Conversation in the United States over the equality to marry is getting louder. The State of Washington recently joined the ranks of six other states along with Washington, D.C., by legalizing same-sex marriage on Feb. 1. This landmark legislation leaves many questioning when or if Oregon will follow. While the debate in Oregon is still strong, the 2004 Oregon constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage keeps the issue off the table. For now.
The amendment, which defines marriage as that between a man and a woman, will remain in place until an even-year election overturns it. Because the amendment was a result of public vote, Oregon law precludes further legal action. The voters must overturn it, and as of now, there has been no movement to put a measure on the November 2012 ballot in support of same-sex marriage. This means that voters won’t get the chance to vote on the subject again until 2014.
With that in mind, Basic Rights Oregon and Organizing Director Thomas Wheatley have been in a long-term public education campaign to build support for same-sex marriage. Through community-level education efforts, television ad campaigns and engaging faith communities, BRO hopes to gain momentum on turning the issue into a potential ballot measure.
“I think the date for a potential election in a lot of ways is right around the corner,” Wheatley said. He added that by “working for a couple of years to build public support and move this forward,” the passing of the measure would carry significant meaning. It would make Oregon “the first state to add this to the constitution via the vote of the people,” Wheatley said.
Wheatley believes that in 2004 the ballot measure against same-sex marriage was forced on the voters. He called it a game of political football: “If we had been given the chance to ask the question, ‘Why is it that same gender couples want to be married?’ we wouldn’t have had to rush the conversation. It was an issue that made people nervous, it’s our job as advocates to answer that question. It is the job of folks in long term same-sex partnerships to share their story,” Wheatley said.
Sharing her story is Cat McGraw, coordinator at Portland State’s Queer Resource Center, and her partner Jody Victoria. McGraw cites some basic advantages that married couples share, advantages that she and Victoriaare not afforded. For example, the couple has to pay an extra $200 to insure Victoria on McGraw’s insurance.
One of these basic advantages touches McGraw on a more personal level. She and Victoria plan to have children this year. But because they are not married, when Victoria gives birth, McGraw will not be legally related to her child and will have to file paperwork to make it legal.
“There is really no reason that the folks who are contributing to the economy, paying taxes and are part of the society shouldn’t be afforded one type of partnership over another,” McGraw said. “I don’t think it’s fair to put this to a public vote. That assumes that everyone has the same access to the education on how it impacts people.”
Marriage equality is a contentious issue for voters. In each state that put a same-sex marriage measure to the vote of the people, the people voted against legalizing same-sex marriage. When the Oregon measure against legalizing same-sex marriage passed in 2004, it carried 57 percent of the vote.
The Oregon Family Council supported the ballot measure that led to Oregon’s constitutional amendment. Founded 30 years ago with the idea to inform Christians on politics and issues that they may care about, OFC and weren’t looking for a fight in 2004, but Teresa Harke, OFC communication director, said that if someone was going to try to redefine marriage, the OFC was willing to fight to keep it the way it is.
“For us, marriage is between a man and a woman; only a man and a woman can create a child. Marriage was long ago a social contract before churches ever got involved in forming marriages. That was the first redefinition of marriage. Marriage is defined that way—if you say that’s discrimination, all of a sudden you’re opening the floodgates,” Harke said.
Harke understands that advocates against same-sex marriage are often labeled as bigoted, a moniker she hopes to avoid. Her best friend is gay, but states that same-sex marriage isn’t on the top of his issue list, so they both know where the other stands. At 25 years old, Harke recognizes that the polling numbers reflect a majority of young people support same-sex marriage, but she believes that most young people don’t spend enough time thinking about the issue.
“The majority of us aren’t married. I think that has a lot to do with it,” Harke said. Information on the issue, Harke added, is not equally distributed by both sides of the argument. This disparity allows one side to have greater visibility, and she said that “there will be an influence on those who are more likely to be influenced.”
For Harke, how marriage is defined, and not how a person feels about the gay community, is the main point: “I hope our generation comes to understand why our parents care about the definition of marriage. It doesn’t change how we feel about our friends, neighbors or family members who are gay,” Harke said.
Oregon offers domestic partnerships, but for many, it’s not the same. Victoria and McGraw believe that waiting until 2014 is simply too long a time. When asked why Victoria wanted to marry McGraw, she replied, “Because I love her.”