Proposed gay-marriage ban splits Oregon

By Lornet Turnbull
Seattle Times staff reporter

DON RYAN / AP Volunteers for the Defense of Marriage Coalition stack boxes containing signatures for the proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage in front of the Capitol in Salem, Ore., in June.

E-mail this article Print this article Search archive Most read articles Most e-mailed articles

Supporters of same-sex marriage hope to eke out a win in this state, which is known to lean toward the unconventional, and are outspending amendment proponents by a ratio of almost 3 to 1.

"Everywhere in this David and Goliath battle, we are the David, the underdogs," said Roberta Sklar of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, which has pumped about half of its national budget for fighting such measures into Oregon.

"But underdogs have a way of breaking through. And hopefully Oregon will be that breakthrough."

With the nation's third-largest concentration of gay couples, Oregon is the only state in which gays and lesbians were granted marriage licenses the same year that a same-sex marriage issue is on the ballot. Other states considering constitutional bans on gay marriage are Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma and Utah.

A win for gays in Oregon would stop what many believe will be a cross-country sweep that halts the momentum for same-sex marriage that had been building all year.

"If you win only one of 11 states, you can hardly claim that the momentum is with you," said Julie Shapiro, professor of law at Seattle University.

Oregon's proposed Constitutional Amendment 36 It is the policy of Oregon, and its political subdivisions, that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or legally recognized as a marriage.

"But I do think that there's a perception that Oregon is the battleground that really counts, where the battles are really joined. Having lost the other 10, which is what I think will happen, winning Oregon would be huge, symbolically."

In practical terms, defeat of Constitutional Amendment 36 won't change anything for Oregon's gay couples, who still would lack the right to marry.

But because the Oregon Supreme Court could allow gay marriage, in a case now before it, opponents want to amend the state constitution as a pre-emptive move.

Trickling back in

Oregon conducts its elections entirely by mail-in ballot, and some 2 million ballots sent to voters last week will begin trickling back to election offices this week.

In all, voters are being asked to decide eight statewide ballot measures — the gay-marriage question easily the most divisive of the lot.

A coalition of groups that previously has worked to defeat anti-gay measures in Oregon says it has an army of 5,000 volunteers fanning the state — dwarfing the opposition, which has between 500 and 600 campaign workers on board.

For the gay-rights movement, the stakes are high.

Already this year, voters in Missouri and Louisiana approved constitutional amendments banning gay marriage, although a judge recently set aside the Louisiana vote.

The latest statewide poll in Oregon shows support for the ban at 51 percent and opposition to it at 40, with the rest undecided.

Both sides have been canvassing neighborhoods across the state. There have been telephone calls to homes of undecideds, mailings and focus groups.

This is familiar territory for Oregonians: Measures dealing with gay rights have appeared on ballots here five times in the past 16 years.

That's the reason, Sklar said, that gay-marriage advocates have so much hope.

Oregon, she said, is different from most of the other 10 states because it has a history of defeating anti-gay measures. "The public there is familiar with this, they are better-educated on the issue. It's one of the places with the most experience and a very strong campaign," she said.

"Extremely frustrated"

Last spring, Multnomah County issued nearly 3,000 marriage licenses to gay couples before a lawsuit halted the practice. A county circuit judge later ruled that state marriage laws forbidding gay marriage violate the state constitution.

Georgene Rice, communications director for the Defense of Marriage Coalition, said the drive to put the gay-marriage question on the ballot grew out of the county's action.

"I think Oregonians are extremely frustrated with the way this issue was brought to the forefront," Rice said. "People feel this is something that was forced upon them.

"We are choosing not to leave it up to the court to make this crucial decision for us."

The group's political director, Tim Nashif, added, "If you look at what took place in Washington, Louisiana and Massachusetts, Oregonians really had no choice. And neither do people in Washington."

In two separate lawsuits, Superior Court judges in Washington this year struck down a state law banning gay marriage, prompting some lawmakers to promise legislation next session to amend the state's constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

This year, Massachusetts became the first state to allow gays to marry, while a judge in Louisiana this month set aside a vote by citizens to outlaw gay marriage in that state's constitution. The judge said the measure was flawed because by also banning civil unions, it had more than one purpose.

