By NATASHA COLLINS
The Domestic Partnership Registry ordinance was approved unanimously by the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors Aug. 13, but the controversy and discussion have not ended.
The ordinance will expand the rights of long-term unmarried couples in the county. These rights include giving partners the ability to make lifesaving decisions in critical care situations, allowing them hospital visitations that are limited to family members and providing them with legal protection of community property.
Domestic partners is defined in the ordinance as "two adults who have chosen to share one another's lives in an intimate and committed relationship of mutual caring, who live together and who have agreed to be jointly responsible for basic living expenses incurred during the relationship."
But a group of 52 evangelical pastors, including some from Sunnyvale, oppose what they described in a press release as "the plan to register homosexual partners by the Santa Clara Board of Supervisors." Pastors were also concerned that such an ordinance would provide an alternative to marriage.
Decline to Sign, a citizens group that supports the Domestic Partners Registry, emphasizes that the ordinance is not geared toward one group but numerous groups, including homosexual couples, the disabled and senior citizens.
Many organizations--including Apple Computer, Silicon Graphics, Stanford University and the county of Santa Clara--enable employees to claim an unrelated person as a domestic partner, allowing that partner to receive health and other benefits.
"We didn't see this ordinance as being any different from what many companies are already offering their employees," Supervisor Dianne McKenna said. "It is simply a civil agreement between two people to care for one another, nothing else."
One of the largest protests to the ordinance has come from pastors in evangelical churches, including Pastor Rich Marshall of the Springs of Life Fellowship in Sunnyvale, Pastor Rick Floyd of the First Baptist Church of Sunnyvale, John E. Worley III of the Valley Church of Cupertino, and Pastor Albert J. Baker of the First Baptist Church of Cupertino.
"I am taking a moral and ethical stand," Baker said. "I am in favor of wholesome, moral role models. Our society is morally decaying, and we need to take a stand somewhere. This is just a stepping stone to future legislation which will be damaging to all society."
Another concern raised by pastors was the ability of gay and lesbian couples to register as domestic partners. There were also concerns over the ordinance being used as a substitute for marriage.
"I have a high view of the Bible, and the Bible speaks against what [the ordinance would permit]," Baker said. "I am in favor of marriage over living together. I believe this [ordinance] will be used as a substitute to marriage."
Supervisor McKenna argued that there is no wording in the ordinance that says the registry is only for gay and lesbian couples. It is also not the same thing as a same-sex marriage, McKenna said.
"It doesn't say the couples have to be from the same sex. They can be heterosexual couples," McKenna said. "It simply lets two people be responsible for one another. There are no other benefits. It is not a same-sex marriage agreement."
A referendum has been written by the Santa Clara County Taxpayer's Association, and supported by local pastors, to repeal the ordinance. On Aug. 27, according to a press release, the Internal Revenue Service gave permission to churches to campaign against the ordinance without losing their special tax exemption.
The referendum suggests the ordinance will increase tax burdens and have far-reaching implications because other jurisdictions will be tempted to pass similar legislation.
According to a report written by Pat Shrum, executive director of the taxpayers' association, government should not pressure employers to provide benefits for domestic partners. The report also states that fraud is easily committed by employees reporting long-term friends as domestic partners.
Decline to Sign disagrees.
"Large companies would not currently be offering benefits to domestic partners if it was not cost-effective," said Marty Schulter, a representative of Decline to Sign. "Higher insurance costs are a smoke screen those against the ordinance are using to convince people to be against it."
"It is entirely a business decision whom to offer benefits to," McKenna added. "[The county] has not crossed the line and said to business they must do this."
Many senior citizens in the area voiced their support for the ordinance at the Aug. 13 supervisors' meeting, because many would like to live with and care for another senior but do not wish to get married. Many fear that if they get married, they will lose many of their pension and Medicare benefits, McKenna said.
"Seniors and the disabled simply cannot afford to get married," said Schulter, who is himself disabled.
Pastor Baker believes the issues of Social Security benefits, medical benefits and seniors were only brought up to gain support.
"Seniors and the Social Security issue were only brought up to add validity," he said. "We know what the real issues are."
This article appeared in the Sunnyvale Sun, September 4, 1996.
©1996 Metro Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved.