Local News

<< Previous   of   Next >> Mark Mulligan / The Herald  (click to enlarge) Sherry McGregor (left) and partner Amy Thein-Durning listen as results on Referendum 71 are announced Tuesday at Pravda Studio in downtown Seattle. (click to enlarge) Mark Mulligan / The Herald Washington State Senator Ed Murray talks on his cell phone while navigating the crowd at a gathering at Pravda Studio in Seattle Tuesday evening where supporters of Ref. 71 celebrated after Tuesday's election. Photo taken 110309 (click to enlarge) Mark Mulligan / The Herald Charlene Strong, who appeared in television commercials supporting Referendum 71 during election season, smiles in the company of friends Catherine Loukas, left, and Kris Kucera, middle, during a party for supporters of Referendum 71 at Pravda Studio in Seattle Tuesday night. Photo taken 110309 Dan Bates / The Herald  (click to enlarge) Larry Stickney, leader of Protect Marriage Washington, talks to media members as security guards watch on in the hallway near the end of a closed-door election party at the Holiday Inn Tuesday night.   ADVERTISEMENT   Related Stories • Tim Eyman loses this time around, but is unlikely to go away 11/5/09 • GOP beats only rural Eastern Washington Democrat legislator 11/5/09 • McGinn’s lead shrinks in Seattle mayor race 11/5/09 • Three County Council incumbents retain lead 11/5/09 • Library tax holds slim approval 11/5/09 • Marysville council candidate arrested after hit-and-run 11/5/09 » More ELECTIONRESULTS2009 stories >   CONTACT THE HERALD Robert Frank, City Editor frank@heraldnet.com   Published: Wednesday, November 4, 2009 ‘Everything but marriage' law close to victory Arlington opposition leader not conceding By Jerry Cornfield, Herald Writer OLYMPIA — Washington voters on Tuesday were narrowly affirming a controversial law giving same-sex couples all the rights and benefits of married couples with the exception of marriage. Just over 51 percent of voters were approving Referendum 71 in the initial night of ballot counting. Statewide, 506,936 people cast ballots to approve and 484,567 to reject. Majorities of voters in Snohomish and Island counties supported the measure. In Snohomish County, the referendum was winning approval 51.5 percent to 48.5 percent while in Island County the margin was 53 percent to 47 percent. “I'm pretty proud of Washington tonight for taking a stand for equality,” said Rep. Marko Liias, D-Edmonds, at the Approve 71 election night party in Seattle. “As long as we win by one vote I'm glad to see 12,000 people in domestic partnerships will continue to receive the protections the Legislature approved,” he said. Those seeking rejection of Referendum 71 weren't conceding Tuesday. “I think we've got a shot. We're working this thing down to where victory is in sight,” said Gary Randall of the Faith and Freedom Network, one of the leading opponents of the new law. Only 10 of 39 counties were backing the referendum, aided immensely by the one-sided total in King County. Pierce County was the largest county in which a majority rejected the referendum in Tuesday night tallies. “We've made strong progress in the state on issues of equality, but the work is not done,” Liias said. People in the Protect Marriage Washington campaign against the referendum gathered for election night festivities behind closed doors at the Holiday Inn in Everett. Larry Stickney of Protect Marriage Washington said there were concerns about the safety and privacy of those attending the party. He said threats against himself and other leaders of the group have been posted online in the past. More recently, the person who made those online threats posted a newspaper photo of girls participating in a reject R-71 rally in southwest Washington, Stickney said. About 200 people attended Tuesday night and there were no incidents, Stickney said. Referendum 71 marked the first major ballot box test of gay rights legislation since the 1998 passage of the Defense of Marriage Act defining marriage as between a man and a woman. It asked voters to approve or reject the law signed by Gov. Chris Gregoire earlier this year that granted state-registered domestic partners all the rights and benefits enjoyed by married couples under state law. Most of the state's 6,284 domestic partnerships are same-sex couples. This law was dubbed the “everything but marriage” law because it would make same-sex couples legally indistinguishable from married couples under state law. The law also applies to heterosexual couples in which at least one partner is 62 years or older. The law was supposed to take effect July 26 but has been on hold pending the outcome of the election. Protect Marriage Washington, a coalition of conservative social and religious groups, gathered the signatures to put the referendum on the ballot. When the state legalized domestic partnerships in 2007, it gave state registered partners a handful of rights such as the ability to visit a partner in the hospital. Last year, lawmakers expanded that law to give domestic partners standing in legal