Carrying the hope

Rebekah Kassell, a spokeswoman for No on Constitutional Amendment 36, said the coalition of groups working to defeat the Oregon measure knows it carries the hope of an entire national movement.

"The bottom line is a win in any state keeps hope alive," Kassell said. "With a win, we can continue to engage in conversation in this state and across the country."

But the implications extend beyond that, to the fate of the 2,961 gay couples who married in Oregon last spring.

The legal status of their marriages hinges on the case pending before the Oregon Supreme Court, but it's unclear how the ballot measure and that court decision, which is expected sometime next year, will affect each other.

Shapiro, the Seattle University law professor, said that if the constitution is amended, the high court could leave the marriages intact on grounds that the couples wed before the ban was put in place. Or, as Rice suggests, "the marriages could remain unrecognized" by the high court.

Mardi Moore, 42, of West Seattle, who married her partner of 10 years in a ceremony in Portland, said such uncertainty seems unfair.

"It just doesn't seem right that Johnny on the street, with his religious leanings and beliefs, gets to vote on an issue that could decide the fate of my marriage," she said.

An almost-even split

While Portland is considered more liberal than much of the rest of Oregon, organizers from both camps agree that voters split almost evenly on the issue in cities and counties across the state.

In Beaverton, a fairly conservative, blue-collar city west of Portland, Mark Imerman recently hustled his three young children from one train platform to the other at the end of a school day.

Tattoos marking his bulging arms, the 44-year-old said his opposition to gay marriage stems from his strong religious beliefs.

"I'm a Christian. I don't gay bash," he said. "But homosexuality is a sin; it's not godly. These are my own values and how I want to bring up my children."

Imerman said he worries about what schools will be allowed to teach his children, ages 10, 4 and 1, if gay marriage becomes part of the mainstream. "I can't afford to send them to a Christian school," he said. "So I do the best job I can to bring them up in the word of God."

At the Canyon Place Shopping Center not far away, Liliane O'Keefe and her mother, Diane Ramey, said people like Imerman are trying to impose their religious beliefs on others.

"I'm not sure why we're sticking our noses in people's bedrooms," said Ramey, 39. "I'd rather see a gay couple in a loving home taking care of kids than neglected kids who have no one to care for them."

At a nearby table, Lisa Meneely, 29, a personal trainer, said that on the question of gay marriage, "I think Portland speaks with a louder voice than the rest of the state."

But she worries, too, that "what people say publicly about gay marriage might be different from what they do when they sit down to vote."

"Opening of Pandora's box"

As the Tri-Met Max light-rail train snakes its way out of Beaverton, heading east toward downtown Portland, Mario Peña, 23, talks about what he calls the "opening of Pandora's box."

The Portland resident, who makes pizza at a restaurant in the city, can't vote because of a felony on his record. But if he could, he said, he would do so if only to support the ban.

"There's a reason why down through the years marriage has been between a man and a woman," he said. "Gay marriage upsets tradition."

At the Lloyd Center shopping mall east of downtown, Stan Dolson, 41, a self-described libertarian, sipped a cup of coffee while reading the paper.

His objection to gay marriage grew out of the way the issue has been "forced down our throats by the judicial branch," he said.

Dolson worries that no matter the voting results, "I think it will be thrown out anyway," he said, making reference to Louisiana. "It's an exercise in futility."

Back at Pioneer Square in downtown Portland, Brad Taylor and Alex Vitale, who both work with the homeless, were taking a midmorning coffee break. They worry that banning same-sex marriage would send a bad message.

"This would permit Oregon to write inequity into the state constitution," Taylor said. "That separates people."

Vitale, an Italian national unable to vote in the election, said, "What upsets me about this is it's happening in a country that puts a premium on freedom. That seems like such a contradiction."

Lornet Turnbull: 206-464-2420 or lturnbull@seattletimes.com

Seattle Times researcher Gene Balk contributed to this story.

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company

E-mail this article

Print this article

Search archive

More local news headlines...