Students for a Fair Wisconsin

A Letter from Eli

2006-11-10T15:36:00.000-08:00

The dust has finally settled on the issue we have worked on for the past year. I’ve been consoled, apologized to, and thanked “even though we didn’t win”, yet I must confess:

I find myself wondering why.

Let me share some facts with you, just in case you hadn’t come across them during the fury of information over the past couple days. Here at UW-Madison, we annihilated the yes vote. On average, in the student wards, people voted No over 85% of the time, and, in some areas, over 90%. Not only did UW vote No, but it did so in record numbers. We blew away past mid-term election year voter numbers by the thousands. To put that into perspective, more people voted on the ban than they did on the Governor’s race. This single issue was so important to people that it brought them out to the polls for that reason alone. History was made last Tuesday.

We did everything we were asked to do and more. Although the statewide results are, indeed, disappointing and saddening, I find myself without regret.

Our opposition has always said that the ban was for the next generation. A simple glance at our turnout and sheer resolve during this past couple weeks shows that… they were right.

Let me explain. We’ve accomplished a colossal feat, one that was never expected to happen. Together, we have rallied around our message of equality and, as the next generation, have shown that our capacity to alter the course of our state can no longer be chalked up to mediocre interest and results, but rather, explosive, election-changing outcomes that politicians must cater to in the future.

The ban has passed, but it will later be amended. We haven’t stopped it now but, had the vote been up to our generation, it wouldn’t have stood a chance. We are saddened by our apparent failure but we must look back at our proven ability to change our world.

If ever there is one thing that I hope all of you take from your experience with Students for a Fair Wisconsin it is that you didn’t let your urge to take an active role in your world end here. For many of you, this was your first experience in politics or civic activism. I know that that is true because it was my first time as well. I just hope what you learned from our sweat, blood, and tears doesn’t fade away in the fog of disappointment and lost hope. If that happens, I know our enemies have truly won.

We look now to the future. The sheer scope of education we brought to the state of Wisconsin about the LGBT community and its issues will assure that it will be granted full rights one day. We shattered our goals and expectations. I just see this as an opportunity to watch my children do the same in a few years.

From the bottom of my heart, I thank you all for what you have done this past year. We have seen terrible weather, hate mail, and direct threats simply because of who we are or whom we were protecting. To that I say adversity forges the greatest leaders. I know that, if this indeed is not our final chapter, the LGBT community and its Allies at the UW-Madison will be a force capable of great change for many years to come.

With honor we served, with valor we fought, and with strength we conquered.

As Always,

Eli Judge

Election Day Reflections

2006-11-09T13:00:00.000-08:00

I'm sure many of you are upset, frustrated, or disappointed with the results of Tuesday's vote to ban gay marriage in Wisconsin, and so, I wanted to say something about the amazing work students did statewide on this vote.

Statewide, many of the counties with the highest percentage of 'no' votes were counties large high student populations: Dane, La Crosse, Eau Claire, Menominee, Winnebago, and Milwaukee. In general, young people overwhelmingly opposed the ban.

I was stationed in Madison as the Campus GOTV Coordinator for the last ten days of the campaign, and I was blown away by the work students did here. In the twelve wards for which students were responsible, we turned out 16,633 votes - a number many thought we'd never reach. Of those, 85 percent voted no. To put that in perspective, only 10,011 students voted in 2002, and in 1998, when Tammy Baldwin got elected by a campus "youth quake," 13,760 students voted. We blew those numbers away.

We turned out a record-breaking number of students to vote on campus. We put all of our time, our hearts, and our passion into this fight, and for that, we should be proud. We did everything we had to do in order to win, and even though things didn't go our way, we should all hold our heads high.

And most importantly, this fight did not end on Tuesday. While we suffered a significant setback, I'm confident that if we keep working, one day our LGBT friends, family members, and neighbors will wake up to a truly fair Wisconsin. Until then, keep fighting!

10,000

2006-10-26T07:45:00.000-07:00

A while back, we did a round-up of all the different facebook groups supporting Students for a Fair Wisconsin.

Sometime yesterday morning, before 10:00am, our main group - A Fair Wisconsin Votes No! - hit 10,000 members. That's right, we officially have at least 10,000 people who are not only voting 'No' on November 7, but also took the time out to join a group on facebook.

We're still about 2,500 members short of being listed among facebook's top 25 campaign issues (on all of facebook), but we imagine we must be somewhere close, which is pretty amazing.

(Oh, and if you're wondering, the main opposition group - A Moral Wisconsin Votes YES - stands at just over 600 members. By my calculation, our support among people who have taken a clear stance on facebook is around 94 percent.)

Note: this post also appears on Fair Wisconsin's No on the Amendment blog.

A Letter in a Bottle

2006-10-24T14:00:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, David Lapidus, a respected, outspoken conservative student at UW-Madison, wrote an entry on his blog, Letters in Bottles, describing why he is voting 'No' on November 7. You may remember David from Students for a Fair Wisconsin's 'Voices for No' Campaign at UW-Madison earlier this semester.

He writes that he supports civil unions for gay and lesbian couples:

In short they are a very useful method to extend legal privileges to non-heterosexual couples that better ensure the individual's ability to discover their philosophical preferences and act upon them within a homosexual relationship and/or as a homosexual foster parent.

David also criticizes the placement of this ban and other "social values" issues on the ballot, saying that they distract from the real issues facing our society and nation:

[the current debate on this proposed amendment] easily distracts the political discourse from finding solutions to the very issues that allow us the opportunity to passionately discuss such "social values" at all (i.e., economics, foreign policy, national security, fiscal policy, civil liberties, etc.)

You can read David's thoughtful entry on the issue in its entirety here.

Note: this post also appears on Fair Wisconsin's No on the Amendment Blog.

Why Our Grandmothers Are Voting No

2006-10-19T14:45:00.000-07:00

I did it. I made the phone call, scurried across Capitol Square in Madison to the City Clerk's office, and froze my nose off. I voted today.

As I went into the office, I was greeted by a warm smile and the question of the day. "Are you registered to vote in the city of Madison?" she asked. "Yes, I am, ma'am." She handed me a few pieces of paper to sign, an envelope, my ballot, and the black magic marker.

When I took my seat, I noticed an elderly lady also voting today via absentee ballot. She looked a lot like my grandmother, with silver-grey hair and a large overcoat covering her petite frame. As I glanced over at her, I was praying she would vote no, just as I have been praying for the entire state of Wisconsin to vote no for several months now. Here was a woman who had lived much longer than I have, seen much more than I've seen, and experienced much more than I have. She had lived through a time when being unmarried was not acceptable by most, and being gay not openly talked about. Yet today, we were both equals at the polling booth, despite our ages and backgrounds.

By the swipe of her pen, she could cast a vote that would change the way we treat unmarried couples - gay or straight - by denying hospital visitation rights, healthcare benefits, and the right to make medical decisions for loved ones. Or she could help us defeat the ban designed to discriminate against gays and lesbians yet would prove to be far more sweeping if passed.

She folded up her ballot and turned toward me. To my surprise, she wore a Fair Wisconsin button. I hadn't noticed it before. Surely, she had voted no.

This brings me back to my own grandmother. Only a few short weeks ago, I decided it was time to set the record straight. On my grandma's 74th birthday, I drove down to Janesville to surprise her. Since she thought I was still in Arizona at school, she definitely was quite shocked that I was back home. And the questions immediately began. Where are you living? What are you doing? Who are you working for? As my hands shook, I asked my grandma to sit down. "I have something to tell you," I said.

