I’m a gay rights activist. I want to give $150,000 to someone who opposes gay marriage -- by Matt Stolhandske

As a gay man, I should hate Melissa and Aaron Klein.

They’re the Portland-based Christian bakery owners who, in 2013, refused to make a cake for a lesbian couple’s wedding. And despite their insistence that they’re only morally opposed to gay marriage, not gays, they make their disdain for equality quite clear: “I didn’t want to be a part of her marriage, which I think is wrong,” Aaron Klein recently said of one of the women he rebuked.

I’m also an evangelical Christian. I can’t understand why Klein or any other Christians twist the words of Jesus Christ to justify this behavior. To me, it’s a deeply harmful and embarrassing bastardization of our faith.

But I don’t hate the Kleins. In fact, I’m raising money to cover the $150,000 punitive fine they received from Oregon.

* * *

To be a gay Evangelical is to live what some may view as a paradox. I grew up in a loving, supportive Christian home and my faith eventually led me to a conservative Presbyterian seminary. I was yearning to study my faith more fully, but I was also deeply burdened by my same-sex attraction.

I believed it to be evil – the most revolting and damning of all sins. Looking back on those dark days, I now see the hate I had for myself. I was also secretly angry at everyone in the church who had tried to lead me to believe that something so fundamental to me was disgusting and wrong.

It wasn’t until I stepped away from the church, albeit briefly, that I was I able to find love and forgiveness for myself and the true heart of the Christian gospel; the love of a Father so stubbornly refusing to condemn that He would send His Son to die in my place. And that gospel has so deeply permeated my soul that I cannot find it in myself to hate the Kleins.

In the face of intolerance, I am yet called to love.

I know some Evangelicals are convinced that being gay is a grave moral sin. And I believe that they, and all people, should have the right to decide whether or not to condone religious marriage ceremonies for gay couples. But the Oregon case is not a question of religious marriage. This couple didn’t ask the Kleins for their blessing. They simply asked to pay for a cake.

Last I checked, a pastry is not moral approval of a religious ceremony.

As he was suffering an agonizing death on the cross, Jesus Christ forgave even those who slaughtered Him. He welcomed the poor, the indigent, the scourges of society, into his arms. It’s impossible to imagine the same Jesus who humbled Himself to the point of crawling on the floor to wash the feet of Judas, today standing in the Klein’s bakery and telling them not to bake cakes for gay weddings. Regardless of what you believe Jesus’s position would have been on gay marriage, the Bible makes it clear that the posture with which He would approach gay and lesbian couples is infused with love.

I know this is a lot to ask of Christians like Klein; to shower love on people like me who represent something she abhors. So I’m trying to live that challenge myself.

The Kleins say the $150,000 fee will bankrupt her family. I’m raising money to help offset that cost. I’ll send whatever we raise along to the Klein family with a message of love and peace. I don’t want them to suffer. But I am also pleading with them and other Christians to stop using the name of Jesus to explain to the LGBT community why we don’t deserve access to the civil rights afforded to heterosexuals through the legal institution of marriage.

I hope the Kleins will accept this sign of good will. After all, they must see that our goals here are the same – to live our lives as we see fit and be treated equally under the law.

Already I can hear the shouts from progressive and gay friends.

“You’re an apologist for homophobes,” they tell me. “How can you reward this anti-gay behavior? Who next will they choose not to serve? African Americans? Single mothers? Muslims? We cannot support this.” To them I say: this is what an olive branch looks like. I am not rewarding their behavior, but rather loving them in spite of it. It is time for these two communities, which both cite genuine love as our motivation, to put aside our prejudices and put down our pitchforks to clear the path for progress.

Gay marriage: Supreme Court declines to halt same-sex marriages in Oregon

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to block gay marriages in Oregon.

In a terse, one-sentence order, the court rejected a request by the National Organization for Marriage to stay the May 19 federal court ruling allowing gays and lesbians to marry in Oregon. 

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who rules on emergency cases in the western region of Oregon, referred the issue to the full court, which then declined to get involved in the Oregon case.

"Love is the law in Oregon," said a statement from Amy Ruiz, deputy campaign manager for Oregon United for Marriage, a group supporting gay marriage. "Try as they might, the opposition cannot take that away."

The Supreme Court's action removed a potential legal cloud hanging over same-sex marriages in Oregon.

Advocates say they will drop a proposed ballot measure to allow same-sex marriage that they had once planned to take to voters in November.

"The last thing we want to do is put the community through a painful and expensive battle" in the fall election, said Jeana Frazzini, executive director of Basic Rights Oregon.

The Supreme Court action came after U.S. District Judge Michael McShane of Eugene overturned the 2004 Oregon constitutional amendment approved by voters that limited marriage to one man and one woman.

John Eastman, chairman and attorney for the National Organization for Marriage, said he thought the procedural hurdles facing his group led the Supreme Court to reject its appeal.

"You can't read that much into" the national significance of the court's decision not to get involved in the Oregon case, said Eastman, noting that court prefers not to take cases that have "a lot of procedural baggage."

