Sunday, April 17, 2005
What's up in Oregon
Washington, DC, Apr. 15 (LifesiteNews.com/CWN) - The Supreme Court of Oregon on Thursday nullified 3,000 marriage licenses that were distributed to same-sex couples last year in Multnomah County, saying the issuance of the licenses was a violation of established law.
The Multnomah County Board of Commissioners began issuing the licenses on March 3, 2004, after deciding that limiting marriage to the union of one man and one woman was unconstitutional. The court ruled that the county had no authority to issue licenses to same-sex couples.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said, "We must commend the Oregon Supreme Court on their restraint and willingness to follow the law rather than making it. Last fall, Oregon voters joined 13 other states in recognizing the definition of marriage as one man and one woman."
Concerned Women for America pointed out that the victory is even larger than it appears since the Oregon Supreme Court is considered to be liberal and activist. "This is a tremendous victory for marriage, especially from a very liberal, activist court," said Jan LaRue, CWA's chief counsel. "This is the same court that in another case held that the state constitution protects obscenity."
The Multnomah County Board of Commissioners began issuing the licenses on March 3, 2004, after deciding that limiting marriage to the union of one man and one woman was unconstitutional. The court ruled that the county had no authority to issue licenses to same-sex couples.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said, "We must commend the Oregon Supreme Court on their restraint and willingness to follow the law rather than making it. Last fall, Oregon voters joined 13 other states in recognizing the definition of marriage as one man and one woman."
Concerned Women for America pointed out that the victory is even larger than it appears since the Oregon Supreme Court is considered to be liberal and activist. "This is a tremendous victory for marriage, especially from a very liberal, activist court," said Jan LaRue, CWA's chief counsel. "This is the same court that in another case held that the state constitution protects obscenity."
