Skip to main content

I voted AGAINST Amendment One because it’s meddlesome. I don’t need control over who cuddles with whom, nor do I feel anyone else has need for this capability.
None of the so-called moral arguments matter to me, because they’re all mean. They are all about taking AWAY rights, privileges, demoting others in standing and status before both society and the law.

The economic arguments aren’t worth a hoot, either. So what if two other people get to file joint tax returns – this is a “privilege” you want to hold back from people you don’t like Really?

No, it’s all about status – because some, to feel tall, must stand on the necks of others, the more necks, the merrier.

(More below the shockingly accurate representation of the true shape of the Multiverse)

What’s what telling about NC Amendment One – it’s not just a “first they came for the homosexuals…” segue. Oh, no. Today’s fascist/Taliban wannabes are an impatient lot. You see, the righties have figured out a sly way to slide their trash through the courts: Don’t disadvantage a discrete group under color of law: disadvantage lots of them at once!

I went to a community town hall meeting in Charlotte last week with Harry Taylor (who is running for Mecklenburg County Commissioner-at-large by the way). There was this one Republican fellow on the stage, offering up his explanation for why the NC amendment would not be struck down in the courts. For you see, the problems with language on similar bills in the past had been corrected to resist legal challenges. Yep, that’s right. The man was outright proud that the Amendment One was an upgrade in civil rights devolution.

Then up stepped the history professor, down for the night from Appalachian State University in Boone. His thesis on Amendment One, based  on past plebiscite votes of this kind in the Tar Heel States, was that… the traditionalists usually win these rounds.

Ok, before the tears start, he went on to say that it ultimately doesn’t matter because last he’d checked it was now legal to marry interracially, for women to vote, to (once again) drink cold beer, to learn about evolution in schools and, oh yes, while we are on the subject it is now okay to attend integrated schools, too.

Such a historical comfort is small comfort (if not outright insulting) to someone who is in love right now dammit. I know that. It’s a slap in the face to someone whose civil rights are being spat on in real time. Get that, too.

Which brings me to the bell lap of this diary: A few months ago, Amendment One was all but a done deal for several reasons. One, until recently it looked like there was to be a competitive Republican primary here in North Carolina. That would have brought out the RepubliVotes in droves. Two, until activists such as the most excellent Pam Spaulding raised awareness, and then even more experts and respected voices began to speak out. Three, the Amendment One story went national as it became clear it was not yet another in a long thirtysomething-state-long refrain of gay-bashing… it was equal-opportunity bashing of everyone not exactly in one perfectly narrow and for many real families perfectly useless definition of family… to the point of stripping away domestic abuse protections for women and children alike.

Domestic abuse impacts. Let’s revisit our Republican presenter again. He up and said, quite proudly, that none of the existing statute would change because family relationships were already defined clearly as being between men and women. Yep, that’s right. Per this fellow, since the fine print on domestic abuse already excludes gays… it’s all good to bash ‘em more with Amendment One.

And this was the best the right wing had on tap to advocate for accepting the change in North Carolina’s constitution: It won’t affect most of you, so don’t worry about it.
Once more, with feeling: the right’s best argument for Amendment One is it won’t inconvenience most North Carolinians at all.

I think that’s all sorts of special. Most North Carolinians aren’t raped or murdered in a given year. Most North Carolinian children aren’t buggered by their uncles. Most wives aren’t slapped around.

By that (cough, choke, gag) logic… sorry that was a hard word to type just then… we could do away with all sorts of laws.

Because removing those protections “won’t inconvenience most people”.

And that just sets the stage for why Amendment One is unacceptable.

It’s  meddling with malicious purpose in the lives of a few, on the open-faced grounds everyone else should just look away, turn away and walk away. Nothing to see here, folk. Move along and get along with your nice white picket fence lives, thanky.
And I don’t hold to that. I think it’s vile, sick and wrong.

Worse, meddlesome malicious people don’t stop. They like the rush of standing tall on the necks of others, the more the merrier. Again – they’ll never stop. They’ll have to be stopped.

A few months ago, this meddlesome Amendment was a sure pass.

Today… I don’t know. Perhaps North Carolina’s pattern of get a first (shotgun) marriage to craziness, then eventually divorcing and having a second and lasting marriage with good sense will repeat itself.

I’d rather object to the first ever taking place. I’d rather that North Carolina, no, the country at large, go with its first, true love of good sense the first time around.

From all the signs I’ve seen here in Charlotte, I’m definitely not alone.

I think we might have a shot as a state of getting the call right on an important civil rights matter the first time around.

Originally posted to cskendrick on Tue May 08, 2012 at 10:56 AM PDT.

Also republished by LGBT Kos Community, Angry Gays, and Milk Men And Women.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site