Eastman argued that it is much more significant that the court issued a stay in January of a Utah ruling allow gay marriage, where questions about legal standing weren't at issue.

NOM has argued, so far without any success, that it should be able to offer a defense of Oregon's constitutional language banning same-sex marriage after  Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum has declined to do so.

Eastman said NOM will continue its efforts to persuade the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to allow the group to intervene in the case.

Rosenblum, who argued that Oregon's ban discriminated against gays and lesbian couples, issued this statement:

Today's ruling, which, notably, came from the full United States Supreme Court, allows the celebrations of marriages of same-sex couples in Oregon to continue without interruption while NOM pursues its motion to intervene at the appellate level (in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals).  I am confident that the federal district court's ruling denying NOM's "last minute" motion to intervene will be upheld, as will Judge McShane's historic decision overturning Oregon's ban on same-sex marriage on the ground that it denies same-sex couples equal protection under the United States Constitution.

Both sides agree on one thing: the issue of gay marriage will almost certainly return to the Supreme Court sometime in the next few years.  Federal judges have struck down or limited same-sex marriage bans in several states, some of which are starting to reach the appeals courts.

David Fidanque, executive director of the Oregon chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said supporters of same-sex marriage eventually want voters to amend the state Constitution to remove the language limiting marriage to one man and one woman.

He said that would preserve the rights of same-sex couples in Oregon no matter how the high court rules.  He said one possibility is to ask the Legislature to refer a measure to the ballot in 2016.

Tony Perkins Has The Oregon Sadz

"This is another lawless decision that the Supreme Court has not provided any precedent for. The Supreme Court has said nothing that would give a federal judge the right to redefine marriage. In fact, the Supreme Court has granted stays in comparable cases which this judge failed to do. The judge's disregard for the rule of law and for the voters of Oregon is breathtaking. The state's failure to defend its own constitution, and the failure of an openly homosexual judge to recuse himself, demonstrate that this decision is without basis.

"If the courts believe they are going to resolve this issue once and for all by forcing a redefinition of marriage on the American people, they are wrong. The far reaching decision inRoe v. Wade was intended to resolve the issue of abortion, which 41 years later we know conclusively it did not. The definition of marriage, like the sanctity of human life, is seen in the natural or moral law. The decisions of courts can ignore it, they can even attempt to suppress it, but they will never eradicate it." - KKK affiliated hate group leader Tony Perkins, via press release.

Campaign in Support of Oregon's Anti-gay ‘Religious Freedom’ Ballot Measure Suspended

The anti-gay Oregon Family Council along with Friends of Religious Freedom have announced they will not be moving forward with IP 52 – the proposed ballot measure that would allow businesses in the state to turn away LGBT people as an “exercise of religion.” 

The AP reports:

The Oregon Supreme Court approved the ballot language on Thursday. The campaign suspended its efforts 24 hours later, saying the ballot language as written by the office of the Oregon attorney general was unacceptable. 

The campaign sought to portray the issue as one that frees business owners from having to violate their religious beliefs by abiding by Oregon law. 

“But the certified ballot title does not acceptably state this,” Friends of Religious Freedom said in the release issued late Friday afternoon. “Indeed, it states it as intolerant instead of protecting equal rights of conscience.” 

The ballot language approved said a "Yes" vote "creates 'religious belief' exceptions to anti-discrimination laws," language the measure's supporters said unfairly prejudiced voters against them.

Mike Marshall, campaign manager for Oregon United Against Discrimination, released the following statement:

“Thanks to the incredible outpouring of early opposition to this measure—more 462 organizations and leaders, including 190 businesses and 167 faith leaders have joined the Oregon United Against Discrimination coalition—Oregonians have realized that this measure would allow businesses to discriminate against people because of who they are and whom they love. And discrimination is just wrong.” 

“We are thrilled that the Oregon Family Council has suspended their IP 52 effort, likely realizing Oregonians wouldn’t support a measure that would allow discrimination.”

Mom Convicted in Death of Son She Perceived as Gay

Oregon jurors took a little more than an hour to convict a 25-year-old woman of murder in the death of her 4-year-old son.

A prosecutor who emphasized Wednesday that the boy’s sister had witnessed the fatal beating said earlier that a motive behind the violence was the woman’s belief that the boy was gay.

Sentencing for Jessica Dutro was set for April 18 in Washington County Circuit Court. Full story here!

Prosecutor: Ore. mom killed son she perceived to be gay

An Oregon woman on trial for the murder of her 4-year-old son believed the boy was gay and that was a motive behind the deadly beatings, a prosecutor said.

Jessica Dutro’s son Zachary died in August 2012, days after collapsing at the homeless shelter where his family was living southwest of Portland.

Washington County Judge Don Letourneau ruled Wednesday, after jurors were released for the day, that a Facebook message from Dutro to her boyfriend was admissible evidence, The Oregonian newspaper reported.

In the message, Dutro told her boyfriend, Brian Canady, that Zachary was “facing the wall” because he had made her angry.

Her son was going to be gay, she wrote, using a slur. “He walks and talks like it. Ugh.”

Canady would have to “work on” Zachary, she wrote.

