'Incredibly Ironic': Equality NC Responds To NC Values Coalition's Cries Of Victimization

This weekend, the anti-LGBT organization known as the NC Values Coalition sent a strange email alerting their donors to Equality NC's latest campaign video.

NCVC's email claims that NC Equality's video, "Payback Challenge," which features footage of an Amendment One supporter shooting holes in an anti-Amendment One yard sign, was a "thinly-veiled threat against supporters of traditional marriage and can have no other purpose than to incite hatred." (See the full email here.)

The email was clearly a classic example out of the Religious Right playbook: the victimizer playing the victim.

I reached out to NC Equality's Stuart Campbell to get his take on the claims.

"We find it incredibly ironic that the NC Values Coalition would condemn Equality NC for recounting the shooting of one of our supporter's signs when they were deafeningly silent during the Amendment One campaign with their condemnation when the actual shooting occurred," stated Campbell.

"This latest attack comes from the same organization that partnered with the anti-LGBT National Organization for Marriage and various SPLC-identified hate groups to support writing discrimination into our state's constitution--an organization that would now, speaking out of the other side of their mouth, attempt to deflect its own hate-filled agenda by calling us "out of line."

Their twisting of the truth demonstrates that the NC Values Coalition will stoop to any level to promote their own agenda of discrimination and division, and that it has never been more important to unite our supporters in our fight for equality."

To learn more about Equality NC and to help them in their fight for equality, visit their website here.

The Bizarro World Of The NC Values Coalition

The NC Values Coalition sent out a fundraising email yesterday that is jaw-droppingly insane.

Let me walk you through it. Here goes:

This week we are reminded that our fight for traditional marriage did not end on May 8th.

EqualityNC has released a very disturbing video targeting our own Tami Fitzgerald and pro-marriage legislators under their "Payback Challenge" campaign. [emphasis theirs]

Let's stop for a second before we get to the crazy part.

Just so we're all clear, Equality NC's "Payback Challenge" is, in their own words, a fundraising drive "dedicated to making strategic investments in key legislative and state races in North Carolina’s primary and general elections." Disturbing stuff, right?

The "Payback Challenge" video's goal is pretty simple. First, it is intended to remind LGBT North Carolinians and equality-supporting allies that Amendment One was very much "personal," and very much "payback," despite the insistence from Tami Fitzgerald and Vote For Marriage NC that it wasn't.  Secondly, the video is to urge LGBT North Carolinians and pro-equality allies to donate to Equality NC who are working to help elect pro-equality candidates in the 2012 election. Horrible, right?

Here's the video, before we move on with NCVC's facepalm-inducing logic.


Pretty effective, right? Sometimes, organizations like the NCVC do all the work for you. All you need is to hold a mirror up to them, and you have yourself all the ammunition you need (no pun intended, seriously).

Okay, back to the hilarious NCVC email:

The video - which can be found here - overlays gunshots and video of a man shooting at an anti-amendment sign with video of NC Values Coalition Executive Director Tami Fitzgerald praising the passage of the marriage amendment on election night.

The video is a thinly-veiled threat against supporters of traditional marriage and can have no other purpose than to incite hatred. [emphasis theirs]

Their purpose is clear and it is distasteful in light of the shooting incident that occurred just a few weeks ago when a volunteer at a Washington DC homosexual rights group walked into the lobby of the Family Research Council and started shooting. This video is innapropriate, and EqualityNC has crossed the line. [emphasis, again, theirs]

We do not expect EqualityNC to agree with us. But we do expect them to communicate responsibly and civilly. We condemn this video and hope that Americans from all walks of life will join us.

Friends, we at the NC Values Coalition will consistently and constantly defend traditional marriage. In spite of their threats.

Please stand with us against their attacks and join us in condemning this disturbing video.

Jessica Wood
Communications Director, NC Values Coalition

Wait, what?

Okay, so let me make sure I understand. The video, which shows an ALLY OF NC VALUES COALITION SHOOTING A RIFLE AT A PRO-EQUALITY SIGN, is a VIOLENT THREAT AGAINST PEOPLE WHO ARE ANTI-GAY. Huh?

(Also, "In spite of their threats" is not a sentence, but let's not quibble over grammar.)

Also, these are very likely the same folks who thought it was silly and overreaching that people got upset when Sarah Palin released a map with crosshairs targeting legislators who voted for Obama's health care bill.

But I digress.

So, back to the email. "Equality NC's purpose is quite clear"? Um, you mean, that they're showing people how hateful and violent your fellow anti-LGBT, "pro-marriage" supporters were in the weeks leading up to the Amendment One vote?

And while nobody on the pro-equality side is condoning the lone act of violence against hate group The Family Research Council, there is nothing -- nothing -- in the video that even remotely suggests that compassionate pro-equality North Carolinians go out, purchase an arsenal, and shoot anti-gay activists and hate group members.

This is what you do, people, when you have nothing but your own religious bigotry. You make stuff up. You project your own hatred, and the hatred of those who share your beliefs, onto your opponents -- opponents who want nothing more than to allow all of their fellow North Carolinians to be treated equally and to not be discriminated against because of their natural traits.

NC Pro-Amendment One Group: 'Stop Bullying' Chick-fil-A!

The North Carolina Values Coalition is the new moniker of the anti-LGBT organization Vote For Marriage NC. If you were signed up to receive their 'pro-family' emails leading up to the May 8 vote, you now are receiving emails like the below, signed by Tami Fitzgerald. Same crap, different name.

In the bizarro-world of the NC Values Coalition, the bullies are not those who aggressively discriminate against others because of their sexual orientation. The real bullies, according to this group, are the those who stand up for kids who are made to feel that they are not wanted, who are told that they are "twisted,""audacious,"and unwelcome.

