Hate=hate

The North Carolina General Assembly has dishonored itself within the legal tradition by passing the Defense of Marriage amendment. As explained by Bob Geary’s “Citizen” column in The Independent, this bill was only passed using two thinly veiled political loopholes, one including the oh-so-slight amendment of Senate Bill 514 from a classification of pertaining to “Nutrient Sensitive Waters” to this monster before us. Moreover, the decision will be made by voters in the May primary election rather than in the November general election of 2012 because those 10 Democrats—cough, sell outs, cough—feared that the traditional hate-mongering crowd might vote with the other lever. Is this democracy?

Most of our state politicians must understand that this bill will fail come next May. The state legislature barely had the votes to get it off the floor. I understand that many of our southern brethren have passed similar bills and a race to the bottom is in order. Is this really how the “New South” falls? We have forgotten our history: The 1967 Loving v. Virginia ruling from the United States Supreme Court stated that anti-miscegenation laws were an unconstitutional deprivation of citizens’ rights to substantive due process, protected by the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The court wrote, in part “Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival ... ” What “compelling government purpose” denies the LGBTQ community its constitutional rights to substantive due process?

Sexuality exists as the basic human condition. In other primates, most notably in bonobos, sexuality extends well beyond procreation. Michael Foucault argued that the separation of sexuality into deviant and normal forms emerged as the bourgeoisie took the capitalistic reigns from feudal aristocratic powers. After defining themselves as superior based upon adherence to their so-written sexual norms, the bourgeoisie demanded that the proletariat also follow suit. With these regulations rose the discourse of sexuality in the very pathological form that we ignorantly accept. Above all, the sanctity of bourgeois marriage was to be protected from racial, class and gender equality.

The historical struggles in communities of color proved that civil disobedience coupled with non-violent property nullification can and will force the hegemonic legal system to honor its alleged ethical commitment. The time has come and gone for such action—we have been asleep at the wheel. On our campus, why must the LGBTQ community stand alone against such oppression? Our legislators have chosen to make a last stand; they understand that my generation no longer overwhelmingly supports institutional sexual repression. However, we have a long way to go when it comes to individual hate and this bill hopes to buttress that filth.

As this vote approaches, there will be a massive campaign from various conservative groups waged across our airwaves and television screens. Imagine that such a debate was occurring about gender equality or institutional racism—we would not allow it. That fight came, was partially won and continues to progress. Our democratically elected officials have pandered to hate groups in their abandonment of the legal process. They hope to legitimize a disgusting and hateful debate that will harm our state and campus in ways that most of us will never know. Imagine reckoning with the reality surrounding love in this climate. Imagine sitting with those parents you must face, watching legitimized campaigns equate what you know as love with rape, bestiality and pedophilia. How many children sit in foster homes because wonderful people are not allowed to raise them with truly accepted love and understanding?

This Defense of Marriage amendment equates directly with the historic racist, misogynistic and class-based oppressive legislation which continues to scar our state. Duke does not want to be on the wrong side of history. Christian leaders at Duke have been brave thus far but a radical separation and organization is needed. Reynolds Price followed the words in red, something I cannot say of the hate-mongering and divinely blessing wing of the church. Duke faculty and students should demand a demonstration of solidarity with our LGBTQ community. We support the right for people to love who they wish and how they wish to do so. Dr. King said “At the center of non-violence stands the principle of love” but he acknowledged that “a riot is the language of the unheard.”

I would caution North Carolina’s elected officials against sacrificing citizen’s rights, legal precedents, and ethical procedure. Communities of color, gender and classed suffering must recognize their solidarity with the LGTBQ community. Legislators must recognize that hate speech—an imposing violence upon a being—demands equal and definite response. Likewise, Duke as a private institution should regionalize a dialogue of acceptance and historical clairvoyance. Students of this university valiantly took the Allen building in 1969 to enact civil rights progressions at Duke. Similar, if not more radical, actions are demanded of those communities who have already had their fight or look forward to it soon. Wake up, Duke. Hate shall not be tolerated upon our campus or this state that we now call home.

Josh Brewer is a Trinity senior. His column runs every other Tuesday.