are not rogues. After all, in the English and
American judicial tradition, judges have been
creating law— we call it the common law— for
about 1,000 years. I have to defend the judicial
system in this respect.
As to a proposed constitutional amendment:
1. Premature. From a legal point of view,
there is no need for an amendment and will he
none until the U.S. Supreme Court rules that a
state must give “full faith and credit" to the pub
lic acts of another state. These would include
marriage, domestic partnership or civil union or
the recognition of one or more rights usually
given to legally married people.
2. Intrusive government. The fundamental
ists always insist on modifying the traditional
Republican view of government by insisting on
an intrusive government if it forces compliance
with their narrow views.
3. Rem oval of rights. Prohibition was
enacted by the fundamentalists. They did not
understand the genius o f the C onstitution
then, and they haven’t learned anything
from repeal of Prohibition since then. The
Federal Marriage Am endm ent is nothing but
another attem pt to have the government do
their bidding.
4 . P olitically divisive. T h e proposed
needs to be answered. When we went down
Feb. 13 to get married, we knew the magnitude
of this action by San Francisco. It is die start
that we’ve all been waiting for, not only for
marriage equality but for recognition that we are
real, legitimate and loving human beings who
aren’t driven by an uncontrolled need to have
sex wherever there’s a hole in the wall.
People need the opportunity to see that we
haven’t “chosen" a lifestyle. We simply are who
we are, and deserve the same rights and privi
leges as anyone else. Mayor Newsom saw this,
the courts in Massachusetts saw this, and the
Supreme Court has seen it. Now, it’s time for
everyone else to know.
amendment would sharpen divisions within
the country without any need for such a divi
sion. In addition, endorsement of the pro
posed amendment by the Republican Party or
G O P officials will drive millions o f voters
away from the party. About 1 million gays
voted for President Bush in the last election,
and I figure there are at least two sympathetic
votes for each of those. In return for the loss of
those votes in an election likely to be decided
by less than 3 percentage points, the amend
ment brings practically no additional votes
from among the extreme right wing of the
party— a damaging tradeoff that thoughtless
Republicans ignore.
L ee C oleman
Aloha
Never fear
To the E ditor :
F
or decades, the homosexual community has
been under attack by conservative funda
mentalists. Slowly, because of fear, gays and
straights across the nation have begun to speak
out against the outmoded way of thinking that
there is only one definition of marriage— a
uncertainty o f the permanence of these
marriages.
People who have gotten married in San
Francisco these past few weeks are acting from
the depths of their souls out of love for each
other. How it will play out politically is sec
ondary to the spiritual and emotional expression
and validation it displays.
Congratulations to all the newlyweds!
J eanne M eyer
Vancouver, Wash.
• • •
uite honestly, I can see both sides of the
question and say yes to each. Mayor
Newsom believes he is upholding the
Constitution, both of the United States and of
California, where every person is entitled to
equal access and treatment. I believe he is simply
interpreting the words as they were intended so
many decades ago. Perhaps this nation should
pay more attention to that document as well.
Was the Boston Tea Party a poorly timed
maneuver that only complicated matters fur
ther? The colonists who participated didn’t
seem to think so. And look where it got them.
Was it the wrong thing to do? I don’t believe so.
Was the activism at the Stonewall Inn poorly
timed, or were those involved just tired of the
conditions leading up to that event? Was it the
wrong thing to do? I don’t believe so.
Sometimes we just have to do what must be
done and see where the pieces fall. I am excited
for what may come from all of this and honored
to have been but a small part of the tea party! I
am looking forward to having my marriage to
Debra, my partner of 19 years, recognized and
given all the very same rights my own brother
and sister now enjoy from their own marriages.
Q
J ason E vans
Portland
• • •
I
think that it is a brave and bold gesture and
that it is bringing out a lot of opinions from
op-ed writers, columnists and religious leaders.
This is good, as the more discussion there is, the
more chances there are to explain the reasons
for (and against) same-sex marriage.
