Portland, OR Joins the Club
March 9, 2004
Civil officers in Portland, Oregon have been giving same-sex marriage licences for almost a week now and I'm still trying to figure out some of the arguements. Certain officials are denying it on the basis that it is the law and it is their duty to uphold the law, no matter if they agree or disagree with it. In some ways, I agree with them BUT I feel like in such a circumstance that more than just a piece of paper is on the line (benefits for married couples must make things at least marginally easier), I'd side completely with those issuing licences no matter how unlawful it is. At the moment, all I'm doing is blogging about it but I assure you that if any kind of law is passed by Bush outlawing same-sex marriages, I will be in DC doing whatever I can.
Hopeless Romantique (from Life on the West Coast) took a trip to the offices where they were marrying couples late last week and has some great footage of it which you can now find here.
Comments
AG - Just wanted to address a technicality in your post. Pres. Bush has gone on record as supporting a constitutional amendment, but has no role in the legislation of the same. I do not know if he has the authority to issue an executive order for the same. Either way, it is not "Bush" who would pass the law. It would succeed only through the bi-partisan efforts of the House, the Senate, and ratification by the States. Hardly the man's fault.
Posted by: Rob | March 10, 2004 12:50 PM
While I understand that Bush isn't the physical 'passer of laws,' I beleive that he, as well as anyone else that supports this amendment, is at 'fault' if such a law gets passed. This is, of course, using my opinion to define what is good and bad. Your opinion, while equally valid, may use a different word than 'fault.' Interpret as you see fit.
Posted by: authgeek | March 10, 2004 1:29 PM
though he does have the power to veto bills - they must pass his desk for approval before being made into laws.
Posted by: Valette | March 11, 2004 4:40 PM