Maslow's Peak: Reports From the Left
  • home
  • blog
  • about/contact

Arguments against marriage equality - first up: The Slippery SLope

5/12/2012

3 Comments

 
Picture
There is enough hyperbole and vitriol to go around on this issue, so you won't find it in this post.  Let's take the slippery slope argument against gay marriage at face value.  Let's assume it is based for some people on a real fear that changing the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples will make it more vulnerable to a definition that includes polygamy, incest, bestiality, and even something that could involve a person and a thing.

Work with me.

There are two arguments I would make against the claim that "we can't allow this or it will lead to that."

Point One: we use the law to draw specific lines all the time. 
That's what it's for. 

Point Two: warnings about the risks of redefining marriage present gay marriage as though it exists along a continuum with polygamy, incest and bestiality.

About Point One
It is not the case that drawing the line beyond "one man and one woman" will mean we must draw it again elsewhere. 

Think about the laws that govern the freedom of religious expression vs. the freedom from religious imposition.  It is precisely in the courts and the legislature that we monitor the pendulum swings society takes around this issue.  Despite all the Sturm und Drang about it (including on my part!), I think we do pretty well.

Similarly, we will always have to attend to where to draw the line on civil liberties like the bearing of arms, and freedom of speech.  We will always be working to find consensus in these areas - stasis is unlikely.  Maybe that's a good thing: the push and pull keeps us in the middle.

It is a naive argument then, to say "if we allow this, pretty soon we have to allow that."  If we allow people to gather on the National Mall to demonstrate about unfair taxation or reproductive rights, eventually we will have to allow people to let themselves into your home and shout you down about their beliefs?  Of course not.  Allowing 16 yr-olds to drive will lead to allowing 14 yr-olds to drive?  No.  In fact, most of our laws are vulnerable to the slippery slope argument.  How much information should intelligence agencies have to provide?  When is self-defense an appropriate claim?  What accommodations for the disabled should employers have to make? 

We use the courts and the legislature to draw lines - it's how we operate.  People who support gay marriage are asking to have the line moved from including only heterosexual couples to including same-sex couples.  We aren't asking for the county magistrate to ratify the union of a man and his horse.

About Point Two
The various types of unions warned against by people against gay marriage can't all be lumped together. 

Hopefully it's just rhetorical flourish when conservative politicians predict that the demand to marry a sheep or a motorcycle is the logical conclusion of the effort to expand the definition of marriage.  I'm not even certain how to address that one - it tempts me to fall back on an appeal to common sense.  I try not to do that, because as a nation, if we could agree on what is "common sense" we wouldn't be in this predicament now.  But to paraphrase Jon Stewart, "Does your wife know you can't tell the difference between a beloved, life-long companion and a favorite turtle?"  I'll just say that when a person is seriously attracted to an inanimate object or an animal, the American Psychiatric Association calls it paraphilia, and recommends treatment.  They came to their senses and stopped including homosexuality in that category four decades ago, so let's try to separate those ideas now.

Pedophilia can be removed from that list of concerns as well.  It too is considered a psychiatric disorder, it is a crime, and the issues of harm and consent disqualify it from even being considered in the same discussion as the one about marriage equality.  The latter is about problematic laws against the marriage of two consenting adults, who would be legally be eligible to marry someone of a different sex, but are not allowed to marry each other.  The former is about sexual predation.

As far as incest, comparisons have been made with some humor about the greater legal acceptance in the US of marriage between first cousins vs. marriage between same-sex couples.  I honestly know very little about the arguments for and against cousins marrying.  I would just say that concerns that marriage between cousins is waiting on the slippery slope below gay marriage aren't valid, since it is already legal in many states. 

Regarding polygamy, this is the one question along these lines that I think is legitimate to raise.  While it is still a very different animal from same-sex marriage, which is a basic right that is currently being denied, the question of polygamy is most closely related because it is an arrangement that has been widely accepted in some realms, and is not necessarily an expression of individual dysfunction.