The message established Dutro’s motive for inflicting a pattern of abuse, prosecutor Megan Johnson said. Dutro assaulted three of her children, but Zachary received the harshest treatment, authorities said.

The judge ruled additional web searches done by Dutro were also admissible. On Aug. 16, 2012, the day her son’s life support was terminated, Dutro searched terms such as anger management and parenting classes, prosecutors said. She also searched listings for free stuff and sex with strangers, they said.

Earlier this month, Canady pleaded guilty to manslaughter and assault for his role in the homicide.

The boy died of blunt-force trauma to his abdomen and a delay in medical treatment, prosecutors said.

Dutro, 25, is charged with murder, murder by abuse and second-degree assault.

Oregon Attorney General Rules Against Backers of Anti-Gay 'Religious Freedom' Ballot Measure

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum sided against proponents of an Oregon ballot measure that would allow faith-based exemptions to non-discrimination laws, The Oregonian reports. Proponents had avoided ballot measure language that mentioned the word 'discrimination' in their 'Protect Religious Freedom Initiative'.

Rosenblum disagreed, issuing a ballot title that reads:

“Religious belief” exceptions to anti-discrimination laws for refusing services, other, for same-sex ceremonies, “arrangements”

This was the language sought by opponents of the ballot measure such as Oregon United for Marriage as it "makes clear this measure creates exemptions to non-discrimination laws." Ballot supporters such as Friends of Religious Freedom, however, object to the title, claiming that the mention of discrimination is "politically charged" and that the unfair wording will stigmatize the measure. It's very likely they'll appeal to the Oregon Supreme Court.

It is also likely that opponents, though the language is close to that which was sought, will also appeal the ballot measure title to the Supreme Court as the appeal would delay proponents from the start of collecting the 87,213 signatures needed to qualify for the ballot.

Oregon Campaign For Gay Marriage Hits Signature Goal

An Oregon petition drive to put the issue of gay marriage before voters next year has hit its goal of 116,284 signatures needed to qualify for the 2014 ballot.

The group Oregon United for Marriage announced the milestone Saturday in an email to supporters.

“It's been just four months since we started gathering signatures on the Freedom to Marry and Religious Protection Initiative,” said Ryan Brown, the group's field director. “Thanks to volunteer signature gatherers in every Oregon county, I have some amazing news to share: We have over 116,284 signatures in hand!”

Signature gathering will continue to guard against failing to qualify due to invalid or duplicate signatures.

If successful, the referendum would reverse the state's 2004 voter-approved constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples and Oregon would make history as the first state to repeal a marriage ban.

Last month, Oregon Family Council, the Christian conservative group that spearheaded the amendment campaign, announced it was working on a ballot initiative that would allow businesses and individuals to refuse participating in or supporting same-sex unions, including marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships. Since 2007, Oregon has recognized gay couples with domestic partnerships.

Teresa Harke, the group's communications director, told the Portland Tribune that the measure was needed to protect marriage equality opponents who are afraid to speak their minds.

Oregon begins petition drive for marriage equality

Oregon supporters of gay marriage on Friday began a statewide petition drive to put the issue before voters next year.

More than 1,000 volunteers will be manning booths in cities and towns throughout Oregon this weekend. Organizers hope to collect the first 10,000 valid signatures of the 116,284 needed to quality for the 2014 ballot.

If successful, the referendum would reverse the state's 2004 voter-approved constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples and Oregon would make history as the first to do so.

Oregon, which currently recognizes gay and lesbian couples with domestic partnerships, is not the only state considering repeal. Efforts are also underway in Michigan, Ohio, Arizona, Nevada and Colorado. In all instances except Nevada, citizen initiatives are being used to put the issue on the ballot.

Opponents have previously said that they will defend the amendment.

“This isn't about restricting or trying to keep other people out of it,” said Teresa Harke, spokeswoman for Protect Marriage Oregon, which opposes marriage equality. “It's about respecting what marriage is – a separate union that deserves its own name.”

EXPOSED: Oregon Bakers Who Won't Serve Gays Because of Religious Beliefs Will Serve Other 'Sinners'

 

Recently, Towleroad has written about two Oregon bakers, Sweet Cakes by Melissa, and Fleur Cakes, who have refused to serve gay couples because of their religious beliefs.

Portland's Williamette Week has now exposed their hypocrisy and blatant anti-gay bias by making undercover inquiries to the two bakeries while plainly stating other qualities that would be characterized as 'sinful' behavior in the eyes of the Bible.

Writes the paper:

"We wondered what other requests these cakemakers would decline to honor. So last week five WW reporters called these two bakeries anonymously to get price quotes for other occasions frowned upon by some Christians. Surprisingly, the people who answered the phone at each bakery were quite willing to provide baked goods for celebrations of divorces, unmarried parents, stem-cell research, non-kosher barbecues and pagan solstice parties."

WWeek adds: "We later contacted both bakeries to ask about these inconsistencies. Regentin declined to comment beyond asking whether she had been taped (she had not). Sweet Cakes owners Melissa and Aaron Klein were upset that we 'would even try to entrap a business' and contacted conservative talk-show host Lars Larson."