Michael Carr of Tigard calls for support from passing motorist as same-sex couples line up for marriage licenses behind him at the Multnomah County Clerk's office in Portland on Friday. AP Photo
PORTLAND - A coalition filed a lawsuit Friday that seeks to block same-sex marriages in Multnomah County, three days after officials here sanctioned gay weddings for the first time in Oregon history.
The lawsuit was filed in Multnomah County court by the Defense of Marriage Coalition, which was created after Oregon's most populous county announced Wednesday it would begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
The group contends that county commissioners violated the state Public Meetings Law by privately agreeing among themselves to change county policy. The group also argues that Oregon law clearly defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
"We would rather have a debate through the democratic process, but we were not given that choice," said Kelly Clark, the attorney for the coalition.
He said four of the five Multnomah County commissioners who approved same-sex marriages deliberated in secret as a way to avoid a public debate.
"These are not people who are new to government," Clark said. "They know this is not how we do things in Oregon."
Ken Choe, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, said the ACLU will help defend the county against the lawsuit.
Choe said the issue was not the decision-making process - which he said followed the law - but rather fairness to gay couples under the Oregon Constitution.
"Their exclusion from civil marriage causes real harm," Choe said. "This is not an abstract debate."
By closing time Thursday, the county had granted 786 marriage licenses over two days - the overwhelming majority going to gay couples. That's nearly twice the number granted last month on the first two days that San Francisco recognized gay marriage.
"Wooo!" exclaimed Kevin Francis, 33, of Salem, throwing his arms around his partner, Tom Cobb, also 33, as the two were pronounced legally married Thursday.
Francis and Cobb were unable to get a marriage license until Thursday morning, and they immediately went to Keller Auditorium, where the gay rights group Basic Rights Oregon had eight people, including a rabbi and several ministers, performing ceremonies.
"We'd talked about going to San Francisco or Canada to get married, but I wanted to get married in Oregon," Francis said.
The Catholic Archdiocese of Portland has denounced Multnomah County's policy and urged commissioners to reconsider.
"The action taken by Multnomah County is a serious affront to the well-being of marriage in our society. Catholics support the respect for all persons, and protection of the institution of marriage," Archbishop John G. Vlazny said in a prepared statement.
Meanwhile, other counties around Oregon were examining the issue and deciding whether to issue licenses, but none had yet joined Multnomah County, said Philip Bransford, spokesman for the Association of Oregon Counties.
In Medford, Central Point farmers Stephen and George Miller-Zauner, who share the same last name, have taken out an application for a marriage license, and Jackson County Clerk Kathy Beckett said she will decide this week whether to issue one.
"We've always determined marriage was between a man and a woman, but things are changing," Beckett told the Mail Tribune newspaper. "It's wide-open with Multnomah County issuing marriage licenses. It's brought the whole issue to the surface and I need to get with the county counsel and review statute and case law."
Democratic Gov. Ted Kulongoski warned the marriages may not be legal, saying the 19th century lawmakers who framed the statute clearly suggested marriage was a union between men and women.
Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers was expected to issue an opinion on same-sex marriage within the week. It is not legally binding but will point the way for future state policy.
The comments below are from users of theworldlink.com and do not necessarily represent the views of The World or Lee Enterprises. Participation Guidelines
Note: There is a maximum of 200 words per comment. If you wish to post more, please visit our forum.
Comment Policy
The World welcomes your comments about stories, and we encourage a robust dialogue on this site. All comments must meet reasonable standards of decency and civility.
Please follow these basic rules:
No defamatory comments about individuals or businesses.
No deliberately false information.
No obscenity or racially offensive language.
No harassment, verbal abuse, threats or personal attacks.
No information that invades another person's privacy.
No business solicitations or charitable solicitations.
Comments that violate these standards will not be posted. Users with repeated violations may be banned from future posting.
Comments will be approved throughout the day during business hours. After hours and weekend comments may not appear until the following business day. It may take a couple of hours before comments are approved.
The World generally does not edit comments, but we reserve the right to edit any comment that does not meet our standards.
"Before recording the ad, French signed an affidavit that said: 'I am able to swear, as I do hereby swear, that all facts and statements contained in this affidavit are true and correct and within my personal knowledge and belief.'"
Andrew Kramer, AP, August 24, 2004
Just for the historical record, of all the shoddy attacks leveled at the Swiftvets, this article represents, perhaps, "journalism" at its worst.
Andrew Kramer of the AP either malevolently or ignorantly misquotes Al French's affidavit. The actual quote from the affidavit reads...
"I am able to swear, as I do hereby swear, that all facts and statements contained in this affidavit are true and correct and within my personal knowledge OR belief."
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/tonysnow_vetaffadavit.pdf (see exhibit 2)
That single, misquoted word was foundational to the specious allegation that Mr. French "lied" in his affidavit...since he acknowledged other than first-hand knowledge in support of his sworn testimony. Mr. French's actual words rendered that allegation moot. Nor was Mr. Kramer unique in his shoddy reporting...
Samuel A. Mullen-Perron wrote on Jul 14, 2007 8:14 PM:
Is this suppose to be a surprise to everyone? If it is then I am flabergasted because all we need to do is look that the polls. The Ironic think about this is supposidly over 50% of the votes were in favor of Bush during the 2004 election. As Connie Frances sang sometime ago; Who's Sorry Now?!?!?
The World welcomes your comments about stories, and we encourage a robust dialogue on this site. All comments must meet reasonable standards of decency and civility.
Please follow these basic rules:
- No defamatory comments about individuals or businesses.
- No deliberately false information.
- No obscenity or racially offensive language.
- No harassment, verbal abuse, threats or personal attacks.
- No information that invades another person's privacy.
- No business solicitations or charitable solicitations.
Comments that violate these standards will not be posted. Users with repeated violations may be banned from future posting.Comments will be approved throughout the day during business hours. After hours and weekend comments may not appear until the following business day. It may take a couple of hours before comments are approved.
The World generally does not edit comments, but we reserve the right to edit any comment that does not meet our standards.
Close Guidelines