Open the floodgates! Gay marriage hits Portland, Oregon!

[Windwalker]

Yee-haw! It looks like Portland is now the latest battleground in the gay rights movement. This time, it wasn’t a mayor, but rather the “Board of County Commissioners”, using ahem interesting legal interpretation to promote a moral agenda. This does have me a bit concerned, as the tactics are not the most ethical, but then again, politicians are finally putting themselves completely on the line and will bear the political and legal fallout. So, the danger of little county dictators running around isn’t really a concern, and I can let out a guilt-free Huzzah!

So far we have San Fran, a little town in New York, and now Portland (and county). Massachussets by the summer (if they don’t add a Bigot Amendment). Keep’em comin’ boys! Let Bush and friends (yes, even his many Democrat accomplices) TRY to pry those marriage licenses from those thousands of couples and forever be stained as Marriage-Killers (with a video shot of crying couples to be used in the political ads). I fear the backlash will be a kick in the balls, but at long last, there are some serious chinks in our nation’s resilient anti-gay armor. The 2004 SF Mayor’s Gambit… In 2020, will kids have to memorize that year for American History? Man, I am getting chills. I feel like joining a protest rally right now (I’m in Washington, home of law-abiding county execs).

Oh, and since this is the Pit, fuck Bush and company (yes, even his Democrat accomplices) for supporting the national We-Hate-Gays Amendment. It’s an annoying little worm of doubt at the back of my mind that fears the backlash will come at just the right moment to enshrine that piece of legislation in the Constitution.

[Metacom]

@Windwalker

The 2004 SF Mayor’s Gambit… In 2020, will kids have to memorize that year for American History?

Hopefully they won’t be memorizing it as the year San Fran, a little town in New York, Portland, and Massachussets set back the gay civil rights movement by a decade when they energize the socially conservative right to re-elect one of the most socially conservative presidents we ever had and empowered him to define marriage as exclusively heterosexual in the Constitution…

[SmackFu]

Oregon state law defines marriage as a “civil contract entered into in person by males at least 17 years of age and females at least 17 years of age.” In other words, the law does not specify that the union be between a man and a woman.

Oops…

[StarvingButStrong]

Does anyone else feel that we’ve hit some sort of watershed? A state here, a town here, a city there, another state, a county…

It truly reminds me of how fast and completely the Soviet Empire fell apart. One day it was there, this huge monolith, as impregnable as the Berlin Wall which symbolized it. And then someone poked at the wall and it collapsed like a termite-ridden husk in what feels like the blink of an eye.

So, too, with the ‘certainty’ that there could only be hetero marriages, that that was an understanding so deeply engrained it could never be changed, forever and ever.

And then someone in VT poked at the wall.

[Olentzero]

I’m just impressed with the Mayor of New Paltz, NY. He’s been hit with 19 criminal counts for issuing gay marriage licenses, and he’s still doing it. Bully for him!

So yeah, fuck you George W. Bush and your bigoted little anti-civil rights vendetta. I’m glad to see my uncle Richard and his long-time partner Gary can finally get married. They deserve it!

[UrbanChic]

With regards to New Paltz, NY and Jason West’s criminal charges, why isn’t (or maybe why haven’t I heard about) the NY State Department of Health getting into some hot water for not issuing marriage licenses to gay couples that requested them? From what I gather, New York doesn’t specify marriage as a union between a man and a woman. If my assessment is correct, on what grounds can the NY State Dept. of Health deny same-sex couples marriage licenses?

[tagos]

Hetero-Brit just chipping in to say that this is the real USA for me, the USA I fell in love with from a distance years before Reagan sullied it. The USA of liberty, freedom of choice and can-do bloody-mindedness in the face of authority not the USA Uber Alles of the neo-cons and their fellow-travellers.

This couldn’t and wouldn’t happen in the UK and damn if it doesn’t restore my faith to see it.

[stpauler]

This just gets me so happy-happy. I came out a little over 10 years ago and have seen how much has changed since then. Everytime I hear another story like this I get goosebumps, my eyes well up and I share the news with friends.

It looks like Sweden is going to be the 3rd European nation to have same-sex marriage too!

(Stockholm) Sweden is about to become the third European country to permit same-sex marriage. Parliament’s Justice Committee is considering three motions that would replacing the current law on same-sex civil unions with full marriage rights.

