08:51 PM PST on Wednesday, March 3, 2004

By RUKMINI CALLIMACHI, Associated Press Writer

Christine Tanner, 56, of Portland, has waited so long she feels too old to be a first-time bride.

Lisa Chickadonz, left, and Chris Tanner, right were first in line to get their Oregon marriage license. (AP Photo)

But when Multnomah County announced it would begin handing out marriage licenses to same-sex couples Wednesday, Tanner and her partner of 19 years became Couple No. 1 in the line which first formed outside the Portland marriage bureau.

Thirteen hours later, the two received their license — albeit not first, after they let friends pass them by. It was emblazoned with the state seal and a silhouette of the covered wagon — the enduring symbol of Oregon's pioneer past.

"It's perfect, isn't it?" said the demure Tanner, in a quiet reference to her own pioneering role.

What few of the more than 300 gay couples who waited in line behind her realize is that Tanner won a landmark 1998 Oregon Court of Appeals decision — one which lay the legal groundwork for the marriage licenses suddenly being issued Wednesday.

In 1991, Tanner along with two other lesbian nurses sued Oregon Health & Science University, where all three worked, for denying their female partners the same medical benefits that the spouses of heterosexual employees received.

Seven years later, a circuit court judge — in a move which became known as the "Tanner Decision" — ruled that homosexuals are members of a protected class under the Oregon Constitution. Denying them benefits would be akin to denying an individual insurance based on their gender or race.

It led to the establishment of the domestic partnership registry at Multnomah County, where gay and lesbian couples were able to sign their names in order to have the proof to enroll in shared benefit packages.

"The Tanner Decision is one of many pieces that made this decision possible," said Multnomah County Attorney Agnes Sowle.

Oregon, unlike 38 other states, does not have laws specifically preventing gay marriage. Moreover, unlike California, Oregon's constitution does not prohibit state agencies — such as Multnomah County — from taking the law into their own hands.

Diminutive, Tanner does not boast of her past, only mentioning it to point out that it made it possible for her and her longtime partner to share an insurance policy.

Standing outside the county building the night before, Tanner said: "This isn't about the benefits. It's about the symbolism."

But at least one younger couple disagreed.

"I grew up Catholic — there were bouquets and bridesmaids and gowns and churches," said Sandra Naranjo, 31, who sat in a lawn chair all night with her partner of 10 years. "But in the end, it's not about the wedding. It's about the rights."