Longview Weather
79°F
Severe
Full Forecaste

Story Photos

Patrick Pate, right, and James Pate wait in line outside the Multnomah County Office building in Portland, Ore. Monday, as they wait to register their domestic partnership. Photo by Associated Press.

Past Month's Most Commented Stories

Home > Breaking News

Couples exchange rings at Ore. domestic partnership registry

Monday, February 4, 2008 11:56 AM PST

By The Associated Press

Font Size:
 
 

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Couples exchanged rings, toasted each other and broke into cheers Monday as other same-sex pairs emerged from the red brick Multnomah County Building waving certificates declaring them newly registered domestic partners.

It was the first day of registration in Oregon after U.S. District Judge Michael Mosman lifted a temporary injunction imposed pending resolution of an argument over petition signatures.

The ruling on Friday made Oregon the ninth state to approve spousal rights in some form for gay couples.

Couples who pay the $60 registration fee can now file joint state tax returns, inherit each other’s property and make medical choices on each other’s behalf, among other benefits married Oregonians have.

“Champagne, ya gotta do it,” said Tiffany Isaman, as she and her partner of four years, Clair Shannon, toasted each other and exchanged rings outside the county building on Monday.

“There aren’t words to describe how I feel. I’m floating,” Isaman added.

For Berdell and Casey Moffitt-Chaney, it was the fifth try during 25 years together.

The Moffitt-Chaneys said the first was a holy union ceremony, then a domestic partnership, a marriage in Portland that was later voided by the courts, a still-valid marriage in Canada and Monday’s domestic partnership.

The line of early applicants flowed out the door. Volunteers passed platters of chocolate cupcakes.

“My 8-month-old daughter is proud to have two legal mommies,” read a placard held aloft by one woman on a nearby corner.

In 2004, Multnomah County passed a law authorizing same-sex marriages and about 3,000 couples took advantage. The law later was ruled unconstitutional and the marriages voided. Voters passed a state constitutional ban on gay marriages that year.

Opponents of the domestic partnership law passed by the 2007 Legislature have argued, among other things, that it disregarded the will of Oregon voters who passed the ban on same-sex marriage.

An Arizona-based group which advocates for Christian legal issues had gone to federal court to argue that county elections clerks had improperly disqualified voter signatures collected during a drive to refer the domestic partnership law to the November 2008 ballot.

But Mosman rejected arguments by the Alliance Defense Fund that state elections officials should have made more of an effort to contact voters whose signatures were disqualified. The referendum drive fell 96 signatures short of the 55,179 needed to refer a law passed by the legislature to the ballot.

The Alliance Defense Fund has said it plans to appeal Mosman’s ruling.

On Monday, Wayland Bruns and Brad Townsend, who married three years ago in Vancouver, British Columbia, were in snappy coats and ties, standing out from the more casual majority.

Bruns said he foresaw a time when gay marriage might again be authorized in Oregon “but it will take more Democrats being elected.”

He was cautious about their new status, saying with many Republicans still opposed, “nothing is safe.”

Several couples said they hope for eventual federal recognition that will allow them other rights such as sharing Social Security benefits.

In Salem, Martha Aaron came bearing a red rose and a cup of coffee brought for her by partner Katie Howe.

“The more people take this legal step, the more friends, families and co-workers will know what is real in our lives, and how having legal protections is just what’s fair,” she said.

“It doesn’t take away from anyone else’s legal protections for us to have this,” Howe added.

Both carry wallet-sized photographs of their daughter, now 11.

Carrie and Sheila Parkins of Keizer said they are planning a formal commitments ceremony to celebrate their new status.

“To me, this is not any different than marriage,” said Carrie Parkins. “As long as we are getting the benefits, it doesn’t matter what it is called.”

“We have children, and we want to make sure we can make decisions for them,” Sheila Parkins, chimed in, before the two left the clerk’s office with their certificate of domestic partnership, arms around each other’s waists.

