generally not homophobic or anything (although there is a sense of modesty required; nobody likes a “shove it in your face” attitude about religion, being gay, being rich, or any other such thing). However, there is a socially conservative aversion to having same-sex marriage. So, at this time, the people generally tend to be those “anything except the word ‘marriage’” types, not at all the “gay people make me sick” types you see down south. At least this is the attitude in Wisconsin and the eastern half of Minnesota. Once you get into western Minnesota and the Dakotas, the people get even more socially conservative and might be averse to this, but really not in Wisconsin. Ultimately I’m not really surprised by the almost complete lack of backlash against this measure. I’d bet that people would even vote for these provisions on a ballot.

      Aug 4, 2009 at 12:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • reluctant commenter
      reluctant commenter

      @M Shane:

      “There are two things: the most important, and I get tired of harping about this is that they asked for and got “Domestic Partnership’ and not ‘marriage” rights.

      The people who are persistent about calling what they get ‘marriage’ are going to get opposition.”

      The constitutional amendment in Wisconsin (and other places) bans marriage between anything other than a couple of one man and one woman…or anything resembling a marriage. Obviously, asking for anything, domestic partnership or otherwise, was going to get opposition.

      “They prefer that people would all be relatively uniform and to not stick out as a uniquly gay community would. They would be horrified by something like urban gays from S.F or NYC. and would as some keep everyone mainstreamed as possible.”

      Aren’t you on another article (and this one) arguing that gay’s shouldn’t be mainstreamed? That educated gays recognize the hazards of attempting to be normal? Now you seem to pleased by these moderate northeasterners and their mainstream gays.

      Aug 4, 2009 at 5:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • youcanthandlethetruth
      youcanthandlethetruth

      The State Supreme Court needs to acknowledge the state Constitution and invalidate these illegal partnerships.

      That blonde guy looks and sounds like a girl.

      Aug 4, 2009 at 5:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jude
      Jude

      I’m from Wisconsin. There are people who are complaining. But in all honesty I think things have changed at least somewhat here. Madison is extremely liberal, so is Gov. Doyle. The domestic partnerships do not give many rights but some of them are important rights. Couples have not been banging down the door of the county courthouse, according to local news reports.

      People here do live simple, modest lives, it’s true. Midwesterners tend to be reserved. If you mind your own business, they mind their own business. If you are a good neighbor or employee, they rarely care about your politics, religion or sexual orientation.

      I honestly think people aren’t saying anything because there is so much more to worry about.

      You can find more information at Fair Wisconsin

      Aug 4, 2009 at 7:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam
      Sam

      @youcanthandlethetruth:

      Hello, these partnerships aren’t illegal. They aren’t substantially similar to marriage because they only offer 43 of the 200-ish marriage rights, therefore the registry is allowed to stand. Substantially similar would be somewhere in the ballpark of 190 of the 200-ish rights. Maybe you should read our constitution a little more closely, that is if you even live in my home state of Wisconsin.

      (Can’t wait till someone in our state legislature grows some balls and tries to get the same-sex marriage question on the ballot again. If nothing else, put a question on the ballot to repeal part of the same-sex marriage ban to allow civil unions, should support not be strong enough for same-sex marriage. I would appreciate full equality but in Wisconsin, sometimes small steps are the best.)

      Aug 4, 2009 at 7:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • M Shane
      M Shane

      No. 3 ยท reluctant commenter ; I just said that that was the way it is in the midwest-no judgement implied also that not asking for too much seemed to be a successful way to do things . I spent most of my life in San Francisco and am much happier with that lifestyle.

      Aug 4, 2009 at 10:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • leonel
      leonel

      Why are the protesters not to be found? Well.. apparently, the Wisconsin Family Action group chose not to protest at county courthouses. Fascinating. I guess the only other opposition is whoever is speaking out against the registry in the blogs.

      http://www.madison.com/wsj/topstories/460646

      Aug 5, 2009 at 2:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Anton
      Anton

      “Where are local professors? Small businessmen? Local community activists who want their name and photo in the paper so history can write them down as bigots?”

      Don’t you mean, “Where are local professors? Small businessmen? Local community activists who want their name and photo in the paper so history can write them down as embracing the bigot lifestyle?”

      Aug 5, 2009 at 8:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • youcanthandlethetruth
      youcanthandlethetruth

      @Anton: You seem to be saying that your bigotry is better than our bigotry??

      It seems that anyone with a strong opinion can now be described as a bigot.

      Aug 8, 2009 at 1:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.