Last year, about 3,000 same-sex marriages were held in Oregon after Multnomah County followed in the footsteps of San Francisco and began issuing licenses to gay couples. As legally married citizens, these couples enjoyed benefits such as access to insurance through a spouse’s job, the ability to file joint tax returns and assumption of spouse’s pension after death. Last Thursday, every one of those same-sex marriages was declared void by the Oregon Supreme Court, with justices citing Ballot Measure 36, which defines marriage as a union between one man and woman, as a major deciding factor.
And we thought “take-backs” went out of style after third grade.
The Emerald understands that, especially in light of the previously discussed Measure 36, not every Oregonian agrees that same-sex marriages should be legal. However, the citizens of this state can surely concur that the marriage certificates issued last year were binding legal contracts between two consenting adults. It is inappropriate for the state to toy with the emotions and the lives of gay couples by voiding a marriage that has already been declared legal under state law.
It is understandable that political climates change with time and often for the best; however, it seems the Oregon Supreme Court has given absolutely no consideration to the upheaval and devaluation of partnership that will occur because of its decision. The lives of gay couples who chose marriage have undergone dramatic changes already. Erasing those changes with the assumption that homosexuals do not have the same basic rights as heterosexuals is surely a toll to both the identity and the livelihood of people previously part of a same-sex marriage.
The argument has been made that the court is only carrying out the wishes of Oregon citizens in general; it is important to remember that as judicial officials, the Supreme Court should be held to a higher standard. It is one thing disallow the issuing of new marriage licenses, but to deny the legality of documents declared legal prior to Measure 36 is unnecessary and verges on vindictive. An unfortunate parallel can easily be made between the denial of interracial marriages before the 1960s and the denial of same-sex marriages in present day. Although almost every American citizen would like to believe that our country has changed throughout time for the better, using religious values to deny a minority group’s secular right to a civil partnership is sadly evocative of America’s racist past.
The saying goes that it is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. In the instance of same-sex marriage, this is one case in which it is not better to have had something only to lose it. We hope the future leaders of this country will someday look back at the voiding of these marriage licenses and recognize it as an event soaked in discrimination and overall wrong intent.
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]