Marion County Clerk Bill Burgess said he might be facing a tough re-election campaign in November, after his office disqualified some signatures on petitions to refer the domestic partnership law to the November 2008 ballot.

“But we have to treat every person with dignity, and apply the law fairly,” Burgess said. “I am happy the court’s decision vindicated what county clerk’s offices were doing around the state.”

Previous Next

WOW... wrote on Feb 8, 2008 4:10 PM:

" There is NO future in what they are doing!
People don't reproduce A-Sexually!
How Do you think you where conceived... A MAN and a WOMAN... Not two women or two men!
What is this world coming to?
But then again i guess it will cut down on the population. "

Oh, well... wrote on Feb 8, 2008 5:38 PM:

" If we all go “gay” and no one cheats, the human race will be extinct in about 100 years. This is might be the most effective way by which we can control global warming. "

Realist wrote on Feb 9, 2008 9:34 AM:

" What is your point, WOW? Many heterosexual people can't reproduce either. Not to mention, many heterosexuals (including myself) choose never to have kids.

To "Oh, well..."
You don't "go gay". Either you are, or you aren't. It isn't a choice. "

Why... wrote on Feb 9, 2008 11:05 AM:

" Why does the TDN home page read that there are 64 comments on this article, and then when I get here there are only three?? "

To: Why... wrote on Feb 9, 2008 11:48 AM:

" Apparently last week there was a goof at TDN.com and the responses to many stories were erased by mistake. "

Moral Minority wrote on Feb 9, 2008 6:20 PM:

" Apparently last week there was a goof at TDN.com and the responses to many stories were erased by mistake

Maybe it is a good thing to start over. Some of the comments were to stupid for even the average tweeker. BTW too many of them having kids, but don't worry you hetros don't have to take care of them. We will take care of your disposable medically needy children. "

somedude wrote on Feb 11, 2008 10:03 AM:

" They had an article, wasn't a goof, it was an upgrade to the system and all comments were lost....they ran a story online about it "

evenotsteve wrote on Feb 11, 2008 11:18 AM:

" Oregon and Washington are both being run by the radical homosexual activists. This is clearly a leftist/liberal plot to overthrow the will of the people which is one man/one woman marriage. The Democrats are tyrants who thumb their noses at the voters. They are dictators. "

to: evenotsteve wrote on Feb 11, 2008 2:03 PM:

" Read your comment. Surely even you can see how dumb you sound. "Plot to overthrow the will of the people" Come on. It's about a free country. A person being able to marry whom ever they choose. "

Realist wrote on Feb 11, 2008 2:32 PM:

" "Radical homosexual activists"? Too funny! Obviously, you are being dictated by a doctrine that is over 2000 years old.
Tell me, evenotsteve, how does homosexual marriage affect your life? And please, answer without referring to your precious book.
No one has been able to give me an answer. Why don't you try? "

My Thanks to Realist wrote on Feb 11, 2008 4:02 PM:

" It is sooooo refreshing to read your posts on this! I am amazed to discover that there is anyone in that bastion of bigotry who doesn't belong to the ranks of bumpkins and Bible thumpers! THUMBS UP TO YOU! "

Tazer Baby wrote on Feb 11, 2008 6:37 PM:

" What ever you do, don't drink any of the Kool-Aid. I mean some of these comments are too scary to have been made up. This is the stuff stand-offs are made of. "

mgn wrote on Feb 11, 2008 9:49 PM:

" Let them do what they want i no i will never have aids "

to mgn: wrote on Feb 12, 2008 10:04 AM:

" Then you probably should wear a medical alert bracelet stating that you will NOT allow blood transfusions or organ transplants should you be unable to speak for yourself due to physical incapacitation. AIDS is NOT exclusive to the gay community, it can be acquired by means other than sexual contact. And it is also spread by heterosexual contact at ever-increasing levels. "

another comment to: evenotsteven wrote on Feb 12, 2008 10:45 AM:

" It sounds like you are trying to be the dictator. Hello Washington is a Democratic state, odviously this is the will of the people. Maybe you should move somewhere where your limited views are welcomed "