actions such as probate and trusts, community property and guardianship. The 2009 law targeted by the referendum extended rights for domestic partners into every remaining law pertaining to married couples including the right to use sick leave to care for a domestic partner, and rights related to adoption, child custody and child support. Opponents said the new law effectively legalized same-sex marriage. While admitting it did not overturn the 1998 law outright, they said it laid the legal ground work for its demise. The Approve 71 campaign raised $2.1 million while a trio of groups urging voters to reject the measure had amassed nearly $600,000. The Approve 71 campaign used a television ad campaign to try to show how the law would assist gay and lesbian families as well as senior heterosexual couples. “If this passes, the voters are sending a very strong message to lawmakers to continue your work to ensure that all Washingtonians are treated equally,” said Josh Friedes, the campaign's manager. Jerry Cornfield: 360-352-8623; jcornfield@heraldnet.com. READER COMMENTS Log in or register to post new comment | Log out GREAT!!!! Excellent! The biggots seem to be losing!!!! signed - HETEROSEXUAL male, who is not afraid of others receiving basic human rights and who does not believe what others do is any of my business. Mariage is "special"? Really? Why do over 50% end in divorce? Seems to be not so special to a lot of heterosexual people who throw their marriage away when it's not convenient for them any longer. special?.....Pffft...... Linton Dawson | Nov 4, 2009 12:29 pm | 1 replies | View all | Post reply | Request removal (No heading) I'm also a heterosexual female that is FOR the rights of the LGBT community. However, this referendum also applies to me as I have lived with my boyfriend for 5 years. There is no common law marriage in this state and previously, I had no rights when it came to him being in the hospital or if he passed away. I understand that I am different then a gay couple because I can just go get married to resolve those complaints. I have chosen not to and I appreciate this referendum being passed. I don't really understand those that oppose ref 71 as why do they care what others do in their personal lives. How does it affect you? Why do you think you have the power to tell a gay couple what rights they should have? Marriage is not such a sacred union these days but for those that do want to participate in this ritual, why stop them? Chelsey Roe | Nov 4, 2009 4:38 pm | 0 replies | View all | Post reply | Request removal Gay marriage and gay relationships... This may seem like a highly unusual letter, but it is heartfelt, and I hope that it will be taken seriously. I am a gay man, and an American citizen. As such, I am as deserving of the equal protection of the laws (guaranteed me by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause (see Bolling v. Sharpe, 347 U.S. 497 (1954))) as is any other American citizen. Yet I feel that I am fighting a constant, uphill battle against what I can only describe, in absolute honesty, as the forces of pure evil. I consider Maggie Gallager and her acolytes to be the embodiment of evil. Any person or group that gleefully rips apart the marriages of other people is, in my book, an evil human being; I believe that fair-minded Americans should call this as they see it, and not mince words. I cannot understand the naked cruelty of people who wish to destroy the loving relationships of other people, merely because they don't like the fact that those people are homosexual instead of heterosexual. I appeal to heterosexul men and women for help. Most heterosexual women are more accepting of gay persons than are heterosexual men (yes, I know that this is a generalization, but this conclusion follows poll data pertaining to the acceptance of gay persons by heterosexual men and women, respectively). I therefore appeal to heterosexual men, in particular, for help. Gay persons comprise a minority in American society. Estimates as to the percentage of the population that is gay are highly variable, because so many gay people are afraid of coming out of the closet and of being counted -- but the most reliable estimates are that somewhere between 4% and 10% of the male population is exclusively or predominantly gay, whereas somewhere in the region of 2% to 5% of the female population is exclusively or predominantly lesbian. As a minority, we cannot win every battle at the ballot box. I consider it to be a great sadness that an issue as basic as that of marriage, or equal treatment under the law, should be subject to ratification by the majority -- particuarly in a society that is so cruel and so abusive towards gay men and lesbians. Fundamental rights should never be voted upon -- they are by definition unalienable, and they exist independent of the outcome of the electoral process. Nevertheless, our right to marry and to have our relationships treated as equal to those of heterosexuals is up for a vote -- regardless of how wrong this may be. I therefore appeal