Seattle Times: Opinion: State constitution shouldn't be used to discriminate
November 24, 2004
No matter what happens with the recount in the governor's race, one thing is for certain — Washington state is the next battleground over the issue of gay marriage.
In the coming months, the state Supreme Court will rule on the two cases that are moving through the courts challenging the constitutionality of the state's Defense of Marriage Act.
We believe that the highest court of the state will affirm two lower-court rulings that said that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, thereby granting equal protection under the law for committed same-sex couples.
That's why anti-gay extremists are moving so fast to try to pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage — joining 11 other states that banned gay marriage on Election Day.
Proponents of banning gay marriage in other states argued that the intent of their measures was simple: defending the sanctity of marriage. But the reality is that these measures will be used to take away basic rights from millions of Americans — gay or straight.
Kentucky's measure was so broadly written that constitutional lawyers believe it could prevent hospital visits for committed couples and even deny emergency protective orders for unmarried domestic-violence victims — gay or straight.
In Utah, the state's Republican attorney general came out against the ban because it will take away domestic-partner benefits for gay and lesbian couples.
In Ohio, many Republican politicians and business leaders opposed that state's amendment because they fear the legislation is so vague that it could be used to discriminate against unmarried heterosexual couples.
Oregon's measure, which narrowly passed, could prevent civil unions, hospital visitation, and even put at risk the contracts that gay and lesbian couples have drafted to take responsibility for each other.
As former Oregon Supreme Court Justice Jacob Tanzer put it, "Whenever we meddle with the constitution, there are unforeseen consequences."
Some argue that the matter is simple — defending traditional marriage.
The results of the other states' measures banning gay marriage couldn't be more clear, though.
It comes as no surprise that the same forces that are backing a constitutional ban on gay marriage have blocked basic protections of gays and lesbians from being passed in the Washington Legislature for the past 25 years.
That's why it is still legal in most of the state even today to fire someone or deny them a place to live simply because they are gay. That's discrimination and it is wrong.
We are confident that legislators in Olympia are finally ready in the next session to support a bill to end discrimination.
But we're also afraid that there will be a long, drawn-out fight to ban gay marriage as well.
We all know that Washington faces real problems, such as a struggling economy, school-class sizes that are among the highest in the nation, and health-care costs that are squeezing middle-class families. Instead of dealing with these important issues, politicians in Olympia will spend valuable time debating whether to permanently write discrimination into our state's constitution.
Proponents of anti-gay amendments also claim to base their beliefs on family values and a concern for children.
Jeff Kemp of Families Northwest and the Rev. Harvey Drake Jr. of Emerald City Outreach Ministries recently wrote, "The marriage movement recognizes people's freedom to choose their relationships and will never dictate what other people should believe" ("Marriage still matters to Washington's children" Times guest commentary, Oct. 25).
But this nice-sounding language masks their true intentions. In fact, their proposal would do exactly what they say it won't do: It will create a permanent second class of citizens, enshrine unequal treatment in our constitution, and harm the thousands of children in Washington state who are being raised by committed same-sex couples.
Washington's constitution should not be used to discriminate. If we stand together, Washington will bring an end to this organized campaign by the religious right to add unequal treatment to state constitutions all over the country.
Roberta Domos, Jennifer Lindenauer and Dan Kully are board members of Equal Rights Washington, a statewide organization working to end discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered persons in Washington, www.equalrightswashington.org
In the coming months, the state Supreme Court will rule on the two cases that are moving through the courts challenging the constitutionality of the state's Defense of Marriage Act.
We believe that the highest court of the state will affirm two lower-court rulings that said that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, thereby granting equal protection under the law for committed same-sex couples.
That's why anti-gay extremists are moving so fast to try to pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage — joining 11 other states that banned gay marriage on Election Day.
Proponents of banning gay marriage in other states argued that the intent of their measures was simple: defending the sanctity of marriage. But the reality is that these measures will be used to take away basic rights from millions of Americans — gay or straight.
Kentucky's measure was so broadly written that constitutional lawyers believe it could prevent hospital visits for committed couples and even deny emergency protective orders for unmarried domestic-violence victims — gay or straight.
