All these posts, and it’s only the lower court ruling, which could be overturned.
Typically, The One True b!X has the best coverage (here and here). B!X is calling this a victory for marriage equality opponants.
He’s got a point; separate is not equal.
But then again… Just a year or two ago, a court ruling requiring Civil Unions (flawed as they are) in Oregon would have been seen by everyone as a stunning victory for gay rights.
Also, Oregon is not Massachusetts… it’s very easy to amend the Oregon Constitution with a ballot measure. I’m pretty certain that Oregon voters would amend the Constitution to prevent gay marriage. However, it’s not as clear to me that a majority will be willing to amend the Constitution just to prevent Civil Unions.
I oppose Civil Unions in the long run, because I think they’re a degrading concession to anti-gay sentiment. Separate is not equal, nor is it fair. Nonetheless, in the short term, it’s possible that Civil Unions will be a better strategic route to eventual equality; it’s certainly better than a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. (Which might happen anyway, but is more likely to happen if an Oregon Court rules that our constitution requires marriage equality).
UPDATE: Issac Laquedem and Worldwide Pablo also have comments on this case..
I hope they go for marriage! I don’t like “marriage lite” whether heterosexual or homosexual. It’s too ambiguous.