Two recent divisive headlines ring sour. 1) "Spousal rights for same-sex partners on hold" and 2) "Judge thwarts gay partnerships law."
Doesn't "There's something rotten in" apply only to Denmark? Nope, it's right un-der our noses here in Oregon! An injunction was requested and honored by Bush appointee Judge Michael Mosman to put a hold on domestic partnerships. The law was to take effect Jan. l. On Feb. l Mosman will consider the issue. The foes argue that if the law went into effect it would violate the rights of those who signed the petition!? If you think that's gobbledygook, Judge Mosman said a "fundamental right" is at stake when voters sign petitions. The "fundamental right" is the "right" to petition the government. The peti-tioners failed to obtain the required number of signatures for a referen-dum. Now the foes are "passing the buck" by stating that it wasn't their fault, it's the fault of state officials who rejected the petitions! Hello? Signing a petition is not a vote; it's merely a request to place an issue before the voters for approval or rejection. A failed petition(er) has no rights except to re-petition! (Source: Secretary of State.)
Let's talk about a real "fundamental right," SB2, which went into effect Jan. l. "The purpose ... to insure the HUMAN DIGNITY of ALL PEOPLE within this state, and to protect their health, safety and morals from the consequences of INTERGROUP HOSTILITY, tensions and practices of discrimination of ANY KIND based on sexual orientation ... "Attacking domestic partnerships is "HOSTILE" discrimination of a "KIND." They've shot them-selves in the foot! (Emphasis added)
There's confusion about Measure 36. It didn't ban domestic partnerships or civil unions, it simply defined marriage. Tom Fee of Sunriver said, "People want to do perverted acts in private [how does he know that?], that's their problem. But don't say you're entitled to state benefits." The joke is on Tom. He says it's "their problem," but makes it "his problem" by wanting to deny gays state benefits. According to Fee, the 50% of married heteros who indulge in "perverted acts," must be denied state benefits!? Fortunately, perversion is only an issue for Fee.
Apparently what Fee does in private is superior. (Not perverted? But how do we know that?) "Superiority" is the prevailing misconception of the anti-gay rights folks.
The rottenness I mentioned in the beginning is alive, but not well, in the state of Oregon. The stench is almost overwhelming! The domestic partnership challenge is a red herring.
Bob Bates, Bend