Marriage Equality

Why Marriage?
Marriage Equality Landscape
Marriage Q&A
The Story Collection Project

Marriage has not been the same forever. In fact, marriage has evolved dramatically even in the last century. In the past, marriage was a relationship between a man and his property (woman), and it was restricted to people of the same race. Not very long ago, men could legally rape their wives, and married couples were not allowed to make private decisions about whether to use birth control. Marriage has evolved over the years to become a more egalitarian institution, and this is a good thing for families.

Lesbian and gay people want the same thing everyone else wants: to share their life with the person they love. Ending marriage discrimination will also be good for all families.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Every professional child welfare source agrees that there is no difference in the ability of same-sex parents and opposite-sex parents to raise healthy, well-adjusted children. Some studies have found that when possible, children do best in a home with two loving parents. While not all children have two parents, those who do deserve the safety net of protections that marriage provides--access to health care, clear custody rights in the event of one parent’s death, and survivor benefits. That is why the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Psychological Association, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and The Child Welfare League of America all oppose any effort to deny the protections of marriage to gay and lesbian families. Real children with gay parents living in Wisconsin communities would benefit greatly if their parents could legally marry.

For more information about what the social science and child welfare experts have to say about gay parenting, visit the ACLU’s Get Busy, Get Equal resource.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The word marriage is too loaded. Why can’t we give them the rights of marriage but call it civil unions or something else?

Civil unions are inherently unequal to marriage. They do not extend the 1,138 rights and responsibilities of marriage at the federal level. They are not recognized from state to state. And unlike civil unions, marriage conveys an important social status that says “we are a family.” It's wrong to create a separate and unequal legal status for lesbian and gay people.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Many Christians believe their fundamental principles call on them to support equal marriage rights for lesbian and gay couples. And many religious groups recognize the love and commitment of gay couples in their congregations.

Respected religious scholars have differing opinions on the question of marriage equality. For example, for some faith leaders and institutions the commandment to “love thy neighbor” guides them to support fair and equal treatment for gay families.

Even if people personally oppose marriage equality from a faith perspective, it’s wrong to insist that one religious viewpoint should be the law of the land; people can morally oppose homosexuality but not impose that view on all other citizens.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ending marriage discrimination for lesbian and gay couples would not force any church to recognize these marriages. Churches, synagogues, and mosques will continue to make their own decisions about who can marry and under what terms. Some already choose to marry lesbian and gay couples; others do not.

Some people believe marriage is a sacrament, and it is for some religious faiths. But the government is not in the sacrament business.

The government rightfully stays away from regulating religious marriage. In keeping with the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of religious freedom, the government does not dictate that marriage follow any one religious viewpoint. For example, Catholic churches do not recognize divorce, yet the government does.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

If we give equal marriage rights to gay couples, what’s to stop people from marrying multiple partners?

Same-sex couples seeking to marry are not saying "let's have no rules." They are saying, "let us have what you have--the freedom to marry the person we love with the same rules, same responsibilities, and same respect."

There are thousands of same-sex couples right here in Wisconsin. They’re real--not a vague, abstract "threat" to marriage-- and they are harmed by the exclusion from marriage.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Won’t equal marriage for gay couples negatively impact the state budget?

Gay people work hard and earn their health and retirement benefits every single day; however, right now non-gay workers can share these benefits with their families, but gay workers cannot.

There may actually be economic advantages to ending discrimination in marriage. A 2004 study by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office found that the federal government would actually gain one billion dollars in revenue if gay couples could marry. Another study of the impact of equal marriage rights on California's budget found that allowing same-sex couples to marry will result in a net gain of $22.3 to $25.2 million each year for the State budget. And a recent Connecticut study also found that the state government would actually benefit by ending the prohibition on marriage for gay couples.