Right then, I came out to my grandma. She was the last family member to find out, and I really wasn't sure how she was going to take it. I told her I was working for Fair Wisconsin, and I was trying to defeat the ban on civil unions and marriage for gay and lesbian couples in our state. As I searched for answers in her expressions, one thing became clear to me. I underestimated my grandma - she was overjoyed that I finally told her and even began asking about my dating life!

And just as I have been doing with all of my campuses in Greater Wisconsin, I asked my grandma to stand with us and vote no. Now, my grandma is a smart woman, but she doesn't know politics. She's not sure who is running against Gov. Doyle in this year's election, she has no clue who Kathleen Falk or JB Van Hollen are, and if asked about Herb Kohl, I'm confident she would ask me if he owns Kohl's Foods down the street from us. Yet one thing is for sure, she pledges to me to vote no - the first time she will have ever voted in her 74 years.

This is a symbol of the real impact that this amendment would have on our lives, and how it will undoubtedly affect our loves ones. While all I know about the elderly woman I sat with earlier today is that she's from "liberal" Madison, my grandmother surely is not and I guarantee I am the only gay person she knows. Yet because this amendment will have a real impact on all of us and our neighbors, these two women and I all are voting early, and we're voting for fairness. I urge you all to do so as well.

In the Campus Papers

2006-10-17T13:00:00.000-07:00

Last Thursday, the Marquette Tribune published a fantastic viewpoint written by a Catholic student whose faith is guiding him to vote no on November 7. In his column, Paul Hinze writes that Catholics have access to God's revelation through three avenues: Scripture, the Church, and personal revelation through an informed conscience. His informed conscience leads him to disagree with various passages of the Bible (which he says have been used just as easily to justify things like racism and sexism that we now agree is wrong):

It is Catholic Church teaching, which strongly emphasizes the obligation to follow an informed conscience, that advises me here. As paradoxical as it may sound, my obligation to the Catholic Church is to disagree with the bishops' teaching in the interest of fostering further reflection and discussion.

He concludes his piece by writing that our growing awareness of homosexual members of our community "gives us new opportunities to learn how God means for us to live together," and says:

We are at a point in history — a point that has come before with issues of race and gender — where the identity of a group of individuals is becoming clear, but their full participation in our community is yet to be attained. Let us not cut off this process with a premature ban, but rather join them at the table as Jesus did and seek the wisdom of God together.

Students for a Fair Wisconsin also received our first campus editorial board endorsement for the fall semester from the Advance-Titan at UW-Oshkosh. They call on voters to be smart and do what is best for Wisconsin:

On Nov. 7, your choice on the ballot doesn’t have to be one between “fair” or “moral.” In order to keep the UW System and other businesses competitive, a smart Wisconsin should vote “no.”

The Daily Carindal editorial board also wrote an editorial supporting the UW System Board of Regents for their opposition to the ban.

Finally, we continue to have letters to the editor published, including this one in the Badger Herald, this one in the Advance-Titan, and one in the UW-River Falls Student Voice.

Note: this post also appears on Fair Wisconsin's No on the Amendment Blog.

Greater Wisconsin Campuses Gaining Momentum

2006-10-11T13:45:00.000-07:00

As I sit here in Fair Wisconsin's field office in Eau Claire, I'd like to give you a quick update of our Greater Wisconsin campuses. We have a strong and aggressive field campaign statewide, and coupled with our university and student support, we are reaching more people than we thought possible.

At UW-La Crosse, for instance, our Students for a Fair Wisconsin chapter is dropping thousands of lit pieces each week. In addition to our regular chalkings, volunteer meetings, and pledge-collecting, we are also leading the forces by canvassing our students and neighbors.

UW-Stevens Point continues to amaze everyone in Madison. With 65 people at their kickoff just a few weeks ago, they're still 40 members strong at volunteer meetings. We've been featured on weekly radio programs, reaching both students and community members, and the student organizers are completely committed to our efforts and on message!

Our students at UW-River Falls have some unique challenges ahead of them, but we are going strong! Since the university is on the edge of Wisconsin's border with Minnesota, we're finding many students are worried about losing their Minnesota citizenship if they choose to vote here. Good news, everyone, that won't happen! You don't need to get a Wisconsin driver's license to vote, and you'll still be able to call yourself a Minnesotan. Simply go to the State Elections Board website for more details. That goes for everyone at UW-Stout as well...

Speaking of UW-Stout, we're very excited to start canvassing and speaking with students one-on-one soon. That's because we've noticed some opposition on campus. We have found just yesterday that College Republicans were handing out pieces of wedding cake with some "Vote YES for the Federal Marriage Amendment on Nov. 7" literature. Sorry to tell you, kids, but the Federal Marriage Amendment was defeated some time ago. We're talking about the ban on civil unions and marriage in our state.

UW-Oshkosh has built a solid - and I'm talking SOLID - coalition of volunteers and organizations on their campus. If they're not canvassing, dropping lit, or chalking, you can probably find them either planning A Forum of Faith Perspectives on the Amendment (Oct. 23, 7pm-8:30pm, Reeve Union, Rm 227 C) or on the phones calling up students for support! And this is very good news since it's my largest campus...

And finally, UW-Eau Claire is picking up steam - just when I arrive in town! We are starting our first canvass this week, tabling, dropping lit, and starting some phone banks soon. We have thousands of houses to knock on between now and Nov. 7, and we need all the help we can get!

The student organizers at the Greater Wisconsin campuses are, by far, one in a million. It's difficult to ask someone to give up their lives for ten weeks prior to a mid-term election, and that's exactly what they did. If you, or someone you know, goes to any of these schools, simply email us at students@fairwisconsin.com and we can get you plugged into all of our volunteer opportunities.

Students for a Fair Wisconsin in the News

2006-10-10T13:15:00.000-07:00

Students for a Fair Wisconsin received a lot of fantastic media coverage again last week, due in part to the UW Board of Regents coming out against the ban. Both the Badger Herald (here, here and here) and the Daily Cardinal (here and here) provided coverage of the decision. Bassey Etim applauds the Board of Regents' decision in a column in the Badger Herald, writing:

The marriage amendment is simply bad business for UW schools and hurts our ability to compete with other university systems.

Further, he explains why our opposition (despite broad support for Fair Wisconsin from people of all walks of life) tends to paint the issue along partisan lines:

[State Representatives Steve] Nass and [Mark] Gundrum change the issue from gay marriage to Doyle's politics because they have no credible evidence to back up their theory that gay marriage would be so detrimental to our society that a ban must be written into our states Constitution. The regents took a risk by formulating an official policy because gubernatorial candidate Mark Green has expressed his distaste with a number of university policies and could inflame anti-UW sentiment across the state. Nonetheless, UW has a duty to stand by its faculty, especially when regressive legislation like this has already resulted in the loss of quality instructors. UWs responsibility goes beyond political impact.

The Daily Cardinal also published a report on the significance of the student vote. UW-Madison Professor Joe Elder explained:

This amendment would be crushingly defeated with the students I deal with. For this group, gay marriage is not a problem. The overwhelming sense I get from the class is, what's the big deal?

Finally, reports on debates held at UW-Madison, UW-Oshkosh, UW-Platteville, and Marquette appeared in campus papers. And we also had letters to the editor published in the Badger Herald and the UW-River Falls Student Voice.