To Realist wrote on Feb 12, 2008 2:24 PM:

" I would love to see the moment when the things you're fighting so hard to maintain will fall to peices and leave you standing all alone. You obviously are being dictated by disgusting and immoral values. I'll take those 2000 year old doctorines over your hatred any day! "

Old School wrote on Feb 12, 2008 2:49 PM:

" Didnt the people of both Oregon and Washington vote agianst same sex marriage/unions? "

Realist wrote on Feb 12, 2008 5:58 PM:

" MY HATRED? LOL! I'm not the one who hates. I am not the one who judges someone on who they are.
I love your comment about "disgusting and immoral values." Who are you to say what is disgusting and immoral? Because you disagree with it? Hmmm.
It is okay. You can come out of the closet anytime. You will be loved. "

Re: Realist wrote on Feb 12, 2008 8:15 PM:

" I'm not the one that says it's immoral and disgusting. God does. And since I follow God, I agree with what He says. And "not judging someone for who they are" is like saying it's ok to smoke meth, because addiction is a genetic predisposition. A meth addict is "who they are" and I'm supposed to be ok with it? I don't think so. And by the way, are you not judging me for disagreeing with gay marriage? That's what I thought. "

Re: Realist wrote on Feb 12, 2008 8:20 PM:

" Who makes you the authority on what's right and wrong? Maybe you don't want people to refer to "that precious book" because you're afraid you might be proven wrong. Who are you to say that "the precious book" is wrong? Because you disagree with it? Hmmm. "

to: evenotsteve wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:07 AM:

" Whats the matter buddy... Couln't stand the heat? "

My Opinion wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:29 AM:

" The sad part behind this whole situation is the fact that this was put to a vote.It failed.The majority rejected it.What will be next?Why can Judge Mosman decide to change what has been voted on,just by disqualifying signatures on petitions?He also disqualified all those ballots. "

Newcomer wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:53 AM:

" The majority of these comments just prove how backwoods and bigoted Longview can really be (not to mention semi illiterate). Thank GOODNESS for the influx of people from Portland and Oregon and areas beyond! We need progressive, enlightened, 21st century thinking, even if it means higher property taxes or housing prices. We need people who realize that owning a bible doesn't mean they have a moral monopoly on anyone. Since when is marraige ONLY a religious ceremony? For many it is NOT a religious event - it is a LEGALLY BINDING contract. I'm personally pleased as punch that some feathers have been ruffled over this issue. Love and compassion should know NO color, NO sex, NO boundaries - I don't care what religion you hide behind. EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL, and if your religion teaches anything different, then take a good hard look in that mirror. You'll be looking at intolerance and bigotry square in the face. "

Someone wrote on Feb 13, 2008 9:01 AM:

" Here's something for you "moral" homophobic bible followers: homosexuality wasn't a sin in the bible until centuries after the first couple of editions. Originally, all the bible said was that man can't have homosexual sex in the same bed as his wife. Some clergy guy decided to add homosexuality is a sin later on to go against the hedonistic lifestyle of Romans. My source: The History of Sex from the History channel. Numerous history and religious scholars talk in depth about it and all accept it as fact...but you won't hear that at church. "

jw wrote on Feb 13, 2008 10:59 AM:

" To "someone".

Read the first chapter of Romans "

Realist wrote on Feb 13, 2008 12:54 PM:

" That "precious book" was written and rewritten by MAN. You follow God, well good for you. I'm happy that you belong to an organization that for centuries has been the cause of most wars and world problems. And yes, I can prove that.
I can't believe that you would compare a meth addict to someone who is gay. They didn't choose to gay anymore than you or I choose to be straight.
Do you have any freckles? Any birthmarks? Did you CHOOSE to get those? Nope. Do you see the distinction?

I refuse to get into a theological discussion with you, because whether or not "God" exists is not the topic of this forum. But I will say this; I don't think I can be proven wrong by the bible. Ever read Joseph Campbell? How about Charles Darwin? I believe them. Not a myth.