to heterosexual men who are fair-minded and decent -- PLEASE HELP US, because we simply cannot attain victory with respect to basic issues such as equality before the law without your help... It appears that we won in Washington, and that the voters approved R-71 by a narrow margin -- which proves that, with the support of heterosexual friends, we CAN win the rights associated with marriage. However, we lost in Maine, which is bitterly disappointing. I refuse to give up and sit on my hands in despair -- but I once again appeal to every fair-minded heterosexual man and woman who reads this to imagine how you would feel were a religious organization to place a measure on the ballot that destroyed your marriage and that rendered you and your spouse strangers in the eyes of the law. In short -- PLEASE, PLEASE HELP US. PHILIP CHANDLER Philip Chandler | Nov 4, 2009 4:25 pm | 0 replies | View all | Post reply | Request removal Good News? I can relate with this group. When I was young I went through this stage. I was looking for "something" and found comfort in another womens arms. I left my husband and was going back to college. I hated men "at that time" This came out in therapy and stemmed from a (adult/child) trama in my childhood. I think we as Americans have the right to go through this stage. I don't think we need to change marriage to do this but we have the right to experiment. After much council from close friends and family I was able to think clearly. This brought me back to a normal family with to beautiful boys and an amazing husband. Brook Harrison | Nov 4, 2009 4:02 pm | 0 replies | View all | Post reply | Request removal Great News Coverage Friggin Morons Johhnny Rotten | Nov 4, 2009 3:29 pm | 0 replies | View all | Post reply | Request removal Riiggghhttttt....... Apparently you've never heard of 'Common-Law' marriage. As for the 'Special Place' marriage has - let's protect marriage by limiting divorce. Jeff Craig | Nov 4, 2009 12:13 pm | 2 replies | View all | Post reply | Request removal Because, opposite sex people ... can get married. It's really simple. It would be better if we could just let same sex partners use the word "marriage" in law, but a bunch of people can't get their head around that idea, so the state legislature compromised on the word and gave domestic partnerships all the rights. The over 62 part of the deal lets seniors funtion as partners without losing their pensions, which can happen if they "marry" under some archaic pension rules. I know you'd like to create as much confusion around the issue as you can, but the law is very clear. You get the same rights in this state if you're married or registered domestic partners. Nothing more and nothing less, regardless of gender. The legislature ceded the word "marriage" to the churches, who often claimed they weren't opposed to people's rights, just calling same sex partnerships "marriage." Apparently the word was not really what bothered some of them after all. I'm hopeful that R71 will retain it's lead. It's a shame that in a country that dares to call itself free that the lead is as small as it is. Chris Bingham | Nov 4, 2009 12:46 pm | 0 replies | View all | Post reply | Request removal Why stop there? Maybe someone can tell me why homosexual and older unmarried couples deserve marriage rights, but others do not. Why not give the same rights to younger unmarried couples? If we are going to say that traditional marriage is not special, then why stop with same-sex relationships. This really seems to be another step on the road to removing the special status that marriage has as the basis of our society. Lance Proffit | Nov 4, 2009 9:37 am | 2 replies | View all | Post reply | Request removal

1. Man arrested in fatal shooting of brother 2. Highway 9 crash victims memorialized 3. Taxes needed to close state's growing deficit? 4. Confrontation led to elderly man's death, police say 5. Fire sends shoppers fleeing JC Penney at Alderwood 6. Snohomish salon owner has a venture with style 7. Pearl Harbor's voices of the past 8. Vikings’ Henderson breaks leg against Cardinals 9. Boeing shares soar as 787 first flight draws near 10. New law aims to deny some felons bail 2 - Top 10 Stories Most Talked about 3 - Top 10 Stories Most Emailed

• Wildcats fall to familar foe in semis • ‘Nutcracker' times three • Road warrior • Mavericks reloading • Holiday Lightings & Santa Sightings • Cities prepare for winter blast repeat • Wolfpack duo takes last shot at state tourney • This Weekend in Your Town • Tips for the stormy season • Boeing will build, flight test and deliver 787s in South Carolina to spe ... • Snohomish County EDC promoting job growth in key industry clusters • $4 million grant to advance brain tumor research has Everett links • Providence medical center construction tops off its 12-story steel frame ... • Tulalip affordable housing project to be financed by KeyBank, Raymond Ja ... • Arlington's Lak of Ink has a growing following for Luke Kooyman's creati ... • Bank of the Northwest formed • Cascade Bank earns $1.6 million