Here is the latest email from the NC Values Coalition, asking that Bible-loving, anti-LGBT individuals support the August 1 Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day by opening their pocketbooks up to the company that funnels millions into anti-LGBT hate groups.

(Note: a protest against the Appreciation Day has been scheduled for the same day -- a National Same-Sex Kiss Day At Chick-Fil-A.)

That Old Refrain: 'Marriage Is Between A Man And A Woman As Designed By God'

Since Amendment One's passing in North Carolina, I have seen dozens of letters which support my assertion that this vote was all about religion.

A letter in today's News & Observer states:

The passing of Amendment One was a protection of marriage, which God created. Many people are upset with Christians wanting this protection. Marriage is and always was between a man and a woman. Christians get their direction and information from the Holy Bible. God did not leave his creation without direction. When people try to take matters into their own hands (or definitions ) they get themselves into problems. Many want to do just what they want to do. They will not listen to instruction.

Variations of this letter have appeared in countless newspapers across the country to support anti-LGBT sentiment.

These folks can repeat this refrain over and over -- and they certainly have the right to say (and believe) it -- but the fact of the matter is that this refrain is historically wrong, and a terrible basis for legislation.

How is it wrong?

Well, let's break it down:

'Marriage is and always was between a man and a woman'
Sorry, folks, but you are not allowed to start the timeline at the point in history that helps make your case. If you ate a dozen donuts, you can't say you only ate 4 just because you didn't like how the first 6 tasted.

Marriage has absolutely not always been between a man and a woman. Over the course of human history, marriage has been defined as between a man and several women, a man and an adolescent boy (Greece), a man and a man, a woman and a woman, every woman in the community and every man in the community (Oneida Colony, New York, 1848), etc., etc.

The point? Marriage has evolved over time, and will continue to evolve until mankind is extinct. When you say that marriage has always been between a man and a woman, you are, quite simply, lying.

'God created marriage'
Did God create marriage? First of all, which god are you referring to? Aa? Anubis? Bahloo? Ceros? Cronos? Fu Xi? Horus? Kōjin? Mamaragan? Mars? Odin? Ra? Saturn? Sōjōbō? Thoth? Vesta? Wen Zhong? Yama? Zaraqu? Zonget? (I could list hundreds more, but you get the idea.)

Your god no more created marriage than any of these gods created marriage. In fact, we know for a fact that marriage existed prior to the emergence of monotheism. How is it that thousands of years of marriage existed before the emergence of the god that created it?

Humans evolved. Religion evolved. Marriage evolved. Humans will continue to evolve. Religion will continue to evolve. Marriage will continue to evolve. It's pretty simple.

When people such as the above letter writer start explaining that the 'Christian Bible' explains this or that about marriage, it might behoove those people to realize that one of our most important rights as Americans is that we can practice whatever religion we choose (and that includes the right to not practice one at all). I should no more expect your rights to be defined by my religious beliefs than you should expect my rights to be defined by yours.  Freedom of religion does not mean that you are free to restrict the rights of others who do not accept the claims of your religion.

It doesn't matter what the majority of Christians believe. What matters is that each American should not have his or her rights defined by a particular set of religious beliefs.

The refrain is getting old. Please feel free to start framing your argument in secular legislative terms moving forward. (Good luck with that.)

How One Dad Is Moving Forward, After Amendment One

The below guest post was written by Matt Shipman, a science writer and father of three who lives in Raleigh. This is his third contribution to def shepherd. You can follow Matt on Twitter at @ShipLives or connect with him here on Google+.  

I wrote, some time ago, about how becoming a father made me a much stronger advocate for gay rights. As a dad, I spend time with my children every day. I see them running around with their friends. Odds are good that some of these kids I see on the playground will grow up to become gay teens and adults. And I have become increasingly horrified that someday someone would want to hurt any of these youngsters because of their sexual orientation.

That paternal, protective instinct makes me reject anything indicating that someone who is gay is somehow less important than someone who is straight. That extends, of course, to “Amendment One,” which passed overwhelmingly in North Carolina on May 8.

The passage of Amendment One has made a lot of people angry. It’s also made a lot of people, including me, incredibly sad. It will be some time before we can fully determine its impact, and there are many outstanding questions regarding what this will mean not only for same-sex families, but for domestic violence protections and unmarried heterosexual couples. No one – and I mean no one – can have any real idea of how these issues will play out.

There is also a great deal of discussion right now about the potential for legal action against Amendment One. I’m not an attorney, so I won’t prognosticate about that either.

All of this uncertainty can leave one feeling powerless. What can I do? If you’re a parent, there is a great deal you can do.

Make sure your children know that you will love them, no matter what. Teach them, by example, how to treat people with compassion and respect regardless of their sexual orientation. And, for those who can’t remember, going through puberty was excruciating. I can’t imagine what it is like to go through that while also fearing rejection from peers or one’s own family because of who you’re sexually attracted to. The least we can do for our children is let them know that they will always have our love and support. Home should always feel safe.

So that’s what I’ll be working on. Loving my kids. Showing them what it means to treat people with respect. Raising them, I hope, to be strong and honest and kind.

Amendment One has me feeling pretty blue right now. But if we, as parents, get this right, I have high hopes for the future.

Despite Amendment One's Passing, NC Is A Better State Today

Amendment One has passed.

The easy thing to do is to get angry. To take it out on those who voted to enshrine discrimination into our state constitution.

The natural thing to do is to lash out. And with something as important as civil rights, I believe that is a completely valid response. When the citizens of our own state tell us we are less than human, it cuts deep.