Monogamy is a purely social construct, without any grounding in biological necessity or psychological health.  It is a decision a culture makes about how it wants to organize families.  I personally am miles away from even taking the time to sort out the pros and cons of legalizing polygamy.  I don't think it's a priority, and because it has historically been so patriarchal, I acknowledge a distrust of the idea.  But at least here, we have a reasonable question: if we expand the definition of marriage from one consenting adult male and one consenting adult female to include consenting adult same-sex unions, why not three of the above?

This question then returns us neatly to Point One.  Legalizing one does not mean legalizing the other.  If an appreciable national movement to legalize polygamy were to form, it would have to take the same path as we are taking to legalize same-sex marriage.  Obviously, it is an arduous path.  They would have a long way to go to make their case.  And most importantly, the case for gay marriage would have nothing to do with it.  Gay Americans are asking for their constitutional rights to equal protection and privacy.  If people supporting polygamous unions intend to stake the same claim, their challenge to the law, like every other, will be taken on it's on merits, unrelated to challenge being made in the name of same-sex marriage now.
3 Comments

Spin Report #1

5/10/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Picture
Watch this space for updates on an already fascinating array of Republican responses to President Barack Obama's interview comments in support of gay marriage. 

First in: last night on FOX, Bill O'Reilly and Dick Morris muddle through an attempt to describe this as a bald political move.  They had a tough time of it.  They couldn't settle on what voting block Obama was going after.  Morris first suggests he is trying to lock in the gay vote, while O'Reilly sheepishly points out that the president probably had that vote already.  Morris shifts to the claim that it's an obvious grab for the middle-of-the-road voters.  O'Reilly is forced to acknowledge that minutes earlier they had just agreed that middle-of-the-road voters don't really care about this issue.  Morris flounders and seethes - perhaps Obama is pandering to the fringe.  O'Reilly looks like he'd rather be anywhere but there and vaguely agrees so he can change the subject to Morris's latest book.
Picture
(Stay tuned for more scrambling.)

0 Comments

Nothing but questions.

5/8/2012

4 Comments

 
Who are these people?
Picture
Picture
Picture


Why does this make them so happy?

_

Picture




What are they so afraid of?

What is it they think they have won?

"The higher you build your barriers
The taller I become
The farther you take my rights away
The faster I will run
The more you refuse to hear my voice
The louder I will sing"
Labi Siffre, "Something Inside So Strong"

4 Comments

We're showing our colors.

5/7/2012

1 Comment

 

It's 9:37 pm Monday evening.  This time tomorrow night in North Carolina, we will know a little more about who we are as a state.  When the votes are counted for and against the constitutional amendment on the ballot, we will have a little snapshot we didn't have before. 

Picture
Sitting here tonight, I have no idea how this vote is going to go.  I worked the early voting polls on several different days, and my experience was about 80% positive.  I knew I was working in something of a bubble at the Board of Elections site in downtown Raleigh.  But I learned tonight from other poll workers it was more of a bubble than I thought. 

We had gathered at the home of a local organizer, picking up flyers and balloons for tomorrow, and the mood was excited and cheerful, but we did talk about how unclear the results are now.  And others described what they had run into at early voting sites in outlying areas.

In Wake Forest, one volunteer had been lectured and insulted throughout his whole two hour shift.  In Johnston County, a woman there described being yelled at and even had trash thrown at her.  They said it was rough going and discouraging.  But at the same time, it's so clear that more and more people are paying attention to this issue and are disgusted by the amendment. 

We parted with plans to meet there tomorrow night, and it will be a party either way.  If the amendment passes, it will just have to be a rally to plan next steps.

North Carolina is my home, and I love it, warts and all.  We may find out tomorrow that we have a hateful streak that runs a little deeper than we knew.  But we also saw so many people whose awareness of this issue has grown by leaps and bounds.

