March 10, 2004
Is The Lawsuit Against Multnomah County Merely A Political Tool?
Musings On The Opposition To Same-Sex Marriage In Oregon
This is all pure speculation on our part, and perhaps it's just our innate sense of cynicism, but we are beginning to suspect that the lawsuit against Multnomah County never was intended as anything but a campaign of public visibility, intended to stoke the flames of prejudice, keep impassioned opinions boiling, generate attention, and energize the base of support for the statewide ballot initiatives against same-sex marriage.
This might be why we've argued so strenuously that incendiary complaints about the process, even among backers of same-sex marriage, and especially when distinctions were not made between the legality of the process and its political strategy (distinctions which, fortunately, are being made more often now), risks playing into the hand of the enemy camp -- it helps keep anti-government sentiment in the very public eye so that it can be misrepresented and manipulated by opponents of same-sex marriage.
(As we said, however, the necessary distinctions increasingly are being made, and so long as same-sex marriage opponents who question the politics of the process continue to make it clear that their governmental critique is not to be equated with opposing same-sex marriage, it will be more difficult for their views to be misrepresented and manipulated by the other side.)
It perhaps also explains why the plaintiffs would bring forward such a weak case to begin with: Defense of Marriage Coalition v. Multnomah County might not be about winning in court. Knowing, as they must, that there is a very strong chance they will not succeed on the merits, plaintiffs also know that their lawsuit provides them with a platform from which to inflame passions against government officials, and energize their supporters to hit the streets in order to place a constitutional amendment on the November ballot.
Intentional or not, everything has begun to line up in the direction of the real fight being waged over such an amendment.
Given the very strong case that the Oregon Constitution requires non-discrimination against same-sex couples (even Kelly Clark has admitted that the "political and legal momentum" behind the County's case is growing), given that Defense of Marriage Coalition v. Multnomah County may very well result in such a ruling, and given that even a proposed County Charter change would be "worthless" because of the constitutional conflict, the only way for opponents of same-sex marriage to win in Oregon is to amend the state Constitution.
But backers of such an amendment face a tight deadline for signatures just to place the amendment on the November ballot, and then they have to work to make it pass. To make that happen, both prejudice and anti-government frustrations must be excited and motivated into a state of hyper-sensitivity.
Defense of Marriage Act v. Multnomah County, as weak as it appears to be as a legal argument, gives them just the public platform they need. Just think of how much further they will be able to issue forth cries of inappropriate governmental activism should the court rule against them.
Comments (3)
brett on 10 Mar 2004
There is little question that such was the purpose of the lawsuit. It's clear from the complaint. They knew that they had a platform - the media was going to run with it - and they didn't want to pass that chance up. Didn't really work.
The One True b!X on 10 Mar 2004
I think it's too soon to tell if it worked or not. We can't know that until we see whether or not they either get an initiative onto the ballot, or convince the legislature to refer a measure toe the voters.
Worldwide Pablo on 10 Mar 2004
>"... a campaign of public visibility, intended to stoke the flames of prejudice, keep impassioned opinions boiling, generate attention, and energize the base of support for the statewide ballot initiatives against same-sex marriage."
How could that have possibly happened?