In Utah, the state's Republican attorney general came out against the ban because it will take away domestic-partner benefits for gay and lesbian couples.
In Ohio, many Republican politicians and business leaders opposed that state's amendment because they fear the legislation is so vague that it could be used to discriminate against unmarried heterosexual couples.
Oregon's measure, which narrowly passed, could prevent civil unions, hospital visitation, and even put at risk the contracts that gay and lesbian couples have drafted to take responsibility for each other.
As former Oregon Supreme Court Justice Jacob Tanzer put it, "Whenever we meddle with the constitution, there are unforeseen consequences."
Some argue that the matter is simple — defending traditional marriage.
The results of the other states' measures banning gay marriage couldn't be more clear, though.
It comes as no surprise that the same forces that are backing a constitutional ban on gay marriage have blocked basic protections of gays and lesbians from being passed in the Washington Legislature for the past 25 years.
That's why it is still legal in most of the state even today to fire someone or deny them a place to live simply because they are gay. That's discrimination and it is wrong.
We are confident that legislators in Olympia are finally ready in the next session to support a bill to end discrimination.
But we're also afraid that there will be a long, drawn-out fight to ban gay marriage as well.
We all know that Washington faces real problems, such as a struggling economy, school-class sizes that are among the highest in the nation, and health-care costs that are squeezing middle-class families. Instead of dealing with these important issues, politicians in Olympia will spend valuable time debating whether to permanently write discrimination into our state's constitution.
Proponents of anti-gay amendments also claim to base their beliefs on family values and a concern for children.
Jeff Kemp of Families Northwest and the Rev. Harvey Drake Jr. of Emerald City Outreach Ministries recently wrote, "The marriage movement recognizes people's freedom to choose their relationships and will never dictate what other people should believe" ("Marriage still matters to Washington's children" Times guest commentary, Oct. 25).
But this nice-sounding language masks their true intentions. In fact, their proposal would do exactly what they say it won't do: It will create a permanent second class of citizens, enshrine unequal treatment in our constitution, and harm the thousands of children in Washington state who are being raised by committed same-sex couples.
Washington's constitution should not be used to discriminate. If we stand together, Washington will bring an end to this organized campaign by the religious right to add unequal treatment to state constitutions all over the country.
Roberta Domos, Jennifer Lindenauer and Dan Kully are board members of Equal Rights Washington, a statewide organization working to end discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered persons in Washington, www.equalrightswashington.org
Seattle Times: Poll shows most in state back current marriage law
November 18, 2004
Fifty-seven percent said marriage should remain between one man and one woman, while 41 percent said it should be between two loving adults, regardless of their gender.
(By comparison, a Seattle Times poll this spring found slightly more than 50 percent of those surveyed said same-sex couples should be denied the right to marry, while 44 percent supported gay marriage.)
The responses released yesterday were part of a wider survey on marriage commissioned by Families Northwest.
(By comparison, a Seattle Times poll this spring found slightly more than 50 percent of those surveyed said same-sex couples should be denied the right to marry, while 44 percent supported gay marriage.)
The responses released yesterday were part of a wider survey on marriage commissioned by Families Northwest.
Seattle P-I: Court sets date on gay marriage appeals
November 17, 2004
OLYMPIA -- The Washington State Supreme Court will hear the appeal March 8 of cases from King and Thurston counties backing gay marriage.
In recent months, judges in those two counties have struck down prohibitions on same-sex marriages.
Gay and lesbian couples won their first step toward being able to legally wed in Washington state Aug. 4, when Superior Court Judge William Downing called it "a fundamental right" for people to be able to marry whomever they want.
In recent months, judges in those two counties have struck down prohibitions on same-sex marriages.
Gay and lesbian couples won their first step toward being able to legally wed in Washington state Aug. 4, when Superior Court Judge William Downing called it "a fundamental right" for people to be able to marry whomever they want.