[E-Sabbath]

I’m pretty damn happy myself. It’s civil disobedience in the finest American Tradition. Elliot Spitzer’s taken the case and is going to be issuing a ruling sometime today, lemme check…

http://wcbs880.com/topstories/topstoriesny_story_062203951.html

News at the moment.

New Paltz Mayor Jason West insisted Wednesday that it was New York’s Health Department that was breaking the law by refusing to give marriage licenses to same-sex couples. “Our state constitution requires equal protection for all New Yorkers,” he said on NBC’s “Today Show.”

[Scarlet]

Alright!! I hope to see more of this! Come on Michigan… I’m looking at you…

[GingerOfTheNorth]

You can add Nyack, NY to the list as well.

[John_Mace]

Ya know, this whole gay marriage thing is sooooo February.

It’s March already. These guys need to get with the times.

[E-Sabbath]

Minor setback, Spitzer has ruled.

http://wcbs880.com/topstories/topstoriesny_story_063134050.html

New York’s attorney general said Wednesday that same-sex weddings are prohibited under current law, throwing a potential hurdle into the plans of two mayors to preside over gay nuptials.

“I personally would like to see the law changed, but must respect the law as it now stands,” Eliot Spitzer said in a statement obtained by The Associated Press.

Spitzer said New York’s law contains references to “bride and groom” and “husband and wife” and does not authorize same-sex marriage.

[Ferrous]

Portlander here. I heard about this last night on the news, and it made me very happy. Even if we are just jumping on the bandwagon, I’m proud of the folks who did this.

I do share some of Metacom’s concerns about backlash, but I don’t think fear of reprisal should stop us from doing what is morally right. It’s time to stand up to those Bible-thumping hypocrites and tell them to keep their moralising in church where it belongs, and out of government.

[nisosbar]

So when I see yet another municipality “fall” or a court ruling in SSM favor happens, I suspect it’s just a matter of time before other places go with it. Cambodia’s king, of course, indicated that gays and lesbians there should be allowed to marry, after seeing the footage of weddings in San Francisco. Sweden, as the poster above mentioned, is going to do it. Where will gays and lesbians achieve equality next? Norway? Germany? Thailand? Brazil? Could be any number of places. I’m sure in Canada, Belgium and the Netherlands, there’s no going back now. It’s exciting!

[Tanaqui]

I’m very proud of my state. I’m glad that people are finally getting the guts to do something about the injustices that have been present in this country for so long. Sometimes, I’m ashamed to be an American, and sometimes I’m proud. This is definitely one of the latter times.

I think that this is something people can believe in. It may energize the right, but I think it will energize others, too.

[presidebt]

@nisosbar

So when I see yet another municipality “fall” or a court ruling in SSM favor happens, I suspect it’s just a matter of time before other places go with it. Cambodia’s king, of course, indicated that gays and lesbians there should be allowed to marry, after seeing the footage of weddings in San Francisco. Sweden, as the poster above mentioned, is going to do it. Where will gays and lesbians achieve equality next? Norway? Germany? Thailand? Brazil? Could be any number of places. I’m sure in Canada, Belgium and the Netherlands, there’s no going back now. It’s exciting!

I agree, it is exciting! And not just for gay people, for all who are dedicated to civil rights and who’ve called for a backlash against the bigots and fanatics who’ve held this back too long. I mean, anti-gay legislation was sweeping the nation because of it, and that may have forced the issue. There was nothing left to lose. Convince a few mayors in a few large liberal cities, and maybe, just maybe…

It’s too early to call, of course, but I wonder if we might look at this in a positive light. Consider:

Maybe this gay marriage issue will change the dynamic in this election. As of today, it’s looking like a watershed for civil rights for gay people. Vermont, Toronto, San Francisco, Portland, New Paltz, NY, Nyack, NY and a county in New Mexico. If it continues in this vein, it’ll act as an all out assault on conservatives who oppose this, which I dare say compose the majority of the Republican party. It could end up looking like an all out assault on everything this administrations stands for. And neocons in the middle, not really giving a shit, but locked in a wicked embrace with the Religious Right. Think of it. Despite what the press says, I think well over 50% of Americans just don’t care or agree that same sex marriage is the right thing to do.

