I Will No Longer Call Myself A Missourian

I have spent most of my forty-seven years living in Missouri, the "Show Me" state. And what the voters of my state showed me yesterday is that we are one of the most backward and fearful states in the nation. Yesterday was nothing to be proud of.

Voters in my state overwhelmingly decided to practice the politics of fear and discrimination, passing the ballot measure to amend the constitution legally banning the right to same sex marriage by a margin of 70% to 30%, giving us the shameful distinction of becoming the first state in the nation to do so. If there was any doubt before, there can be no doubts now, that this is still very much a bible-belt state, ruled moreso by social issues than pocketbook issues.

Fear has trumped fairness for all in Missouri. The voters have said that gays are second class citizens, and that straight people alone can enjoy the legal right to marriage. They, and they alone can enjoy the benefits of a marriage license. They, and they alone can become married in a house of worship. They, and they alone can enjoy the right to hospital visits. They, and they alone can have the right to raising children legally. They, and they alone will have the rights to the death benefits of a beloved spouse. And, they and they alone have the right to a messy divorce, spousal support and alimony.

At the risk of angering my African-American brothers and sisters, the struggle for gay civil rights at the beginning of this century is, to a degree reminiscent of the black struggle for civil rights in the 1960's. The denouncement of gays in the state of Missouri and elsewhere around our country should be an affront to all Americans who believe in the ideals and rights that millions of citizens have fought hard and shed blood for during our history. Will gays be forced to recieve prominent tattoos for identification purposes? Will public water fountains, restrooms and restaurants become instruments of segregation? Probably not. But one has to wonder where does this stop? Who will be next?

There is no doubt in my mind that the message Missourians sent yesterday will be recieved by other states as a green light to proceed with their own discriminatory legislation. I may live in Missouri, but I will no longer call myself a Missourian, for it is clear that it is not just a place, but a state of mind that is completely foreign to me. My apologies to everyone.

Joe Fields

They have had this bigotry blasted to them in every concievable fashion. They tried to find another side but everywhere they turned they got the same crap. You know what they say, when you start to hear one thing all the time you start to believe it as the truth. MO. was brainwashed on a massive scale. Don't feel alone though. My State of OH is probably next.

But not at the outcome. Rural Missourians are firm bible-belters, and Kansas City and St. Louis alone are not enough of a force to turn the tide of bigotry.

More than anything I am disappointed and angry that reason could not win the day.

Social issues are also the reason that Governor Holden lost his primary race yesterday. Rural Missourians were rabid about the "Conceal and carry" gun issue a couple of years back. Governor Holden fought hard to defeat the gun issue. The issue WAS defeated, but rural Missourians never forgave Holden. Now, it is almost a given that Matt Blount, the Republican candidate for governor will win handily in November. The Missouri legislature is overwhelmingly Republican. As far as I'm concerned, the Republicans can have this state. They deserve each other.

My wife and I are staying in Kansas City just long enough for my 16 year old son to graduate from high school. Once he graduates we are moving to northern California, and we will never look back.


Joe Fields

on issues you care about..you'll be much happier.

Northern Cal is so beautiful, too. And by then I predict the gropenator will be Gone!

I just hope my state doesn't follow suit this November. (Arkansas here)

?

Any provision of a state constitution or state statute may be attacked as violating the US Constitution. Normally, challenges to state law (even challenges based on US Constitution)initially are handled in state courts. After the state's highest court rules either way, it would go directly to the US Supreme Court on appeal.

b/c my answer was "I don't know".

You don't need to apologize.

Like I said in another post...gay marriage WILL happen. It's just a matter of time. It's inevitiable, it's a certainty and it will happen.

Right now, I'm angry at the people who voted for this anti-gay amendment. But they will ultimately lose.

Thank you for your post, your anger and your caring.

Terry

It should just be. It really bugs me that homophobic assholes get to vote against the rights of gays, or the rights of any minority group for that matter.

I'll let ya know in about 90 days

... And it's called the State of Massachusetts.

Proud to be from the birthplace of the American Dream.