And once again I challenge you, or anyone to tell me, without using the BIBLE, how does their marriage affect you??? "

Re: Realist wrote on Feb 13, 2008 1:39 PM:

" I feel so sorry for you. You are so incredibly decieved. "

Realist wrote on Feb 13, 2008 2:19 PM:

" No need to feel sorry for me. I know the truth, because I can think for myself. I don't blindly follow a story. I do, however, feel sorry for you, for you are the one that is incredibly deceived.

"

ernie wrote on Feb 13, 2008 3:04 PM:

" Re: Realist

The INSTITUTION of marriage between a man and a woman is the foundation of the family unit. This type of family unit has always been the main component in not only procreating the human race, but also in child rearing. This should be preserved at all costs.

Allowing homosexual marriage can do nothing for the proliferation of the human race. It would serve to devalue traditional marriage, and sends the wrong message to our offspring who will be responsible for continuing the human race. The homosexuls agenda is to try and tear down the traditional family unit. They want to force people to accept and respect them and their despicable lifestyle. Is it their envy that causes them to despise the very thing that is the foundation and future of the human race.

Allowing Homosexual marriage is to step onto a very slippery slope. What is next, marriage between 3 people, between young children and adults, or people and animals? Where does it stop? "

Re: Realist wrote on Feb 13, 2008 4:51 PM:

" You never answered my question. What or who gives you any authority whatsoever to speak on such matters? No one put the guidelines of right and wrong under your charge. So why don't we just agree to disagree. Don't bother writing a response, because this is the last time I'll give you the satisfaction. Have a nice eternity. It'll be real hot. "

Realist wrote on Feb 13, 2008 8:01 PM:

" Actually, I did answer your question, but for some reason or another, TDN didn't post it.
And I DO want to respond, TYVM.
What gives YOU the right to say what is right and wrong? No one put the guidelines of right and wrong under your charge either, but because you are RELIGOUS, you think you have the right to spew your religous B.S. all over me and anyone else. Fine. We can "agree to disagree", but for the record, I am not worried about it being "hot" when I die, because when you die, you are dead. Prove to me otherwise and please, do it without referring to a story.

You haven't answered my question either. I will repeat it again. HOW DOES GAY MARRIAGE AFFECT YOU? (WITHOUT REFERRING TO THE BIBLE?)

Ernie- I will say it again- many heterosexuals can't reproduce either, so your arguement is a moot point. "

Gave up Trying wrote on Feb 14, 2008 8:32 AM:

" To Ernie: What planet are YOU living on? We are already overpopulated on Earth, and the last thing we need is an emphasis on reproducing. Gay couples often do the "cleanup" task of adopting the unplanned and unwanted children that are the product of "mistakes" made by uninformed teenagers whose parents refuse to teach them about any form of birth control other than abstinance, expecting their God to provide for those babies. Well, God DOES provide for them, now doesn't He? And to Realist: Best to just give up on expecting any degree of education from the population in that Hillbilly Haven. While you and I were watching the History Channel, they were most likely glued to the latest installment of Survivor or checking out the hooters on Deal or No Deal! "

NewComer wrote on Feb 17, 2008 5:55 PM:

" I am SO happy to see some enlightened, progressive, open minded people posting on here. THANK YOU oh THANK YOU. I recently moved here and have been horrified to see the homophobic, narrowminded, judgmental condemnation that seems to run rampant on this website. What a relief to see that I won't be the only one in left field. ERNIE, my friend, the human population is choking this planet to death, and what we need are families who do NOT reproduce, and who are willing to adopt the myriad children without parents. Your POV isn't just moot, it's archaic and downright comical. Thanks for the belly laugh. "

Common Sense wrote on Feb 21, 2008 7:08 AM:

" Laugh while you can. I'll laugh with you, just a little later. "

Re:Realist wrote on Feb 21, 2008 10:43 AM:

" THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU Finally someone that can say what I am thinking. Keep up the good work you are a wise person. "

Let's Get Real wrote on Feb 21, 2008 4:01 PM:

" Okay .... Not everyone agrees with the same thing. If you want to be gay, that is your choice. (I know you don't choose to be gay). If you think it's okay, that's fine; if you think it's bad, that's okay too. Not everyone has the same beliefs. I believe in God, you might not. It's their decision to go "against what is right"! Sorry to say but not everyone is religious or believes in God. I do, but I also believe it's their life, let them do what they want. You do what you want, they don't judge you for liking the opposite sex. Just let it go ... you do what you like, they do what they like. "

Gay Woman wrote on Feb 22, 2008 6:42 AM:

" How about we talk about money, your money. Tax dollars. My partner and I would love to get married, or have a civil union that allows us the same privileges of all the heterosexual marriages but it is not allowed. Since we are not allowed to get married, my company does not provide benefits to my wife. Therefor she is without medical, dental, and vision insurance. Based on HER income, not mine because we are not married, the tax payers are now paying for her medical insurance, her food stamps, we called FISH a local charity ran by CHURCH DOLLARS to get her a dentist appointment which was free to us based on HER income, not mine. If we were married you would not be supporting this lesbian family at a tune of probably around $1000/month. All of these services YOU, the bigots out there, are PAYING FOR because you won't allow us the same rights the others. And you know what else, I make over 35,000 a year, not a ton, but enough to support us, but we will continue to use the tax dollar supports as long as you won't allow us to marry. I wonder how many others are liks us? "

Common Sense wrote on Feb 25, 2008 7:42 AM:

" Re Gay Woman: So you think your employer should bear the burden of your you girlfriends medical? "

Gay Woman wrote on Feb 25, 2008 9:42 AM:

" Yes I do. My employer assumes the burden of my co-workers husbands', how is my wife any different?

Wouldn't you rather the employers take care of them then tax dollars?

"

Common Sense wrote on Feb 25, 2008 2:54 PM:

" The real question is where to draw the line. If we bend the rules of marriage, how far shall we bend them? Do you think we should allow multiple people to marry each other? Perhaps my 10 friends don't have coverage. Should my employer be burdened to provide coverage for them also if we all choose to have a multiple marriage? The question is how far to bend the rule if to bend it at all. There will always be an exception asking to bend it just a little further. Before you know it, the rule will be broken and thrown in the garbage. "

Realist wrote on Feb 25, 2008 5:05 PM:

" Common Sense--
Give me a break. You know full well that isn't going to happen. That is just a copout by the religous right to deny equal rights to same-sex couples. I for one, am sick to death of people saying, "well, if we allow gay marriage, people will one day want to marry their pets, or want to marry numerous people" blah, blah, blah.

And by the way, mulitple marrige does happen. What state is that.... oh yeah, UTAH.

I'm sorry, but you just don't fit your moniker. "

Daily Reader wrote on Feb 25, 2008 5:31 PM:

" To Ernie: Why would I want to tear down the traditional family unit? I simply want to add my family to it. "

To someone wrote on Feb 26, 2008 7:55 PM:

" Please provide info that substantiates your edition theory. Was this the P-fragment, was this the T-fragment, or was this the E-fragment. If so was this a pre-exilic redaction or was this a post-exilic redaction. In addition, what fragments of the Torah are you using to show the nature of this edition. I have never heard of this edition or redaction theory even Schliermacher, known to be the most critical of the Old Covenant transmission history never even mentioned this incident. I am very interested to see your evidence. "

The BIBLE is TRUTH wrote on Feb 26, 2008 8:23 PM:

