Is This Really God’s Plan?
Fact-checking “The Battle for Marriage in Wisconsin” DVD
By Lisa Kaiser
Originally published in the June 1 edition of the Shepherd Express (http://www.shepherd-express.com/6_1_06/newsandviews.htm)

Peace. Love. Compassion. Tolerance.

These are the lessons taught in churches, synagogues, mosques and temples.

But many Wisconsin Christians learned another lesson in their churches: that discrimination is OK—not only OK, but part of God’s plan.

These Christians watched a DVD produced by the Family Research Institute of Wisconsin (FRI), which is pushing for a constitutional amendment that would permanently ban same-sex marriages, civil unions and domestic partnerships in our state. As part of their campaign, FRI distributed 4,000 copies of “The Battle for Marriage in Wisconsin” to select churches around the state so that churchgoers would become motivated to vote for the amendment in November.

“We think [the DVD] will help educate many, many people across the state on what the reality is on this marriage issue,” Julaine Appling, executive director of FRI, told an interviewer.

Of course, many members of the faith community have been vocal in their opposition to the amendment, and the DVD in no way represents the only Christian take on the issue. But the DVD doesn’t make those distinctions or allow for differing views.

The DVD itself is slick, with images of children playing on the beach, loving couples, the Bible, the flag and an appearance by Appling.

But are viewers getting the truth? We did a quick fact-check of the DVD and found that it confuses Christian principles with state statutes, demonizes the opposition and tries to scare viewers into believing that society will be destroyed if the amendment isn’t passed. Here are some examples:

Voiceover: “The institution of marriage is God’s creation, designed for mankind’s good and God’s glory. Marriage and the family are not the creation of the state or even the church. Therefore marriage or the family cannot be redefined by the government or the church.”

Facts: That must be news to our lawmakers, because marriage is in fact defined by state law. Statute 765.01 states “marriage, so far as its validity at law is concerned, is a civil contract, to which the consent of the parties capable in law of contracting is essential, and which creates the legal status of husband and wife.”

Voiceover: “Unfortunately, today, activist judges, some government officials and a small but very vocal group of people”—images of what one must assume are gay people on the steps of the state capitol—“are working hard to redefine marriage and family here in Wisconsin and across the nation to include persons of the same sex.”

Facts: Aren’t the ones who want to redefine marriage—as between one man and one woman, because the terms “husband” and “wife” are too confusing—coming from the other end of the political spectrum? Namely, right-wing Republicans and groups such as the Family Research Institute?

Voiceover: “It’s already happened in Massachusetts. In May 2004, for the first time ever in the U.S., legal marriage licenses were issued to people of the same sex, all because a small group of judges overruled the will of the people and the will of the elected legislature.”

Facts: In fact, the opposite is true. Last September, Massachusetts lawmakers rejected a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriages there. The vote wasn’t even close—157-39—because lawmakers found that tolerance is better than discrimination and allowing gay people to form legal partnerships in no way harms heterosexual marriages.

Voiceover: “Who knows what the next attack will be? If we continue down this road, will we be asked to legalize marriage between one man and two or more women, or even between groups of people? Recent events have shown conclusively that these arguments are already being made on the heels of the same-sex marriage debate.”

Facts: These arguments are in fact being made—by amendment supporters trying to scare people.

Voiceover: “This is not a political issue. It’s a moral and biblical issue that has been politicized.”

Facts: Yes, the issue has been politicized, by right-wing politicians who are exploiting conservative Christian voters. But this tactic has been decried by one of the nation’s most popular Republicans, Laura Bush, who said that marriage amendments should not be used as a “campaign tool.”

Voiceover: “It’s an issue that will affect every one of us, right now, and will affect our children and grandchildren, and the generations to come.”

Facts: Absolutely! The generations to come will have to pay the price for the foolishness of the current crop of GOP legislators. As Republican Rep. Gregg Underheim put it after Assembly Republicans voted to place the amendment on the ballot, “Today, we are crossing a line, a line that matters. We are crossing a line that says it is OK to put our policy preferences in the Constitution for perpetuity. That is not the role of this document. We are so overstepping those bounds, it is frightening. We should not be doing this, and I hope that people on my side of the aisle will vote with a clear conscience.”

What’s more, it will certainly affect the 10% of future generations who will likely be gay and whose partnerships will never be recognized by the state, as well as the countless straight people who also want their civil unions or domestic partnerships to be recognized. Plus, if this amendment passes, Wisconsin’s children will grow up thinking that it’s OK to discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation.

Voiceover: “And it will affect our churches.”

Facts: How? If the amendment fails, nothing will happen to churches. But if it succeeds with the help of the churches, then they’ll have sanctioned discrimination.

Voiceover: “Wisconsin is only one of a dozen states that has no legal protection for traditional one-man, one-woman marriage built into our statutes or our Constitution.”
Facts: Fair Wisconsin has compiled a list of 100 legal protections that heterosexual married couples enjoy in Wisconsin, protections that would be permanently denied to gay couples.

Voiceover: “The battle for marriage in Wisconsin is the defining social and moral issue of our day.”

Facts: Really? Legislators say that their constituents’ main concerns are health care, jobs and education.

Julaine Appling: “Friends, imagine a Wisconsin where the definition of marriage is changed in any way. If this vast social experiment is allowed to succeed, what will happen to our churches and pastors? To our businesses? To our public schools? To our religious liberties? And most importantly, to our children, our very future?”

Facts: Nothing negative will happen to any of these institutions, but doesn’t it sound scary?

Julaine Appling: “Make no mistake. Our Constitution will be amended. The question is, by whom? A few renegade judges at the insistence of a very loud but small group of people or by our elected representatives, by we the people?”

Facts: Actually, judges can’t amend our Constitution. Amendments must be passed by two consecutive sessions of the state Legislature, and then it is put on a ballot. In this case, the “small group of people” who is insisting on putting this on the November ballot is the Republican leadership, afraid of losing big-time in the election and hoping to win only by appealing to the base instincts of voters.

Julaine Appling: “We urge you and your church to get involved in the battle for marriage in Wisconsin today. Together we really can make a powerful difference and ensure that God’s plan for husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, and children, is preserved in our state for generations to come.”

Facts: I think most fair-minded Christians would question whether God’s plan calls for appointing Julaine Appling as His spokesperson. Until her role is more clearly defined, the separation of church and state seems like a better blueprint for Wisconsin.