I'm not gay. I can't express how it must feel to have the majority decide whether or not I should have the rights they are afforded. I am hyper-empathetic, however, so I like to think I have some idea of how devastating that might be.

There are people who are near and dear to me who will wake up tomorrow morning to a less welcoming North Carolina. They will wake up in a state that not only actively discriminates against them, but has also written discrimination into their mission statement.

There will be children, seniors, women, and heterosexual couples who will be harmed in the coming months and years because people are afraid of change.

As the inevitability of the passing of Amendment One sunk in, I began to feel resentful, angry, sad, embarrassed, and incredibly disappointed. I am sure millions of North Carolinians feel the same. But as the pro-amendment camp celebrates their victory in downtown Raleigh, it's important to remember that, while we suffered a devastating loss, what we accomplished over the past several months should make us all very proud.

The majority of North Carolinians were on the wrong side of history on May 8, 2012. Despite this fact, I have no doubt that North Carolina received an education over the past several months. Many North Carolinians were challenged, many for the very first time, to re-evaluate their views on homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Many who once believed homosexuality was a 'sin' and a 'poor lifestyle choice' now understand that we do not choose our sexual orientation. We also opened a lot of eyes to the cynical nature of politics (not so sure that was a secret), and encouraged them to really think about the potential unintended consequences of their vote. We rediscovered the power of music, art, and the written word to enact change (even if that change is much more gradual than we feel is acceptable).

Most importantly, we reminded people that every voice counts, and that everyone has a unique way to contribute to the cause of social justice. In all my years in North Carolina, I have never seen such an outpouring of creativity, passion, and determination. Despite our defeat at the polls, each of these efforts impacted many lives, changed many minds, and opened many hearts.

No amount of back-patting can make up for the fact that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters have been wronged. I have no words that will lessen the blow. It is a devastating blow that will reverberate for many years to come. This amendment will undoubtedly join the interracial marriage ban amendment of 1875 as one of the ugliest moments in North Carolina history. We will surely lose many of our wonderful friends and fellow citizens to other, more welcoming states, and I can't say I blame them.

What we can say, however, is that we put up one hell of a fight. While just we took a giant step backwards from a legislative perspective, we are actually a better state because of our fight. As odd as it may be to state, North Carolina is a more welcoming, more tolerant state today as a result of our hard work. There are more allies now than there were in September (or that there have ever been in our state's history). There are more people willing to stand up for injustice now than there were in September. There are more churches willing to reach out to (and stand up for) the LGBT population. There are more people willing to risk their community standing, their relationships, or even their employment status, by vocally protesting against religion-based bigotry.

Most importantly, there is an entire generation of young people -- kids, teens, and college students -- who witnessed this injustice firsthand. There is an entire generation of young people, like my own, who cannot believe that gays and lesbians would be denied rights enjoyed by the rest of the population. To them it is as unconscionable as denying marriage rights to interracial couples, or denying women the right to vote.

These young people are the voters, lawmakers, clergy, community leaders, business leaders, and elected officials of tomorrow. While we are devastated by Amendment One's passing, we do know that North Carolina's future is in their hands.

While we can be certain this younger generation will clean up our generation's mess, our part in this fight is not over. We will wake up tomorrow with a heightened sense of purpose and the resolve to pick up the pieces and continue in our fight to make this a better North Carolina for all families.

We shouldn't have to wait, but one thing is very clear. As MLK said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

Amendment One: 11th Hour Thoughts On Faith, Homosexuality & Choice

These words were originally posted in an online neighborhood forum about Amendment One to address a neighbor who believes homosexuality is a sin and that he could not cast a vote that condoned it, regardless of any unintended consequences of the legislation.



As both sides of the Amendment One debate wrap up their closing arguments, it has become clear that the vote comes down to religion. Mostly, it comes down to religion and the debate over the nature of sexual orientation.

I have been chastised in past posts for my adamant stance that homosexuality is not a choice. Some in the LGBT camp have criticized me (and rightfully so) for making this assertion, since people should be free to choose to be gay if they so wish. I agree wholeheartedly -- it shouldn't be anyone's concern if two consenting adults choose to be intimate with one another. But civil rights causes are a marathon and not a sprint, unfortunately. And the linchpin of the gay marriage debate is indeed the belief held by many religious people that homosexuals have made a conscious choice to live a lifestyle of sin and abomination.

We do not choose our sexual orientations. Our sexual orientations are determined by genetic, hormonal, and environmental factors. The following organizations have issued statements concluding that we do not choose our sexual orientation: American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, National Association of Social Workers, Royal College of Psychiatrists, and American Academy of Pediatrics.

Sexual orientations are not binary. Bisexuality is an actual thing, and not just a phase in college.

Gender is also not binary. If you believe it is, please explain your beliefs to an acquaintance of mine who was born with ambiguous genitalia. Doctors and parents made a choice that she would be a girl. Guess what happened? She grew to only be interested in girls. Whoops. Gender dysphoria is a real thing.

At the time of the Bible, people did indeed believe that gender and sexual orientation were binary, just as they thought epilepsy was demonic possession, and just as they thought the earth was flat and at the center of the universe.

When we gained enough understanding, we realized that the sun was not a god, but rather a hot rock. Then we learned enough to understand that it wasn't a rock at all, but a fiery hot ball of plasma interwoven with magnetic fields.

Please read this article in The Atlantic exploring the nature of gender, and tell me that you believe that the boy in the article made a decision to be the way he is. No amount of church, or whippings, or therapy is going to alter what this boy is in his heart, and nobody should try to change that. To deny him the right to grow up to experience marriage and family is cruel and unusual punishment.