The coverage of students working against the ban has been widespread and overwhelmingly shows that students are doing what it will take to make a difference on November 7.

Note: this post also appears on Fair Wisconsin's No on the Amendment blog.

Voices for No (Part Two)

2006-10-05T13:15:00.000-07:00

Today was a big day for the Madison Chapter of Students for a Fair Wisconsin. As part of our "Voices for No" campaign this week, we dropped 10,000 pieces of lit on both Wednesday and Thursday morning and set up a display on Thursday on Bascom Hill:

Students for a Fair Wisconsin Banner on Bascom Hill.

And as promised, here are the final six voices for no:

"I'm voting no on November 7th because the greatest commandment of my faith is 'Love thy neighbor as thyself.' The teachings of Jesus Christ tell us to love and accept each other, not to judge or discriminate."

-Tonya Neumann, sophomore

"I'm voting no on November 7th because the amendment bans civil unions, a practical, moral and legal alternative to marriage, and that goes too far."

-David Lapidus, active conservative on campus and blogger at Letters in Bottles

"I'm voting no on November 7th because I believe in the liberation of all oppressed peoples."

-Mingwei Huang, junior

"I'm voting no on November 7th because I believe that everyone deserves the right to be happy."

-Will Endres, freshman

"I'm voting no on November 7th because I don't believe the government should intrude into the personal lives of its citizens."

-Amanda Bychinski, sophomore

"I'm voting no on November 7th because I don't want my adopted home state to abandon its history of leadership. In the civil rights battle of our generation, I want my voice to be heard."

-Eli Judge, chair of Students for a Fair Wisconsin

Earlier today, I was stopped by a student who said to me: "Thanks for doing this. It's so great that you guys emphasized real faces and the voices of real people this week." Our "Voices for No" campaign has been quite successful in showing the diverse backgrounds and motivations of taking a stand on this issue, and it shows that we will make history on Election Day.

Students reading voices for no between classes.

Note: This post also appears on Fair Wisconsin's No on the Amendment Blog.

Voices for No (Part One)

2006-10-04T13:00:00.000-07:00

As we mentioned here yesterday, this week is "Voices for No" week for the Madison Chapter of Students for a Fair Wisconsin. We asked a bunch of people to finish the sentence "I'm voting no on November 7th because..." and then we picked twelve of our favorites to put on our literature this week. Below are six of our twelve voices, and we'll post the other six tomorrow.

"I'm voting no on November 7th because if the ban passes, more of UW's oustanding professors will leave because they will never receive partnership benefits."

-Dylan Rath, Chair of ASM

"I'm voting no on November 7th because I believe it's wrong to place anyone's life or family up for a vote."

-Ginnie Kamp, junior

"I'm voting no on November 7th because it's appalling to use a constitutional amendment to deny rights. Wisconsin's Constitution is meant to protect personal freedoms."

-Patrick Elliott, first-year law student

"I'm voting no on November 7th not because I'm some liberal budding politician or a rainbow warrior. Rather, I'm voting no because I'm merely a girl that, just like anyone else, wishes to be with the one I love."

-Jhani Miller, sophomore

"I'm voting no on November 7th because this is more than a partisan issue; it's an issue of right and wrong. Writing discrimination into Wisconsin's Constitution is wrong, and students of all political beliefs understand that."

-Eli Lewien, Chair of College Democrats of Madison

"I'm voting no on November 7th because I think that all loving families should be valued, regardless of gender."

-Magdalena Cerrina, freshman

Note: This post also appears on Fair Wisconsin's No on the Amendment Blog.

Live-Blogging the Debate

2006-10-03T18:20:00.000-07:00

In case you didn't hear, The Federalist Society at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Law School sponsored a debate tonight on the proposed ban on gay marriage and civil unions. University of Wisconsin-Madison Political Science Professor Howard Schweber argued the "no" side, while Alliance Defense Fund Attorney Jordan Lorence argued the "yes" side.

We decided to live-blog tonight's debate.

Professor Schweber focused on the abstract standard of legitimate state purpose, an judicial ruling on the Fourteenth Amendment that requires a state to justify any restrictions it makes on the liberties of an individual. He also focused on the fact that there is no conclusive proof that gay marriage poses a threat to heterosexual marriage.

Mr. Lorence, on the other hand, focused on the historically determined right of the government to regulate marriage law (stemming mainly from previous regulations placed with respect to polygamy), and repeatedly argued that this ban was constituionally justifiable and necessary to protect marriage.

A summary of their remarks follows:

7:05 pm: The debate begins with a brief history of the proposed ban and the ground rules for the debate. Professor Schweber was first to give his fifteen-minute opening statement.

7:08 pm: Professor Schweber describes the relative youth of our Constitution, and he mentions that it was only recently, in Lawrence v. Texas, that a freedom from the regulation of our intimate relationships was granted under the Fourteenth Amendment.

7:13 pm: Professor Schweber's first argument points out that just because something has been done a certain way for a long time, it is not necessarily therefore justified. He points out slavery as one example, and says "it can never be enough that just because we've done something for a long time, it is legally and constitutionally justifiable."

7:15 pm: Professor Schweber's second argument is that the assertion "religion disapproves of gay marriage" does not constitutionally warrant outlawing gay marriage. He points out that there are a number of points where our laws overlap with religion, but that by itself, the fact that a church holds a particular stance, does not justify that stance constitutionally.

7:17 pm: Professor Schweber's third, and "most important," argument relies on anti-denigration. He says that it does not constitute a legitimate state purpose to say "we don't like your kind" to a particular group of citizens.

7:20 pm: Professor Schweber begins to anticipate his opponent's argument by saying that he "doesn't see how gay marriage poses a threat to heterosexual marriage." He asks, "why is this, uniquely, the only group of people whose marriage would be a threat to heterosexual marriage when no other groups's marriage poses a threat?" And he points out: "Marriage does not crumble whenever you allow someone else to get married."

7:23 pm: Professor Schweber wraps up his argument by discussing the claim that children are better off raised in a household of two parents of the opposite sex. His most compelling reply to this argument is: "there is one thing you know for certain about a child in a household with same-sex parents: that child is wanted. And I think that weighs heavily."

7:25 pm: Mr. Jordan Lorence begins his opening remarks by calling on everyone in the audience to vote yes on the proposed ban.

7:30 pm: Mr. Lorence begins his argument describing the history of polygamy in Utah to begin to answer the question of whether the government holds the authority to regulate marriage as an institution. From when Congress and the Supreme Court required polygamy to be outlawed in each new state constitution as a condition of statehood, he argues that the government does possess that authority.

7:33 pm: Mr. Lorence's first argument is that constitutional amendments banning gay marriage and civil unions are justifiable on the grounds that they take the definition of marriage out of a "simple majority" of the justices in the Supreme Court of any state and place it back in the hands of the legislature - that is, the people.

7:35 pm: Mr. Lorence describes marriage as something beyond legal rights and benefits. He also claims that arguments about benefits are simply "a red herring issue" and that rights and benefits (like the ability to make vital healthcare decisions on behalf of another) can be secured through other legal means (like powers of attorney). Mr. Lorence also argues that the best way - according to studies and historical evidence - to raise children is with one mother and one father.

