Multnomah County grants gay marriage licenses (Portland, Ore.)

The Oregonian ^ | 03/02/2004 | Laura Gunderson and David Austin

[TenaciousZ]

Multnomah County will begin granting marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples on Wednesday, making it the first jurisdiction in Oregon to officially recognize that same-sex couples can marry.

County officials have been discussing the move for more than a week and they made the decision based on a legal opinion. County offcials refused to release the opinion and County Attorney Agnes Sowle did not return repeated telephone calls for comment.

But a number of county officials confirmed that the county will begin granting the icenses immediately.

The county sheriff's office also was alerted to be on hand at the county's Southeast Portland headquarters Wednesday for security purposes.

A handful of Washington County officials also confirmed that Multnomah County board Chairwoman Diane Linn said issuing the marriage licenses would begin today. Dennis Mulvihill, Washington County's chief lobbyist, said he was meeting with Linn in Washington, D.C., when she announced the plan.

Mulvihill contacted Dan Olsen, Washington County's counsel, who requested copies of Multnomah County's legal analysis but said that he was told copies would not distributed until Wednesday.

Olsen said that he plans to review the analysis and share with his board whether he agrees or disagrees with Multnomah County's decision. Washington County's longstanding policy only allows marriage licenses to be issued to people of different genders, Olsen said.

[BlessedBeGod]

I am sooooooooooooooo sick and tired of this already.

[conservative cat]

I know I am absolutely not adding anything new or novel to this debate, but I am so sick of this issue and these people trying to shove it down our throats. They should all be arrested and thrown in jail as the lawbreakers they are. When will it end for them?

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

More on Oregon plunging into the abyss.

Let me know if you want on or off this busy ping list.

"Washington County's longstanding policy only allows marriage licenses to be issued to people of different genders..."

Genders doesn't refer to people. Second, it's not only Washington County's longstanding policy, it's Earth's longstanding (thousands of years) policy.

[Andy from Beaverton]

When are they going to get this right? Gays can get married now, to people of the opposite sex. They should be saying 'same sex' instead.

[DemWatch]

As I've said before...we're being taken over.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

For all the localities that are illegally issuing homo marriage licenses, they haven't thought this through. Now that they've opened the floodgates and legitimized gay marriage, just wait until some lawyers get together and calculate the monetary amount of lost benefits due to the previous denial of marraige licenses. They'll think they did a good thing when they're getting the pants sued off them and the activist judges award for the plaintiffs. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

[AntiGuv]

Actually, it's almost certain that they are not breaking the law in Oregon (unlike California and New York). Since other locales started leaping, it was only a matter of time for Oregon (and they almost certainly would have recognized marriages from Mass. or wherever, anyhow). What they are certainly breaking with is custom, but they are not clearly breaking with statute, which says this:

106.010 Marriage as civil contract; age of parties. Marriage is a civil contract entered into in person by males at least 17 years of age and females at least 17 years of age, who are otherwise capable, and solemnized in accordance with ORS 106.150. [Amended by 1965 c.422 §1; 1975 c.583 §1]

106.020 Prohibited and void marriages. The following marriages are prohibited; and, if solemnized within this state, are absolutely void:

(1) When either party thereto had a wife or husband living at the time of such marriage.

(2) When the parties thereto are first cousins or any nearer of kin to each other, whether of the whole or half blood, whether by blood or adoption, computing by the rules of the civil law, except that when the parties are first cousins by adoption only, the marriage is not prohibited or void. [Amended by 1989 c.647 §1]

106.030 Voidable marriages. When either party to a marriage is incapable of making such contract or consenting thereto for want of legal age or sufficient understanding, or when the consent of either party is obtained by force or fraud, such marriage shall be void from the time it is so declared by decree of a court having jurisdiction thereof.

[TheBattman]

Another forcast for this issue....

Enough counties across the country will bait in the gays and perform enough of these "gay marriages" that it will become too late to stop it. AT that point, it will be impossible to push through the Constitutional Amendment that would otherwise forbid such marriages.

Say goodbye to the traditional definition of marriage - 'cause it's gone!

[squidly]

I believe that it's now safe to say that the cow has left the barn and gay marriage is here to stay in the US of A. If we play our cards right, we can keep them from adopting kids though. Gay adoption concerns me much more than gay marriage, since the couple was already living together anyway. To my knowledge, gay adoption is currently against the law in Alabama, Georgia, and Florida.

[Republic If You Can Keep It]

At that point, it will be impossible to push through the Constitutional Amendment.....

I disagree.

38 states right now have DOMAs and/or state constitutional amendments.

Those same 38 will support the federal amendment if the situation looks dire enough. Don't give up!

[gawd]

yep, it seems what you've got quoted there doesn't explicitly prohibit same-sex marriage.

[gawd]

Those same 38 will support the federal amendment if the situation looks dire enough. Don't give up!

why are the same guys who are the first to cry "states' rights" are now pushing the most for the amendment ? since when is marriage a legitimate federal preoccupation??

[sandbar]

>I am sooooooooooooooo sick and tired of this already.

Sadly enough, I don't think it's going to stop. There is always one or two in every government office and they are making names for themselves this way.

[AuntB]

Lars Larsen is going to have a heart attack.

[BibChr]

The word "blindsided" does come to mind.

As does the expression, "caught napping."

Then there's the one about shutting the door after the cows... well, you see the trend.

Dan

[Mr.Atos]

A Ping for the Oregon Ping List.

Hugh Hewitt mentioned this on his show today as well. It was only a matter of time before the nuts here, predictably joined the bandwagon. At least, the State of New York had the good sense to bring the mayor of Newpaltz up on charges. The Oregon governor might want to remember that his election was pretty close, and he has spent any political capital he might have had with Moderates and Conservatives when he tried shoving a tax increase down our throats.

If the commissioner (no doubt with the support of the Portland Mayor) sees fit to acknowledge, obey and enforce laws selectively regarding a tiny minority, I wonder what they would think if County tax payers followed their lead and engaged in civil disobedience of our own by refusing to pay the new M-Tax. One might argue that he has forfeited his mandate to enforce the issue. On what basis would he try?... I mean legitimately?!

Atos

[AuntB]

Did you see this??

Gov. "Tax and gouge me" will do nothing to try to stop this, ya know. Vera Katz will probably be the best "man" at the ceremonies. Maybe I'm not sad that I left Oregon????

I want to form a new state. Maybe a new country. I'm sick of all these whiners who just want free health insurance and the lawyers that will profit from filing their divorces!!

I give up. sigh....

[Libertina]

One law-breaking mayor aided by a Governor and AG who say nothing...and then the whole country goes crazy!

[Mo1]

Does Oregon have any law on the books regarding Gay Marriages??