4 J U S t O U t • auflusl 6.2004
3 m * o u t
impose its values— regardless of its tradition—
on a minority without creating oppression.
T
hat in a republic, “we the people” are the
TO THE El'HTOR:
ith Republicans and Democrats almost i source of the legal system, and that “we" are
part of the “we the people."
equally opposed to gay marriages, and
Marriage, the basic cell of the society,
with the once liberal media’s exclusive coverage"
belongs to all society's members. Extending it to
of the right wing’s religious perspective, we have
all citizens does not constitute an attack on it. If
been left alone in the struggle lor total equality.
the religious rexits of the civil union also called
This battle is now entirely up to us.
marriage stands in the way of full equality, a
G ay Democrats have accepted the agenda
compromise could be reached by reserving the
compromise of civil unions. T his compromise
would’ve been comparable to African A m eri name “marriage” for religious rituals only and
“civil union" for civil rituals only.
cans back in the ’50s accepting being allowed
Names are ultimately irrelevant and arbi
to sit in the middle of the bus but not in the
trary. Reality is what matters, and the reality
iront. This middle ground option reflects Kith
offered to us must be identical to the one
the hypocrisy ot the majority that offers the
enjoyed by straight citizens. Call it marriage,
deal and the lack of determination of the
civil union, domestic partnership or “gayrriage,”
I minority.
1 don’t care. I just don’t want to be forced to sit
We can only win the battle lor equal rights
in the middle of the bus.
with knowledge, strong political will and
determination. T he outpouring ot civic senti
ments during the Democratic N ational C o n F r a n k O ’N eill
vention was consistent with the party’s com Portland
mitment to equal rights since the ’50s. The
Dem ocratic Party cast most of its votes j W hy not am en d
against the right wing’s efforts to send us back
th e C o n stitu tio n ?
to the closet. Still, the fact is that many
To the E ditor :
Democrats in both houses of Congress crossed
arriage shall henceforth he considered a
party lines to vote against us, with some even
religious institution between one man
co-sponsoring the bills.
We need everybody’s involvement in order
and one woman, with no legal rights or remedies
to attract moderate votes to achieve the high thereof.”
er good of unseating President Bush, and for
A little radical, admittedly. But why wouldn’t
it work? It’s got the same basic concept built into
this goal the more progressive platforms need
it as the Federal Marriage Amendment, which
to K* toned down. This is a necessary com m it
ment. However, it has to be made clear to the ; requires marriage to lx* forever defined “between
one man and one woman.” But it’s also got one
Democratic Party that this compromise is a
tor those us of who believe in the separation of
temporary agreement and not a capitulation of
church and state: It requires that we remove
principles.
We have to firmly declare that the “sepa all legal rights, responsibilities and protections
conveyed through “marriage” as it is tixlay
rate but equal” compromise principle is as
administered.
unacceptable now as it was 50 years ago. T hat
Would it pass.7 Highly unlikely. But it would
we are not asking for tolerance but demanding
do something those of us w'ho’vc been quietly
equality. That until we are granted all rights
and protected from all forms of discrim ina advocating a new’ approach feel is essential. It
would force the extreme right-wing ideologues
tion, our Constitution’s letter and spirit will
continue to be violated by the civil and polit pushing this issue to admit their true rationale.
It would force them to openly state that what
ical societies. That our claims are civil, and
they really intended was to deny more than
that they do not require a religious argument
1,020 rights and responsibilities to the minority
in order to validate them. That in a dem ocra
cy, a majority does not have the right to I in the name of their religion. They would have
The m id d le off th e b u s
THE
ANDY
v WARHOL
COLLECTION
HAS
ARRIVED
Big Brothers Big Sisters
o f Metropolitan Portland
Bring magic to the
life of a child.
Become a Big Brother
or Big Sister today.
i
503-249-4859
www.bbbsportland.org
P e a rl Rung C o
•T
\
C
Artwork for your Floors
r"
EQUITY
t O U N D A t IQ N
4818 N. Interstate • 503-282-5102
inside the Portland Costless Carpet Complex
M-F 9-6, Sat 10-4 and Sun 11-3
pearlruKCompany@aol.com
A n y project. E v e ry budget. S e e h o w o u r e xp e rie n ce c a n m a k e y o u feel right at hom e.
B arb G oodrich | General Contractor
(5 0 3 )8 1 9 -8 0 0 0
1 www.goodrichrenovations.com
OR C C B # 1 5 3 0 1 8
1 WA
i
¡K
_
f/C
IL _ A 1
B
L ie # G O O D R R L 9 8 3 R L
S
\ |
Goodrich
R e r x w a t í o n r , LLC
Molalla residents Deborah Ann Whalen
(left) and Debbie Spickerman were married
March 12 at Holocene.
Whalen, who hails from Long Island,
N.Y., works for Safeway in the deli depart
ment. Spickerman, who was bom and raised
in Portland, works as a low-voltage techni
cian and is a member of the International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 48.
The couple, who met online, have been
together since June 2001. They made a
commitment to each other in October of
that year.
“ We never would have found each other
without the Net,” the Couple told Just Out.
“ No two people were more intended for
each other.”
It’s My Pleasure owner Holly Mulca-
hey (right) and the Rev. Ann Duffy mar
ried in a simple ceremony March 8 at the
home of their pastor, the Rev. Lynne
Smouse Lopez of Ainsworth United
Church of Christ, after 13 years. The
couple met the second week Duffy was
living in Oregon and serving United
Church of Christ in Gresham.
D id you know Just Out
publishes free wedding
announcem ents .7
Submit your story and photo
at w w w .justout.com l