7:39 pm: Mr. Lorence discusses marriage law throughout the United States saying that the laws never single out a group saying that "anyone can get married except that group." He says, rather, that the law excludes an individual from marrying disparate groups - "I cannot get married to someone underage, to a close relative, to someone of a same-sex" - and outside that group one can marry any person. He then claims that the individual doesn't have a right to ask for the group one can marry to be redefined according to one's personal preference.

7:43 pm: Mr. Lorence brings up the case Loving v. Virginia, which overturned a Virginia law that didn't allow whites to marry interracially, claiming that this example is different than the current debate because "it didn't preclude an Asian-American, for example, from marrying an African-American - that is, it only excluded one group." He concludes by saying that he believes the government's definition of marriage to exclude polygamy is a better analogy for the current debate.

7:45 pm: Professor Schweber begins his rebuttal by saying that the fundamental question isn't whether gay marriage should be legalized, but rather, whether the states have a right to exclude gay marriage. He cites the fundamental premise of the Fourteenth Amendment - that the state must justify its actions - as proof of this lack of justification. He says that when a state is allowed to categorically exclude certain rights, you "have a totalitarian state."

7:48 pm: Professor Schweber revisits his point about families, saying that this would be the first instance where two people would be told (and wrongly) that they can't get married by virtue of the fact that they're not the best situation in which to raise children. Moreover, he claims that marriage is about benefits - "it is a benefit," he says - and that children of same-sex marriage would "most certainly be better off if their parents can get married."

7:52 pm: Professor Schweber finishes by claiming that the proposed ban on gay marriage is exactly the issue confronted in Loving v. Virginia, claiming that the central reason the original Virginia law was struck down was that the state couldn't articulate a justification for outlawing interracial marriage.

7:54 pm: The debate was now opened for questions, the first of which was directed to Mr. Lorence: does outlawing a status substantially similar to marriage present a trap where people in an unmarried domestic relationship - like the situation in Ohio where domestic violence cases are being thrown out - could suffer in unanticipated ways?

7:56 pm: Mr. Lorence replies by citing the statute as the problem, because it uses the words "spouse-like." He said the statute would be fine if the criterion for domestic violence was two people living in the same household rather than living in a spouse-like relationship. Likewise, he claims, domestic partnership benefits could remain so long as the criteria was that they could only be shared with one person, rather than a domestic or life-long partner.

7:59 pm: Professor Schweber rebuts by asking whether the phrase "substantially similar" applies to the relationship or the benefits being provided. He claims that it is possible to read the second sentence to outlaw benefits substantially similar to those offered by marriage, rather than outlawing benefits for people in relationships substantially similar to marriage.

8:00 pm: Anne McClintock asks Mr. Lorence to clarify why a man and woman with no desire to have children would have a legal right to marriage (based on the fact that he had argued that the principal purpose of marriage and criterion for getting married would be to raise children) where it would seem that a same-sex couple wanting to raise children ought to have that legal right and an opposite-sex couple not wanting to raise children (or incapable of having) ought not.

8:02 pm: Mr. Lorence replies by attacking the second part of the question, arguing that it would be invasive to require a fertility test in order to get married. Further, he claims that the vast majority (if not all) children are produced by heterosexual activity, and that the question of the same-sex couple does not necessarily apply. He concludes by adding that he believes Professor Schweber's argument about legitimate state purpose is an overstatement.

8:05 pm: Professor Schweber replies to Mr. Lorence's argument by questioning why we allow so many relationships that are potentially quite harmful to children, and then say that a same-sex couple raising children is less than ideal and therefore ought to be outlawed. Professor Schweber emphasizes that this reasoning is flawed because the evidence for such an argument is meaningless and misguided.

8:08 pm: Mr. Lorence rebuts Professor Schweber's argument by stating that the legitimate state purpose standard makes it impossible for us to say no to anything, including polygamy. He claims that this standard allows anybody to require the government to redefine marriage to fit their own personal purpose.

8:11 pm: The next question asks how a yes vote can be justified on the grounds that it keeps the issue in the hands of the people when this particular ban would take the issue out of the hands of any future legislature by outlawing any laws that provide benefits substantially similar to marriage.

8:13 pm: Mr. Lorence replies that the provision may not be that strong in the long-run - that future legislatures could potentially go through the amendment process to overturn the ban. He then concedes that a narrower amendment could be drafted, but that he supports a yes vote on our ban because it protects the valuable institution of marriage.

8:15 pm: Professor Schweber replies that he agrees that marriage is a valuable and essential institution, but that he just doesn't see how it's in peril, as Mr. Lorence repeatedly claimed.

Those were the final remarks of the debate. In my own particularly partial opinion, I believe Professor Schweber won this debate quite handily, but I'll let their arguments speak for themselves.

Voices for No

2006-10-03T15:00:00.000-07:00

This week, the Madison chapter of Students for Fair Wisconsin is unveiling its Voices for No campaign, featuring twelve real students from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and their reasons for voting no on the ban. The campaign will include lit drops featuring these twelve students and their statements and will culminate with a display on Bascom Hill this Thursday. It will be a unique showcase of the diverse reasons that students have for voting against the ban, and just so you don't miss anything, we will be posting the statements here, too. So keep checking back over the next few days, and keep a look out on the Madison campus!

Recent Student Media Coverage

2006-10-02T13:30:00.000-07:00

As you can see from our student press page, we've been getting a ton of coverage in student newspapers around the state lately.

The Badger Herald covered our weekend faith canvass and a press conference held by the Madison Equal Opportunities Commission and city leaders to encourage Wisconsinites to vote against the ban. Speakers included Mayor Dave Cieslewicz, who explained how the ban would harm Madison:

The Madison Chamber of Commerce opposes this amendment because they understand that it’s anti-economic development and it’s anti-prosperity. We live in what is virtually a full-employment economy here in Madison. We cannot afford to exclude or to turn down anybody in our community.

The Daily Cardinal has written about faith groups around the state that oppose the ban and an earlier piece about our new ad campaign featuring the story of Lynn and her family. They also ran this editorial that describes in greater detail the potential effects of the ban on families like Lynn's.

Editorials also appeared in The Marquette Tribune describing how the ban could affect domestic violence cases and in the UW-River Falls Student Voice asking for equal marriage rights for all. In that piece, Ben Jipson writes:

Equal civil rights are guaranteed to every law-abiding citizen in our country. Homosexuals should be able to have the same marital benefits, responsibilities and opportunities as everyone else under the law, and that is a Constitutional right. If there is any justice in this country, 50 years from now gay marriage and civil union bans will be seen as an embarrassing blemish of our nation’s history.

Finally, letters to the editor appeared in The Racquet at UW-La Crosse (here and here), and we even found one printed a few weeks ago in The Oracle at Hamline University in St. Paul

A Note on Voting

2006-09-22T09:00:00.000-07:00

Lately, we've been getting a lot of questions about how to vote no on November 7: I'm from New Jersey, can I vote in Wisconsin? Should I vote at my school or in my hometown? I'm not registered to vote, how do I register? I'm currently attending school in Minnesota, can I still vote in Wisconsin? etc.

Lucky for us, former Madison mayor Paul Soglin posted an incredibly instructive entry to his blog about voter registration and voting absentee in Wisconsin, including when and where to register, how to vote absentee, and much more. And of course, if you have any unanswered questions, you can always email us.

