~On May 8th (or earlier, if you vote early), voters in North Carolina will have the chance to vote in the 2012 primary election for their desired political party. But in addition to that (and a couple of nonpartisan judicial seats), they’ll also be voting on a proposed amendment to the North Carolina state constitution. You may have heard of it as the “marriage amendment”, and perhaps you have a vague idea that it defines what marriage means in the context of state law. If that’s all you think it does, then you’re in for a rude awakening. Here is the full text of the amendment:“Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State. This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts.” (Source)
Hmmm… “domestic legal union”…what exactly does that mean? Well, we’re going to find out (or rather, we aren’t, because nobody really knows). And I’m going to give you some very good reasons why, even if you are completely opposed to gay marriage on principle, Amendment 1 is a bad idea for everyone in North Carolina, regardless of sexual orientation.
1. It would deny children health insurance
I usually roll my eyes at arguments that begin with a wail of “What about the children?”, but in my line of work (Healthcare IT), I’ve recently worked with two pediatrics practices, and I just spent a delightful weekend playing around with my young nieces and nephew, so I’m feeling a bit protective of kids at the moment. So hear me out: currently, many municipalities in North Carolina extend job benefits to same-sex domestic partners (not all do, and some employers also extend benefits). If the Amendment passes, municipalities would be forced to terminate these policies.So what does that have to do with kids? Although some people want to stick their heads in the sand and pretend it doesn’t happen, in many of these relationships there are children from previous relationships. Under N.C. law, such children are legally the children of only one of the partners…do you see where I’m going with this? If the amendment passes, a lot of kids would lose health insurance coverage because it would no longer carry over from their other mom or dad. Sorry, kids: looks like you won’t be seeing the doctor today! Well, I suppose they can always go to the emergency room at the hospital and drive up health care costs for the rest of us...
2. It would weaken or even eliminate domestic violence laws
When two people are in a relationship, violence between them is subject to specific legal penalties that are harsher than if you attack some random guy on the street. Society recognizes that even if people are not married, a relationship can exist, and there can be children involved as well, so the penalties are stiffer. Makes sense, right? But wait…if the amendment passes, then marriage is “the only legal domestic union”, right? Legally, it would then make sense that domestic violence laws are null and void.You might be shaking your head at the idea of this, believing that such a dramatic legal shift is unlikely or impossible if the amendment passes. House Majority Leader Paul Stam (R-Apex), who championed getting the amendment on the ballot, scoffs at the idea that this might happen. Well, I’ve got news for Mr. Stam: he’s either ignorant or lying, because it’s already happened in Ohio. In 2004, a state constitutional amendment similar to amendment 1 was passed, and now domestic violence offenders are appealing their sentences. It’s gone all the way to state appellate courts, which have ruled state domestic violence laws unconstitutional based on the amendment. And why shouldn’t they? After all, if marriage is the only recognized domestic legal union, then “domestic” violence can only occur within a marriage. Outside of that, it’s “only” assault.
So remember: a vote for amendment 1 is a vote for domestic violence. I do not exaggerate in the least.
3. It’s bad for business
North Carolina has seen remarkable economic and population growth in the past two decades, much of it built on emigration from other states. My family, for example, moved here from upstate New York, moving to be near the Research Triangle Park area that is home to so many high-tech businesses and universities. But competition for this business and this growth is fierce. Passing amendment 1 would send a clear signal to the gays and lesbians of other states: “We don’t want yer kind ‘round these here parts!”
Imagine for a moment that you’re a young, well-educated, motivated, gay professional (shocking, I know). You have a choice of where to go, or perhaps where to relocate or expand your business. And then, along comes amendment 1. Does this make you feel welcomed and included in North Carolina society? Do you feel like moving here, even with business tax breaks, is a good idea for you as a person?
A large number of business leaders and local Chambers of Commerce (private business lobbying groups) are publicly opposed to passage of amendment 1. It would make it harder for companies to recruit the best talent, since whether you’re gay or straight really has no bearing on your ability to program a computer, mix chemicals, drive a truck, teach a class, or anything else.
So regardless of your views about gay marriage, please realize that a vote for amendment 1 is a vote in favor of an economically weaker, less competitive North Carolina.
