Oregon Wingnuts Initiate Drive to Overturn Gay Rights Laws

Oregon Republican wingnut Marylin Shannon is spearheading efforts to overturn the two recent gay rights bills (domestic partners and non-discrimination) that were passed there last week:

Marylin_shannonReports the Statesman Journal: “Shannon said she and other social conservatives believe the measures, especially the domestic partnerships bill, go against the wishes of Oregon voters who approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage in 2004. ‘We are offended that the Legislature voted to overturn the will of the people,’ Shannon said. Once state election officials give the group the go-ahead to begin a referral campaign, the petitioners will have to collect 55,179 signatures from registered voters within 90 days after the Legislature adjourns for each of the gay rights laws they want to overturn. A spokeswoman for the state’s leading gay rights group, Basic Rights Oregon, said it appears likely the newly formed coalition will have the ability to gather enough petition signatures. Melissa Chernaik said she believes Oregonians will uphold both laws, but the ballot measure campaign likely will be expensive and divisive.”

Shannon was also busy fighting against rights for gays and lesbians back in 1999, when Williamette Week reported: “Shannon, who says she doesn’t believe in legislating doctrine, maintains that those who pretend God doesn’t belong in the Capitol are kidding themselves. ‘We legislate morality here every day,’ she says, ‘and it might as well be ours.'”


  1. Zeke says

    Yet when these people are passing these hateful and discriminatory amendments they swear up and down that they are only intended to protect marriage and will have no affect on domestic partnerships and other forms of civil recognition of relationship.

    Lying in the name of Jesus has become the American pastime.

  2. Zeke says

    The Polling Point question above, “Is gay marriage WRONG?”, is leading and an inappropriate way to phrase a question for a poll.

    How about, “What do you think about marriage equality?”.

    Or even, “Where do you stand on same-sex marriage?”.

  3. Marco says

    Is she in the running to be crowned Miss Falwell 2007?

    Fuck her. She needs a life or a hobby. I suggest drinking rubbing alcohol.

  4. Chris says

    I can sort of understand why Christian conservatives are against gay marriage and domestic partnerships. I obviously dont agree with them, but I understand their beliefs and whatnot about religion being a “religious institution”. What I dont understand is why they are always in support of the discrimination bill. Do they want all of us to get fired from our jobs and be forced to go on welfare so they can support us with their tax dollars?

  5. Jonathon says

    Here we go again with the “will of the people” canard.

    When Republicans will let the “will of the people” prevail with the Iraq war, then I will buy into their talking point.

    The Declaration of Independence cites “inalienable rights”. Wikipedia defines these as “a set of human rights that are in some sense fundamental, are not awarded by human power, and cannot be surrendered. They are by definition, rights retained by the people.” These rights cannot be denied or taken away by the “will of the people” or anyone else – even a US president with dictatorial leanings.

    “Will of the people” is important, but it is not superior to an individual’s human and civil rights. SUCH RIGHTS SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN PUT UP FOR THE POPULAR VOTE IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!! Had African-Amerians had to get over the hurdle of the “will of the people” THEY WOULD STILL BE IN CHAINS!!

    What really offends me is the number of so-called “Christians” who seize upon the “will of the people” talking point and run it into the ground. At the same time we hear from many of these same people that Christians are under attack and need special protections and privileges. One day this country will truly be secular and those who cling to religion will be a small minority. Will these Christians then be satisfied with the “will of the people” should that will involve restricting their right to practice their religion? Will they still feel the same way when THEY are on the receiving end of discrimination?

    Just damn, y’all. Just damn.

  6. jack says

    Marylin Shannon (R) of Brooks
    – Born: September 7, 1941, La Grande.
    – Education: Central Washington U., B.A., 1972.
    – Military Service: None.
    – Occupation: Teacher; office clerk.
    – Family: Husband, Albert; three children.
    – Religion: Assembly of God.
    – Political Career: Ore. Republican Party county chairwoman and national committeewoman, 1982-97; Ore. Senate, 1995-present; .

    She’s a teacher–thats scary.

  7. Frank L says

    Creepy woman, but not at all atypical of Oregon. (The non-metropolitan parts, anyway.) Lon Mabon and the so-called Oregon Citizen’s Alliance have been doing this kind of thing for years. Mabon is now circulating petitions for a ballot measure that would restrict what teachers and college lecturers/professors can say in public schools (not just K-12, but colleges as well) about homosexuality.

  8. Zeke says

    The problem is they keep winning these anti-gay referenda.

    If she is and her homophobia is atypical of Oregon then I suggest that you, and other typical Oregonians, make that clear at the ballot box come November.

  9. Chris says

    Zeke: Frank L said “not at all atypical of Oregon”. Most of Oregon, aside from Portland and some other major metro areas is very conservative.

  10. Zeke says

    Chris, you’re absolutely right.

    Apologies to Frank L.

    People from Portland and other major metro areas need to vote and vote often!