One thing to consider about this is that Americans are getting to see couples celebrating and marrying. In the civil rights movement of the 60’s, it was the press, the pictures on TV of things like black men, women and children being hosed down with powerful fire truck hoses or a little girl escorted into school by soldiers. It personalize the issue, and white people could put themselves into their shoes. It rallied their support, and more importantly, their action. Perhaps this will a) energize liberals and liberal-leaning moderates, and b) change a few mind in the apathetic group, not to mention moderate conservatives. It might rally some people who don’t vote. It is indeed exciting, and maybe that’ll sweep through the states to the consternation of people we’ve long suspected to be out of touch with real American values.

I hope…I really do. This could have larger, positive implications.

[Seven]

@StarvingButStrong

Does anyone else feel that we’ve hit some sort of watershed? A state here, a town here, a city there, another state, a county…

It truly reminds me of how fast and completely the Soviet Empire fell apart. One day it was there, this huge monolith, as impregnable as the Berlin Wall which symbolized it. And then someone poked at the wall and it collapsed like a termite-ridden husk in what feels like the blink of an eye.

So, too, with the ‘certainty’ that there could only be hetero marriages, that that was an understanding so deeply engrained it could never be changed, forever and ever.

And then someone in VT poked at the wall.

I think it was Bush poking at the wall.

If he hadn’t opened his big monkey mouth on the issue, it wouldn’t have gained the media attention it is getting now.

People have been asking for gay marrage for some time and it always falls to the bottom of the list. But now, when you have some asshat saying right out “gays shouldn’t marry” and giving damn stupid reasons on why they shouldn’t get married, I think more people start asking “well? Why SHOULDN’T they be allowed to marry. That whole ‘save the children’ shit dosen’t make any sense.”

They realize there really isn’t a good reason to keep them from getting married, so they let them.

I see this as a domino effect. More and more towns and cities will allow it and before long it will be too late to stop. Fuck what Bush has to say on the issue. He’s an idiot anyway. I mean, how many Presidents go to war without checking the facts first. Geeesh. What a dildo.

[whiterabbit]

Oh boy. My very conservative (though not annoying about it) great-aunt is a longtime Portland resident. Her very liberal sister, my maternal grandmother, is in Seattle. And I bet if they get onto the subject of this bit of news you’ll be able to hear the argument from Mars!

This is exactly what I was hoping would happen when I first heard about San Francisco – the whole thing spreading here and there. Heh heh heh…kudos to all involved.

[schplebordnik]

@SmackFu

Oops…

Oregon lawyer here, Multnomah County resident. When I first heard the news, I recalled what they taught me at BarBri – that marriage in Oregon prohibits same sex marriage. So figured we’d be going through the same rigamarole that is happening in San Fran.

Then I saw the posting above. What do you know, the report is right, the ORS says the following:

*106.010 Marriage as civil contract; age of parties. Marriage is a civil contract entered into in person by males at least 17 years of age and females at least 17 years of age, who are otherwise capable, and solemnized in accordance with ORS 106.150. [Amended by 1965 c.422 §1; 1975 c.583 §1]

106.020 Prohibited and void marriages. The following marriages are prohibited; and, if solemnized within this state, are absolutely void:

(1) When either party thereto had a wife or husband living at the time of such marriage.

(2) When the parties thereto are first cousins or any nearer of kin to each other, whether of the whole or half blood, whether by blood or adoption, computing by the rules of the civil law, except that when the parties are first cousins by adoption only, the marriage is not prohibited or void. [Amended by 1989 c.647 §1]

106.030 Voidable marriages. When either party to a marriage is incapable of making such contract or consenting thereto for want of legal age or sufficient understanding, or when the consent of either party is obtained by force or fraud, such marriage shall be void from the time it is so declared by decree of a court having jurisdiction thereof.*

I’ll be damned. It doesn’t say marriage is “between” men and women, nor does it say that same sex is prohibited. Don’t see any way you can read this statute to read in a limitation to opposite sex. Guess they missed that one. Wonder why in the hell this never came up here before (although maybe there is a court case out there I’m unaware of).

Interestingly, there is a challenge going on against what the county is doing here, but it is based on a violation of a provision requiring public meetings and comments before the county commissioners take action – not based on this being in violation of any state law. Which is a pretty good indication that the people opposed to this know they don’t have a particularly good argument for challenging this as in violation of state law or the state constitution.

Looks like Oregon’s going to hit the tape first in the “completely legally sanctioned gay marriage” footrace.