Love, fear and politics: Question One

My friend Amanda Painter works as a phone canvasser for Maine People’s Alliance, a progressive activist group. She has lots of stories about her fundraising phone calls, which sometimes turn into consciousness-raising experiences. I’ve encouraged her to tell some of the stories here — since this is grassroots politics, the real thing. No punditry, just actual human beings talking about the intersection of existence with the political process. Here is Amanda’s first article in this genre.

Tonight I spoke with Barry, the confused but well-meaning hippie. The call began typically, with my giving our standard rap explaining why we believe people should vote down a proposed tax-related referendum. Barry asked several genuinely interested questions about it and our stance, then asked what else is on the ballot this year. I told him a few of the issues my organization is taking a stance on, mentioning Question One only in passing.

Question One is a referendum to repeal a law legalizing same-sex marriage in Maine. The bill was passed by Maine state legislature this spring and signed into law by the governor. A confusing but high-profile referendum question aimed at repealing this law has been placed on the ballot this fall, mainly through the work of conservative religious groups here. I hadn’t yet had a chance to secure a donation from Barry, so I was reluctant to potentially jeopardize it by discussing another issue — especially that one. Barry had another agenda, immediately asking me what my organization’s stance was on Question One.

I told him we advocate a ‘no’ vote, based on a basic platform of human rights. With a fair amount of hemming and hawing, Barry expressed that he hadn’t made up his mind on this one, and held what he himself described several times as some opinions that might simply be “ignorant” and a little “redneck,” but hoped I might be able to explain a few things to him. I finally told him to go for it. Barry explained that despite being “an old hippie,” having friends in San Francisco, and having no problem with people being homosexual, he was afraid of a few things.

He was concerned that going so far as to legalize same-sex marriage would “promote” this lifestyle choice. He asked why there needed to be marriage when there were legally recognized domestic partnerships. Couldn’t we just extend things like being able to inherit a partner’s estate to those partnerships? He was afraid that going this far might encourage kids to just try being homosexual for fun, although he was aware of the idea that there may be a biological component to being gay. And finally he asked about the phenomenon of women suddenly deciding they’re lesbians and hating men after twenty-some odd years of marriage (a friend of his had been through this), and wanting to know how it is that people can “turn gay” after so many years of being heterosexual.

It was a lot to take on, but he seemed to be asking out of a genuine desire for some answers, or at least a glimpse at another perspective. I have to admit, I kind of skirted the whole ‘domestic partnership vs. marriage’ debate since it had some potential for argument, but did mention how awful it would be to have been in a loving relationship with someone for twenty years and then not be able to make decisions about the partner’s medical care if he or she was critically ill. As for the idea that legalizing same-sex marriage would encourage kids to experiment with homosexuality, I pointed out that there is still a lot of angst and fear surrounding coming out to friends, family, etc. in many places; it’s not something most people put themselves through without a lot of thought. More to the point, I reminded him that the portrayal of gays and lesbians in mainstream media is far more ‘promotional’ than a law allowing same- sex marriage could ever be when it comes to shaping kids’ impressions these days.

As for people ‘turning gay’, I explained that it’s more often the case that men and women in these situations generally have homosexual feelings from a very young age, but ignore and stuff them down out of fear and social conditioning until the pressure and unhappiness get to be too much; like continually stuffing clothes into a suitcase until it finally just bursts open all over the place. I also made an analogy to growing up in a certain religious tradition and realizing late in life that it didn’t fit, or simply getting married and having kids because ‘it’s what people do’, and then realizing down the line that you’ve been unhappy for years, even without homosexuality as a factor. Barry seemed to accept all of my explanations, but still hemmed and hawed a bit, repeating some of the things he’d mentioned. I realized everything he was saying began with “I fear,” or “I’m afraid,” and had a touch of the irrational to it.

The ol’ light bulb flashed on. “You know Barry, I just want to point out that you’re saying the word “fear” a lot. Making decisions from a place of fear usually doesn’t get us anywhere and makes us feel stuck. When we try to live from a place of love, things seem to open up and work a lot better. At least, that’s how I’m trying to live my life. Sorry to get all philosophical on you!” I said with a laugh.

“That’s the best thing you’ve said yet!” exclaimed Barry. “You’re right; making decisions based on fear never works for me. But if I make my decision based on my love for people, then I vote ‘no’ on Question One, because that means gay couples who have been together twenty years can take care of each other when one is in the hospital, right?”

I confirmed his statement and he told me that he’d pretty much switched his vote because of our conversation and that he should probably give me some money since I’d spent so much time talking to him. We completed the donation process, and then Barry confessed that his girlfriend would be happy, since she had been mad at him for thinking about voting ‘yes’. I managed to catch myself and refrain from asking him if that meant he was going to ‘get a little’ tonight. I like to think that he did.