The Marriage Amendment: Ban shrimp, too?

Another dozen or so letters on the Marriage Amendment. Some of these you will see in print, probably on Saturday's Other Opinion page:

Regarding the Sept. 15 letter “What God intended”:

I’m sure the letter-writer felt very smug telling us “what God intended.”  She says we should  “be obedient to God’s commandments” and not treat them  “as if they are a smorgasbord of suggestions to pick and choose from. “

May we assume she never eats shrimp or shellfish (Lev.11:10-12) or pork barbecue (Lev. 11:7)? That she sleeps in a separate bed during her menstrual periods and offers up a sacrifice of turtledoves afterward (Lev. 15:19-33)? That she welcomes illegal immigrants (Lev.19:33-34)?  That she neither has nor allows any family members to get a tattoo (Lev.19:28)?

I’m quite aware that Christ’s sacrifice was supposed to do away with all these silly OT injunctions, but the letter-writer can’t pick and choose one without choosing all.  Concerning those laws, Christ said the only important law was to “love thy neighbor as thyself.”

And as for same-sex marriage, I still haven’t heard anyone tell me how that undermines my marriage. Our politicians need to get out of our bedrooms and start making the lives of their neighbors better.

Margaret Maron
Johnston County

-----------------------

The recent debate over the rites of marriage, the definition of marriage, the overwhelming need for some to control all, the sound and fury that surrounds the issue has taken me somewhat aback. There seems to be an evergrowing need to hate and have others agree with various sundry hatred – high-fiving each other. Have we digressed to this point? Do we live each day one behind the other reaching for the thing that will make us feel that we are better than our neighbor?

If so I have to ask: Why do we reach, what are we reaching for and what gives any of us the right to reach.

What are we thinking?

Edward Conn
Warrenton

---------------------------------------------------------

The N.C. Same Sex Marriage Amendment is not enough! It is not complete!
We must also ban the other abominations in Leviticus. Legislators need to amend the bill to add bans on eating pork (Lev 11:7) and shellfish (Lev 11:10); different crops in a field and linen/wool blend clothes (Lev 19:19); trimming beards (Lev 19:27); and  tattoos (Lev 19:28). Since these are all given the same condemnation (abominations) as being equally evil, the bill is not complete without protecting the citizens of North Carolina from these other hideous sins. Surely since the abomination of same-sex marriage has been brought to the attention of the public, industries will not be able to overlook these other equally egregious abominations and will not locate in our great state of high moral import.

I know lawmakers are in a hurry to get home to their fundraisers so that they can continue to reduce the evil government interference in our lives and businesses, but I hope they take care of this before they leave Raleigh or at the very latest in November when they return to town to (collect weekly allowance, daily per diem, mileage and) take on another bill so critical to the economy, health, and vitality of our great state

L.F. Eason
Cary
---------------------------------------------------------

The News & Observer ran an editorial Sept. 14 speaking of our state's "10.1 percent unemployment rate, a full point higher than the national rate." The editorial continued, "At this point...the public is ready for some positive, aggressive steps to help them."

In the face of these sober facts, Raleigh was visited this week by government leaders displaying two very different priorities. The Republican-led North Carolina legislature returned to Raleigh for three days solely to pass an anti-Gay Marriage Amendment referendum. This, despite 80 North Carolina business leaders who cautioned the amendment is bad for business.

Meanwhile, President Obama came to Apex and Raleigh to explain his job creation ideas.

Maybe this was just bad political timing by North Carolina’s Republican leadership. Nevertheless, this legislative leadership appears out of touch with North Carolina priorities.

John Gordon
Raleigh

---------------------------------------------------------

I grew up in North Carolina in the 1970s, and it’s great place. Sandy beaches, nice little mountains and a heartland sprinkled with farmland and even a couple big cities. Having said that, as a gay man, I had to get out, just so I could survive emotionally.

Now living in San Francisco (aka Sodom and Gomorrah) where we have sex in the streets and eat small children, I thought North Carolina was more progressive given the migration of liberal Democrats from the north.

I find it hard to believe that someone like Jesse Helms could even get elected today. Clearly, I have to reevaluate this position as a result of this new anti-gay initiative.

I thought that North Carolina would be one of those few states in the South that could rise above the fray. I would often hear areas like Chapel Hill compared to an island of sophistication, in a sea of ignorance. If you go 5 miles outside of this area, you run into those folks where the baby Jesus will be back soon and evolution is still just a theory.

It’s time to grow up, North Carolina. Gay marriage is the only thing that’s coming soon.

Skillman Hunt
San Francisco, Calif.

---------------------------------------------------------

Over the long run, tolerance, civil society and forbearance will surely win out. That is the arc of history.

However, this week’s vote on the Gay Marriage Amendment was a real setback. North Carolinians of fair mind will now have a chance to offer their own views about the amendment. Apparently simple in word and intent, the consequences of the proposed amendment are decidedly unpleasant.

Before going to the polls, voters should read about the ramifications, which our legislators, in an act of political demagoguery and contrary to the advice of CEOs and many religious leaders statewide, debated in abbreviated session. Do voters know that the amendment could deprive many stable families from purchasing health insurance (a right many current state and municipal employees have, and a benefit offered by many corporations, including the state's largest employers)? Do North Carolinians know that protections for citizens who are victims of child abuse could be substantially weakened under the law? And do the voters know that were the amendment passed, it cannot be easily amended or corrected to protect from unwanted consequences, as legislation can be?

All of these are reasons for voters to reject the proposed amendment – and in the next election, to support wiser legislators. It is indeed a sorry development. The arc of history is clearly more positive.