Facebook Round-up

2006-09-20T11:45:00.000-07:00

As this recent article in the Advance-Titan at UW-Oshkosh demonstrates, Facebook has become a useful and almost ubiquitous tool when it comes to organizing on college campuses. With that in mind, I spent some time poking around Facebook to see where we stand. (Unfortunately, Facebook only allows me to search the school tied to my account, so I can only report on what I've found at UW-Madison. If you're reading from another school, feel free to share what your school has in the comments section.)

A Fair Wisconsin Votes No! is our statewide election-issue group, and is therefore our largest. It's growing by the minute and, as I write this, just reached 3,501 members. There is also A Fair Wisconsin Votes No! (Minnesota Chapter) for those fair-minded Wisconsinites attending school in Minnesota.

Students for a Fair Wisconsin is the "official" Facebook-group version of Students for a Fair Wisconsin: UW-Madison Chapter. These are The Students for a Fair Wisconsin at UW-Madison - the ones that make everything happen on campus. It currently has 336 active members.

We also have a group called I'm voting No on the amendment... which asks members to finish the sentence: "I'm voting no on the ban because..."

There are a couple classic groups at UW-Madison: the always absurd Gay Marriage Killed the Dinosaurs (Wisconsin Chapter) and the somewhat vulgar Against Gay Marriage? Then Don't Get One and Shut the Fuck Up!.

And let's not forget my favorite spin-off: Sellery Residents for a Fair Wisconsin. I hope we'll see a lot more groups like this soon!

Finally, our round-up would not be complete without checking into our opposition. Though we disagree with their title, they've also registered a statewide election-issue group: A Moral Wisconsin Votes YES. Unfortunately, they currently have 268 active members.

Our opposition at UW-Madison is much milder: Protect the sanctity of marriage, vote yes November 7th!, which has merely three members, and Students for an Unfair WI (what?), which is now up to six.

The sheer number of people in our groups (and their rate of growth) show just how important this issue has become on campus. Students are energized and committed to defeating the ban, and with their frequent updates, these groups are a great way to get involved. Together, we can make history on November 7!

Kicking Off Around Wisonsin

2006-09-18T14:30:00.000-07:00

Just as we kicked off here in Madison slightly more than a week ago, Students for a Fair Wisconsin groups have been kicking off around the state. Andrew Moe, who wrote for us last week, has been working hard to help organize statewide campuses outside of the Madison and Milwaukee areas. Last week, groups he has been working with held kickoffs in Oshkosh, La Crosse, Whitewater, River Falls and Eau Claire. And soon, they will be kicking off at Stevens Point and Stout. Here are a few highlights from last week’s kickoffs in Oshkosh and La Crosse:

UW-La Crosse: Over 35 people, including 23 new volunteers, showed up. Everyone was excited to learn about the ban and how they could get involved to make sure students at La Crosse vote no on November 7. And they hit the ground running by planning to table at the Cartwright Center and to drop lit in the classrooms.

UW-Oshkosh: Over 40 people came to learn more about defeating the ban this November. After a mini speakers training from field organizer Jeff Broxmeyer and hearing why County Supervisor Jef Hall opposes the ban, they planned tabling events at Reeve Union, along with lit drops and chalking around the UW-Oshkosh campus.

Update (19 September 2006 at 2:00pm): In the statewide student activity round-up, I forgot to include UW-Platteville, where a lot of great things have been going on. Coleman, a field organizer for Fair Wisconsin in the area, has an update here.

The Associated Students of Madison

2006-09-14T08:45:00.000-07:00

Yesterday something happened at the University of Wisconsin that doesn't happen very often: ASM, our student government, passsed a resolution expressing its opposition to the gay marriage and civil unions ban that will be voted on this November. It is only the third time ASM has taken a stance on a political issue.

Their stance simply confirms how important this issue is to Wisconsin students and the widespread negative effects the ban could have if it passes. If this ban passes, it would severely limit the ability of every university in Wisconsin to recruit and retain the most talented students, faculty and staff. Students in Wisconsin are energized and committed to defeating this ban on civil unions and marriage come November, and ASM's resolution is just one more sign of that committment.

The Badger Herald and The Daily Cardinal have coverage (here and here).

Facts vs. Fear

2006-09-11T17:30:00.000-07:00

This morning, we ran across a column written by Emily Hartwig for the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire student newspaper, The Spectator, in favor of the constitutional amendment banning civil unions and gay marriage.

At first, I was outraged. I have been on the job as the Statewide Campus Coordinator for Fair Wisconsin - working with UW schools outside of the Madison and Milwaukee areas - for about three weeks now, and this is the first sign of support for the ban on these campuses. Of course, I know some students are going to vote for the ban and some may even organize efforts to oppose us, yet this was the first time opposition was hitting home, on my turf.

I challenge you to try and make your way through the convoluted and often incoherent arguments being made, touching on a range of issues, from voting for precedence because 20 other states have passed similar discriminatory amendments, to a religiously flawed argument against fairness. Here is an excerpt from the article that I'd like to share with you:

We have a clear-cut choice. Vote yes and agree with 20 other states in clarifying traditional marriage.

Or vote no and open the floodgates for challenges to current marriage laws.

Though Wisconsin statutes refer to husband and wife when discussing marriage, nowhere does it define these terms as man and woman. We need to clarify this so future lawsuits don't weaken our interpretation of the law.

Right now, many see this amendment as an attack on same-sex partnerships. But it's actually just what it is titled - a marriage protection amendment.

Now, I can appreciate educating students when these arguments are made. That's probably why my anger after initially reading the article turned into a sense of hope - an opportunity to have a discussion with students on our campuses about the far-reaching consequences this kind of ban will impose.

Hartwig argues that we have a choice. That, for a fact, is true. We have a choice - but the options she presents are skewed. Insisting that Wisconsin should follow the lead of other states - states that are just now realizing the harmful effects of their amendments - is a mistake. In Ohio, for instance, domestic violence cases are being dismissed because a relationship between a woman and her abusive boyfriend is "substantially similar to marriage" - a relationship that is not recognized by the state following its own constitutional amendment. Is this the kind of precedent we are willing to follow? Flawed policy passed by the legislature and voters because they didn't realize what the amendment was actually going to do?

Hartwig is also right in claiming that many see this amendment as an attack on same-sex partnerships. It most certainly is. But it's also an attack on our unmarried, straight friends, affecting basic rights such as health care, medical decision-making, and already-established domestic partnership benefits. Wisconsin students can clearly see this isn't about protecting marriage. If it were about protecting marriage, we would see proponents of the ban trying to change the laws governing divorce and separation. This is about writing discrimination into our constitution against those who choose not to get married - or are barred from getting married - and prohibit those people from receiving the same benefits, rights, and privileges that are offered to married partners.

And creating a social "fear" of what may happen if we don't act now to protect marriage is a strategy that those on the other side of this debate are using, and we as students need to stand together to clarify this so-called marriage amendment. We are not instilling fear - we are simply giving the facts.

One Big Step

2006-09-08T12:15:00.000-07:00

As you surely know by now, the UW-Madison Chapter of Students for a Fair Wisconsin held their kickoff last night on the Madison campus. And it was a resounding success. Over 350 students came to show their opposition to the proposed ban of gay marriage and civil unions and to learn more about how to get involved with the campaign on campus. That's right: we filled the room!

The Students for a Fair Wisconsin.

At the meeting, Representative Mark Pocan addressed the crowd, stressing the importance of the student vote in defeating the ban. He called on students to make sure their voices were heard by informing their peers about the ban and making sure every student gets out to vote.

