The heated debate over the same-sex marriage ban came to a head Wednesday as the resolution to prohibit gay marriage passed in the state Senate on a 19-14 party-line vote.

The Republican-backed "Defense of Marriage Amendment," termed Senate Joint Resolution 53, will now be put to an Assembly vote. If it passes there, it will be on the November 2006 election ballot as a public referendum.

In the previous session, both the state Senate and Assembly approved the proposed amendment in its first consideration.

Debate in the Senate chambers was contentious, as both Republicans and Democrats pleaded their sides of the issue.

Proponents of the bill said it is a means of protecting marriage and keeping with the status quo in the state.

"Marriage in Wisconsin is under attack by activist judges from out of state who are trying to impose their extreme liberal views on the public," State Sen. Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, an author of the resolution, said in a release. "We didn't pick this fight, but it's one we must win. Our laws and our traditions must be defended."

Fitzgerald said a 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Court decision could threaten Wisconsin's existing statue which defines marriage as being between "a husband and a wife" by forcing the state to recognize gay marriages that took place outside Wisconsin.

However, the amendment's opponents said prohibiting same-sex marriage and civil unions disenfranchises certain groups of people and is a step backward from the progress made to afford equal rights to all people.

"This vote is discriminating against a number of our citizens," Sen. Fred Risser, D-Madison, said. "It has left unequal a number of our citizens. There's no justification for such a vote."

Senate Majority Leader Dale Schultz, R-Richland Center, said in a release he was satisfied with the floor debate on the matter from both sides of the issue. The Senate action now puts the decision over same-sex marriage and civil unions one step closer to being in the hands of voters throughout the state, he added.

"What we saw (Wednesday) was a thoughtful sharing of ideas and opinions," Schultz said. "From what I've heard, overwhelmingly, the citizens of Wisconsin feel they should be given the opportunity to vote on the definition of marriage."

But Risser said the ban is politically motivated, arguing Republicans purposely placed the referendum concurrent with the 2006 gubernatorial elections in an attempt drive up voter turnout to oust incumbent Democrat Gov. Jim Doyle.

"There were efforts made to pick a different time frame — either next April or the next presidential elections — but the majority party again, on a strict party-line vote, insisted on this November," Risser said, noting he felt partisan politics played a far greater role in the vote than the senators' religious beliefs.

However, all is not lost, ban opponents said, as they gained the votes of two Democrats, according to Sen. Dave Hansen, D-Green Bay, and Sen. Roger Breske, D-Eland, who previously voted for the ban.

"We're pleased that we gained votes from the last time it was voted on," Mike Tate, Action Wisconsin campaign manager for the "No on the Amendment" campaign, said. "I think that is sort of a microcosm of what is going on around the state with this issue. We're picking up votes every day from people who know this is wrong for Wisconsin."

Tate said gay-rights activists and opponents of the ban are "gearing up" for the November 2006 vote, adding he thinks the ban will fail when put to the public. Additionally, Tate said, citizens will see through the Republican "ploy" to sway the 2006 elections.

"This amendment goes too far," Tate said, "because it's not only the marriage clause. It would ban civil unions, it would ban domestic-partnership benefits [of] gay and straight couples. There are far-reaching consequences for this amendment."

Toward the end of the more than five-hour debate on the issue, Sen. Tim Carpenter, D-Milwaukee, expressed disappointment in his colleagues who stood behind the ban.

"For those of you [who] are voting [for the amendment], I forgive you," Carpenter said.