" For those of you who say that the Bible doesn't speak against gay relationships as being bad, you probably haven't actually read it. Romans 1:26-32 calls it (and I quote) "shameful" "against nature" "vile" "wickedness" "unrighteousness"....it goes on. So before you go stating as fact that the bible doesn't say it's a sin, NOWHERE does it say it's good either! TO REALIST: Can you show me one verse in the bible that says homosexuality is ok, and keep it in the proper context? I guarantee you'll not find a single one. What is your obession with keeping the bible out of things? Why do you like gay people and hate religious people? What did religious people ever to do you besides try to tell you the truth, which you're too foolish to hear? You hate people that are religious, because they're "preachy" right? Well, you're being everything you hate, just in a different direction. You hate God, you hate straight people (even though you claim to be one), and you're going to have a VERY rude awakening one day. "

CUT IT OUT!!! wrote on Feb 26, 2008 8:31 PM:

" This whole argument is absolutely absurd! Gay marriage is disgusting, yes, but unfortunately it's a fact of life. No one is going to change a thing by arguing about it on a newspaper website. I guess everyone will find out what truth really is when God finally decides to wipe us all off the face of the earth, and believe me, THAT DAY IS COMING!! "

Jill wrote on Feb 27, 2008 9:40 AM:

" I can't believe some of the posts on here, talking about AIDS, are you people living in the 50's still? AIDS affects all people not just the gay community. And wiping out the face of the earth??? Give me a break, there are wayyyy too many unwanted children out there, that will have wonderful homes thanks to these families, that do want children. "

Realist wrote on Feb 27, 2008 9:47 AM:

" To: The bible,

I don't hate religious people. Where on earth did you get that?
I just challenge them to tell me how gay marriage affects their life without bringing their BIBLE into it. It can't be done. I don't hate god. I just don't believe that he OR she exists. I don't hate straight people. (Where did you get THAT?) And yes, I AM straight; I'm just not narrow.
I just don't understand this obsessive need that the religous right has to keep them from being happy. Honestly, I don't hate anyone. (Where do you get this stuff?)
And the only rude awakening I will ever have is my dog jumping on the bed because he has to go potty.
Oh, before you go all crazy on me, I seem to remember something called.... what is it.....? Ah! Seperation of CHURCH and STATE. That is my "obsessive need" to keep religion out of things. But hey, thanks for playing.
"

To the Bible and Realist wrote on Feb 27, 2008 1:40 PM:

" Although I enjoy reading the comments between the two of you, I feel the need to interject my opinion. I also, am not religious. I feel that a person has the right to choose a life partner. Whether that person is of the same sex or opposite sex really is irrelevent. I also would like to hear from The Bible how this affects your life with out using the bible. The bible may be the backing for your beliefs. But it is not law. The fact that you choose to follow the bible and another chooses not to, by no means makes that individual a bad person. Or a sinful person. The law doesn't recognize sin. It recognizes crime. Why should law prohibit this. Sex before marriage is a sin... Correct? Should law police this as well? I'm interested in your response... "

Newcomer wrote on Feb 27, 2008 3:14 PM:

" JILL & REALIST, the folks in these parts aren't just stuck in the 50s, they are stuck in a Hillbilly Haven of backward thinking. It's hard to believe some of the narrowminded, bible thumping comments on here (and yet they believe they are GOOD people, mind you), and often makes me wonder how a place as backward as Longview could exist within 1 hour of Portland. However, I predict in 10 years Longview will be a very different place because of the influx of people who actually USE their brains instead of letting cult & supernatural myth determine their thoughts. I can't wait to see a same sex, interracial couple walking down the streets of Longview - I for one will be jumping for joy! "

Pierce Co. Repub wrote on Feb 28, 2008 7:50 AM:

" Unbelievable. Just because the fine people of Cowlitz County have morals and integrity, they get branded as "Hillbilly"'s and "narrowminded, bible thumping". Nice.. Maybe some of them moved away from the big urban areas to north and south and settled in the Cowlitz valley to be in, and raise their children in a morally acceptable area. It was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. I haven't read about this yet, but does Oregon recognize mixed sex partners the same as same sex partners? Or do they discriminate? "

Top Jobs
More Top Jobs
Top Garage Sales
More Top Garage Sales
Top Rentals
More Top Rentals