Madison Mayor Dave Cieslewicz took formal opposition to resolutions that would ban gay marriage last Thursday.

In a letter sent to Sen. David Zien, R-Wheaton, and Rep. Mark Gundrum, R-New Berlin, Cieslewicz expressed the city's opposition to bills working to ban gay marriage in the state.

The proposal, Assembly Joint Resolution 67 and Senate Joint Resolution 53, would create a section in the state Constitution stating: "only a marriage between a man and woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state."

The resolution, in its second consideration by the state legislative bodies, already passed its first consideration. If it passes the second consideration, it would be decided on by public referendum.

Cieslewicz said in the letter that the proposal, if approved, would eliminate a freedom provided in the Constitution.

"This piece of legislation takes a step that is unprecedented in Wisconsin history: amending our state Constitution to remove a civil right, rather than protect one," he wrote.

University of Wisconsin senior Ryan Plantz said he sides with the mayor and objects to the proposed amendment.

"I'm not for [banning gay marriage]," Plantz said. "For me, it's a civil rights issue. Whoever proposed this is looking for the state to take away people's rights."

Supporters of the gay marriage ban have called it a defense of traditional marriage that will ensure, to the best of their ability, that children have a mother and father.

Many legal analysts, however, have called the amendment unnecessary because the current language in the Constitution states marriage is a union between husband and wife, Cieslewicz wrote in the letter. He added that in 2004 the Bureau of Health Information and Policy declared it would not process marriage licenses for gay couples.

The amendment would also outlaw domestic-partnership ordinances in Madison and other Wisconsin cities, taking community control away from local politicians and leaders, according to Cieslewicz.

"This legislation represents a serious retreat from the progressive values of our state, and is an unprovoked and unnecessary attack on local control," he wrote in the letter. "The unnecessary nature of this legislation not withstanding, its reach goes shockingly further, and attempts to override the will of communities like Madison."

Cieslewicz also stated the legislation would detract from city and economic growth. Taking away Madison's ability to provide benefits for domestic partners is a competitive disadvantage, he added.

"With an unemployment rate now well below 3 percent, my community competes for qualified workers with communities all over the country," he wrote. "Some of these highly skilled workers are in committed relationships that benefit from our domestic-partner ordinance and they certainly view Madison as a welcoming place to settle down, take jobs or start businesses that contribute to our economic growth."

According to Cieslewicz, Wisconsin should be leading the nation in encouraging all kinds of committed relationships. Instead of retreating into the "Dark Ages," he said Wisconsin must keep up the "progressive tradition that has been the cornerstone of our economic health."