Since marriage fairness took hold here, not a single piece of the sky has fallen.

for the welcome. :)

It seems the majority of 'pious' missourians dont actually believe in 'personal freedom' ....

They believe in the power of the state to compel consenting adults to not engage in mutual communion, even if it is their freely chosen will ...

Pitiful ....

in which Bartlett verbally spanks a "Dr. Laura" clone, who whips up hate against the GLBT community based on one Bible verse. Bartlett lists a bunch of other rules listed in the Old Testament, asking if his brother should be put to death for planting two crops side by side, or Leo, for working on the Sabbath.

It made me burst into tears, knowing this vote, and other such votes, were coming.

The intolerance of alleged Christians -- who pick and choose what they want to believe out of the Bible, and then claim that they believe every word of the Bible is the abolute word of God -- makes me want to vomit.

This country is going BACKWARD ... until we get Democrats in control again, all around the country, it will continue going backward until we've gone PAST 1776, and we again have a monarchy. And its name will probably be Bush.

My prayers go out to the gay community, and the community of compassionate humankind, in Missouri.

I know people will want to stay and fight ... but perhaps if some of these states start losing large amounts of their population, they'll think better of their decision.

"By any means necessary."

I am ashamed and embarrassed this morning. I went to the polls yesterday, not thinking it would be possible that this would pass. Imagine my shock last night before I went to sleep to see the margin of victory for all the religious nut jobs in this state. I was born and raised in Missouri, spent several years overseas, and when given the choice of where I wanted to move after my husband left active duty, chose to come home. What a mistake! I can't wait till I finish school so I can leave this place. I am so disgusted right now.:puke:

of years here, you know the anguish and frustration I feel about our regressive politics. I surrender this state to the Republicans. They can have it. Time to move on after my son graduates from high school. Thankfully I only have to wait two long years.

As much a "the media" wants to tarnish Massachusetts, we actually are a most wonderful state. Anyone who wishes to deride us, will do so at their peril.

of years here, you know the anguish and frustration I feel about our regressive politics. I surrender this state to the Republicans. They can have it. Time to move on after my son graduates from high school. Thankfully I only have to wait two long years.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It's unfortunate, but not unexpected. We're a country headed in the wrong direction. Too many of us have become misguided by the idealism of the evangelical movement. Very sad. But don't feel too bad. Try living in Texas. With the exception of Austin, it's just as backward.

:hi:

Glad to be here! :hi:

'A Letter to Louise: A Biblical Affirmation of Homosexuality


http://www.godmademegay.com /

This was posted ca 6 months ago on DU. Read the letter.

Information about the author

Bruce and Anna Marie Lowe, 2002

The author is a graduate of Ouachita Baptist University in Arkadelphia, Arkansas (1936) and of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas (1946). He married Anna Marie in 1944; they have two sons and two grandsons. His ministry included the chaplaincy during World War II, pastorates in Louisiana, and teaching Bible at Louisiana College, Pineville. He left the ministry in 1966 and worked until retirement in the Office for Civil Rights of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.



Anna Marie is a graduate of Henderson State University in Arkadelphia (1946) and attended Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. She has been the church organist or pianist in churches and missions since she was eleven.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Al Franken just released a burst of sarcasm on the narrow-minded people of the state of Missouri who voted for the anti-gay-marriage amendment -- believing they are "saving marriage."

Franken said "if only this amendment had been passed a little earlier," it might have saved the first, second and third marriages of Rush Limbaugh, and the first and second marriages of Newt Gingrich (who's, amazingly enough, still on his third marriage).

Bwahahaha. Hypocrites.

hit the nail on the head. Fortunately it didn't pass there.

The original link is no longer available, so I am posting the editorial in its entirety...if this breaks DU rules, moderators can delete.

Of particular note are the last two paragraphs....


Atlanta Journal-Constitution
January 30, 2004

Homosexual marriage ban protects hate, not families

The Georgia Senate is considering a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would bar marriage between gay people; sadly, the bill is all but guaranteed to pass.

However, as our senators vote and debate the issue, they should at least have the decency to be honest about what they're doing.