Brandon Simms, age 5

I realize that by pointing to examples of gender dysphoria I am not directly addressing the issue of gay marriage. It's not so different, however. My point is that we are who we are. The fact is that we are not all born as males who will grow up to be attracted to females, or females who will grow up to be attracted to males. Some of us will be born gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender. We are attracted to who we are attracted to. We can't turn that off and pretend. We all can't simply go along with society and ignore who we are at our very core. To do so is to live a lie. To force others to do so is to punish them for their natural born traits.

The Bible, while a great source of morality for many, cannot be looked upon for every bit of moral guidance. We must adjust our morality to consider our modern understandings about biology and the cosmos. If we don't, we will simply continue to live by Bronze Age morals -- and we know what that has done to Afghanistan, where they still practice many of the same laws that we find in the Old Testament. We Americans abhor their enforcement of holy law. We would do well to abhor it in our own country, too.

Good luck with your vote. I just hope that when you cast your vote you will feel comfortable knowing that a FOR vote will be engraved in stone. You may come to change your mind about sexual orientation. Changing a constitutional amendment, however, is not easily done.

If there is any doubt in your heart -- if you feel anything in your heart for those people like my acquaintance or the boy in the above linked Atlantic article, you should understand that by voting FOR, you are harming those people. (You are also harming heterosexual couples, children, seniors, and women -- but we've been through that already.)

If your Bible tells you to harm them anyway, then I am afraid your morality is flawed.

My morality requires that I never do harm to another human being, and that I respect the rights of minorities, and that I don't force others to live by my beliefs.  Is not one of our central roles as human beings to reduce suffering? How can we reconcile this with the denial of rights to our fellow humans based on their natural traits?

Legalizing gay marriage or domestic partnerships does not force someone else's beliefs on you (Remember, they will still be illegal if you vote AGAINST). This is what so many fail to understand. Legalizing domestic partnerships/civil unions/marriage doesn't alter YOUR rights to form a union that aligns with your belief system. Your YES vote tomorrow, however, will definitely alter others' rights. That is unfortunate, and completely at odds with everything that has made America a beacon of freedom.

I fear I will wake up on Wednesday extremely disappointed in my state. But I feel confident that before I die, I will see NC begin to accept all people for who they are, and afford them the same rights, no matter what their natural traits. It is a shame that North Carolina will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

I thought we were beyond this, but I guess we will have another generation of this way of thinking, until we look back and are embarrassed by this legislation the way we are embarrassed by the inter-racial marriage ban amendment of 1875.

The Top 10 Secular Legislative Reasons to Vote For Amendment One

In Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971), The Supreme Court's decision stated that the government's action must have a secular legislative purpose.

As voters in NC will be deciding the fate of Amendment One, let's take a look at the ten most compelling secular legislative reasons to vote in favor of the amendment:


1.




2.




3.




4.




5.




6.




7.




8.




9.




10.



Please keep these reasons in mind as you cast your ballot on May 8 to determine whether or not North Carolina will forever restrict the rights of its citizen based on natural traits.

"Bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possesses their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression." - Thomas Jefferson

Voices Against Amendment One Pt. 3

Here's the third installment of 'Voices Against Amendment One' from All Aces Media featuring a collection of voices urging North Carolinians to vote against Amendment One.

The video features a broad spectrum of NC citizens, as well as many influential and well-known artists and musicians with ties to North Carolina, including Danny McBride (Eastbound & Down), Craig Robinson (The Office), Gibby Haynes (Butthole Surfers), Mike Dean (Corrosion of Conformity), Tift Merritt, yours truly, and others.

Don't forget to vote on May 8 (or vote early if you can). Make sure your voice is heard.

NC Kid-Run Newspaper Pens Editorial Against Amendment One

The children of Greensboro, NC's Lindley Park community have been writing, printing, and distributing their own xerographic newspaper, The Lindley Park Gazette for a few years now. The neighborhood paper is funded by $5 ads bought by neighborhood businesses, and is distributed to over 300 homes and businesses.

The paper isn't just kid's stuff. There's serious stuff in this rag. Lucy Newsom and her staff cover real issues affecting the area, including Amendment One.

A few months ago, I posted a pro-equality editorial by Max Gearhart which ran in the Gazette. Now, with the May 8 vote fast approaching, the paper has published an editorial urging their readers (or perhaps their parents) to vote against the amendment.

This editorial is a collective stance taken by the entire staff of kids who publish the paper. The editorial was published in the May 2 edition of the paper.


Lindley Park Gazette Editorial Against Amendment One
We've spent months making signs, marching, researching and reporting. We have made videos. We write about this in our paper.

The one thing we can not do is vote.

Please vote (for us) against Amendment One.

The North Carolina Same-Sex Marriage Amendment will appear on the May 8, 2012 ballot in the state of North Carolina.

It says: Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.

Our parents have the opportunity to vote on this. We hope they will vote AGAINST it. And here is why:

Sometimes, as kids, we feel like we are in the minority. Just because we are young. We literally cannot vote. Sometimes we get bullied because we are small. It is not fair for the big guys to beat up on the little guys. It is scary on the playground but it is terrifying when the people who are supposed to protect you are part of the bullying.

Amendment One would write bullying into the NC state constitution.

What if the dominant religion in North Carolina said that all women have to wear burquas or that children can be sold into slavery or told who they have to marry? What if you thought - and of course you would – Hey, that is not cool! Women have rights! Kids need to be protected! But this religion was so popular that it had power to take away rights from those less powerful. To make their beliefs into the LAW. It would feel terrible if you were bullied by your state. That is what this amendment feels like to us. Bullying.

