Now, are you going to interpret the Wisconsin marriage amendment to preclude domestic partner benefits?

Wisconsin voters have approved the anti-same-sex marriage amendment, despite arguments about how damaging it would be to the university to preclude us from extending domestic partnership benefits. Now, the time for broad interpretations of the text is over, and the new interpretation is, of course, narrow:

In an effort to retain and attract quality staff members, the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents voted Thursday to ask for domestic partner benefits for university faculty members....

UW System President Kevin Reilly ... pleaded with the governor and state Legislature to amend state statutes to provide for domestic partner benefits, calling it an issue of basic human fairness and the ability to stay globally effective....

The regents briefly addressed concerns about the state’s gay-marriage amendment, which voters affirmed in November banning gay marriage and the recognition of similar partnerships.

A key source for the narrow interpretation, of course, will be the proponents of the amendment:

The amendment’s author, Rep. Mark Gundrum, R-New Berlin, said in a previous interview with The Badger Herald that the ban does not necessarily prevent domestic partner benefits.

“If done correctly, the amendment would not preclude those benefits,” Gundrum said.

What did you expect?