ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Wednesday, December 4, 1996 TAG: 9612040057
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-3 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: HONOLULU
SOURCE: Associated Press
A judge on Tuesday barred Hawaii from denying marriage licenses to gay couples in a case that already has led Congress to allow other states to refuse to recognize such unions.
The ruling is certain to be appealed.
Kirk Cashmere, an attorney for three homosexual couples who sued the state, said Circuit Judge Kevin Chang ``in a nutshell ruled that the sex-based classification in the state's marriage law is unconstitutional.''
Chang said the state failed to show any compelling state interest to deny gay and lesbian couples the right to marry, Cashmere said.
A spokeswoman for the conservative Family Research Council said the ruling defies the wishes of the majority: Polls say 70 percent of Hawaii's residents oppose same-sex marriages.
``This ruling is a slap in the face of the Hawaiian people who have made it clear that they don't want liberal judges tampering with society's foundational institutions," Kristi Stone Hamrick said.
Two gay men and two lesbian couples sued in 1991 for the right to marry, to the dismay of some national gay rights organizations that felt the move was premature and would provoke a backlash.
It certainly prompted furious debate. In the state Legislature, lawmakers failed to agree this year on either a proposed constitutional amendment to ban them, or domestic partnership legislation giving gay and lesbian couples many of the legal and financial benefits of married couples.
Congress, meanwhile, approved a law President Clinton signed in September, saying the federal government will not recognize gay marriages and allowing states to refuse to recognize such marriages licensed in other states.
An appeal of Chang's ruling would send the case back to the Hawaii Supreme Court, which ruled in 1993 that denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples amounted to gender discrimination under the state constitution's Equal Rights Amendment.
The state Supreme Court sent the case back to a lower court to give the state a chance to show a compelling public interest in allowing such discrimination.
In a two-week trial in September, Deputy State Attorney General Rick Eichor argued that Hawaii's marriage law is intended to promote the best environment for procreation and the rearing of children.
He said children thrive best when raised by biological parents, and contended that legalizing same-sex marriages would open the door to demands that bigamy, polygamy and consensual incestuous relationships be licensed as well.
Both sides presented testimony from a parade of expert witnesses on family and child development, who gave conflicting opinions on whether gay couples could provide an equally nurturing environment.
Hamrick said the evidence was ``very clear that the union of a man and a woman in marriage has been a uniquely beneficial team that has civilized nations and made a positive difference in world history.''
Eichor was not immediately available for comment Tuesday. Both sides had said they would appeal if Chang ruled against them.
If the Hawaii ruling is upheld, gay activists would try to build upon the success and sue to overturn the federal Defense of Marriage Act, said David Smith, spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, a gay-rights group based in Washington, D.C.
``This is a tremendous victory, but the battle's not over,'' Smith said. ``A major bridge has been crossed, but the battle will continue.''
LENGTH: Medium: 69 linesby CNB