The sad fact is that bullying happens. It happens on the playground and in governments all over the world. We can’t let it happen here in North Carolina.

We understand that most of the religious leaders in North Carolina are speaking out against this as unfair. We know that religion is not the enemy. Most religious leaders see that it is bullying. But there are some leaders in religion and politics and even in the media who have misused their power to BE bullies. To try to write bullying into the CONSTITUTION. To make discrimination part of a document that is supposed to protect ALL of us.

We believe that gay marriage is fine. It is cool with us. But more than that, no matter how you feel about gay people, bullying is never OK. Never. We pledge to stand up for the people who are getting bullied, no matter who they are. We will not let the bullies win on the playground or in our government.

Please VOTE (for us) AGAINST AMENDMENT ONE. 

Voices Against Amendment One, Pt. 2

Here is the second video from All Aces Media featuring a collection of voices urging North Carolinians to vote against Amendment One.

The video features a broad spectrum of NC citizens, as well as many influential and well-known artists and musicians with ties to North Carolina, including Jeff Tweedy (Wilco), Bob Mould (Husker Du), Ian MacKaye (Fugazi, Minor Threat), Laura Ballance (Superchunk, Merge Records), and others.

Don't forget to vote on May 8 (or vote early if you can). Make sure your voice is heard.

Wife Of NC Senator: Amendment One Is Necessary ‘To Protect The Caucasian Race’

Sen. Brunstetter, Caucasian

The Amendment One debate has certainly had its share of crazy, but a story reported by Pam's House Blend really takes the cake.

Chad Nance, a freelance journalist covering the NC election, recorded the wife of NC Sen. Peter Brunstetter saying some ridiculously offensive stuff about Amendment One.

Nance said he recorded a conversation with the woman, whose name is Jodie Brunstetter, on video, and that she confirmed that she used the term “Caucasian” in a discussion about the marriage amendment, but insisted that otherwise her comments had been taken out of context by other poll workers.

…Nance paraphrased the remarks, as told to him by those who were present: “During the conversation, Ms. Brunstetter said her husband was the architect of Amendment 1, and one of the reasons he wrote it was to protect the Caucasian race. She said Caucasians or whites created this country. We wrote the Constitution. This is about protecting the Constitution. There already is a law on the books against same-sex marriage, but this protects the Constitution from activist judges.”

Nance said he recruited a friend, who works for the Coalition to Protect All North Carolina Families, to witness his interview with Jodie Brunstetter. He said Brunstetter reluctantly acknowledged that she had used the term “Caucasian” and then repeated the statement previously attributed to her, but substituted the pronoun “we” for “Caucasian. Nance said Brunstetter insisted there was nothing racial about her remarks, but could not explain why she used the term “Caucasian.”

Holy shitballs, people. This is what we're up against in NC.

When you visit the polls on May 8, I hope you realize that voting for Amendment One is to align yourself with this garbage.

Voices Against Amendment One, Pt. 1

This is a wonderful collection of voices urging North Carolinians to vote against Amendment One.

The video features a broad spectrum of NC citizens, as well as many influential and well-known artists, musicians, and comedians with ties to North Carolina.

Part 2 of this series will be available tomorrow.

Don't forget to vote on May 8 (or vote early if you can). Make sure your voice is heard.

Looking Beyond Amendment One to Amendment Two

I have asked countless people to provide a secular legislative purpose for Amendment One. I have broadcast this question to thousands of people, via Facebook and Twitter. I have posed this question directly to people I know are planning to vote in favor of Amendment One.

Amendment 2?

Crickets.

I have yet to hear one legitimate secular legislative purpose for the amendment. I have also posed a similar question asking non-believers to come forward with reasons why they are voting for Amendment One.

Again, crickets.

I am aware that there may be some voters out there who claim to have a secular purpose for voting for the amendment. I am also sure there may be some non-believers who are doing the same. I do, however, believe that these instances represent a tiny sliver of the population voting in favor of the amendment.

What does this say?

I believe there are only a few conclusions that can be drawn: 1) Voters are ignorant to the effects the amendment will have on heterosexual couples, children, and seniors, 2) Voters are ignorant to the overwhelming scientific evidence that sexual orientation is no more a choice than right- and left-handedness or skin color, 3) Voters will go to great lengths to legitimize their own bigotry.

The common denominator here is religion-based bigotry.

One thing people need to understand is that we do not add constitutional amendments that a) deny rights to a group of citizens based on natural traits, or b) have no secular basis.

It does seem apparent, however, that a large swath of the NC religious population are determined to ensure that we do just this. As North Carolinians, this should be deeply disturbing.

What will Amendment Two bring?

Should the population become overwhelmingly Muslim (as it is in Dearborn, MI), can we expect an amendment to be based strictly on Sharia Law?

Should we add an amendment stating that anyone who does not worship God be killed? (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)

If a city worships a different god (or no god), will an amendment require the destruction of the city and the execution of all of it's inhabitants... even the animals? (Deuteronomy 13:12-15)

Will an amendment require that we kill our own family members who choose a different religion? (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)

If a man has sex with an animal, should we kill both the man and the animal? (Leviticus 20:15-16)

If a man has sex with a woman while she is menstruating, should we cast him out from society? (Leviticus 20:18)

If the preacher's daughter sleeps around, should an amendment require that we burn her at the stake? (Leviticus 21:9)

Will an amendment require that psychics and horoscope writers be put to death? (Leviticus 20:27)

If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, will an amendment be in place to ensure that both the man and the woman are executed? (Leviticus 20:10)

Will an amendment outlaw Super-Cuts, and shaving? (Leviticus 19:27)

When men fight with one another, and the wife of one draws near to rescue her husband from the man who is beating him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the private parts, will an amendment require that we cut off her hand? (Deuteronomy 25:11-12)

You might tell me that none of these old laws are valid because they were for a different people at a different time. I will see your old crazy law argument and raise you a few equally as old, and much more vague Bible passages which you claim denounce homosexuality.

