If this were some totalitarian government, you would never have the right to disagree, for their codes were never derived considering your agreement to begin with. Here in America, even in Georgia, the so-called ‘law’ is no longer a law and is then rendered null and void if a community ceases to agree with it in spirit and in truth. Legislators must then reach a new agreement with their constituents. Conversely, the deal of agreeing upon a code works both ways. Legislators are not the slavish servants of their constituents. They are the public servants of the best interests of their constituency and coworkers with them in that aim. Any good and sensible legislator would never settle upon a bad agreement with their constituents. They would never acquiesce or be afraid to engage with their constituents to help them understand what is right, fair, equal and just and why it must respect the rights and freedoms of everyone involved, even its most numerically vulnerable members. They could very well do this using the same influences and passions they used to sell themselves to get elected. That’s if they stand behind something more meaningful than a hollowed out name.
Personally, If I were to serve in the state legislature and my constituency demanded that I do wrong and I could not manage to help them see the light of day and then desire to do right by all of its fellow citizens, I would publicly resign. I would give my true reasons and leave them to find someone else to represent their evil. My moral integrity is too expensive to be for sale, it is too strong to be bullied and the love in it makes it sweet enough on its own so that it can not be sweet-talked into acting in contrary ways. Echoing one great Georgian, "A genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus."- Rev Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Legislators who are worthy of shame and deserving of losing their place as respected leaders are those who make bad agreements and then blame it on the consensus of their constituents when called out on it.
Amendment 1 fails as a law by definition and in purpose. By Georgia now making marriage an institution of discrimination, it has helped absolutely no one and has injured many. It hasn’t given anyone a job in a state hit particularly hard by the recession. It hasn’t helped not one family stay in a home threatened by foreclosure. It hasn’t helped anyone get married or stay married. In fact, after 2004, the census has reported a rise in the incidence of divorce in Georgia. Then the only purposes Amendment 1 has served is to make life harder for its LGBT citizens who wish to engage in loving and stable relationships, build homes and lives together and maybe raise children. It has achieved nothing and has had no effect other than to lessen the status and human dignity of its LGBT citizens. It is hard to imagine in this century, a state wishing to do harm to a segment of its population for no just cause, and for the American people to tolerate this form of tyranny and not fiercely repudiate it. But this is exactly what we have here with Amendment 1.
One who defies unjust or false laws must do so openly, lovingly and with a willingness to accept the consequences. I assert that any individual who defies a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment, fines, social harassment or the termination of his employment in order to arouse the conscience and awareness of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing a greater respect for a higher law; the Law of Love. Forget not that privileged groups seldom share their privileges without determined, persistent and assertive action from the oppressed. 156 years ago, Frederick Douglass said this, “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them.” If we all committed to this, I am thoroughly convinced that Amendment 1 would not survive one more year. But this ‘all’ begins with you.
"Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, they send forth a tiny ripple of hope...These ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance."
-Robert F. Kennedy
The impact of legal discrimination against same-sex relationships has had wide-spread, deep and devastating ramifications. Does Georgia currently prohibit us from forming romantic relationships, cohabitating and raising children? No. But we have to be mindful that sex between same-gendered partners was illegal in this state just ten years ago. What challenges a couple must face if making love to one another is considered a crime in the state in which they live? When love is a crime, the society which makes it so, lives in sin. May we help it to repent. Just the threat of criminalizing the demonstrations of our love was enough to unnecessarily inhibit many of us. We had to express our affections under the cloak of darkness and in secret as though our love was a dirty shame. This is important to note because unless one has accepted their love to be a dirty shame, how could anyone ever comply and conform to such laws? No pun intended, but no one can ride your back unless it is bent. Therefore, just in the often already uncomfortable process for anyone to find a suitable life partner is then subject to another layer of difficulties when it comes to the differing comfort levels and the shame of internalized homophobia. Are we then to be surprised at the epidemic of single LGBT adults who have experienced little if any romantic relationships with someone of the gender they are most comfortable and natural with? Because of these challenges, are we to be surprised at the higher incidence of promiscuity among LGBTs? Because of the higher rates of promiscuity, are we to be surprised at the disproportionate levels of STD infections among the LGBTs? Are we then to be surprised by the disproportionate incidences of suicide among LGBT youths?
At this point, you might agree with me. But then the question might be "Is the fight worth it?" Numerous studies have been conducted to conclude that those who are married, tend to live longer, be more financially stable and earn more. They suffer from far less physical and mental illnesses than those who are single. "It is not good that Man should be alone; I will make him a helpmate." -Genesis 2:18. Those who argue that marriage is solely for the purpose of procreation are missing GOD’s first intentions for marriage before the benefit and responsibilities of parenting. The role of parenting is temporal, while marriage is for a lifetime commitment. Since it has only been in the recent years that our relationships are no longer criminal and no longer persecuted, without marriage rights, some over 100 benefits at the state level and 1138 benefits at the federal level are denied. These include tax-breaks, assuming social security benefits of a deceased partner, waiving of estate taxes upon the inheritance from a deceased partner, the right to make medical decisions and funeral arrangements on the behalf of a partner, the sharing of medical benefits, the power to sponsor partners for citizenship and continuing custody of children after the death of one partner and many other rights.
I have spoken to many married couples who have expressed to me that being and having a husband or a wife, brings with it a completely different set of expectations and societal benefits than having the casual boyfriend/girlfriend relationship. It is not something with which to enter into lightly for there are major financial and life consequences for making a mistake or failing to honor those commitments the law then makes binding. For this reason, couples will work harder to resolve their differences and strengthen their relationships. Before marriage, it was just about love and less about commitment. My own brother has expressed to me the new level of respect he has been given since becoming a married man. It shows that he is capable of commitment and able to take important things seriously. This factor does often give married people an edge above unmarried people in seeking higher paying, stable and respectable employment with high responsibilities. When was the last time we have ever had a single person even get into the primaries of seeking the Presidency? It is indeed a status symbol our society has long respected and valued, to legally call oneself "married". Those who are excluded from this privilege by the government are made to live as second-class citizens, which is evidence of societal abuse. The late Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. has made it clear, "If America is to remain a first-class nation, she can no longer have second class citizens."
With this long list of denials, the foundational tools to protect one another and what we build together over a lifetime is still directly destabilized and put under jeopardy by the very governments in which we are expected to support with our tax dollars and protect with our very lives through military service.
((Look forward to this conversation continuing with Part #3))
No comments:
Post a Comment