After Pocan spoke, Fair Wisconsin Campaign Manager Mike Tate took the stage to motivate students to get involved. He asked the students to picture 15 years from now, when they are talking to their children about the ban. He asked everyone in the audience to think about that day, and whether they would be able to tell their children that they sat on their couches, eating pizza and drinking beer, or whether they would be able to say they took a stand, got involved, and sent a message to this state and this nation that we will not tolerate discrimination.

Campaign Manager Mike Tate energizes the crowd.

The meeting concluded with pizza and with handing out window signs to the students in attendance. (And if you happen to have been in attendence, and didn't get a sign - we ran out - expect an email from us soon about where and when you'll be able to get one.)

Students pick up window signs as they leave the meeting.

Finally, the Daily Cardinal also has a piece about the event, and Fair Wisconsin has more photos on their blog.

As we, and others, have been saying all along: students have the power to make sure this ban doesn't pass. Last night, we took one big step in showing why.

The 11th Hour

2006-09-07T06:45:00.000-07:00

In slightly less than eleven hours, Students for a Fair Wisconsin will officially kick off in Madison. I say officially, because we've been quite busy with our pre-kickoff activities - lit drops, chalkings, tablings, and columns in the campus papers (here and here) - and it seems like we've practically kicked off already. It won't be much longer now.

But for now, we have a new student website! And if you're looking for the Madison chapter, we are no longer located here, but are now here. Visit our events page, too, to see what's happening on your campus.

Oh, and if you're in Madison, don't forget: Students for a Fair Wisconsin, tonight, 7:30 pm in 3650 Humanities. Be there, or ... you know the rest.

It's Coming...

2006-08-30T08:15:00.000-07:00

Last night, a group of us at Students for a Fair Wisconsin went out chalking for the first time this fall. We had a great turn out and a fantastic time chalking for our kickoff. And our chalking looked fabulous - like this one on State Street Mall:

Chalking on State Street Mall.

It says:

Extreme politicians have been playing politics with the lives of real people for too long!
In 19 states, they forced anti-gay amendments on the ballot to get re-elected.

In 19 states, they tried to turn people against each other.

In 19 states, it worked.

This November, it stops here.
We have the power to make history.

Students for a Fair Wisconsin

Kicks off
Thursday, September 7
7:30 pm, TITU

Be there.

Oodles of Updates

2006-08-25T19:30:00.000-07:00

As mentioned here, a lot of new things have been happening with Students for a Fair Wisconsin lately. It has been a hectic couple of weeks, and with all the new developments, we haven’t had much time to transition and update the blog. But the new blog is finally here (along with some updates to the old website while we await the new one), and here are some highlights from the past two weeks:

Fair Wisconsin has hired Andy Gordon to coordinate the campus campaign in Madison. He comes to our group with experience as a volunteer and intern Democratic Candidates, the Communications Chair of the College Democrats of Madison, and past involvement with ASM as a student council representative and slate organizer.

Our good friend Eli Judge, meanwhile, has stepped up as the Chair for Students for a Fair Wisconsin and is excited to build upon the great work Students for Equality did last semester. He and Andy have already been working diligently, crafting a fantastic fall campaign. Together, they bring an unrelenting energy and passion to the campus campaign and are going to do a terrific job ensuring that every student has heard about the proposed ban and why they should vote no on November 7.

In other campus news, Fair Wisconsin has also hired Erika Grace Nelson to coordinate the Milwaukee-area campuses and Andrew Moe to coordinate statewide on the La Crosse, Eau Claire, Stout, River Falls, Stevens Point, Oshkosh and Whitewater campuses. Both are doing tremendous work to educate and mobilize students throughout Wisconsin.

As for the blog – I will be working with a few others on campus media this fall. We plan to saturate campus newspapers statewide with features, letters, and editorials about the proposed ban and its harmful effects on students. Alongside these efforts, we will continue to blog with updates from the campuses throughout the state and with exciting news and developments both inside and outside the campaign. We will still be here, and we hope to post more frequently and more broadly – expanding beyond the boundaries of the Madison campus.

Finally, our update would not be complete without mentioning the terrific press students received in today’s Capital Times. Judith Davidoff’s piece, Swing Votes: Young People and the Same-sex Marriage Ban, discusses the importance of students statewide in defeating the ban. In the article, University of Wisconsin-Madison professor, Kathy Cramer Walsh describes the enormous significance of the student vote: “I think the campus vote statewide will be the deciding factor.”

Davidoff also quotes our own Eli Judge quite extensively:

"I have never been more passionate about a subject in my life," says Judge.

A native of Illinois, Judge says he could see himself settling down in Madison after college, but not if the constitutional ban on same-sex marriage passes.

"What I see here is someone openly attacking my way of life and my ability to raise a family here," says Judge, who is gay. "I can't do that effectively if this amendment passes."

[…]

Judge says that he and many of his straight and gay contemporaries take political interference into their right to marry as a "personal insult."

"That's why people are starting to come out like armies opposed to this amendment," he says.

Indeed, armies are what we plan to have. This is the civil rights issue of our generation, and we plan to come out in full force to show the state of Wisconsin, our country, and the world that we will not put up with discrimination and that we will not accept the extreme, far-reaching consequences of this ban.

We have 74 more days, and we will work indefatigably to turn out enough students to defeat this ban.

And Finally, Some News

2006-08-08T18:30:00.000-07:00

As you may have noticed here, some changes have been underway with Students for Equality. Most importantly, we have officially changed our name to Students for a Fair Wisconsin. We will also soon have a full-time campus organizer in Madison, and we continue to grow our group and our efforts statewide. We have a new facebook group and will be working to secure a new email address and create a new website.

As we transition, you can continue to use the current (old) website and email. We will be sure to take care of all the forwarding work, so nothing will be lost. And I must ask again: please pardon our dust as we transition and get things up and running.

We’re gearing up for a terrific fall, and we’re going to take campus by storm. Stay tuned for more updates!

Dear Friends...

2006-08-02T08:15:00.000-07:00

Two days ago I got back from being a camp counselor in Western Michigan. It was my eighth summer up there, so there wasn't much surprise as to the layout or expectations of the camp. When I was leading, I taught a small class that debated different controversial issues in the US political scene. Things like abortion, gun control, and the death penalty all led to passionate discussion, even with 13 year old boys sharing their own personal convictions. The sides were usually split half and half; some taking the more "conservative" stance, the others the more "progressive."

What does this have to do with Students for Equality? On the last day, we were supposed to discuss gay marriage, but not one single camper believed that gays didn't deserve all of the rights and responsibilities that straight couples enjoy. It was the only topic we discussed where a unanimous opinion was reached.

As the fall season gears up, and the SFE crew starts getting ready for the long fight we've got over the next couple months, it gives me confidence to see that these young people already understand the need for equality. It also gives me motivation by reminding myself that our efforts, now, could very well save them a longer struggle later in time.

We've got a golden opportunity. Have you recently said "I wish I was more active" or "They've got a point" or even "I don't agree with gays getting married, but the amendment just goes to far!"? Then now is your time.

Students for Equality needs your help, but don't let that confuse you. It's those campers and the future families of Wisconsin that you will be fighting for.

"Once again into the breach, dear friends." Henry V III.I.1

Too Much Silence

2006-07-24T19:30:00.000-07:00

The Students for Equality Blog has been strangely silent of late. (Nothing has been posted for over three weeks now!) And for that silence, I must apologize. I was out of town for much of the week of July 4, and once I returned, things began to heat up at Fair Wisconsin, where I’ve been spending almost all of my free time this summer. Between that and my regular job, I’ve not had the time to provide an update, so let me try to fill you in on what has been happening.