You might not want these laws to become amendments because you have broken some of them, and when you broke them nobody got hurt.  The same can be said for homosexuality. Gay marriage hurts no one. Amendment One does.

You are entirely free to cherry pick scripture to validate your own prejudices against taxpaying citizens who simply wish to live their lives in a loving relationship with a consenting adult. You are free to dislike someone based on their natural traits. You are free to be freaked out by homosexuality (That's your problem.) You are free to believe that it is a sin, or that your holy book requires you to believe that it is an abomination.

What is wrong, however, is forcing your personal beliefs into a constitution whose purpose is to protect its citizens, even those of us who do not share your particular religious beliefs.

Be careful what you wish for. It's a slippery slope.

Amendment One Supporters: I Have Nothing Against Homosexuals, Except That I Do

Christian Conservatives have a most disingenuous mantra when it comes to the topic of marriage equality.

Take the following passage from a News & Observer article about NC's Amendment One:

Gaffney said she was not against homosexuals and has gay and lesbian friends. But she does not want them to have the right to marry.

“If America doesn’t get back to God, we are going to definitely be lost,” she said.

While those who use the 'I'm not against homosexuals -- I have lots of gay friends" line tend to believe they are doing the Christian thing by fighting marriage equality, what everyone else hears is this:

"I am not against homosexuals, it's just that they're wicked, sinful, and hell-bound, and I believe their rights should be restricted."

Sorry, folks, but you're either with homosexuals or you're against them. You either accept the overwhelming scientific evidence which shows us that sexual orientation is determined by genetic factors, brain structure, and early uterine environment, or you simply ignore it and continue to cling to the Bronze Age view of homosexuality as abomination. (Those same folks believed epilepsy was caused by demons.)

And no matter how much you try to convince yourself and others that you have gay and lesbian friends despite your discriminatory views, you might want to reconsider just how they view your friendship. People usually don't think too highly of 'friends' who consider them to be abominations unworthy of equal rights under the law.

"I really like you, but you are part of why America is lost. You are leading us away from God, and I am working to ensure that your rights are limited."

With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Stop trying to candy-coat your bigotry, folks. Free yourself. Admit it. You really, really don't like gay people and you want to see them suffer.

Tell us the truth. It's the Christian thing to do, right?

The Facts About Amendment One

May 8 is upon us, folks, and unfortunately too many North Carolinians are either unaware that there is an amendment vote or confused as to what the amendment would actually do.

The amendment question will appear on the May 8 ballot, and will read as follows:

Constitutional amendment to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.

Voters will either vote FOR the amendment or AGAINST the amendment. Seems pretty straightforward, right? That's all part of its design.

Like most referendums and ballot questions, most voters read the wording for the first time while they are in the voting booth. People who have no additional information will very likely be voting for something with which they very strongly disagree.

From a PPP poll in late March (emphasis mine):

The marriage amendment which will be on the ballot during the May 8th North Carolina primary continues to lead for passage by 20 points, but if voters are informed of its negative consequences for the potential future passage of civil unions for gay couples, it would narrowly fail.

58% of likely primary voters say right now that they would vote “yes,” while 38% plan to vote “no.” But at the same time, 51% of these voters support some form of legal recognition for gay couples’ relationships, either full marriage or civil unions. 34% of those folks are planning to vote for the amendment. Because of that, if informed that the amendment would ban both marriage and civil unions for gay couples, support goes down 17 points to 41%, and opposition rises 4% to 42%.

Part of the problem is that voters are not well informed about what the amendment does. A 34% plurality say they are not sure on that question. Almost as many (31%) do know that it would ban both gay marriage and civil unions, but then not many fewer (28%) think it would only ban marriage. 7% actually think it would legalize gay marriage. Those who think it bans solely marriage rights are voting 67-30 for it, so 8% of North Carolinians, while misinformed, are voting against the measure simply because they think it bans same-sex marriage alone. Of course, those who think a “yes” vote actually legalizes these unions are voting by the same margin for it.

This is troubling, and underscores the need for an agressive education drive these next few weeks. More importantly, we need to ensure that people actually go out and vote.

Please visit ProtectNCFamilies.org for downloadable tools, printable information sheets, videos, or to donate or volunteer. We need all the help we can get these last few weeks.

Most importantly, talk openly with your friends, neighbors, family, community & church leaders, and make sure that, no matter how they vote, that they have all the information. This isn't just about marriage. It's about all North Carolinians, gay or straight.

My Amendment One Twitter-Fight With Two Leading Anti-LGBT Bigots

On Friday night, I responded to a tweet by Peter LaBarbera referencing NC's Amendment 1 measure, which would add language to the NC constitution which would define marriage as between one man and one woman.

DL Foster, Patrick Wooden, Peter LaBarbera

For those of you unfamiliar with Peter LaBarbera, he is the president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, an anti-LGBT organization that is classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. He's a horrible, horrible man.

As I was preparing to reply to LaBarbera's tweet, Pastor DL Foster, founder of the ex-gay ministry organization Witness Freedom Ministries chimed in by praising NC conservatives and people of faith for their 'passion' for fighting 'evil' homosexuality.

