PDA

View Full Version : Oregon Court Tosses Gay Marriage Licenses



Jolie Rouge
04-14-2005, 06:04 PM
By WILLIAM McCALL

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - The Oregon Supreme Court on Thursday nullified nearly 3,000 marriage licenses issued to gay couples a year ago by Portland's Multnomah County, saying a county cannot go against state matrimonial law. ``Oregon law currently places the regulation of marriage exclusively within the province of the state's legislative power,'' the high court said in its unanimous ruling.

The court said state law bans gay marriage. It also noted Oregon voters approved a constitutional amendment last November that even more explicitly prohibits the practice.

Kelly Clark, attorney for the Defense of Marriage Coalition, which represented gay marriage opponents, said the ruling ``sends a signal to the rest of the country.''


``Two West Coast liberal states now, both California and Oregon, have both said that local governments don't have authority to take the law into their own hands,'' Clark said.


Kevin Neely, spokesman for the state attorney general's office, said the court left the big issue - civil unions for gay couples - for another day. ``I suspect the issue will be resolved by either legislation or by additional litigation,'' he said.


Legislators had been waiting for the court's ruling for guidance. On Wednesday, Democratic Gov. Ted Kulongoski said he will push for a law allowing gay couples to form civil unions that would give them many of the rights and privileges of marriage.


Couples whose marriages were scrapped by the ruling said they were disappointed but hoped the civil-unions proposal will become law. ``We feel great sadness, but we also have faith that this isn't the end,'' said Mary Li who with her partner Rebecca Kennedy were the first lesbian couple to be married last year in Multnomah County. ``Our family deserves the same kind of protection that your family has.''


Multnomah County, which includes much of Portland and is the state's most populous county, began issuing marriage licenses to gay couples last March, its county commissioners arguing that not doing so would violate the Oregon Constitution.


A judge stopped the practice about six weeks later, but not before nearly 3,000 gay couples had wed.


Similarly, San Francisco started issuing thousands of marriage licenses to gay couples in February 2004. The spree of gay weddings was also shut down by the courts, and those marriages were likewise declared invalid, though a constitutional challenge to California's law against gay marriage is still pending.


The Oregon Supreme Court ruling came a day after the Connecticut House passed legislation that would make it the second state, after Vermont, to offer civil unions to same-sex couples. If the state Senate approves the bill, Gov. M. Jodi Rell has said she will sign it.


Massachusetts has allowed gay marriage since last May.


Voters in 13 states approved constitutional gay marriage bans last year, joining four others. Kansas voters did the same earlier this month, and similar proposals will be on the ballot next year in Alabama, South Dakota and Tennessee.


http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news/story.jsp?floc=ne-main-9-l1&flok=FF-APO-1110&idq=/ff/story/0001%2F20050414%2F2239724428.htm&sc=1110


On the Net:


Defense of Marriage Coalition: http://www.defenseofmarriagecoalition.org


Basic Rights Oregon: http://www.basicrights.org



04/14/05 22:39

schsa
04-15-2005, 03:56 AM
I agree that civil unions should exist for gay couples. It should not be referred to as a marriage because that implies a religious ceremony. But there are many gay couples who have been together for years and they need to be able to protect their assets if one should die.

llbriteyes
04-15-2005, 08:27 AM
I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on this one in part. Civil unions are very important, not just for gay couples but for older, retired widow/windowers who want to live together with protections, but without marriage. That part isn't a rarity, at least in Ohio.

I still have yet to find any person who can actually tell me why gay marriage is wrong. Not a religious reason, but a legal one. And of course the other question of exactly WHO's marriage/family does it undermine and why?

Linda




QUOTE=schsa]I agree that civil unions should exist for gay couples. It should not be referred to as a marriage because that implies a religious ceremony. But there are many gay couples who have been together for years and they need to be able to protect their assets if one should die.[/QUOTE]