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."

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

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.

The NC Anti-LGBT Amendment: Coalition to Protect All North Carolina Families Launches Campaign

The Coalition to Protect All North Carolina Families held a news conference Wednesday in Raleigh to unveil its campaign aimed at defeating the amendment question forced onto the ballot by the state Legislature.

The ballot question, for those who have been living under a rock over the past year, would add to NC's Constitution a ban on legal recognition for all unmarried couples, regardless of sexual orientation, and revoke many protections already in place for hundreds of thousands of tax-paying citizens.

The Coalition is comprised of dozens of 'organizations dedicated to defeating Amendment One in order to protect ALL North Carolina families,' including Democracy North Carolina, Institute for Southern Studies, National Association of Social Workers NC, North Carolina Council of Churches, North Carolina Justice Center, PFLAG, and many more.

The organizations serving as the Coalition's steering committee are: ACLU-NC, Equality NC, Faith in America, Human Rights Campaign, Replacements, Ltd., Self-Help, and Southerners On New Ground (SONG).

The Coalition's brand new Website serves as a powerful resource, as both an education tool, and as a call-to-action. Visitors can learn about the many ways in which the amendment would be harmful to NC. They can learn about the many clergy members throughout the state who are committed to defeating the amendment. Visitors can also read compelling stories from NC citizens affected by anti-LGBT legislation.

The site also makes it easy for anyone to get involved. Visitors can sign up to volunteer, attend an event, share their own story, or donate.

The Coalition has made a toolkit available, which features sharable videos and printable pamphlets. Their goal is to have 1,000,000 conversations with North Carolinians before May 8, and they need our help to meet that goal.

Whether or not you think you have a dog in this fight, it's important to familiarize yourself with this ballot question, the harms that would come from an amendment, and to be a part of the conversation.

It's important that NC citizens from all walks of raise their voices. Don't leave it up to the 'activists.' Straight, gay, religious, atheist, old, young, black, white...this affects all of us, and it sets the tone in our state for years to come.

Be on the right side of history and help defeat this harmful initiative on May 8.

Culture Wars 2012: Faux Religious Persecution

Sarah Posner, over at Religion Dispatches, writes about how 2012 will be a "banner year in the faux religious discrimination wars."

She highlights a full page ad placed in the Washington Post by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The ad provided the Bishops with a venue to voice their disapproval of the Department of Health and Human Services rule which requires employer health insurance plans to provide contraception without co-pay. The Bishops claim that if Obama does not amend the rule, his administration will be guilty of religious discrimination.

Posner writes:

The Bishops’ opposition to the Department of Health and Human Services rule—which they describe as mandating “preventive services” (scare quotes in original)—was to date the most public salvo from their Ad Hoc Committee on Religious Liberty. That effort was launched last June because, in USCCB president Timothy Dolan’s ominous words, “never before have we faced this kind of challenge to our ability to engage in the public square as people of faith and as a service provider. If we do not act now, the consequence will be grave.” At the Bishops’ annual meeting in Baltimore this past November, Dolan took his charges into conspiratorial territory, telling reporters that “well-financed, well-oiled sectors” were attempting to “push religion back into the sacristy.”

While many may see this as simply more of the same Catholic 'recommendations' we've seen over the years, the Bishops are poised to put their money where their mouth is.

Staffed with ten of the Bishops’ brethren, the Ad Hoc Committee will be assisted by the USCCB’s former top lawyer and now Associate General Secretary, Anthony Picarello, who served on Obama’s first Advisory Council to his Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. A staff lawyer and a lobbyist have also been hired and assigned to the effort.

Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution last October, Bishop William E. Lori, chair of the Ad Hoc Committee, described LGBT equality and access to reproductive care as “serious threats to religious liberty,” that “represent only the most recent instances in a broader trend of erosion of religious liberty in the United States.” The problem, he went on, is like a disease that must be treated immediately, “lest the disease spread so quickly that the patient is overcome before the ultimate cure can be formulated and delivered.”

Louise Melling, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, sees the Bishops’ framing as “significant,” noting that, “They’re really trying to put a spin on what’s happening, and they’re hoping that they can convince people that their rights are the ones being violated.”

These faux religious discrimination claims are a phenomenon that we have seen mirrored in US culture for years, although it seems to have been ramping up recently.

These claims come from two angles:

On one side, as Posner illustrates, we see religious organizations and legislators condemning any tax money being associated in any way with the funding of services at odds with religious teachings (contraceptives, abortion, etc).

On the other side we see cries of religious persecution any time harmful or discriminatory religious ideology is condemned or challenged.

Daily, we hear politicians claiming that equal treatment of gays and lesbians encroaches on their religious liberty -- essentially their 'right' to aggressively discriminate against gays and lesbians.