When I was growing up in the South, even
heterosexual sex was not discussed, and any
thing else was a perversion. Actually, a lot of
heterosexual sex was considered perverted! In
this era closets should be open, and no subject
should be off-limits. if discussed in a calm and
rational way with tolerance for diverse opinions.
Let the dialogues begin!
J ean M. E llis
Portland
• • •
hat an amazing response this act of
courage has elicited! There are so many
of us who have had our private commitment
ceremonies and drawn up the legal documents
to protect our families as best we can. The drive
to have our families, our relationships
legitimized by society in the form of the
government is overwhelming, despite the
W
nextmzm
M ary A n n H umphrey -K eever
Portland
• • •
G
avin Newsom did the right thing. Granted,
we’ve seen unprecedented gains for our
“union for life of one man and one woman in
the holy estate of matrimony” (Murphy vs.
Ramsey, 1885).
'After years of struggle, same-sex relation
ships have become more accepted, but merely
acknowledging these relationships is not
enough. Why shouldn’t the partners in these
relationships be afforded the same rights as other
committed couples? Do we love each other any
less? Are we any less able to make lifetime
choices? Or is it merely that people are afraid of
what they don’t understand?
It has taken years for the gay community to
make the strides it has, and it will take many
more years to eliminate this discrimination,
which is based in fear. And like those who
fought for civil rights and equality in the past—
Abraham Lincoln, Susan B. Anthony, Martin
Luther King Jr.— thousands of men and women,
gay and straight, across the nation will not give
up before the battle is won.
Perhaps Mayor Newsom said it best:
“America has struggled since its inception to
eradicate discrimination in all forms. Califor
nia’s Constitution leaves no doubts; it leaves
no room for any form of discrimination.
Doug Beebe
Associate Broker
503.471.3479
Find Your New Home at
OregonDreamHome.com
Continued on Page 7
civil rights in the courts in the past few months,
but the law moves slowly, and it does so by
design. Unfortunately, the “deliberate speed” of
the law too frequently favors those who oppose
change.
Mayor Newsom gave the law just what it
needed: a good swift kick in the ass. By declar
ing that San Francisco would not discriminate
against same-sex couples, he forced the Califor
nia courts to consider the conflict between the
state constitution and the law that attempts to
restrict marriage to heterosexual couples. A
court can’t address issues that aren’t presented to
it; now the California courts will have an oppor
tunity to do the right thing.
Will there be backlash? O f course. But that
can work both ways. Those who would keep us
second-class citizens will protest and nominate
true
sympathetic politicians, but so can we. The crit
ics say Newsom’s actions will just complicate
matters, but that’s how it works. Real progress is
never smooth and peaceful. Real progress only
comes about when someone is brave enough to
take a stand for what he believe is right, no mat
ter the cost. That’s what Gavin Newsom did,
and he should be supported for it.
P atricia H ansen
Portland
C O L D U ie L L
B A N K E R
□
BARBARA SUE SEAL
PROPERTIES
503.224.7325
LAURE LHURST
• • •
T
he righting of deeply rooted social
injustices have almost without exception
required courageous acts of civil disobedience.
Those who have succeeded are not remembered
as lawbreaking rebels but as pioneering heroes
who have made the world a better place.
Countless others have made important
progress without monumental victories or broad
recognition. Gavin Newsom is engaged in just
such a courageous act, and whether his efforts
lead to a monumental victory or are limited to
the happiness of the couples married due to his
courage, we should consider him a hero for
fighting for his convictions and for social justice.
DENTISTRY
C l a r ic e J o h n s t o n
& ASSOCIATES
Treatment explained and discussed
Teeth whitening
New patients welcome
S teve K emper
Portland
Regardless of the outcome, do you feel the Multnomah County Commission followed the
proper procedure in deciding to issue m arriage licenses to same-sex couples? Was the
process handled appropriately? Respond at www.justout.com. (Don*t forget to include your nam e, city and
daytime telephone num ber.)
d m . d .
503 / 233-3622
2520 East Burnside