Thursday, April 14, 2005

{ - marriage - } { + generic union + }

Senate Bill 1000 (Civil Unions)

Establishes requirements and procedures for entering into civil union contract. Applies only to civil unions between persons of same sex. Provides that partners in civil unions have same privileges, immunities, rights, benefits and responsibilities under state law as are granted to or imposed on persons who are or were married.
Two things are established in this paragraph; this only applies to one group of people (homosexuals) and this is marriage with a different name.

This is how the state will define "sexual orientation"
'Sexual orientation' means an individual's actual or perceived heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality or gender identity, regardless of whether the individual's gender identity, appearance, expression or behavior differs from that traditionally associated with the individual's sex at birth.
To accomplish this purpose, the Legislative Assembly intends by this chapter to provide:
...A program of public education calculated to eliminate attitudes upon which practices of discrimination...
Oh good, they will teach about "perceived gender identity" in public schools.

SECTION 22. ORS 182.100 is amended to read: 182.100. (1) It is declared to be the policy of Oregon that this state shall be a leader in affirmative action. All appointive authorities for state boards, commissions and advisory bodies shall implement this policy of affirmative action in their appointments, subject to the legal requirements for each appointment. (2) The Director of Affirmative Action shall assist all persons who have appointing authority at the state level for boards, commissions or advisory bodies in carrying out the state policy stated in subsection (1) of this section and ORS 236.115. (3) As used in this section, 'affirmative action' means a method of eliminating the effects of past and present discrimination, intended or unintended, on the basis of race, religion, { - national origin, age, - } sex, { + sexual orientation, national origin, + } marital status { + , age or disability + } { - or physical or mental disabilities - } ,that are evident or indicated by analysis of present appointment patterns, practices and policies.
Judge people not by the content of their character...

(3) A governing body { - shall - } { + may + } not hold a meeting at any place where discrimination on the basis of race, { - creed, - } color, { + religion, creed, + } sex, { + sexual orientation, + } { - age, - } national origin { + , age + } or disability is practiced.
This will only apply to the Boy Scouts. "Governing bodies" will still be able to meet with the Hispanic Caucus.

(3) Competition for appropriate positions may be limited to facilitate employment of those with a substantial disability or who are economically disadvantaged, or for purposes of implementing a specified affirmative action program.
They hire/promote based on your skin color, disability status and your household income level. Nice.

How the state defines "civil unions"
'Civil union' means a civil contract that is solemnized in accordance with ORS 106.150 and that is entered into in person between two individuals of the same sex who are at least 17 years of age and who are otherwise capable.

SECTION 54. ORS 106.077 is amended to read: 106.077. (1) When the county clerk has received the written application for the marriage license { + or civil union license + } from both applicants, and all other legal requirements for issuance of the { - marriage - } license have been met, the county clerk shall issue { - a marriage - } { + the + } license { + . + }
This is a very telling paragraph; the { } brackets indicate a change; { + + } is something being added and { - - } is something being removed from the language. Notice how the word "marriage" is being systematically removed.

(d) The county clerk or official responsible for issuing the { - marriage - } license.
Again, { - marriage -}
(2) If an applicant for a { - marriage - } license is less than 18 years of age
Yep.
(3) Each applicant for a { - marriage - } license shall file with the county clerk...
A mass exodus of the word "marriage"
...is consummated with the belief on the part of the { - persons so married - } { + parties + }, or either of them,...
It's one big party.
SECTION 61. ORS 106.160 is amended to read: 106.160. The person solemnizing the marriage { + or civil union + } shall give to the parties to the marriage { + or civil union + } a { - marriage - } certificate in the form prescribed in ORS106.165 (1) and (2).
Hey look, they removed the word "marriage" again!

{ + This 2005 Act takes effect on the 91st day after the date on which the regular session of the Seventy-third Legislative Assembly adjourns sine die. + }
Not if we let our legislators know that we do not approve of the systematic removal of marriage to be replaced by something generic. We said NO to gay marriage and that's what this is, they are just calling it something different.

3 comments:

activist kaza said...

Daniel: You and I might agree on this - government ought to get out of the marriage business altogether. Perhaps we should push for marriage reform (how do conservatives feel about a guy like Michael Schiavo, for example?) to remove the incredibly institutionalized benefits for the one-third to one-half of society currently in wedlock? But accept this: discrimination is illegal and can't continue ad naseum. You might not like the language of SB1000 (co-sponsored by a Republican, state Sen. Frank Morse) http://www.dhonline.com/articles/2005/04/14/news/local/news02.txt , but it's gonna pass...in some form not radically dissimilar to this. The alternative is probably worse - a slew of litigation from gays that establishes far-reaching rights via judicial fiat. Which do you prefer? More radical (and occasionally leftist) rants at: www.kazablog.com

Daniel said...

"Occassionaly leftist" Mr. Kaza? Yeah, like when your awake! It doesn't matter how many times you say the word "discrimination" in the marriage argument, it doesn't make it so. I am hoping that you will actively oppose "a slew of litigation from gays that establishes far-reaching rights via judicial fiat." I know I will. And just because some RINO co-sponsors a bill doesn't mean that is has true conservatives' blessings.

Anonymous said...

"And just because some RINO co-sponsors a bill doesn't mean that is has true conservatives' blessings."

You've got that right; after all, Republicans aren't even true conservatives. That's why the Libertarian Party exists--for the real conservatives.