Madison Redskin Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Gov. Scott Walker wants Wisconsin to abandon legal defense of a new state law that gives same-sex couples the right to visit partners who are hospitalized. A Democratic-controlled Legislature, in 2009, approved a new law in which same-sex couples can sign domestic partnership registries with county clerks “to secure some — but not all — of the rights afforded married couples,” the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported. The law has been challenged by an anti-gay rights group, Wisconsin Family Action, saying the visitation privileges violate an amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex marriages or similar legal agreements. Republican State Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen has refused to defend the law, saying he believes the registration procedure violates Wisconsin’s constitution. “Governor Walker, in deference to the legal opinion of the attorney general that the domestic partner registry . . . is unconstitutional, does not believe the public interest requires a continued defense of this law,” says a brief from Walker, filed by his counsel Brian Hagedorn. Read the rest of the story here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweedr01 Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 on a sidenote, i never knew intelligencer was a word Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 What awesome people Wisconsin Family Action must be to make this a high priority in their lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 sad, while I understand where walker is coming from a bit, I dont think it is an adequate rationale for an issue like this. Just another reason of a thousand that the Government should have literally zero role in marriage of anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Was there a mass migration of people from Mississippi to Wisconsin that I was unaware of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 If that is the AG's opinion,why not defer to it? I thought O issued a EO on that topic awhile back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 A sad decision unless there is something in it that I'm not aware of or thinking about (only read the blurb copied) this is just cruel and rotten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 I just don't understand why people hate gays so much. I don't understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 I just don't understand why people hate gays so much. I don't understand it. and its such a silly issue when compared to so many more things. I think any Pol that makes either pro or con gay marriage a pillar of their platform is an idiot and doomed to fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 I wonder how those in favor of this would feel if gov't barred them from seeing a loved one in the hospital based on moral judgements from a group that doesn't understand/hates them. Wisconsin is preventing US citizens from benefits that other US citizens are allowe, based completely on moral grounds, rather than rational grounds. But they think the violation to their constitution is allowing gays hospital vistation rights. SMH. This **** is just as ignorant as the "separate but equal" laws. Just one group that doesn't understand another group, makes no attempt to understand, and instead hates and forces its own morality on others. Yet those same people don't care about assigned/fixed marriages and a lot of them are either never themselves married or are divorced. I'm going to take a step furhter and at this point say that anyone who is against gay marriage is a bigot. There is no valid reason why they shouldn't be allowed to marry, only moral objection from people who backwardsly think homosexuality is immoral. If a religion/church wants to marry gays, than it should be allowed to. I think the decision to marry gays or not should be left up to each church, but should be legal in each state. 2 people who love each other and want to marry should be allowed to do so regardless of gender, and should be entitled to the same marriage benefits as everyone else. States should not be allowed to bar only certain groups from marrying, especially not based solely on morality. There was a time when black people and white people had an equally difficult time trying to marry "outside their race" because of the same backwards "morality." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 A recall of Gov. Walker is getting closer by the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Walton Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Even money that that the Gov is gay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 I guess I'm not understanding this issue, or how it is an issue. I have never once been stopped from visiting anyone in the hospital or ever been questioned as to my relationship to the person I was visiting, including people in intensive care or on the verge of dying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrong Direction Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Stupid position by the governor, IMO. It adds fuel to the fire that R's are anti-gay rights rather than pro-states rights. Just dumb, and not representative of me. I hate that people on the right undermine themselves on a host of other positions over this issue. Just stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 I guess I'm not understanding this issue, or how it is an issue. I have never once been stopped from visiting anyone in the hospital or ever been questioned as to my relationship to the person I was visiting, including people in intensive care or on the verge of dying. I haven't either but there are rules that can be followed about who is allowed to visit and when they are allowed to visit. I think a lot of hospital's follow a common sense approach to this, but others can choose not too esp. if you want to stay overnight with your loved one. I do remember once when I was visiting one of gbear's daughter was in the hospital a nurse came in and told us that there were too many people in the room and one of us would have to leave, but I was welcome to return as long as the number didn't exceed X. That made sense and I bowed out, waited a half hour, and then returned to support my friend. I can imagine if my wife or girlfriend was dying in a hospital room or in a CCU and I was denied my chance to hold her hand it would kill me. Compassion and empathy should override stupidity in these cases. Forbidding a gay partner to be with their loved one in their final moments is downright evil in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Considering the financial crisis the state is in right now according to the Governor, this seems like a poor use of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 I guess I'm not understanding this issue, or how it is an issue. I have never once been stopped from visiting anyone in the hospital or ever been questioned as to my relationship to the person I was visiting, including people in intensive care or on the verge of dying. Happens