This is not about protecting marriage or family. Talk of protecting marriage is merely an excuse, a politically convenient disguise for the real agenda behind this proposal, which is to bash gay people. In fact, those who are advocating this amendment are behaving just like those despicable bullies on the playground who try to make themselves popular by picking on the weak and the unpopular.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

Per DU copyright rules
please post only four
paragraphs from the
copyrighted news source
and please provide a
link to the source.


Thank you.

DU Moderator

barefoot walking around in grocery stores suck, and the high Missouri income taxes suck, and....

That's the reason I have been living in the greatness of Dallas for the past 7 years!

:)

But I have no use for Texas, either.

At least the metropolitan areas aren't. Most people in Dallas are immigrants from just about everywhere.

MO's income tax only ranks 38th as of 2003. If our damn taxes were higher, maybe our roads wouldn't be so lousy, and maybe our people would be better educated. In fact most of this state's problems can be traced to too-low taxes.

It is shameful, and I am completely disillusioned with this state. We will have to make sure that this doesn't distract us from the real issue, though.

That would be getting rid of the Idiot in Thief.

*Not that gay marriage isn't an issue, and we will have to address this constitutional ban eventually, I just think we should concentrate on removing "misunderestimated" and the entourage first.

After all, as my friend Harry would say "A fish rots from the head down."

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

you said:

"passing the ballot measure to amend the constitution legally banning the right to same sex marriage by a margin of 70% to 30%, giving us the shameful distinction of becoming the first state in the nation to do so."

Alaska, Hawaii, Nebraska and Nevada have already added the same amendment to their state constitutions.

the first.

Dems in their legislature. Albeit, a repub gov right now.

What would happen if everyone who opposed amending their state's constitution to forbid gay marriage simply left their state when it happens?

Typically, aren't progressives, or even moderates or conservative with a brain, typically better educated, make more money, and more civically responsible?

Why not just leave these backwater screwheads with their mandated morality? Then their states can dry up from the 'brain drain'.

Maybe after a few states start to see the migration of their best and brightest out of their economies, and watch their opportunities start to dry up over several decades, they'll have second thoughts.

I'm not talking about forming a 'liberal Nirvana' state, I'm merely talking about moving out of states where there exists efforts to write discrimination into state constitutions. You don't even have to be liberal or progressive or whatever, just opposed to such draconian and anti-American measures.

I know it's a pie-in-the-sky scenario, and it sounds far too easy, but one can dream.

Gov. Holden and others fought hard to get this issue on the August ballot instead of November when all the Bushites would be out in force. The turnout of Democrats for this primary election was huge--almost 2-1 over Rethugs. Mostly because of the high-stakes primary between Holden and challenger McCaskill. And the amendment STILL passed by 70 - 30.

I've lived in Missouri for ten years, and the fact that almost half a million people voted against the most controversial issue imaginable speaks volumes for this state. Missouri is not brainwashed, nor is a monolithic block of religious conservatism. The fact is that many, many straights, regardless of their party affiliation, cannot wrap their minds around this issue. We have to remember that nobody in their right mind was even discussing gay marriage four years ago, and now people are being asked to decide in a very final way whether they approve of the idea or not. Not to mention the fact that it took decades just to get to the point where even one state dared to have a civil partnership law. Actual marriage is a huge leap beyond that, and I dare say there is not a single state in the Union that would vote to approve it at this time, not even California or Hawaii. If I'm wrong, well good, happy to hear it; but let us not single Missouri out for the apparently excessive stupidity and malice of it citizens.

Understand this: this WILL be challenged in the courts, and it will NOT survive. It's going to be a hugely wrenching thing, the overturning of a statewide vote, but that vote simply does not stand up against the US Constitution. People will be shown that they are wrong on this issue, and that no amount of religious blathering will make them right. It's not going to be pretty, but it WILL HAPPEN.

I've witnessed a great number of regressive positions Missourians have sided with over my lifetime I will leave it in your hands. I'm outa here in two years.

I hear ya Joe. I'm also a resident of Missouri. Last night as my wife and I watched the returns come in we were very disappointed. I had felt that it would pass but at least at a closer margin. The 70/30 was just awful. I looked down at my 6 month old son as he played on the floor and I told him that even though things like this happen now I think in his lifetime he will see it 'legal'.

