Debate Club is back tomorrow night, moderated by yours truly. What in the world could I possibly know enough about to grill people on? Why, domestic partnerships and marriage.

From the Bus Project’s stellar write-up:

Join the Bus Project and the Portland Mercury back at rontom’s this Wednesday for your favorite monthly hot topic debate.

Co-hosted with BRO and the Portland Mercury, we bring you an evening of perplexing progressive policy proposals:

Domestic Partnerships in Oregon—Is marriage next? Should it be?

We’ll be hearing from a few perspectives on what happens now that Measure 36, a Constitutional Amendment that defined marriage as “between one man and one woman” is finally BEHIND us! Now that the Oregon Family Fairness Act has created domestic partnerships for same-sex couples, what’s next for Oregon? What does marriage equity look like and how should the government be involved?

Come join in the discussion and hear what people are saying about domestic partnerships and marriage in Oregon.

Indeed, we haven’t invited the “marriage is one man and one woman” crew—they failed to refer domestic partnerships to the ballot, and they’ve yet to launch a repeal effort (the clock is ticking, folks…).

Instead, we’re focusing on the progressive reality, and the choices that face us. Aubrey Harrison, Basic Rights Oregon’s Metro Field Organizer, will be on hand to talk about what comes next in the quest for marriage equality. We’ll also have Cecil Prescod of Love Makes a Family, who has a much different perspective—a concept called “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage.” Prescod’s colleague at Love Makes a Family, Bonnie Tinker, has written about the idea for the Portland Alliance. It boils down to the idea of expanding the definition of family beyond romantically involved couples.

This strategy seeks access to a flexible set of economic benefits and options regardless of sexual orientation, race, gender/gender identity, class or citizenship status.

Practically speaking, this lets the elephant out of the family room: there are many families in our society that are effectively excluded from the protections and benefits offered through legal marriage. It is time to open up the dialog and ask some basic questions about family life and survival: Why shouldn’t the legal rights of marriage be granted to any two adults, regardless of sex or sexual intention? Sex and procreation are no longer required for a legal marriage. Many people live long and happy lives without ever living with a sexual partner or having children; many others spend a significant part of their life when their chosen family does not include a sexual partner. Why don’t these families count?

Why don’t our laws deal with the new ways families are forming and reforming? Most couplings and marriages are not lifelong; how do our laws deal with emerging family structures?

Why should de facto parents have to present themselves as sexually involved opposite sex couples to gain “legitimacy” for their children? Many children are raised by grandparents, relatives, step parents, and many are unrelated genetically or through marriage to the parents who raise them.

What happens to families who are effectively cut out of access to legal marriage and, therefore, to health benefits? The Salt Lake City council recently enacted an ordinance allowing employees to identify an “adult designee” who would be entitled to health insurance benefits in conjunction with the benefits provided to the employee.

When safety nets such as social security are under attack, what is the sense of simply adding one more group, same-sex couples who can afford marriage, to share the shrinking pot? We need to address the real issue of providing for the financial needs of all elders and disabled people.

Harrison and Prescod are both smart on these issues. I can’t wait to see them engage tomorrow night! 7 pm, rontoms, 6th and E Burnside.