One thing that I know tonight, before we have any idea what the returns will tell us, is that it is only a matter of time before we won't have to fight this fight anymore.  Gay marriage will be legal in North Carolina within a few years.  If the amendment is defeated, we still have to overturn the law itself.  If it is passed, we will just have to start from scratch and get it overturned.  No matter what, if supporters of this amendment think this question will be answered with finality tomorrow night, they have a lot to learn about their fellow North Carolinians.

1 Comment

4 yr-old son acting "girlish"? Pastor says squash him like a bug.

5/2/2012

1 Comment

 
Picture
Sean and Pamela Harris, Berean Baptist Church
Fathers, if you have a limp-wristed son, man up and punch him.  Tell him to go outside and dig a ditch, because that's what boys do.  If you have a girl who acts butch, let her know she's going to act, walk, talk and smell like a girl. 

So says NC Pastor Sean Harris.


I'm not paraphrasing here; these are real quotes from a sermon heard by hundreds of church-goers Sunday as their trusted pastor worked to fire them up to go out and vote FOR the constitutional amendment on the ballot Tuesday, May 8th.  And it was just one of the messages preached, to just one of the many North Carolina congregations that participated in the statewide project called Marriage Sunday last weekend.  The right-wing organization promoting the event, Vote For Marriage NC, claims to be in partnership with 6000 churches in the state.  It's not clear exactly what that means, and perhaps not all of them take a line so hard.  But it's frightening to imagine even a fraction of them preaching this sort of message.

Sean Harris, (above left), Senior Pastor at Berean Baptist Church in Fayetteville, NC, took the opportunity to urge his flock Sunday to root out any sign of homosexuality in their children early, and with all applicable force.  While he has since stated that he "would never, ever advocate hitting a child", he advocated just that from the pulpit Sunday.  "Dads, the second you see your son dropping the limp wrist, you walk over there and crack that wrist. Man up. Give him a good punch. Okay?"  Tell your effeminate sons: "You are not going to act like that. You were made by God to be a male and you are going to be a male." 

I ask you: how can it be possible in these times to not know that you are planting the seeds of despair and abuse with those words?

Harris later told the Fayetteville Observer that he was joking.  He said he believes members of his congregation know the difference between "when (I'm) saying something seriously and when (they're) supposed to just understand the intent and not the application."  In order to make that distinction clearer, Harris said, in the future he would say it differently.  But he has no regrets about the message itself.  ""Those weren't planned words, but what I do stand by is that the word of God makes it clear that effeminate behavior is ungodly. I'm not going to compromise on that."

Imagine this sermon falling on the ears of a parent who has lost a gay teen to suicide.  There's a local chapter of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, (PFLAG) just up the road from Berean Baptist Church.  I wonder if Harris would be willing to stand in front of one of their support groups and repeat this rant, in the same tone, with the same vehemence, and then take their questions and comments.
Picture
Harris has served as pastor of Berean Baptist for six years and is administrator for their sizable school.  There are nearly 400 children, grades K-12, under his watch.  He and his wife also have a son of their own.  Presumably not limp-wristed.

Fascinating update: Sean Harris has issued an official statement of retraction for his sermon.  If you go to the Berean Baptist Church website, you will find a banner near the top announcing the retraction and linking to three things.  A copy of the document, which reads like it was written with a lawyer standing over his shoulder; an audio recording of his statement, which mostly consists of him reading the document, flavored with a couple of obnoxious remarks; and an audio recording of his interview with WRAL reporter Brian Mims.  In totality I would say his point is this: "if you have a son you think is gay, I'm not saying crush his wrist, I'm saying crush his spirit." 

1 Comment

Push Back From the Pro-Amendment Camp

5/1/2012

3 Comments

 
"Everyone, gay or straight, is free to live as they choose," says this recent TV ad.  "But nobody has the right to redefine marriage."
(Fade out with American flag in the background, Holy Bible in the foreground.)
(Their Holy Bible.)
(Which according to the US Constitution cannot be used to define state law.  )

"The marriage amendment does one thing: it protects marriage as the union of one man and one woman, just as God designed it." 
(Shots of wedding rings, roses, and a smiling, "traditional" family.)