This state is just so damn backwards... only thing worse is Kansas(hey I'm a Missourian I have to get a Kansas jab in its required by law).

I wish we could take some of our go go hate support and fix some damn roads and bridges around here.

We should take heart in one thing though. This could have been worse... At the beginning of all of this Republicans here in the state were trying their hardest to ensure this vote took place on Nov 2nd. Which of course would have at least in my opinion dealt Kerry a tremendous negative blow.

That is what concerns me for Ohio as their amendment is on general election day.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

an American, if you don't agree with every major policy or action undertaken by this country?

I generally don't like this form of absolutism from either party. This country is big enough, great enough, diverse enough to feel like we're all on the same team, even though the team heads off in a direction at one time or another that we don't agree with.

I don't want to discount your feelings, but I have to wonder how old you are. Maybe not old enough to have had the opportunity I have had to experience growing up in the land of the free?

To be honest, I am not too proud to call myself an American right now, either.

As I have stated, I have seen over forty years of Missouri and national politics, plus the social trends. We are going rapidly backward. I see a civil war brewing. Sorry I cannot feel optomistic.

If there's going to be a civil war in America, it's opinions like yours-- and like minded individuals on the other side of the aisle-- who will precipitate it.

I get the distinct impression that you would rather go to war, REAL war like the Civil War, with you fellow American brothers and sisters because you refuse to compromise and acknowledge that YOUR way isn't necessarily the path we choose to proceed along. In essence, you would rather kill conservatives rather than share SOME conservative ideology in the United States-- and attempt to affect change through legitimate, peaceful, democratic methods.

At least you sound very willing to embark on such a crusade.

I don't know what to say to that.

Maybe you haven't gotten upset enough over the freedoms we are losing, the bad air we are going to breathe, water you can't drink, rampant division of classes, and a whole lot more. Excuse me if I get righteously pissed at homophobia, or any discrimination that is being pushed in this country by our great and illustrious leadership.

Nebraska, Alaska ...

If you boycott Missouri, you will probably be hitting the main areas of the state that were not for this whacky amendment.

Tourism income in St. Louis and Kansas City doesn't deserve to be hurt by the mid-staters who voted for this.

I am not gay and really don't know anyone who is gay (that I know of), but my question to these people is HOW does this AFFECT YOU?

If 20 trillion gay couples were all of a sudden "married" how the hell would that bother me? How would it "infringe" on the "sanctity of marriage?"

I don't get it and I am not even coming from a Liberal perspective here. I just want to know, "what's it to you people" who want to create amendments and other assorted bullshit.

If anything is weakening the sanctity of marriage it is us heterosexuals who are getting divorced at alarming rates, cheating on our spouses, etc...Maybe we should work on that before effing with gay and lesbian people.

It is nothing but a political tool to divide us yet again.

The sanctity of MY MARRIAGE is ONLY AFFECTED BY what my wife and I do with it?

and make all good points. Not a single opponent of Gay marriage has ever come up with a rational explanation for exactly how this will hurt the "institution" of marriage. Common sense says it will bolster marriage, but that doesn't seem to be much in use on this subject.

... Since marriage fairness became the law in Massachusetts, and I don't think anyone can show that life has suddenly changed for John and Jane Q. Public.

Material impact on the lives of average citizens: Zero.

Moral impact of treating all citizens with dignity: Quite a nice feeling to know that we're doing right by America's ideals!

Missouri disgusts me with this. I have been gone a year, and the whole state has taken a crazy sharp right turn. I am somehow not suprised by this. The governor lied about his support for LGBT issues. And he is the only dem power in the state right now. 3/4 of the counties go Puke in any given election. I say good riddance to the Show Me State. How about "show me" some equality.

Though my pride in the state will not recover for a long while.

This vote simply confirmed my worst thoughts about a large portion of my fellow Missourian, that they are religious, insecure nutjobs who lack both brains and education to discern bullshit and fundie brainwashing when they see it. Having lived in state all of my life, and in different parts of the state, I've seen both the best and the worst that our state has to offer. And it saddens me to admit that the worse is winning.