I have been spending my time at Fair Wisconsin divided between two tasks. The first has been ensuring that the walking lists are prepared and mailed in time for the canvasses happening in the many Action Networks throughout the state. The second has been working to place stories in labor-related newspapers around the state, to try to reach out to union members with our message. Both have been quite exciting, but have taken a great deal of time and attention.

As for Fair Wisconsin, you may or may not have noticed, but they’ve gone on TV throughout the state. In fact, their second ad debuted today. (Both ads can also be seen on YouTube – here and here.) In addition to that, Fair Wisconsin has been and continues to hire a great deal of new staff. And there was this brief bit of “controversy” over the opposition, Vote Yes for Marriage. (And while you’re at it, check out Mike Fitzpatrick’s wonderfully entertaining piece on the opposition’s logo.)

Finally, in Students for Equality news, we had a meeting last Monday, July 17, to discuss how we are going to win campus this fall. Though nothing is finalized, we have begun developing our plan of how we will make sure every student knows exactly what the proposed ban on civil unions and gay marriage entails and how to vote no on it come November 7. Part of it may include this blog, and we may be seeking writers for the fall. We'll see what happens.

There are some exciting things in the works; stay tuned here, and we’ll keep you posted. And get ready, because come fall, we’re going to take campus by storm, and with your help, we are going to make sure that every student knows why and how to vote no on the ban!

9 Days Later...

2006-06-30T09:00:00.000-07:00

Well, it's June 30, and the results are in. Fair Wisconsin raised $42,530 in their $30K by June 30 campaign. That's right, $12,530 beyond the goal! In fact, the effort was so successful that the bar was raised from $30K to $40K on Wednesday. Thanks to everyone who donated.

30 by 30

2006-06-21T11:00:00.000-07:00

Two days ago, Fair Wisconsin unveiled a fundraising drive asking for at least 1,000 people to donate 30 dollars - to raise a total of $30,000 - before the State Elections Board filing deadline on June 30th. If you've returned home for the summer and are out of range of Fair Wisconsin's many Action Networks, giving $30 (or more) is a great way to help out. (And you can watch here for updates as they approach their goal.)

If there is an Action Network in your area, continue checking the events calendar for ways to get involved. In Madison, for example, the TAA is co-sponsoring this Saturday's canvass, while volunteer nights continue to be held four nights each week. Interning, if you're near Madison or Milwaukee for the summer, offers a great way to begin or enhance your campaign and organizing experience.

Same-Sex Marriage Ban Update

2006-06-07T08:40:00.000-07:00

It's now official: the U.S. Senate rejected the proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage by a 49 to 48 vote. The Senate fell 11 short of the required 60 votes.

Meanwhile, many updates have been posted to the blogosphere since yesterday's summary. Here are some more highlights:

Fair Wisconsin's No on the Amendment Blog has a similar review of the blogosphere posted, including the text of Senator Feingold's speech on the Senate floor.

Purple Scarf has, likewise, been following the debate closely and has posted many updates. Highlights include the speeches of Senator Feingold, Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Senator John Warner of Virginia. He also has a handful of other remarks, posted with comments.

Senate Debates Same-Sex Marriage Ban

2006-06-06T08:30:00.000-07:00

While we engage in a battle to prevent the ban of civil unions and marriage for same-sex couples in the state of Wisconsin, the U.S. Senate has begun debating a national ban of same-sex marriage, setting the blogosphere in action. Many of the blogs linked on our page have posted about the debate. Here are some highlights:

President Bush spoke yesterday for over nine minutes about the need to pass this legislation. Fair Wisconsin’s No on the Amendment Blog and Gay Rights Watch both have the video (here and here).

Gay Spirtuality and Culture has an entry about yesterday’s Atlantic Journal-Constitution, which featured a story with a headline indicating that a ban of same-sex marriage is one of President Bush’s top priorities.

Wisconsin’s own Tom Scharbach offers his own analysis of the debate on Purple Scarf, suggesting that it is a ploy by Republicans to gain support during the upcoming election cycle.

Finally, the New York Times reports on yesterday’s debate on the ban and that the debate will continue today in the Senate. Thankfully, they also report that the Senate probably doesn’t have enough votes to pass the legislation.

Waking up on November 8, 2006

2006-05-25T15:10:00.000-07:00

Last weekend, if you hadn’t heard, volunteers knocked on doors in all 72 Wisconsin counties, talking to people about the amendment to ban civil unions and marriage for same-sex couples. (Personally, I heard a lot about it, since I had a hand in printing out many of the walking lists that volunteers used around the state.)

Fair Wisconsin has a page where they’ve compiled press coverage for the 72-County Canvass. Locally, Barry Adams had a nice write-up of the event in the Wisconsin State Journal, featuring the University of Wisconsin-Madison LGBT Campus Center’s very own, Nathan Figueroa. Mayor Dave also took part in the Madison canvass.

This event demonstrates the broad scope from which we're fighting this battle. It's not just in Madison or at the University of Wisconsin, it's happening throughout the state. And no matter where you are in Wisconsin – if you’ve gone home for the summer, for example – there are things you can do to help out.

Today, I walked into the office of one of the staff members at the Fair Wisconsin, and I saw a sign that said: “How will you feel when you wake up on November 8?” It’s a question we should all be asking ourselves – a question whose answer we should be shaping every day.

The State of the Ban (in the News)

2006-05-18T16:30:00.000-07:00

Judith Davidoff’s article, “Taking Liberties,” in today’s Capital Times, discusses the legal and political implications of the same-sex marriage and civil unions ban, as well as where various groups around the state stand on the issue.

She opens writing that the ban would write discrimination into the constitution, an unusual and unprecedented act:

Banning same-sex marriage through a proposed amendment to the state constitution would write discrimination into the 158-year-old document for the first time in Wisconsin history.

She also quotes and names groups around the state who have come out in opposition to the ban, including the ACLU, the League of Women Voters, Latinos United for Change and Advancement, and the Urban League of Greater Madison.

Perhaps most alarming in the article is what the supporters of the ban have to say. Julaine Appling of the Family Research Institute, for example, argues that gays and lesbians are not discriminated against, suggesting that in order for discrimination to occur:

You have to have an immutable characteristic, you have to have financial deprivation and you have to have political powerlessness.

She claims that gays and lesbians have none of the three, and to prove there is no immutable characteristic, she adds:

I've met many, many, many former homosexuals, but I've never met a former black man or a former Chinese man.

Additionally, Gordon Hoyton, a law professor at Marquette University, preposterously argues that it isn’t unusual to take away rights in a constitutional amendment:

The 13th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which abolished slavery, for instance, prevents individuals from selling themselves into slavery.

Hoyton, perhaps, would have been better off mentioning prohibition, rather than implying that the millions of African(-American)s enslaved and tortured throughout history actually desired their fate.

But that’s not the real point.

The point is, we have an opportunity - and a duty - to ensure that discrimination is not written into the Wisconsin State Constitution. The words of those in favor of the ban bespeaks intolerance, and we must do everything we can this summer - in the next 173 days, and beyond even - to ensure that we live in a safe, tolerant, and accepting society. And to do it, we have to work together - we have to build coalitions of support.