Stephen Jaffe
Durham

---------------------------------------------------------

What a dark and sad day in North Carolina when the Senate and House voted to allow the anti-LGBT amendment to go to the voters. The only catch is that the date chosen is on the GOP's primary voting date in May 2012. My thoughts and questions to ponder about all this are as follows:

What gives a majority group of people the right to vote on a minority group of people's basic human rights?

The constitution is here to protect people is it not? So why is there going to be a vote to allow discrimination against a minority group of people?

There is already a law banning same-sex marriage in the state of North Carolina. So why put this on the ballot or in our NC constitution at all?

Wasn't this such a waste of taxpayer money to have this "special session”?

At one time, weren't the conservatives all about not intruding on other peoples lives? Perhaps that was the old conservative way.

How are the homosexual youth going to feel about seeing all the negative ads that the so-called Christians are going to have on TV?

There could come a time when there could be a constitutional amendment to ban the consumption of shrimp and shell fish in this state since the Bible clearly states eating them is wrong, according to Leviticus 11:9-12 and Deuteronomy 14:9-10. Not that I am a Bible thumper because I am not. However, I do have homosexual friends who are. Imagine that!

I could just go on and on about this subject, but why should I? Afterall did I vote on your marriage? So what gives you the right to vote on mine? How can anyone truly believe that this is Gods will?

Jill Kidd
Raleigh

---------------------------------------------------------

One of the reasons put forward for opposing the N.C. Marriage Amendment is that it will hurt business in the state. Au contraire! Think of the huge amounts of money spent on advertising to oppose the amendment. Or large amounts of protest tourism that will take place as huge numbers of protesters converge on this state.

Of course, this will all come from the gay-friendly states that surround North Carolina. Oh wait. That's right. We're the only state in the South without a traditional marriage amendment. Well, then never mind.

John Long
Raleigh
---------------------------------------------------------

The General Assembly has again attempted to use its power to thwart the future of another vulnerable group. After withdrawing needed budget support from age, racial, ethnic, gender and disabled groups, it is now asking North Carolinians to add a discriminatory amendment to the State Constitution to allow only man-woman unions. This supposed norm never existed in biblical times or any other until the Victorian era and then primarily for upwardly mobile married women [while their husbands were free to pursue other liaisons].

We should support in law any form of committed union between caring couples on equal terms. The first North Carolinians understood the importance of equality when they constitutionally promised access to education for our children, a guarantee that the current legislature erroneously overlooked.

Let us recognize the many-sided diversity of our state and be open to diverse caring families. Stable families are good for communities and good for children. They invite enterprising people into our state and prepare children who can successfully traverse and lead in a globalizing world.

Let us as citizens be wiser than our leaders and refuse to build inequality into our Constitution.

Nancy Milio
Chapel Hill

---------------------------------------------------------

Honestly, it’s distressing to me that I live in a place where such obvious discrimination is being exhibited as in the same-sex marriage ban.

I am a sophomore at Carolina Friends School, a place where, today, in our weekly silent meeting, we chose to rise above the hatred and “tolerate intolerance,” as a teacher of mine put it.

I found I couldn’t.

I understand that people supporting the amendment are simply standing up for what they believe in, just as I and so many others are by opposing it. Still, this one’s different. I don’t understand how to believe in discrimination.

With all my heart I hope that voters won’t allow this blatant ban of human rights to be added to the state constitution. Let same-sex marriage be recognized legally and let the benefits that come with marriage apply to same-sex partners.

Let me live in a state where everyone has the respect they should and where I can marry the person I someday fall in love with, no matter the person’s characteristics.

Hope Pungello
Chapel Hill

---------------------------------------------------------

There are many important milestones in the religious life of the faithful: baptism, the bris milah, communion, confirmation, bat mitzvah to name just a few. These ceremonies reaffirm a person’s life in their religious community and to their God. They do not change the way that person is viewed by the government.

But marriage changes everything: your relationship to civil law and the criminal justice system, to your insurance company, to your health care provider, your legal heirs and especially the IRS. All of your civil rights change.

We already have two working definitions of marriage, i.e. a legal one with specific requirements and no mention of God (if you are married by a civil servant) and a sanctified one defined by religion. It seems unfair that in America, religion sets the standard for all marriage. It should be a simple thing to separate a legal marriage (sanctioned by the state) from the idea of holy matrimony that is part of a religious life.

This clearer separation might help in our continuing struggle to be a just country and give all married couples the same civil rights.

Diane Vannais
Pittsboro

-----------------------------
Ignorance and bigotry know no boundaries, so please let's not make this Defense of Marriage bill a North/South debate or feel shame for where we live.

As November's ballot will reveal, our representatives are not truly representing North Carolinians on this issue. This year in particular has demonstrated that politicians countrywide take ridiculous stands that eat up time and money, instead of addressing more pressing matters.

So, NC natives, let’s ride this one out until Election Day. And if you transplanted Northerners feel compelled to move back to your old home state, make sure it’s just for the bagels and not in search of a more compassionate, intelligent society.

JoAnn Warn
Knightdale

-------------------
As a high school student in North Carolina, I feel as ashamed and embarrassed as ever to live in this state. I cannot think why lawmakers would try to ban same-sex marriages.

In my opinion, two people who love each other and want to spend the rest of their lives together, no matter their sex, deserve to have a marriage that is legally binding.

Although the Bible defines a marriage between a man and a woman, we live in the 21st century; ideas are destined to change over time.

I have many friends who are either gay or lesbian, and I see no reason why they don't deserve to be happy in the future. Do I treat them differently? No. Do I make fun of them? Absolutely not.

Gays and lesbians do not deserve the treatment they are receiving from lawmakers and the general public.

Look at New York and how many people celebrated the fact that gays and lesbians could legally marry. The population of gays and lesbians is growing; they are not just a small percentage of us. They deserve the same rights as everyone else, something lawmakers and the rest of the world needs to learn.

Matt Wotus
Cary