Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Amendment One

I am just as upset as everyone else about the passing of Amendment One; perhaps even more so than many, given my personal involvement with the homosexual community over the past several years.

It is a civil rights violation, I don't disagree.

But what is important to remember is that this bill passed in North Carolina for a reason, however silly and selfish. Shouting about gay rights on Facebook and other social networking sites isn't likely to accomplish anything, as the rights of same-sex couples were obviously not a consideration to those that passed the bill. The strongest course of action is to find the effects of the bill that are universally appalling (limited rights of children born or adopted into these now unrecognized unions, inability of unrecognized domestic partners to seek legal protection against domestic abuse, etc.) and stress those in the efforts to repeal the document.

Discrimination based on sexual orientation should be universally appaling. But as North Carolina has so generously demonstrated, it isn't yet. As long as the religious are allowed to so blatantly incorporate their own personal beliefs and biases into legislation, this will always be a struggle. One group of people should not be allowed to determine who the rest of us are allowed to call our family, but until a method is found to actually enforce the separation of church and state in this region of the United States, we must find ways to work around their bigotry.

This is all very unsettling, I understand. And don't get me wrong, I have no problem with people voicing their opinions and emotions about how wrong this sort of legal action is. Make your voice heard; let people know that you are not okay with this. But also keep in mind that the people who have passed this bill have spent their lives actively deciding not to listen to reason. If there is to be a solution to this, it is going to have to be a practical one.

Anger only perpetuates hatred.


  1. Personally, I don't care for your use of the term 'religious'. While I understand what you meant, it does seem to paint all religious people with the same brush. I consider myself a religious person, and I find this every bit as wrong as you do.

  2. Dave, I understand your concern and I understand that there are plenty of religious people that oppose this sort of thing. But the fact that there are religious people who oppose the issue does not change the fact that this bill was the result of religious interference in state issues.

    This sort of homophobic bigotry is almost exclusive to the religious worldview, particularly the Abrahamic faiths. There are exceptions in both directions, of course, but as with any sort of scientific or sociological analysis, the outliers are excluded when considering the general trend of the data.

    I know that this sort of legislation is upsetting for anyone with any sort of propensity for critical thinking. But until people are willing to just come out and admit that the primary reason that gay rights are even still in contention is that the religious are still managing to work their personal prejudices into public law, the issue is not going to go away.