A Matter of Civil Rights, Not Marriage

Yesterday the citizens of North Carolina voted in favor of Amendment One to our North Carolina Constitution.  I do not plan to criticize any voter, but I have plenty of criticism of the media.  This amendment was referred to as an amendment to ban gay marriage and lumped NC in with 32 other states who have already banned gay marriage.  This amendment was far more than that.  Many citizens thought this to be an amendment that defines marriage between one man and one woman (at a time).  But it was far more than that.

To set the record straight, gay marriage is already banned BY LAW in the State of North Carolina.  The amendment goes much further than that by defining a marriage between one man and one woman as the only domestic LEGAL UNION that is recognized by the State.  This applies not only to same-sex couples, but to heterosexual couples living together without being married.  These civil unions have been recognized by employers to provide health care benefits to the partners and children of such unions.  All unions between gay couples (whether married in another state or not) and unions by heterosexual couples who choose not to marry are no longer recognized as legal unions.

The results of this amendment will be far-reaching.  The faculty of the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Law School published an extensively researched paper when this amendment was presented, outlining the potential legal impact of passage of the amendment as it read in its final form.  I read the entire thirty-one page document which is very frightening indeed.

The amendment would remove civil rights now provided to gay partners no matter how long they may have been in a deeply committed and loving relationship.

Did we really want to take away the rights of these two women to determine the disposition of the remains of the other partner in case she died?

(photo from a anti-amendment Web site)

If you tell me there are ways to circumvent the obstacles to civil liberties contained in the amendment I must ask you why certain individuals should be forced to fight harder than others to obtain the same rights given others in the same area?  And why some civil rights are now forbidden to them by this amendment?

Did we really want to take the health care insurance from so many children of domestic unions?  (Oh, pardon me...these are no longer legal domestic unions.)

From a personal standpoint, why on earth does this matter so much to me?  After all, I've been married to the same man for forty years now.

This matters so much to me because we have amended our State Constitution to remove civil rights and not to promote them.  It grieves me to think that we are moving backward rather than forward; to limit rather than guarantee the rights of all of our citizens.

As you might imagine, the opinion pages of the newspapers have been filled with comments.  It is of interest that every single pro-amendment letter included the words "God" or "The Bible."  Honest...I looked at each one.  Every single pro-amendment television ad also included those words and many quoted scriptures.  It's always useful to find a good sound bite and "Protect the Sanctity of Marriage" was a winner.

I'm not criticizing the Holy Bible.  Remember, I was raised Southern Baptist.  I know the Bible quite well.  I can recite the names of the books of both the old and new testaments.  I was frequently a winner in the "sword drills" in church in which the quest was to find a given verse in the bible and quickly step forward.  I loved it.  I can recite hundreds of verses and can find one to contradict almost any position you might put forth.

My criticism is that religion should not have been the driving force in this vote.  And it was.  Our own church included "Vote Yes" literature in every Sunday Bulletin for the past two months.  Most of the full-page advertisements supporting the amendment were paid for by religious groups.

Tell me that all marriages and all unions must be sanctioned by God (and must be defined based on a single quote from the Bible) and I will ask you how then, can non-Jewish non-Christians have a valid marriage?  How can you have a valid marriage if it isn't performed by a member of the clergy?  My own son was married by a lawyer in his wife's firm who got a "Judge-For-A-Day" license in order to perform the beautiful non-religious ceremony in her lovely backyard.  Neither God nor Jesus were mentioned in this moving and lovely ceremony.  If their union is legal then exactly how did the Bible enter into this discussion?

Or should I say how did the Bible DRIVE the vote on the amendment?

If you are still reading, I will leave you with the words of Cory Booker, Mayor of Newark, NJ.

"Before you speak to me about your religion, first show it to me in how you treat other people.  Before you tell me how much you love your God, show me in how much you love all his children.  Before you preach to me of your passion for your faith, teach me about it through your compassion for your neighbors.  In the end I'm not as interested in what you have to sell or tell as in how you choose to live and give."

Just how much does the overwhelming approval of Amendment One tell us about our compassion and how much does it tell us about our continued bigotry and intolerance?

We Need A New Ice Cream Flavor

In 2009, Vermont became the fourth state to uphold the rights of all people to marry whomever they wished.  The legislature passed a law ending the prohibition of gay marriage.

Ben and Jerry's, my favorite ice cream maker sold a new flavor to encourage passage of Vermont's "Freedom to Marry" law.  They called it "Hubby Hubby" and featured a gay couple atop a wedding cake on the containers.

Earlier this year when the United Kingdom debated legalizing gay marriage, Ben and Jerry's stepped up again with a gay couple atop a wedding cake on the containers of a new ice cream flavor.  They named the new flavor "Apple-y Ever After."

