The Badger Herald

NEWS

ASM opposes gay marriage ban

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Nick Penzenstadler:

For whom the bell tolls (November 29, 2007)
New apartments for West Wash? (November 20, 2007)
One-and-out: Kumar will not seek 2nd term on Dane County Board (November 15, 2007)
Displaced Carroll residents call university, bookstore helpful (November 13, 2007)
Carroll Street fire displaces students (November 12, 2007)

by Nick Penzenstadler

Thursday, September 14, 2006

Political tensions ran high at last night's Associated Students of Madison meeting when the group decided to adopt a referendum opposing the civil-union and gay-marriage ban up for vote in November.

ASM passed the resolution by a narrow 11-9 margin. This is the third political issue ASM has publicly opposed in the past, along with the war in Iraq and the Patriot Act.

Student Council member Samantha Ziesemer said she supported ASM's resolution against the ban on civil unions, which informs the UW campus of the election Nov. 7.

"The main thing that will happen is the diversity committee will spread awareness of the issue and inform other student organizations carrying ASM's name," Ziesemer said.

Eli Judge, chair of Students for a Fair Wisconsin, was at the meeting to support the council's decision and to provide his perspective on the ban's opposition.

"I think it's really important to realize this will affect UW for decades," he said. "The way I see it, it would be nice if the student government that represents me as well as the thousands of others on campus took a stance."

Representative Andy Peterson said taking a stance against the ban was impossible because the student body ASM is meant to represent has split opinions on many different issues.

"How can you make that decision when there are students on campus who believe different things?" he said. "I don't want us to become a political pawn — especially with the elections coming up."

Arguments circled around the table about whether the referendum was a political or student issue and how the board should view it.

Representative Erika Lopez echoed the sentiment that civil liberties directly correlate to student life, therefore falling under the realm of ASM.

"We shouldn't be taking a political position, but this is an issue that a lot of students on this campus care about," she said. "We need to show solidarity and represent them to our fullest ability."

The main argument in support of the statement against the civil-union ban was that students' education would suffer because professors would not be able to receive domestic partnership benefits, an issue recently spotlighted with the departure of engineering professor Robert Carpick in August.

According to Danny Sprin, communications director for Students for a Fair Wisconsin, Carpick not only left an educational void, but UW lost his valuable research funding as well.

"When that professor left he took $3.4 million of his research funds to Pennsylvania," Spirn said in a phone interview with The Badger Herald. "If Wisconsin doesn't have a friendly climate they will continue to lose high level professors — in the long run, hurting the university on the whole."

Student Council member Zach Frey said he fears ASM's resolution will cause backlash among the student body.

"Our funding is not supposed to go to partisan action," Frey said.

Student Council member David Lapidus echoed Frey's sentiments and said the decision could divide the UW campus and discredit ASM.

"It might actually turn people off to the system and ASM," Lapidus said. "We're taking ASM to even a lower level than people think it is at."

Although the issue caused an emotional quandary, Ziesemer said she is proud the student government took a stand for what the majority believed.

"We're not going to let a little political pressure stop us," Zeisemer said. "We aren't trying to sway anybody's vote, but rather educate them of the issues."

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 3:56am):

This is a great choice by ASM. I understand that they want to shy away from political issues, however Fair Wisconsin is a non partisan campaign. It hurts UW professors and thus our educations. I think it's about time ASM deals with STUDENT issues instead of say... protests on US foreign policy.

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 9:14am):

ASM shouldn't take a stand because people have different viewpoints?

Then maybe the state govt shouldn't pass laws either in which people are evenly split, like gay marriage bans?

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 11:05am):

1. The campaign against the ban on gay marriage and civil unions is a non-partisan campaign. It always has been. That's why they have a Republicans page on their website and invited the College Republicans (who declined the invitiation) to speak at their kickoff on campus.

2. This resolution does not mean that ASM is now funnelling money into that campaign. It means that ASM will work on campus to inform students and student organizations about the issue on their own.

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 2:42pm):

Wow! Well, if ASM is against it, I'm sure everyone else will be too.

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 2:49pm):

THANK YOU ASM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 2:52pm):

ASM does a great job of representing students!

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 2:53pm):

YES!

Anonymous (September 14, 2006 @ 8:55pm):

ASM should be taking a stance on this issue and they chose the RIGHT stance!

Anonymous (September 15, 2006 @ 9:30am):

Representative Andy Peterson cleary misunderstands what is meant by being a "Political Pawn." ASM has chosen to take a stance on an issue that is going to have a direct, adverse impact on students -- far from being manipulated for someone elses gain. On the contrary, ASM has become a Commander in the political chess game this November, by standing up for what the majority of intelligent students know to be right.

Zach Frey is equally unclear about what is meant by 'non-partisan'. The Marriage Ban is by definition non-partisan -- it is an ISSUE, there is no endorsement of political parties, candidates or idealogies. Infact, the majority of students, faculty, business leaders, etc are opposed to the Ban. How can you claim 'partisan politics' when both students, the LGBTQ community, and groups like the Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Madison, Inc. have taken a stance against the ban.

Be sure, ignorance is the only ally of folks who would support such a civily and economically crippling ban.