Seattle Weekly: Evangelize the Vote
Given all of Fuiten's efforts, you might think that he was disappointed in the results. Bush lost the state by a bigger margin than he did in 2000 (7 percentage points this year, versus 5 percentage points in 2000). The pastor finds vindication, however, in the triumph of McKenna and what, as of this writing, is the possible triumph of Rossi. His picks for Supreme Court also won the day.
The court battle over gay marriage, expected to be heard in the spring, is now uppermost in his mind. Fuiten hopes to use his and WERG's new political base to take on the issue. WERG, which already maintains a lobbyist in Olympia, is about to bring on a second staffer to speak out publicly and develop a grassroots campaign against gay marriage.
He is against abortion and homosexuality, both of which he classifies categorically as sin. To strengthen families, he supports putting restrictions on divorce. He's in favor of tough criminal laws and public support for religious and other private schools. He believes businesses and individuals need to be "unfettered" from excessive taxes and regulation. It is, in other words, a quintessentially ultraconservative agenda.
The court battle over gay marriage, expected to be heard in the spring, is now uppermost in his mind. Fuiten hopes to use his and WERG's new political base to take on the issue. WERG, which already maintains a lobbyist in Olympia, is about to bring on a second staffer to speak out publicly and develop a grassroots campaign against gay marriage.
He is against abortion and homosexuality, both of which he classifies categorically as sin. To strengthen families, he supports putting restrictions on divorce. He's in favor of tough criminal laws and public support for religious and other private schools. He believes businesses and individuals need to be "unfettered" from excessive taxes and regulation. It is, in other words, a quintessentially ultraconservative agenda.
Longview News: Lesbian Candidate says she ran to steal votes
November 4, 2004
Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Ruth Bennett said Wednesday she "deliberately" ran her campaign to steal votes away Democrat candidate Christine Gregoire.
Bennett said she pointedly pandered to the left, meeting with black groups and pushing for the legalization of gay marriage. The one newspaper ad she purchased was in the Seattle Gay News, said Bennett, who is a lesbian.
"Honestly, that's where my votes are going to be," she said. "The big story is going to be, where did Ruth Bennett's votes come from?"
Bennett said she pointedly pandered to the left, meeting with black groups and pushing for the legalization of gay marriage. The one newspaper ad she purchased was in the Seattle Gay News, said Bennett, who is a lesbian.
"Honestly, that's where my votes are going to be," she said. "The big story is going to be, where did Ruth Bennett's votes come from?"
P-I: Social conservatives have reason to be optimistic
The Rev. Ken Hutcherson looked at an electoral map of the United States yesterday with glee.
"Eleven out of 11," he said, referring to voters approving constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriage, a sweep that included Oregon and 10 other states.
For Hutcherson, pastor of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond and the organizer of high-profile rallies to support traditional marriage, the lopsided results "prove that America is still a moral country."
"This is the Christians' view," he said. "We're a force to be reckoned with."
"Eleven out of 11," he said, referring to voters approving constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriage, a sweep that included Oregon and 10 other states.
For Hutcherson, pastor of Antioch Bible Church in Redmond and the organizer of high-profile rallies to support traditional marriage, the lopsided results "prove that America is still a moral country."
"This is the Christians' view," he said. "We're a force to be reckoned with."
Seattle Times: The legitimacy of commitment trumps political expediency
November 3, 2004
Though there is not a single statistic connecting gay marriage to issues of paramount importance to the American people, such as war, poverty, health care, violence, economic growth, Social Security, the environment or education, the hypothetical horrors of gay marriage apparently have become a central concern of our politicians.
And so, in the din of the arguments pro and con, I would like to share a personal story about two people who recently got married.
At the end of May, my partner Gwen and I walked into the Town Hall office in Whistler, B.C., to apply for our marriage license. A short time later, walking down the steps of Town Hall with license in hand, we both looked at each other and burst into tears.
And so, in the din of the arguments pro and con, I would like to share a personal story about two people who recently got married.
At the end of May, my partner Gwen and I walked into the Town Hall office in Whistler, B.C., to apply for our marriage license. A short time later, walking down the steps of Town Hall with license in hand, we both looked at each other and burst into tears.
