|
|
Sunday, November 07, 2004
OREGON COUPLES FRET OVER GAY MARRIAGE BAN: From the Associated Press
As she watched her 3-year-old son convert a box into a spaceship, Kelly Burke was dreading the arrival of a letter that could change their lives. The stay-at-home mom and her partner of 15 years, Dolores Doyle, are among the nearly 3,000 gay couples who wed in Oregon this spring. Now the status of those marriages, and the benefits that come with them, is unclear after Oregon voters decisively approved a ban on gay marriage this past week. "The mailman came this morning and I panicked," said Burke, who relies on Doyle's employer for health insurance. "My first thought is: 'Oh my God, here comes the letter. They're cutting me off.'" While 11 states passed constitutional amendments banning gay marriage on Election Day, Oregon is the only state among them where the government has already approved gay marriage, albeit temporarily. Some 2,960 gay couples tied the knot after Multnomah County momentarily flung open the door to same-sex marriage. A judge stopped the practice after six weeks, and the state has refused to acknowledge the marriages pending the outcome of a lawsuit on the constitutionality of banning same-sex marriage. Still, some companies took it upon themselves to view the couples as legally married, extending benefits--such as insurance coverage--not previously available. ... It is unclear what the passage of Measure 36 means for the current lawsuit in the Oregon Supreme Court, in which nine gay couples--including Burke and Doyle--claim that preventing them from marrying is unconstitutional. The next hearing was postponed until Dec. 15 to give both sides a chance to argue what effect the amendment will have. Oregon was home to the first court ruling in the nation to interpreted a state constitution to prohibit all discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. In that case, the Oregon Court of Appeals required Oregon Health & Science University to extend insurance benefits to the same-sex partners of its employees. But since that 1998 ruling, there has been little movement in the Legislature toward a clear policy on same-sex partner benefits. more |
|||||||||
|
home | marriagedebate.com | resources | about imapp | contact |
Post a Comment
<< Home