Just a few days ago, I engaged Peter LaBarbera on Twitter. Peter LaBarbera is the president of the anti-LGBT Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, an organization which is classified as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

LaBarbera had re-tweeted a comment that stated, "The left likes to immediately shut people's views down by shouting "Racist, sexist ,homophobe" - since 80s."

In other words, LaBarbera and his ilk believe that, if their religion states that something is true (i.e. that homosexuality is an 'abomination,' or that women should submit to their husbands), and they act on that 'truth' by way of discrimination, then society is wrong to condemn these acts as homophobic or sexist. They are scripturally 'true,' after all, and our constitution protects the freedom to practice our religion.

Recently, on the campaign trail, Rick Santorum stated that he would seek to invalidate gay marriages via a constitutional amendment. During his trip to Iowa this week, he stated (as he has on many occasions) that "rights come to us from God." This is not dog-whistle politics. There's no subtlety about it. This reflects Santorum's insistence (and that of many other GOP candidates and legislators) that anti-LGBT, anti-choice legislation is in keeping with God's law, and is therefore wholly American.

We have seen resistance to hate speech legislation (and same-sex marriage legislation) in which opponents wrongly proclaim that ministers would be prosecuted for preaching against homosexuality.

We have seen legislation which allows for anti-gay bullying, as long as it is religion-based.

The culture wars have come down to this: opponents of progressive legislation have run out of cards to play. Their beliefs are not backed up by the science. The studies do not support their anti-LGBT, anti-choice ideology. (And in the case of contraception, 98% of Catholic women use birth control, despite its ban in the church.) All they have left is the supernatural, which is protected by religious freedom, and that's the only card they have left to play.

What they fail to understand is that religious beliefs cannot become law simply because they are religious beliefs. Religious beliefs may indeed dovetail with secular law -- for instance, stealing is frowned upon for many reasons that have nothing to do with religion. It is not illegal because God said so somewhere in the Bible. We do not have laws against wearing blended fabrics -- such a law would not have a secular purpose.

If the basis of proposed legislation (or your opposition to legislation) in any way relies upon supernatural concepts (i.e. 'soul,' 'sin,' 'God,' etc.) you can be pretty sure that it's unconstitutional.

It is not religious discrimination to employ and enforce secular law (or to extend secular rights to all citizens). It is not religious discrimination to oppose and strike down the legislation of religious ideas which have no secular basis.

I would ask any religious conservative if they are okay with implementing Islamic laws requiring women to cover all of their bodies except their hands and face. If not, why? Most likely, they would answer that this is not something they believe, and that it as extreme and discriminatory. This is how many Americans view the beliefs of the Christian right.

To impose these laws on us is the same as imposing Islamic law on them. To deny citizens their secular rights because of your religious beliefs is impose your religion on those who do not subscribe.

House Re-Re-Re-Affirms 'In God We Trust' As National Motto

While American minds were focused on the flagging economy, multiple wars, a ballooning deficit, record unemployment, corporate greed, and economic inequality, the House spent part of Tuesday officially re-affirming 'In God We Trust' as the official national motto of The United States of America.

'In God We Trust' has been our official motto since 1956. The phrase has appeared on US coins since 1864, and on paper currency since 1957. Americans see this motto every day when they spend their hard-earned money on overpriced products that are manufactured overseas -- money they earn from jobs that they fear they may lose, if they haven't already lost them.

Even though the motto is enshrined in our currency, in our legislation (Public Law 84-851), and in the United States Code (at 36 U.S.C. § 302) which states: "'In God we trust' is the national motto," House Republicans wanted to ensure that there isn't any confusion about the motto. (The non-binding resolution was approved 396-9, with 2 abstentions.)

Representative J. Randy Forbes, Republican of Virginia and the measure’s sponsor, stated:

“What’s happened over the last several years is that we have had a number of confusing situations in which some who don’t like the motto have tried to convince people not to put it up.”

He has a point. How can America possibly overcome its obstacles if there is confusion about the motto that appears in the House chamber above Forbes' head, and in the Capitol Visitors’ Center, and on the very money that he uses to purchase his morning latte?

Maybe America is confused. Maybe, despite the motto's inclusion on our currency, its enshrinement in public law and US code, and its appearance on public buildings, we have forgotten that in 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law a bill re-affirming 'In God We Trust' as our official national motto.

Maybe, despite the money thing, and the public law and US code stuff, and the re-affirming by Bush, Americans are still confused, forgetting that Senate re-reaffirmed the motto as our official national motto on its 50th anniversary of officialdom.

Maybe the House is treating this issue the way many religious people treat prayer requests. Maybe if its repeated enough times by enough people, the signal is stronger, and God is therefore more likely to receive the call if he's traveling through a dead spot in the San Fernando Valley.

Maybe now, we can finally get some help on the issues that are plaguing our country. If not from God, perhaps from our lawmakers, who won't need to reaffirm our motto for at least a few more years.