Start by talking to your friends, your neighbors, your family, and your coworkers. Write letters to the editors. Knock on doors. Start out with small steps, but be persistent, and eventually we’ll get there.

Summer's Here

2006-05-15T13:15:00.000-07:00

Now that finals and graduation and move-out week are all complete, it's time for a blog revival - summer's here! Really, I just wanted to take a moment to point out opportunities for you all to get involved this summer.

If you're ever looking for ways to get involved with the campaign, the first step is to check out Fair Wisconsin's Events Calendar. A few highlights from that calendar:

Statewide Door-to-Door Canvass: From 10:00 am to 3:00 pm this Saturday, May 20, we will be canvassing each of Wisconsin's 72 Counties!

Volunteer Nights: Volunteer Nights are being held in the Madison office (located at 122 State Street) each week from 6:00 to 9:00 pm on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday nights and from 4:30 to 8:00 pm on Sundays. Stop by to make phone calls or help out with data entry and other projects!

If you've gone home for the summer, watch the events calendar for opportunities near your hometown. Or, if you have a story to share, email us about writing for the blog.

And don't forget to relax and enjoy the weather - things will be heating up as the summer moves on!

Summer's Coming

2006-05-07T19:05:00.000-07:00

I can tell that the year is ending over by my quiet lakeshore dorms. Those red carts, sitting around to help people move their stuff out, remind me of the day we all showed up back in August. It went fast, that's for sure; the year passing so quickly reminds me that November 7th is coming at the same pace.

Terrace in the Summer.

Our last Students for Equality meeting, which focused on the first couple weeks at the beginning of next semester, centered a lot on getting new incoming students informed about the amendment and interested in our group. With multiple lit drops, mailbox stuffers, meetings, and Speakers Trainings planned for the fall, I'd be disappointed if every freshmen hadn't heard the words "Students for Equality" at least once by the time October rolled around. Be sure to check in on our events page during the coming days and weeks to see what we're up to over the summer and at the beginning of next semester.

A lot of our plans also involve our growing list of coalition members! Our most recent additions, Advocates for Choice, Voices for Planned Parenthood, the University of Wisconsin Department of Curriculum and Instruction, and the University of Wisconsin School of Social Work, will all be crucial and influential in our goal of educating campus about the ban. Even though summer is coming quickly, we hope that student organizations will continue to join the fight for equality during the hotter Wisconsin months.

Blogging on the Blog (Or, 'Metablog')

2006-05-02T19:30:00.000-07:00

Before we get too far into things, it seems like we ought to offer some introduction or mission statement, as is often customary in the blogosphere. The blog already has two posts, which give a good idea of what we’re about, but I’m going to try to circle in and offer something less vague.

As our name suggests, this is the blog for the University of Wisconsin-Madison organization, Students for Equality, which is dedicated to educating campus about the upcoming amendment to ban civil unions and marriage for same-sex couples. (You’ll find most of that in the blog header, but it’s important and bears repeating, I think.) So what does that mean?

We are going to focus on this proposal and other LGBT issues. (Or perhaps it’s better to say we’re going to take off from that focus.) We will provide announcements and recaps of Students for Equality events and information about the amendment. We also hope our members will share their stories – why they’re interested in this issue and what got them involved. We want this to be a forum for the voices of equality, so if you have something you would like to write about, let us know what it is (you can find our contact information on the Students for Equality homepage), and we’ll see what we can do. And if you want to contribute on a more consistent basis, we’re open to that, too. We, of course, reserve the right to moderate posts and comments and submission inquires as we see fit, but we will try to remain as objective and open as possible.

With 189 days left until the vote, we’re excited and optimistic, but we can’t do it without your help. So stick with us – and write something if you’d like – it’s going to be quite the ride!

Reflectig on the Past, Looking to the Future

2006-04-30T13:25:00.000-07:00

Bascom Hill Display.

As the semester is coming to an end, I've been taking the time to look back and see all that we have accomplished this past semester. I had been worried at the beginning that Students for Equality would end up being one of those 5-minute-hits: bringing a big burst of energy at first, then dwindling into nothing. I was pleased to find that our dedication and determination were stronger than the urge to just do what was "easy." Our coalition of student organizations and staff/faculty divisions is growing weekly, the amount of people we have educated about the negative effects of the ban expands every day, and our membership is getting larger and more dedicated with each event and activity we complete.

The recent Day of Silence gave me the chance to realize other benefits of what we experiencing here on campus. Working closely with the UW-Allies and QPOC when trying to get the rally going has given me friends and contacts that I know I'll be able to maintain for the rest of my college career. I've also gained the confidence I'll need to make an impact on whatever issue I decide to fight for while I'm living on the banks of Mendota.

What's more is that other members of our group seem to be making similar connections and skills while they work with us. Watching prospective Students for Equality members who didn't know much or anything about the proposed ban on civil unions and marriage, I always thought they seemed a little timid and shy at first. Already, I've been amazed with the skills and knowledge they've gained through attending our info sessions, speakers trainings, and campus-wide events. Just recently when Students for Equality was at the Sellery Cup-O'-Controversy, curious residents would ask questions about the ban, and newer members were fielding the questions like they had been doing it for years.

Students for Equality members at the Day of Silence.

We've had a great start, and we're teaching campus, and ourselves, what it needs to know to make an educated decision come November. Although this progress is motivating, we're nowhere near done. It's our job to not only let people know why the ban will hurt them, but also that they have the opportunity to fight for what's right and demand the same chance to get a first-rate education that could be lost should the amendment pass.

As we move into finals, think about what you can do for equality over the summer. It can be as simple as starting a conversation about the ban or volunteering - perhaps canvassing or making phone calls or attending events - for Students for Equality or Fair Wisconsin. Keep reading our blog to see what's going on, and check our events page and the Fair Wisconsin events calendar frequently to find out ways you can get involved!

The Day of Silence Rally.

Modifying the old saying: Now isn't the time to get mad, now is the time to make things even.

Breaking the Silence

2006-04-27T11:25:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, you may have noticed that the bright, outspoken student in your class was strangely silent. You may have bumped into somebody, only to have them put their head down and hurry away. Or, you may have passed a friend on the street and received only a slight nod, instead of the usual, cordial ‘hello.’ Why all the odd behavior? you may have asked yourself.

Yesterday marked the tenth annual National Day of Silence. Nationwide, a half million middle school, high school and college students took a vow of silence to protest the silence imposed upon gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals and their allies. Their intentional silence echoed the silence caused by harassment, prejudice, and discrimination toward these individuals. “Think about the voices you’re not hearing today,” was their resounding message.

In Madison, the day concluded with a rally at the State Capitol. In the late afternoon, a crowd of LGBT students and their allies gathered at Library Mall, and they marched together, in silence, down State Street toward the Capitol:

Students marching down State Street.

Arriving at the Capitol.

The rally called on students to break the silence – to speak out and make their voices heard on LGBT issues, particularly in Wisconsin, with the upcoming vote to ban marriage and civil unions for same-sex couples. For some time, Students for Equality has been organizing on campus to educate students, faculty and staff on the proposal, while fostering a campus community that is inclusive and free of discrimination. This blog is our way of breaking the silence, of making sure that our voices are heard.

In the upcoming days, weeks and months, we hope to use this blog to report on the activities of our group, to spread our message, and to provide a forum where the voices of LGBT individuals and their allies can be heard. Please pardon our dust as we get things off the ground, and check back often for updates!