This one is chilling - crazy ideas from folks who come across as earnest, fair-minded pillars of society. 

Be afraid.  Be very afraid.

Dr. Patrick L. Wooden, Sr., Pastor
Upper Room Church of God In Christ
"We're not trying to shove our views down anyone's throat.  We're only defending the law as it is stated.  And there's no bigotry in it.  Marriage is by definition a union between a man and a woman.  We've never seen 'homosexuals only' water fountains, or 'homosexuals only' entry doors.  There are no signs that say 'if you're homosexual, go to the back'.  Homosexuals thrive in this country.  They do very well in this country.  I'm not opposed to that.  But when it comes to the institution of marriage, I submit to biblical authority."
Dr. Mark H. Creech, Executive Director
Christian Action League of NC
"The church has a role to play in bringing righteousness to bear upon the political process...This is an unprecedented opportunity for the church to bring the will of God, the righteousness of God, the teachings of Scripture to bear on the political process.  It's also an unprecedented opportunity that only comes once in a great while in history to make a mark on our most sacred of government documents, our constitution."

Vote AGAINST the Amendment.
For a sample ballot and voter information, visit:
Protect All NC Families.
3 Comments

Sample Ballot

4/25/2012

4 Comments

 
Picture
        IMPORTANT NC VOTER INFORMATION

The proposed amendment to the North Carolina Constitution, up for a vote on May 8th, will not be labeled "Amendment One" on the ballot as originally thought.  This is the amendment proposed by those who want to ensure that gay marriage can never be legalized in North Carolina.  If we can defeat the amendment, we will keep a path clear to eventually legalizing gay marriage in our state.  Defeat the amendment by going to the polls May 8th and voting AGAINST it.

Originally described as "Amendment One", the amendment is actually a referendum that will appear under the heading "Constitutional Amendment"  (See sample ballot above.)  Some advocacy materials still contain the Amendment One wording, and there was a story in the N&O still using it yesterday.  PLEASE SHARE THIS LINK.  The wording of the amendment itself is confusing enough, as are the real implications of the amendment.  Let's all make sure everyone knows how to find it on the ballot.

VOTE AGAINST!


For more information about polling places, early voting sites, voter registration, and the rest of the ballot, go to the Wake County Board of Elections website.


Get involved!  Time is running out, and the conservative push back is coming on strong.  Visit Protect All NC Familiesfor information about the amendment and its consequences, who is affected, who is rallying against it, and what you can do to help defeat it.
4 Comments

If you support gay marriage, this one is for you.

4/23/2012

0 Comments

 
Picture
Some NC voters have already decided they will vote to officially write ignorance into our state constitution on May 8th.  They will not be dissuaded over the next two weeks.  At this point, the rest of us can only hope to outnumber them.

To that end, I'll share something I've learned over a couple of decades of being involved in the fight for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights.  I hope it inspires you to discuss this upcoming vote with the people around you in whatever way you normally engage, knowing you may be helping the cause more than you realize just by talking informally.

Obviously many LGBT people are still in the closet, and the increasing popular attention to this issue is a double-edged sword; as voices of acceptance and support grow stronger, so do the voices of hostility and judgement.  For the same reason, some straight people who have gay loved ones can be just as closeted.  Even those who feel no personal connection to the issue, but are offended by the obstruction of gay rights, sometimes stay quiet too.  In certain environments, simply speaking up against intolerance appears treacherous. 

In the conservative settings we sometimes find ourselves in at work, at church, with relatives, or in some whole towns, voicing progressive ideas can feel like walking on eggshells.  So if you do feel comfortable speaking up for LGBT issues in a group situation, there may be someone quietly listening to you, amazed to find they are not alone.  You may not know it then, you may never know it.  But more than once I have later learned that incidental comments I've made have been silently appreciated.  It's an unexpected pleasure to find out that during some past party or break room conversation at work, I have unknowingly signaled my support to a quiet observer.  You don't have to show up at a rally to make a difference.  If you feel like you are in a position to speak up, even in a low-key way, do.