For those of you unfamiliar with DL (yes, that's what he goes by) Foster, he was "delivered from homosexual sin over 22 years ago," and now reveres himself as "an expert, well versed on issues in the cross section of sexuality and theology." His Website states that he's been "quoted, cited and interviewed extensively in such media venues as CNN, Newsweek, Charisma, WorldNetDaily, 700 Club Newswatch, AOL Black Voices, Faith Under Fire, ABC News, Jewish World Review, TV One Network and numerous other print and broadcast mediums."

It was an ugly and disjointed discussion, if you can even call it a discussion. As these things go, it was sloppy, rapid-fire torrent of off-the-cuff remarks, retorts, overlapping threads and nothing even resembling a conclusion.

If anything useful came out of it, hopefully the below Storify-zation of the melee will show you what we're up against on May 8, and just how important it is that people get out and vote.

We won't change the minds of folks like Pete and DL. We're better off using that time and energy making sure that people know the harms of the amendment, and that they actually go to the polls to vote.

Anyway, here goes...

It's probably worth noting that DL Foster blocked me immediately after this 'conversation.' I've only been blocked (that I'm aware of) by two other accounts: Governor Rick Perry and the Pro-Amendment organization NC 4 Marriage.

He's in good company.

15 Reasons Why North Carolinians Should Vote Against Amendment 1

1. Amendment 1 is poorly written

Many who are voting for Amendment 1 do not understand this poorly written amendment's implications beyond same-sex marriage. This amendment, if passed, would affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians.

2. Amendment 1 harms children
Amendment 1 strips legal protections from children (and not just children of same-sex couples).

3. Amendment 1 harms families
Amendment 1 bans all legal relationship recognitions except for married heterosexual couples, leaving all single-parent households, unmarried couples (with or without children), and domestic partnerships without many crucial legal protections.

4. Amendment 1 will harm seniors
Widowed or single senior couples could be forced to marry to maintain their legal protections, which would result in loss of benefits such as pensions, health care, and social security.

5. Amendment 1 may invalidate domestic violence and stalking laws as they apply to non-married couples
Domestic violence laws may only apply to married heterosexual couples if Amendment 1 passes, leaving unmarried women without protection. When a similar constitutional ban passed in Ohio, domestic violence convictions were overturned as a result.

6. Amendment 1 is bad for business
The Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce has stated that "North Carolina’s proposed Amendment 1 is bad for business. It will interfere with employer’s ability to recruit talent and their right to provide competitive benefits to their employees. It also signals to employers and employees that North Carolina is not welcoming to the diverse, creative workforce that we need to compete in the global economy. We should not do anything that diminishes any corporation's interest in locating or remaining in North Carolina." Many North Carolina businesses agree, including Bank of America, House Speaker Thom Tillis (R), Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes, Replacements Ltd., and Capstrat.

7. Same-sex marriage is already illegal
The Amendment does not change the legal status of same-sex marriage in North Carolina. It will however, have cascading effects to the lives of children, families, seniors, and unmarried heterosexual couples. And do we really need to enshrine discrimination in our state constitution?

8. Same-sex marriage is inevitable
North Carolina State University House Speaker Thom Tillis (R), once a strong backer of the marriage ban, stated that he believes Amendment 1 will pass, but he believes it won’t remain long. “If it passes, I think it will be repealed within 20 years,” he stated. Desegregation was inevitable, and many fought it at the time. Do we really want to look back and be reminded that we voted to enshrine discrimination at a time when equality was becoming mainstream?

9. If your faith compels you to vote in favor of Amendment 1, you are blurring matters of church and state
If we are to write religious ideology into our constitution, where do we draw the line? Do we outlaw tattoos (Leviticus 19:28), divorce (Mark 10:9), and shellfish (Leviticus 11:10)? Do we allow Sharia Law for our muslim citizens? There is a reason why, as Americans, we don't legislate religious ideology. It's a slippery slope.

10. Faith leaders across NC are speaking out against Amendment 1
If you don't believe you can reconcile your faith with your vote against Amendment One, you may want to consider the hundreds of faith leaders from across the state who have pledged to vote against. Many have recorded video messages in which they share how their faith requires they vote against the amendment.

11. People who have devoted much of their lives to North Carolina and its citizens are speaking out against Amendment 1
Many people who have spent their entire lives working to make North Carolina great have spoken out about how Amendment 1 is bad for our state, including NC Libertarian Party Chair J.J. Summerell, Lt. Gov. Walter Dalton, Bev Purdue, Bob Etheridge, Rep. David Price, Russell and Sally Robinson (Russell is the grandson of the NC Constitution's principal drafter), Rep. Bill Faison, Sen. Eric Mansfield, Durham City Council Member Mike Woodard, and Duke Political Science Professor Michael Munger. Do you really believe that all of these proponents of our great state are part of a radical, extremist agenda to destroy the place they call home?

12. Sexuality is not a choice
Sexual orientation is determined by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences. The biological factors related to sexual orientation involve a constellation of genetic factors, as well as brain structure and early uterine environment. The following major medical and professional organizations have concluded that sexual orientation (and gender identity) is not a choice: American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, National Association of Social Workers, Royal College of Psychiatrists, and American Academy of Pediatrics. If you don't agree, when did you make the conscious choice to be heterosexual? Should our great state discriminate against people based on their natural traits?

13. Children do just fine in families with same-sex parents
The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychoanalytic Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the Child Welfare League of America, the North American Council on Adoptable Children, and the Canadian Psychological Association are all in agreement: Each has issued reports and resolutions in support of gay and lesbian parental rights. But let's not forget, this amendment also discriminates against single parents and unmarried heterosexual couples and their children.

