Finding God in a Dog

The anti-gay Oregon Family Council apparently decided that Oregon United for Marriage is likely to not only get their get their initiative to legalize same-sex marriage in Oregon onto the 2014 ballot, but is likely to win that election. To fight back, they have submitted a proposal for an initiative that would allow businesses to refuse service to gay and lesbian weddings. ThinkProgress has the scoop.

The language of the initiative reads as follows:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if doing so would violate a person’s deeply held religious beliefs, a person acting in a nongovernmental capacity may not be:

(a) Penalized by the state or a political subdivision of this state for declining to solemnize, celebrate, participate in, facilitate, or support any same-sex marriage ceremony or its arrangements, same-sex civil union ceremony or its arrangements, or same-sex domestic partnership ceremony or its arrangements; or

(b) Subject to a civil action for declining to solemnize, celebrate, participate in, facilitate, or support any same-sex marriage ceremony or its arrangements, same-sex civil union ceremony or its arrangements, or same-sex domestic partnership ceremony or its arrangements.

Ostensibly, this stems from two incidents where Oregon bakeries (Sweet Cakes and Fleur Cakes) refused service to lesbian couples who wanted cakes for their weddings. (Same-sex marriage is presently illegal in Oregon, but legal just across the Columbia River, in Washington.) The couples filed complaints with the State that the bakeries violated Oregon's anti-discrimination law, which says, among other things, that a public business cannot refuse service to LGBT customers. Sweet Cakes responded by shutting its doors and moving to a private kitchen, probably so they would no longer be a public business.

On the face of it, this initiative is intended to shield Christian businesses (such as bakeries) from having to compromise their beliefs and serve same-sex couples. There are two other intentions here that are less obvious:

1. Rally support against the Oregon United for Marriage initiative. It's not just enough to say, "we're against this." They also have to frame this as a fight to prevent real people from real harm. Like it or not, being forced to choose between your business and your religious beliefs is a compelling story of victimhood.


2. Rally support against Senator Jeff Merkley. He's up for re-election in 2014, at the same time that both this initiative and the Oregon United for Marriage initiative should be on the ballot. He was also critical in passing SB2, which became the Oregon law banning LGBT discrimination. This initiative helps to frame the case for defeating him in the next election.

I have no doubt that the Oregon Family Council measure will make it to the ballot. Oregon's liberal, blue-state reputation comes mostly from the Portland metro area and Eugene. Outside of those areas - including in Salem - it's more like Idaho. Ergo, there's certainly enough signatures to qualify the initiative. Whether it will succeed in the polls is another matter. It's not just anti-gay bigots who are going to vote for this measure, but also libertarians who don't want the State telling bigots that they have to violate their morals or close their businesses. Oregon doesn't have enough of the religious right to pass this measure, but it could have enough libertarians to pass this law. Those same libertarians, by the way, are likely to also vote for the same-sex marriage statute. The principle in both cases is that government shouldn't be the arbiter of moral behavior.

The Oregon Ducks Mascot's workout:



Contrast against Willie the Wildcat's workout:



In summary, Go Ducks.

First read this: The Slow Death of the Oregon Republican Party.

Now consider the potential to do the following for kicks:

1. Vote for Rick Santorum just to keep his one-man wrecking crew alive a bit longer


2. Write in progressive Democrats for the Republican primary elections for both Attorney General and State Treasurer




Admittedly, I wouldn't be sincere in my conversion to the GOP, and would probably switch back before the end of the year. But it wouldn't be the first time I voted for a Republican, either. The last time was in the 1990s, when I voted against Pat Quinn for something.

Today the State of Michigan holds its primary elections. Polling is all over the map - not only on who's ahead (between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum) but in which candidate is in the midst of a surge. Nate Silver gives Romney a 55% chance of victory in his model, which as far as he's concerned makes this race too close to call.

The narrative has shifted for Michigan. This used to be the state that Romney had to win or his inevitability would turn into a steaming wreck, and that Santorum had to win of else his campaign couldn't continue. Well, that's changed. Romney is no longer inevitable, Santorum's campaign will continue, and now Michigan is a test of organizational strength coming into "Super Tuesday" next week. A close win for either candidate isn't going to signal much other than this is still a two-horse race. Only a big win by either candidate - 15 points or more - is going to pose an existential threat to either Romney's or Santorum's campaign. If either candidate loses big, they have to find a way to come back next week, or their opponent takes sole possession of the first tier. That's what's at stake coming up.

And yes, this implies that, in all likelihood, this primary season is going to continue well into summer. Which means Oregon's primary might actually matter.