Of course in general I myself am a rowdier troublemaker than most.  But I also try to remember that sometimes social progress takes place without fanfare, in the simplest social settings. 

Just something to keep in mind over the next couple of weeks.  The TV ads and news stories are starting to get intense, so it's easy to get anxious.  Let's just keep talking to the folks in our own circles, and trust that most people, in the privacy of the voting booth, will do the right thing. 

VOTE MAY 8TH


Get all the voter info you need from the Wake County
Board of Elections website
  • polling places
  • early voting
  • sample ballot
  • official explanation of the amendment by the NC Secretary of State
  • listing of all the primary candidates in each party
Here are some great facebook pages to check out and share:
  • facebook.com/equalitync
  • facebook.com/ProtectNCFamilies
  • facebook.com/events/Vote-AGAINST-Amendment-One
  • facebook.com/pages/My-Marriage-Is-Not-Threatened-By-Gay-Marriage-in-NC
  • facebook.com/FaithProtectsNCFamilies

TO GET LEARN MORE AND INVOLVED:  The Coalition to Protect NC Families


0 Comments

North Carolina - leading the country in enlightened marriage amendments since 1875.

4/16/2012

3 Comments

 
"Intermarriage of whites and negroes forbidden."
Picture
Amendment to Article 14, Section 8, NC Constitution, passed 10/11/1875.
Text reads: The Constitution of N.C. Sec.-, All marriages between a white person and a negro, or between a white person and a person of negro descent to the third generation inclusive, are hereby forever prohibited. Read three times and ratified in open Convention, this 11th day of October, A.D. 1875. M.Ransom, President of Convention.
Johnstown Jones, Secretary.  W.M. Hardy, Assistant Secretary.
Intermarriage
of whites and negroes forbidden.
It took over 90 years to overturn this one.  Maybe we could save a century and just not pass the one against gay marriage on the May 8th ballot.

Vote AGAINST the Constitutional Amendment on May 8th, 2012, in Wake County, NC.
The amendment defines any marriage or domestic union in NC as invalid, unless it is between a man and a woman. 

A look at the amendment as it will appear on the ballot.

Picture

For more information about this proposed amendment, and ideas about how to help fight against it, visit Equality NC or Protect All NC Families.

3 Comments

Against the Amendment, For Marriage Equality

3/29/2012

0 Comments

 
Vote AGAINST Amendment One to vote FOR gay marriage.
Picture
On Tuesday, May 8th, North Carolinians will go to the polls to cast primary votes for US President, NC Governor and a number of other state offices.  Also on that ballot will be a referendum for an amendment to the NC State Constitution, called Amendment One.  The amendment - if it passes - will ban gay marriage in North Carolina.  NC law already prohibits gay marriage, but conservative Republicans in the state want extra insurance against future challenges to that law.  They want to make sure it would be as difficult as possible for NC to change the law and begin allowing gay marriage.

If you want to keep these anti-gay-marriage folks from putting up more barriers to gay marriage, vote AGAINST their amendment.  The language may sound confusing; just remember, vote AGAINST the amendment to vote FOR the people.
  • For a pretty unbiased report on what the amendment would do, see this recent WRAL report.
  • For more information about current public opinion on this issue and the odds of the amendment passing, click here.
  • For information about getting involved in the fight for gay marriage in NC, click here.
0 Comments

    Politics & Policy
    all posts by Julie Boler

    Categories

    All
    2012 Election
    2016 Election
    Better Angels Journal
    Capitalism
    Church/state
    Conservatism
    Crime & Justice
    Democracy
    Election Law
    Gun Regulation
    Lgbt Policy
    Liberal Theory
    Media
    Obama
    Poverty
    Race
    Reproductive Law
    Voting Rights
    World Affairs

    Archives

    February 2019
    January 2018
    March 2017
    February 2017
    November 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    May 2016
    October 2014
    May 2014
    November 2013
    October 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
Photo used under Creative Commons from nathanrussell