14. Marriage has not always been defined as a union between a man and a woman
To characterize marriage as "the union between a man and a woman as designed by God," is, quite simply, to freeze the definition of marriage at the point in human history that suits your idea of what marriage should be -- with total disregard for how marriage came about, how it evolved, and how it will inevitably continue to evolve.

15. Less government in our lives
Regardless of political affiliation, Americans seem to agree that we would all like to see less government intrusion in our lives. This is a mantra to Libertarians. Conservatives decry what they see as the Obama Administration's desire to control our health care. Democrats largely stand united against the GOP's desire to control family planning. We all seem to agree on one thing: We need less government intrusion in our lives. Why should we allow the government to decide who we choose to love, who we choose to live with, and how we choose to raise our families? We have the chance on May 8 to send a clear message:

For more information on the harms of Amendment 1, please visit:
Protect All NC Families
Neighbors For Equality

Please donate what you can to help fund television ads to inform North Carolinians about the harms of Amendment 1.

Volunteer to help beat Amendment 1 on May 8:
Protect All NC Families
Neighbors For Equality

Most importantly, vote on May 8. (Are you registered?)

Read about why I am voting against Amendment 1:
Why A Heterosexual, Married, North Carolinian Father Of Three Cares About LGBT Equality

NC Amendment One Sample Ballot

Here is the Amendment One referendum as it will appear on your ballot when you vote on May 8 (you are registered to vote on May 8, right?).

You know what to do.

Please share with your friends, neighbors, and family.  Make sure they are registered to vote on May 8, that they are not confused by the wording, and that they understand the harms that will be done to many North Carolinians (not only homosexual couples), if this amendment passes.

Vote For Marriage NC: Protecting Marriage From 'The Whims Of Radical Activists'

Vote For Marriage NC is the deceitful, Bible-thumping, bigoted organization rallying 'marriage supporters' to pass the harmful amendment to ban same-sex marriage in the NC state constitution.

I get their emails. As a straight, married father living and working in North Carolina, Vote For Marriage NC comes across as, well, pathetic. They have nothing. It doesn't matter how you look at it, Amendment One is completely unnecessary, discriminatory, bigoted, shortsighted, bad for business, and just really lousy legislation.

We hate gay people, and this family is a stock photo

Their latest email is a flaccid attempt to rally 'marriage supporters' to stand up and be counted, as they can't seem to rally quite like the anti-amendment folks.

Dear Marriage Supporter,

Recent reports claim that “several thousand” of our opponents will be marching on our State Capitol today in protest of our efforts to preserve marriage through the Marriage Protection Amendment that is on the ballot on May 8th.

These activists have an agenda, and we must act now in order to put a stop to it. Will you stand by while activists seek to redefine marriage in our state, or will you join our efforts to protect marriage? Please donate $20, $60, or $100 now if you want to preserve marriage in North Carolina!

By passing the Marriage Protection Amendment on May 8th, we can protect marriage from the whims of radical activists who are working to redefine marriage against the will of the people. But we can only make our voices heard with your support.

In December 2011, a court case was filed in Guilford County challenging our state’s marriage laws. The threat to marriage is real in North Carolina, and our opposition’s organized and highly funded campaign is using deceptive messaging to confuse voters about what the Marriage Protection Amendment accomplishes. Thankfully, we know the truth: The Amendment simply elevates our current marriage laws to a constitutional amendment where it can only be changed by another vote of the people of North Carolina. Protecting marriage in our Constitution will prevent the court in Guilford County or any other state court, for that matter, from re-defining marriage for the rest of us.

How do we make our voices heard above the roar of activists and our oppositions’ deceptive messaging? Volunteer or donate today! May 8th is rapidly approaching, and we need your support to bring us to victory.

With your support, we can make sure marriage stays between only a man and a woman on May 8th.

Sincerely,

Rachel Lee
Communications Director, Vote FOR Marriage NC

There's something incredibly telling in the email. Vote For Marriage NC can't seem to come up with actual reasons why same-sex marriage is such a threat.

Let's see. Well, for starters, they want to 'protect marriage from the whims of radical activists who are working to redefine marriage against the will of the people.' Hm. Do they mean radical activists like myself? A married, lifetime North Carolinian, father of three, who lives in the suburbs? God forbid a pasty, overweight, lawn-mowing, soccer dad destroy marriage with one of his crazy whims. Am I not part of the will of the people? Are the thousands of gay and lesbian citizens not part of the will of the people? And really, do we want to put the rights of human beings up for a vote? Do you know how that might have went in certain southern states during the civil rights era?

If you believe marriage to be a union between a man and a woman, you are working with a definition of marriage completely different to what actually occurred in, say, 500 BCE or 54 CE. Marriage has been redefined over and over and over again, and it will continue to be until the earth is swallowed by the sun (or until humans are extinct, whichever comes first).

The email mentions that 'these activists have an agenda.' Well, of course we have an agenda. We have an agenda to allow citizens of our great state to be treated equally -- just as civil rights activists had an agenda to allow human beings with different skin color to be treated equally.

Hey Vote For Marriage NC, have you ever thought that maybe you are the radical activists? As I mentioned, I'm not gay. I'm happily married. I contribute to the state economy. I vote. I mow the lawn. I attend parent-teacher conferences. I volunteer at the food bank. I grill out. And I think you are radical. You are actively working to deny rights to other human beings based on their natural traits. That's radical. Jesus would ask you to kindly chill the fuck out.

Which group more resembles the radical Taliban? The people who want equal treatment for all, regardless of natural traits? Or the ones who are hell-bent on oppressing an entire group of citizens because they do not meet your definition of holy?

The only fact in your email, Vote For Marriage NC, is your opening salutation.  You're absolutely right. I am a 'marriage supporter.' For everyone.