Court's decision to reject challenge to domestic partner registry was right one
Lack of justification for decision shows objections lack legitimacy
Issue date: 11/5/09 Section: Editorial/Opinion
The Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision to reject a challenge to what little rights the state has granted gay couples shines as a beacon of hope in what appears to be an intensifying battle for human rights across the country.
The fact that the court did not even justify its decision shows challenges to the state's domestic partner registry's lack legitimacy, so much so they do not even deserve an explanation. It also shows our state government is committed to guaranteeing basic rights for all of its citizens.
The rights granted to state residents by the domestic partner registry - which was added to the constitution in 2006 - include the right to visit a partner in the hospital and inherit each other's property, as well as make end of life decisions.
Those rights, we feel, are something that every human being should be entitled to. It should no longer be up to the government to decide who counts as family to a person.
The registry is a far cry from equality, but it is a step in the right direction.
We feel the challenge to the registry is interesting, in that it threatens to take away rights that are of no consequence to anyone else. The registry allows gay couple to be recognized partners, but it does not ensure many of the rights and benefits of a heterosexual couple.
The registry does not define marriage in any way. Many opponents of the registry claim that that it is a moral issue that rocks the foundation of the long-held belief that marriage should only exist between a man and a woman. In fact, it is quite opposite since the state already decided not to allow homosexuals to marry.
For those reasons, challenging such a small victory for gay couples would be a colossal waste of tax payer dollars and the time of the higher courts, which have more important issues to deliberate on.
The fact that the court did not even justify its decision shows challenges to the state's domestic partner registry's lack legitimacy, so much so they do not even deserve an explanation. It also shows our state government is committed to guaranteeing basic rights for all of its citizens.
The rights granted to state residents by the domestic partner registry - which was added to the constitution in 2006 - include the right to visit a partner in the hospital and inherit each other's property, as well as make end of life decisions.
Those rights, we feel, are something that every human being should be entitled to. It should no longer be up to the government to decide who counts as family to a person.
The registry is a far cry from equality, but it is a step in the right direction.
We feel the challenge to the registry is interesting, in that it threatens to take away rights that are of no consequence to anyone else. The registry allows gay couple to be recognized partners, but it does not ensure many of the rights and benefits of a heterosexual couple.
The registry does not define marriage in any way. Many opponents of the registry claim that that it is a moral issue that rocks the foundation of the long-held belief that marriage should only exist between a man and a woman. In fact, it is quite opposite since the state already decided not to allow homosexuals to marry.
For those reasons, challenging such a small victory for gay couples would be a colossal waste of tax payer dollars and the time of the higher courts, which have more important issues to deliberate on.
Be the first to comment on this story