THE OCCASION FOR THE RALLY AGAINST THE MARRIAGE AMENDMENT Mount Zion Baptist Church May 5, 2012

Several of us who are clergy have committed our lives to the struggle for freedom and justice in our country and state. We have become veterans if this struggle, and have seen its progress and reversals. While many of us hold to the traditional view of marriage between a man and a woman, we are careful when we step beyond our faith communities into the area of Civil Law. We are clear that the laws of the state have to protect all of its citizens and not seek to establish a particular religion nor prohibit the free exercise thereof. We oppose any attempt to legislate people into our particular faith convictions. People have to come to faith out of heartfelt conviction as free moral agents under God. While we understand the importance of constitutions and laws and consider ourselves law abiding citizens, experience has also taught us that people without compassion can use law to further divide people and to advance their own hidden agendas. We have seen this enough to recognize it when we see it, and experience has taught us to be wary of the wolves that dress up in sheep clothing. We stand against the proposed marriage amendment because we see it as a sophisticated political tactic aimed at dividing minorities from each other to dilute the voting strength of those voters who are very concerned about issues like jobs, healthcare, and education, and justice for the most vulnerable of our citizens and those who would like to be citizens. Politics is so often ugly because it sets up a we against them. We believe that the proposed amendment confuses and complicates the lives of many North Carolinians under the disguise of concern for marriage. There are too many unanswered questions around this amendment. If marriage between a man and woman is the only valid and recognized domestic union in this state, what does this mean for all the other living arrangements of people with respect to the receiving of benefits, equal protection under the law, immigrants, children of unmarried parents, grandparents raising children, etc. It is simply not clear. The language of this amendment opens a door that could damage many unsuspecting people. Further, if existing statutes already state that marriage is between a man and a woman in this state and that same gender marriages are not recognized, why do we need an amendment that will almost certainly entangle the courts in legal battles for years to come ? This amendment may pass, but history needs to show that those who would deceive us did not fool all of us. Today we expound upon six points that we ask every voter to consider concerning this amendment.