all the time. That's why hospitals have visitation hours and why visitation rights is even an issue. Just because you yourself haven't encountered it doesn't mean it isn't an issue. Have you ever tried spending the night at a hospital when visiting a non-family member? That won't fly. Plus, imagine a gay person trying to see their partner and stay the night with them in the hospital in a state that is unsympathetic to the homosexual community. Without any law saying they have that right, the motivation by the hospital staff is likely going to be to bar the person from after-hours visitation, and that's a really crappy thing to do to someone regardless of sexual preference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnhay Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 The government focuses too much on issues like this and too little on important matters. No one is negatively effected by just leaving this law alone. Even if it takes 5 minutes, it's such a waste of time. Considering the financial crisis the state is in right now according to the Governor, this seems like a poor use of time. Or a perfect distraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 A recall of Gov. Walker is getting closer by the day. They are doing their best their to limit who can vote ---------- Post added May-21st-2011 at 09:39 AM ---------- Considering the financial crisis the state is in right now according to the Governor, this seems like a poor use of time. What financial situation they have one of the most solvent pensions in the country and they just found another 600 million in revenue Walker is just a liar who is doing what his puppet masters tell him to do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 Well, all I can say is we should feel fortunate that the republicans are all about the government staying out of people's lives. More lies from the Family Values crowd. Lap em up, trough lickers. Interesting connundrum.. the Republicans are anti-gay (no matter what words are used to hide it),, yet as I read in the oil speculators thread,, they love nothing more than ****ing the American people up the ass. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 Republicans do not care about family values they just use the bible to justify their wanting to dictate to others how to live. Like I said before if they were about the bible and really worried about abortion and gays they would p[ush for a no sex outside of marriage law but they know they could never live by it so they pick and choose what parts of the bible they want to push on others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 Republicans do not care about family values they just use the bible to justify their wanting to dictate to others how to live.Like I said before if they were about the bible and really worried about abortion and gays they would p[ush for a no sex outside of marriage law but they know they could never live by it so they pick and choose what parts of the bible they want to push on others. Oh come on. Lets not get CRAZY now.. I mean who doesn't love a good bear hug in an airport mens room? Hands up if you've NEVER fathered a secret child with your housekeeper? Don't be shy. It's not like NO ONE ELSE ever uses taxpayer dollars to leave the country and bang their Argentinian mistress. Now those are good core heterosexual American values! (and YES, even the airport trysts,,I have been assured that the anti-gay Republican lawmakers who use these travel facilities SWEAR to me they imagine the small little hairless twink boys who are on the other side of the partition is their WIFE, so knock it off with all the accusations. Everyone knows that as long as you keep your eyes closed and think of women you're not gay, and if you think of your wife then you're certainly not cheating.) at the pinheads who still believe these people. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 Only someone who has never been really sick could think the idea of keeping whoever the sick person wants to see away is anything but inhumane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 It amazes me how gullible some are http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/18/us-wisconsin-gays-idUSTRE74H72J20110518 The law enacted under then-Governor Jim Doyle in 2009 created registries to give same-sex couples some rights and benefits. These include hospital visits, family medical leave to care for a stricken partner, health benefits under a partner's insurance and the right to inherit assets when a partner dies. There is a federal EO that covers visiting rights at any hospital that receives federal funds http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/04/15/2010rightspatients.mem.final.rel.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted May 21, 2011 Share Posted May 21, 2011 First, I think we need to stop acting like hospitals are only for the gravely sick or terminally ill...95% of people in hospitals end up leaving the hospital on their own two feet and never come near being on their death bed. So visitation after hours isn't really much of an issue...and while the article title is a bit misleading--it sounds as if gay couples aren't allowed to visit their partners at all, regardless of visiting hours--there are only specific visitation issues being effected here. Second, I can imagine those who ARE on their death beds are probably allowed more room in the visitation rules at hospitals around the country...hospital staff make allowances and skirt policy and rules all the time for all sorts of reasons. The overwhelming majority of hospital staff really are there out of care and concern for the patients. Third, a law should have been written to allow anyone the ability to declare "x" number of non-family members be allowed to visit them in the hospital as if they were family members. There are literally millions of people who have no family to speak of and are not gay, yet have close friendships--lifelong and otherwise--with people of the same gender and would be greatly comforted by their presence while dealing with health issues, especially serious ones. The issue of sexual orientation shouldn't even BE an issue in this case. The patient's wishes and desires should be all that matters. Immediate family members are allowed by default, and "x" number of friends will be allowed extra visitation rights as long as the patient lists them ahead of time (a nurse can ask the patient if they have any additional visitors they would like to see after hours). Whether those friends are platonic friends or "friends-wink nudge" (as my mother would say lol) is irrelevant. In cases where a patient is unconscious or in a coma or what have you and are unable to designate who those extra friends would be, a family member can speak of the patient's behalf. If no family members are available to do so, it's left up to the individual hospitals as to what to do. *EDIT: and after reading twa's post it seems that the President agrees with me lol...that federal EO basically says what I just said here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.