Bending towards justice

Standard

It started out a close race: 55/45, 53/47, back and forth. But it was early in the night, with few precincts reporting in. The balance shifted mightily to 60/40 and ended 61/39. Amendment One passed.

The citizens of North Carolina chose to embed discrimination in the state constitution.

I had already been embarrassed to have such a proposal on the ballot. Now I was ashamed.

As I wrote about Amendment One, as I spoke and made phone calls, as I stuck that AGAINST sign in my yard, I came to appreciate the battles that have been fought—that continue to be fought—for civil rights. My heart shifted from logic to justice.

I started to feel the impotent rage that many before me must have felt. Anger at the tyranny of the majority, anger at the institutional bigotry, anger at an unfair system.

Relief that it is not my personal life affected. Guilt that I didn’t do more. Guilt that I could so easily put it out of my everyday mind.

Guilt about the curious realization that I might not have been strong enough to fight for civil rights, for women’s equality, for mixed-race marriages.

How do you accept such a defeat and, even in the knowledge that the law may change in 20 years, how do you keep going in the fight? How do you channel the rage for a sustained battle?

I felt bitter, heavy, low.

My salvation came from the unlikeliest of places: the Greater Raleigh Chamber Economic Development Forum.

Joel Kotkin, “uber-geographer” and futurist, spoke for a half hour on where the Triangle ranks in a variety of categories that land it time and again near the top of “Best place to [live/work/your-verb-here]” lists. He spoke of geographic and generational trends. He showered the Triangle with praise.

During the Q&A session, the last question asked was “What will be the impact of passing Amendment One?”

His short answer: Probably not much. Thirty states have similar laws or amendments and we haven’t seen an immediate migration away from those states—mostly because it’s not practical.

His longer answer: Laws like this are an artifact of the past. They are remnants from a prior time. They will go the way of anti-miscegenation laws.

Two main factors tend to influence attitudes on gay marriage, he said: age and where people live. The younger they are and the more urban they are, the more accepting they tend to be of gay marriage. The older and more rural, the less accepting.

Kotkin was confident that anti-same-sex-marriage laws would be removed within his lifetime.

As he spoke, I observed many heads nodding in agreement.

Laws like this are an artifact of the past. That was my new touchstone.

I could tolerate this one step back because I knew the two steps forward would come…with time.

***

 “I do not pretend to understand the moral universe; the arc is a long one, my eye reaches but little ways; I cannot calculate the curve and complete the figure by the experience of sight; I can divine it by conscience. And from what I see I am sure it bends towards justice.”

—Theodore Parker (abolitionist Quaker 1853)

2 thoughts on “Bending towards justice

  1. Rich

    Sometimes, the real issues get lost in what is presented to the voters. I have spoken to MANY people who say they do not oppose same sex marriage, but they did vote FOR Amendment One.

    I do not believe the passage of Amendment One should be seen as a statement of desire by North Carolinians to disregard the civil rights of its residents. I believe the passage of the amendment was due to a lack of clarity around the issue and a lack of choice.

    In politics, we mistakenly believe that an issue passes or a candidate wins because they are the first choice of the voters. In reality, it is often a statement against the alternative choice. In the case of Amendment One, the only choice was to pass a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage. Had the voter been offered an alternative choice, I think we would be looking at very different results.

    Additionally, if the amendment had read “This amendment will intentionally limit the civil rights of and discriminate against any married or joined person other than a man and a woman without exception or alternative” I believe the vote would have gone the other way.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s