  11. Jessica says

    I’m not against gay rights, I mean, I have gay friends that I love to death and they are my best firends. I don’t think that right now is a time for anyone to be discriminating against or arguing with anyone else. If people would take the time to look around at the world that we live in, maybe they would realize that. I think that this is a time when we need to try and help and encourage each other, naot tear each other down. I do beleive in God, and jesus, I’m catholic, but that doesn’t mean that I’m going to go around condemning people for their sexual preferences. That’s not my job to do. I think that what people beleive or feel is their own choice, not anyone else’s. I decide if I like someone, not by their beleifs, but by how they treat me and others. Nobody has ANY right to judge ANYONE else about ANYTHING EVER. Nobody is perfect. Maybe people should think about that before they start talking shit on anyone else.

  12. says

    Is marriage a religious institution?

    I feel at times I am the only gay person that is not satisfied by the term “civil union”. To me it feels like a consolation prize given as a means of pacifying gays. Throw them a few crumbs as their used to and they’ll shut up. Truthfully, I hope that we gay men and woman will not stop at gay unions and go after what we truly deserve, that being gay marriage. I am saddened but not surprised that many gays are willing to accept second class citizenship after all it is what we are accustomed to. Our entire gay civil rights movement that is being courageously fought by a very few, has been about equal rights, not just some rights. This of course means marriage as well.
    We should not be satisfied by civil unions. Unions are not equal. It’s unfortunate that this issue has become so politicized as did the civil rights movement back in the 60’s. Even the politicians that are privately in favor of gay marriage are afraid to speak openly about it with the exception of a few impassioned politicians that have a strong sense of integrity and a clear view of what is right and wrong.

    We cannot look to the bible for any answers regarding equal rights. Those laws were written at a different time and for an ancient culture. It may surprise many to know that gay marriages were widely accepted by the Romans and the Greeks. We also must understand that many of the ancients were a very superstitious people that made many of their laws in regards to those superstitions. We therefore cannot be influenced by scripture. The many books within the bible vastly contradict themselves on issues to numerous to mention here. Which ones should we believe? Many religious institutions have the belief that sexual relations is solely for the purpose of procreation. This is an affront to childless marriages. Are they any less valid? Should they therefore not have sexual relations knowing full well that there will not be any children produced? I wonder why God would make sexuality so very pleasurable if it were only for the purpose of procreation. It wouldn’t need to be enjoyable. The mechanics of sexuality would be all that is necessary to create offspring. Beside don’t we live in a country that has a law about separation between church and state?

    Somebody please help me understand why marriage by many is considered a religious institution. For the sake of discussion I would like someone to tell me why atheists are then eligible for marriage? It seems to me that heterosexual marriages are afforded just about any opportunity and environment they choose to take their vows. Even those damned heathens.

    Straight men and woman can choose a church marriage; they can get married underwater, on a mountaintop, by a justice of the peace or even by a ship captain. However, the most romantic and holy place I can imagine to pledge ones vows of love and fidelity, is driving through a drive-in chapel in Las Vegas, as one would order a happy meal. Don’t get me wrong, I do love happy meals. The best part is no one even has to bother to get out of the car. How can one compete with that kind of service? I’ve heard that they even change your oil while waiting but that may be just hearsay.

    Has it dawned on anyone that the constitution of the United States says very clearly that all people shall be treated as equal? There are no clauses added to that, such as, except for gays. What was stated in that document still rings very clearly yet today and likely for many years to come. We don’t have to look too awfully far back into our history to find examples of how we ignored the constitution for selfish heterosexual Anglo-Saxon citizens so we could still own people. It wasn’t until the early part of the nineteenth century before woman were allowed to vote. Not so long before that, slavery was legal. It wasn’t until nearly fifty years ago that African Americans weren’t allowed to marry whites. If we are to learn anything from our nation’s history, we should then know that whenever we veer off from what that beautifully crafted document for whatever convenient reason, it is eventually overturned and changed for reasons of being fairer. I have still yet to hear a valid reason how gay marriage could negatively impact modern society. I’ve heard that if gays were allowed to marry it would have the potential of destroying traditional marriage. We only have to look at the statistics of the success of “traditional marriages to discover that more than half end up in divorce. Gays did not cause that. Fidelity within marriage has a terrible track record as well. Therefore I would truly like to hear some reasonable argument posed that would make sense why gay marriage ought not be allowed. Thank you, Aaron Jason Silver http://www.aaronjasonsilver.com; Fennville, Mi 49408 for more information on issues within gay culture please read; “why gay men do what they do”, an inside look at gay culture.

  13. Kieren says

    Whether folks on the “right” like it or not, gay and lesbian people are going to continue to love each other and (gasp!) even have children. In the United States today, there are hundreds of thousands of kids that have two Moms or two Dads. Exactly what kind of message are we sending to those children when we say, “your family isn’t real…it’s not moral, and your not equal to us.”

    I have to agree about Civil Unions not being equal. Just because the seats on the back of the bus go in the same direction as those in the front doesn’t make it “equal”.