Ben and Jerry...we need a new flavor for North Carolina.  Please.  And soon.

In May, citizens of our State will vote for or against an amendment to the North Carolina Constitution.  For the record, it will be Amendment One.  It is commonly called (and it makes me sick to my stomach to even write it) "The Marriage Protection Amendment."

Essentially the ammendment states that MARRIAGE BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN IS THE ONLY DOMESTIC LEGAL UNION THAT IS VALID OR RECOGNIZED in our fair State. (The all-caps shouting is my own.)  It is important for you to know that NC law already prohibits same sex marriage in North Carolina.  It might also be of interest to note that for the first time in over a century, both the State House and State Senate are controlled by Republicans.  I won't go into detail about how expansive and far-reaching this ornerous ammendment could be.

The House Majority Leader (Rep. Paul Stam) likens gay marriage to polygamy and even incest!!!  County Commisioners and City Councils, particularly in the conservative mountain areas have issued proclaimations in support of the ammendment.  Leaders of the Catholic Church are in favor of the ammendment and have written extensively in letters to Catholic Churches around the State.  The most recent one is a four-page "FAQ" (frequently asked questions) with such explanations as the "fact" that the ammendent is needed for the children.  "Marriage between a man and a woman protects and promotes the well-being of children by allowing the children to benefit from being raised by both their father and their mother," says the publication distributed in all Catholic Churches last weekend.  Oh, and the publication denies that the amendment promotes any discrimination against the way same-sex couples choose to live.  PULEEZ!!!

A well-dressed gentleman approached me in the grocery store yesterday and asked if he could give me a card.  The laminated card urged a "Yes" vote for the ammendment.  I gave the card back to him and stated that in fact, I planned to vote a resounding "NO."  He then asked, "Are you married?"  At this point I might otherwise have simply walked away, but I responded, "Yes, I have been married to the same man for forty years and same-sex marriage in no way threatens that."  He said, "It might not affect yours, but what about your grandchildren?"  I responded in an overly-polite tone of voice, "What I hope for my grandchildren is that they will have full and equal rights to marry whomever they wish whether that is a person of the same sex or a person of the opposite sex.  And I hope they will live in a more open-minded society than the prejudiced bigots I see before me."

And I turned and walked away.

Much to my chagrin, as I drove home I wondered if I had been too harsh on the gentleman.  But that was only for a brief moment.  After all, he was the one who approached me.  And I did use a polite voice.

Didn't That Used to be Mack's Place?

It's not at all uncommon to find sudden change along our highway.  One day a business is open and the next time you go by it has closed.  I ran across a new establishment the other day.

Since we moved here there has been a vacant service station.  It's near the Cedar Mountain post office and has been abandoned for years.

I was surprised to find that the building is now a church, The Well.  It is a Baptist church, which in North Carolina means very little except that it is protestant.  Only the Baptist churches belonging to the Southern Baptist Convention are remotely organized.  [There is another organized group of Baptist churches within the group called The American Baptist Church, but we don't have any of them in the mountains.]  Otherwise, one is free to found a church and call it a Baptist church.  I have no idea why the terms "Methodist" or "Presbyterian" are not so widely used.  The terms "freewill," "hard rock," "pentecostal," "hard shell" are sometimes used to identify the type of worship.  In many cases the pastor is a farmer who is called to preach.  Sometimes the entire membership is composed of family members.

Here is the new Well Baptist Church

At the corner of the lot, the old sign for "Mack's Place" still hangs.  It has been painted over an Exxon sign.

I hardly ever print a photograph without credit to the source, but for the life of me, I cannot remember how the following picture came to be my computer.  I am printing it for some of the people of Wisconsin (where we lived for 20 years).  Proof positive (as if you needed any) that enough money and enough lies will buy an election.  Senator Russ Feingold was defeated in yesterday's election.  It matters not what political party he belongs to...he is the most honest, conscientious, patriotic Senator in Congress.  Never willing to follow his party blindly, he often reached over the aisle when the other party was right.  He held listening sessions in every county in the State to hear what the citizens had to say.  He is a "Senator's Senator."  So why do I care what happened in WI?  Because senators represent the entire country, not  just their individual states.  Truly, one of the best will not be serving next term.  I hope the new senator-elect will lose some of his partisan stands and work with all the other senate members, not just the ones in his party.

Salute to many (not all) voters in Wisconsin

Words Divide the Indivisible

The Letters to the Editor sections of the newspapers around here are full of vitriolic exchanges among fellow Americans. It all began when a few large billboards appeared along the highways in the western North Carolina mountains. Patriotic in appearance with the colors of our flag, the signs read: "One Nation Indivisible." Since we proclaim ourselves to be indivisible, you might not imagine such a billboard would be the subject of intense debate.

The reason for the debate of course, is that our Pledge of Allegiance has similar words. In fact, until 1954 the Pledge of Allegiance had exactly those words.





