March 03, 2004

(Updated) Same-Sex Symmetry

Note: This post has been updated. Any and all updates appear at the end of the original post.

There's an utterly perfect Associated Press story out this evening which brings to light one element of today's events of which we were previously unaware, about one Christine Tanner, who married today:

What few of the more than 300 gay couples who waited in line behind her realize is that Tanner won a landmark 1998 Oregon Court of Appeals decision � one which lay the legal groundwork for the marriage licenses suddenly being issued Wednesday.
In 1991, Tanner along with two other lesbian nurses sued Oregon Health & Science University, where all three worked, for denying their female partners the same medical benefits that the spouses of heterosexual employees received.
Seven years later, a circuit court judge � in a move which became known as the "Tanner Decision" � ruled that homosexuals are members of a protected class under the Oregon Constitution. Denying them benefits would be akin to denying an individual insurance based on their gender or race.

In addition to prompting Multnomah County's domestic partnership registry, that decision is referenced directly and repeatedly in the legal opinion of the County Attorney, which uses its ruling that homosexuals are a protected class as the thread that leads to Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution prohibition against discriminatorily granting privileges to one class of citizens but not another.

We're fairly certian that we saw Tanner on at least one local newscast, and neither she nor the reporters in question ever mentioned her connection to the court case that utlimately led to today's new policy.

But we're glad that someone finally noticed and dutifully passed along the connection. Today's story becomes all the richer for it.

March 06, 2004

Update

OPB News interviewed Tanner on Friday.

Posted at 11:44 PM | PermalinkComments (1) | TrackBacks (2)
More In Law Enforcement & Legal Issues, Livability, Metro-Area Politics, Same-Sex Marriage

« Previous Next »

Comments (1)

  1. Bob R. on 04 Mar 2004

    This is great news - glad to see it here.

    One thing bugs me about the original article - this quote: [tanner decision] "ruled that homosexuals are members of a protected class under the Oregon Constitution"

    I don't like to see it reported that way, because it plays into the fears of the "special rights" crowd. Homosexuals are NOT a protected class. Rather, "sexual orientation" is a suspect class of discrimination. That includes heterosexuals.

    It's about equality, not special protection. We know that, but most folks think of this in terms of protection.

    - Bob

Trackbacks (2)

  1. No Same Gender weddings in Central Oregon on 04 Mar 2004

    The Bend Bulletin reports Nancy Blankenship, Deschutes County clerk, said Wednesday unless the Oregon Supreme Court rules current law unconstitutional, or until the Legislature directs county clerks otherwise, gay couples will not be issued marriage li...

  2. where's my damn pictures? on 04 Mar 2004

    Coming! I plan to upload thumbnails and medium sized files this evening. What's this all about? Spousal unit and I took half of yesterday off work and pestered couples for pictures as they lined up to get marriage licenses as per the last entry. We did...