Lars mounts his soapbox

In 1992 a measure was brought to the Oregon voters, Measure 9, which stated in part;
Be it Enacted by the People by [sic] the State of Oregon:
SECTION 41 (1) This state shall not recognize any categorical provision such as "sexual orientation," "sexual preference," and similar phrases that includes homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism or masochism. Quotas, minority status, affirmative action, or any similar concepts, shall not apply to these forms of conduct, nor shall government promote these behaviors. More.

It was defeated in the November 3, 1992 general election with 638,527 votes in favor, 828,290 votes against.[2]

The ballot measure was the effort of the Oregon Citizens Alliance, a conservative group active in Oregon politics in the 1990s. Supporters of the measure felt that their traditional values were under siege in the face of growing acceptance of homosexuality by society. Opponents stated that the measure was unfairly discriminatory, that it was unconstitutional, and that it demonstrated the homophobia and bigotry of its backers.

Although the measure failed, its legacy can still be seen today. The Oregon Citizens Alliance went on to introduce a series of watered-down ballot measures along the same lines as Measure 9 (most of which failed). On the other hand, opposition to Ballot Measure 9 formed the basis of much of the current gay rights movment in Oregon, including the organization Basic Rights Oregon.[3]

In 2004 and 2005, there was controversy and political disagreement concerning the status of same-sex marriage in Oregon. In 2004, Multnomah County began issuing same-sex marriage licenses, which began a political battle over same-sex marriage that ended later that year with an amendment to the Oregon Constitution. In 2005, the legislature introduced a bill to create civil unions which eventually died in committee and did not become law.

I was one of the 422 couples who did manage to get married before the courts decided to shut it down after 1 week.

Th experience affected me a lot more than I would have thought it would. Not so much that was allowed to marry my partner Geoff, but more that I was finally considered a valid member of society. A very short lived feeling as the anti-gay forces quickly swung into action. Within one week of the November vote to deny same-sex-couples the right to marry I had received my refund check from Multnomah county for the marriage liscence.

With the recent passage of proposition 8 in California the anger and frustration again surfaced in me.

As recently mentioned in The Gay Dissenters Blog, it does take a toll on ones psychological well being when ones fellow citizens are constantly attacking and voting on your personal rights.

The question, in my mind, that needs answering at this point is not whether same-sex-couples should have the right to marry, but whether marriage itself is a civil right or a religious rite.

If it's a civil right then it and should be available to all citizens that choose to "marry" their fortunes together, homo- or hetero- sexual.

If it is a religious rite then it has no place anywhere in state doings, health and welfare benefits, inheritance issues, tax breaks, housing, hospital visitation etc.

And, no, I do not think that granting same-sex-couples the right to domestic partnerships or civil unions is the answer. There is either a state sanctioned domestic partnership for all couples or there is the right to marry equally and with the same jargon for all couples. If marriage is a religious rite then churches can bless the union separately from the state registry of the union.