The wording of the Pledge of Allegiance has been changed four times since it was written in 1892. The most recent change occurred in 1954, when the words "under God" were added to follow "one nation" and to precede "indivisible." Because of this latest change, many people feel that the billboards, by saying "One Nation Indivisible" are in effect "leaving out God."

No coincidence that the name of the sponsor of these billboards is displayed prominently. It is the North Carolina Secular Society. While we all know that secular means "apart" from religion, many of our citizens believe secular means "hating God."

Therefore, these citizens have begun to place billboards of their own along our highways. These billboards feature the Amerian Eagle proclaiming, or protecting the words, "One Nation Under God." These billboards also prominently display the name of the sponsors. In this case it is an organization called "We Still Pray."

As these billboards spread across NC, they will no doubt spill over into neighboring states. Vandals are hard at work, especially painting "Under God" on the first ones. So far, none of the "under God" billboards have been vandalized.

I do not understand the depths of concern these billboards are causing. Does anyone acually disagree that we should be one nation indivisible?

Reading the Letters to the Editor section gives me laughter and grief. Some of the people think one nation under God is in the Constitution. Others insist that we have no right to blaspheme the "original" Pledge of Allegiance. Of course there is always the point that even our money says "In God We Trust." Many call for the "God-haters" to leave if they don't like it here. I suspect some of the letters are too scathing to print.

My opinion of billboards has changed dramatically since I grew up. When I was a youngster, I loved them. Keep in mind that in those days there were no electronic games, no DVDs, hardly anything to keep children occupied on long car rides in hot cars with no air conditioning. [And wouldn't you know...reading in the car made me carsick!] So as I sat in the back seat (with my brother ALWAYS trying to cross the imaginary dividing line), I loved reading all the billboards and imagining myself visiting all those places.

But in these days of comfort I think billboards are distracting nuisances. Surely with GPS, smart phones, etc., no one needs directions from billboards. So as much as I loved them when I was a child, I hate them now. Given my preferences, there would be no billboards anywhere.

Organizations can spend however money they wish to purchase billboard advertising. Let them go ahead. But isn't there a better use for all that money? Do they really change anyone's mind about an issue?

Be on the lookout for the "Battle of the Billboards." I suspect they will soon come to an area near you. Do you have an opinion about these billboards? This is an open-minded blog so nothing you say will be criticized. I'd just like to know what you think about the issue. Or even, as in my case, if you see it as a non-issue.

Hold My Chicken Leg While I Burn This Bible

No Trick-or-Treating for these folks. At 7:00 on Halloween night members of tiny Amazing Grace Baptist Church in nearby Canton, North Carolina, will gather to perform an ancient (and illegal) ritual. You may have heard about them. They certainly have tried to out-Gosselin the Gosselins in attracting the media. Why, you might ask, are the Associated Press, national newspapers and television networks, and even the UK Telegraph, so interested in this little pastor and this little church?

Some call it the "Bonfire of the Profanities." Pastor Marc announced a burning of Bibles that are not the King James Version (KJV). He maintains that the KJV is the true word of God and that all other translations of the Bible are satanic. During the past month Pastor Marc and his followers have been gathering the "satanic" versions of the scripture along with sermons, books, and music they consider satanic as well. Writings include those by Mother Theresa, Billy Graham, the Pope. It might seem a bit strange to include Billy Graham since he is a very popular evangelical preacher from the NC mountains. However, he has occasionally used bibles that were not the KJV so his words have lost their Christian context. Contemporary Christian music will be added to the fire.

A scripture reference always provides the explanation for the actions. In this case, the church uses Acts 19:18-20 to justify their Bible burning. "And many that believed came, and confessed, and shewed their deeds. Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver. So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed."

This photograph of the church is taken from their Web site:

http://amazinggracebaptistchurchkjv.com/Download99.html

This photograph is Pastor Marc in an interview with an AP reporter.

It is of note that this Bible burning celebration will include a fried chicken dinner with "all the fixin's." The visual of tossing a Bible into the fire while holding on to a piece of fried chicken is almost too much, isn't it?

---------------The bonfire is NOT open to the public. Only church members and others invited by the Pastor will be allowed to attend. Anyone else will be considered trespassing.

---------------While this post is written tongue-in-cheek, there is a serious part of me that is very frightened to be sharing my world with people who so fervently believe only they are correct.

---------------I feel the need to clarify a couple of things. For the most part, the citizens of Canton are just like the citizens of every other little mountain town. Secondly, this "Baptist" church is not a part of any other group of Baptist churches...it is yet another little independent church that names itself baptist. Anyone can start a baptist church around here...just find a meeting place, a preacher, and a couple of families and you have your own baptist church. Oh, you'll also need a collection plate.