4. It’s deceptive and misleading
For those of you who have gotten this far and still believe gay marriage is frightening and that passing the amendment is the only way to stop it, let me set the record straight: gay marriage is already illegal in North Carolina. With a conservative legislature and a historically-conservative higher court system, gay marriage is highly unlikely to become legal for the foreseeable future. So, if it’s already illegal, why bother? Simple: the politicians of both parties that arranged to put this on the primary ballot don’t give a fig whether or not it passes. It’s really about political gamesmanship: energizing voters to get out and vote for desired candidates, driving a political wedge between socially conservative but politically liberal minorities and whites, etc. Originally, the amendment was going to be on the ballot in November for the general election, but wrangling in Raleigh got it moved to the primary. This sort of amendment is guaranteed to be a political wedge issue that, regardless of how it turns out, will leave some people feeling smug and some people feeling crushed. It’s not good for anyone, least of all those seeking civil unions -- all the benefits and responsibilities of marriage, but without the title. Amendment 1 would make civil unions permanently illegal in North Carolina.
So to reiterate: even if you’re against gay marriage, the amendment is pointless, because gay marriage is already illegal. But…but…what if the law is changed?! Surely we can’t let that happen, so don’t we need the amendment to protect our children from the Gays of the Future? Which brings me to my final, and perhaps strongest, reason why this amendment is a terrible idea:
5. It’s the past imposing its values on the future
These who support these sorts of laws and amendments across the nation are overwhelmingly older people, those of the baby boomer generation and earlier. The idea of gays marrying touches some deeply visceral vein of unease, making them queasy and upset, just as the idea of black people marrying white people did just a few short decades ago. Yes, that too was also thought of as “unnatural” for violating Biblical prohibitions, and that interracial marriage would devalue same-race marriages and lead to people marrying animals, etc. See for yourself.
But younger people are overwhelmingly opposed to such restrictions. Why? Because, like me, they actually know people who are gay. Are friends with people who are gay. Went to school with people who are gay. Knew gay and lesbian soldiers who put their lives on the line for you. Are friends with people who are not only gay but are in same-sex relationships. We see that these relationships are pretty much the same as opposite-sex relationships, with all the drama, heartache, fights, breaking-up, making-up, and commitment or lack thereof that “traditional” couples have. The idea of gay people being able to say they’re married…it just doesn’t bother us in the least. We aren’t afraid of it or disturbed by it.
If anything, people of my generation were emotionally damaged and disturbed by the massive number of divorces over the past few decades. If anything is a threat to traditional marriages, it’s not the small number of potential gay marriages, it’s the tens of millions of broken families, of partners who were unable to commit and so shuttle their kids to each others’ homes every other weekend. If older people truly cared about preserving traditional marriage, that’s what they’d go after, that and ridiculous hours-long celebrity marriages and shows like “Who wants to marry a millionaire?”. I’ve been told that, if I were married, then I might feel differently, but frankly I cannot imagine any scenario in which I would somehow feel that my marriage to my as-yet-nonexistent wife would somehow be less “meaningful” if my gay friends were also married. Hell, I’d go to their wedding, toast them, eat cake, and have a blast!
I’m not the only one who gets it. Consider the surprising words of N.C. Speaker of the House Thom Tillis (R-Mecklenburg):
“It does appear to me to be a generational issue,” said House Speaker Thom Tillis, “so 20 or 30 years from now, if you look back at the society we were 20 or 30 years ago, it just seems to me that those who support it are going to have to work hard to keep it in place, and they are probably going to have growing pressure to keep the constitutional issue in place as well as the underlying law which we all know is already there.” (Source)
So even the politicians leading the charge to pass the amendment don’t believe that it will last (remember, it’s really just on the ballot to Get Out The Vote and Divide and Conquer). I do not believe that the past has the right, much less the duty, to unilaterally dictate its rules and morals onto a younger generation. Young people, as they grow into adults (and inevitably into the leaders of society) must be free to choose. If the older generation did their job well and passed down laws and morals worth following, then they have done well and such rules will be honored. But if not…if they try to impose rules and morals that their own adult children disagree with…well, it doesn't take a time traveller to see the inevitable result.
So remember, when you vote in the upcoming North Carolina Primary on May 8th (or with Early Voting), I encourage you to vote AGAINST the proposed Amendment 1 to the state constitution. It’s bad for children, it’s bad for all couples regardless of orientation, it’s bad for business, it’s divisive and politically sleazy, and it’s bad for the future. If, after all of this, I still haven’t convinced you, by all means leave a comment and I’ll be happy to discuss the issue with you further. Happy voting!