At one time, there was a solid progressive block consisting of St. Louis, KC and Columbia that could force the state into the twentieth century, no matter what manner of fight the rest of the state put up. But over the past ten years, that coalition has changed for the worse. Part of it is population growth and change. Good ol' fundie heaven, Springfield, has grown radically, and the people moving into the area down there are just as bad, if not worse, than the natives. Somewhere along the line people started taking pride in the fact that Flush Limpballs is from our state, and started accepting his word as gospel. And the three big liberal/urban areas have become progressively more conservative, as those with little or know job prospects out in the rural areas stream into the cities, bringing their fundie religion and morals with them.

I love this state, and will not be driven from it. I will stay here and fight back the tide, as I've been doing for the past thirty years. Joe, I understand your rage and frustration, but please, channel that energy into helping us take our state, not abandoning it to the radical right. Besides, wherever you go, this kind of conservative crap is going to follow, if not already be there waiting for you. Better to stay and fight on ground that you already know than move and have to fight on ground that favors your foes. Even California is no longer a safe haven, for it too is swinging right.

But there is one last hope on this issue. I have it on good authority that this amendment will be challenged in the court system. And generally they have more sense that the population at large, especially in these times.

I moved to Florida last year and can't believe how antigay this place is...particularly outside of South Florida.

Interestingly, I am interviewing for a job in (where else) Massachusetts next week. Wish me luck!

"Mr. President, recently the state of Missouri has passed a ballot measure to amend their state's constitution banning gay marriage, a position you have supported to such an extent as to propose amending the federal constitution. This ban, which certain people support based on their interpretation of their individual religions, has often been supported based on the concept of "preserving the sanctity of marriage". At of this moment, however, there is NO evidence that any heterosexual-based marriages have been, shall we say, torn asunder due to the concept of the potential existence of gay marriage. However, there IS an action that very often threatens heterosexual-based marriages that is also addressed extensively in various religions. While this action is occasionally addressed in various laws, prosecutors routinely ignore these laws despite this action's obvious threat to the sanctity of marriage. Consequently, legal intervention on the federal level may be necessary to preserve the sanctity of marriage and stop this action. This action is adultery. Since you have expressed a desire to preserve the sanctity of marriage, would you like to state your support for a federal constitutional amendment banning adultery?"

Just asking. :)

with such questions.

Regular interviews are subject to the president interrupting the interviewer, filibustering, and pontificating about unrelated subjects. In addition, the president takes great umbrage if the interviewer dares to get the president back to the point of the questions.

On the other hand, the presidential debates allow for complete, well-thoughtout questions, a time limit on answers, and the requirement that answers need to be "bulletproof" since an uninterrupted rebuttal will follow from Mr. Kerry.

I can't imagine anyone outside of Jim Lehrer (I'm assuming it'll be Mr. Lehrer again) at a debate of being able to ask the question I asked, in the manner I asked it, in order to allow the maximum exposure of hypocrisy.

In addition, the debate is broadcast everywhere. As for a regular interview, this is the guy who survived Andy Hiller ("Who is the leader of Taiwan, India, etc. ?").

BTW, I wish you well dealing with your state.

and the 2000 election craziness there. Seems like there's two Missouri's: the "sane" Missouri and the crazy freeper Missouri that votes for an Ashcroft.

He was working the little ol' lady church circuit back during his first run for MO Governor. I remember him having that glazed, Moonie, would you like to buy a flower, to help out our church look of a "true believer." Scary

...and the repeal of those laws just made the ballot - with, this time, the support of the mayor and city council.

Credit boycotts, the hard work of activists, what have you - but they've made it happen in the most conservative city in the Midwest.

Get to work.

I can't tolerate their intolerance! Didn't know it was a requirement for living in the state but now I do.

How can people call themselves Christians when they have no tolerance for all of God's children.

An earlier poster mentioned that Missouri has taken a right turn. Well If everyone sane person left the state, the right turn would be that much more sharper.

The main problem that I see for the state is the democratic party. I live in the inner city of St Louis, and I see very little effort on behalf of the party to inform nor campaign for votes from those who support them the most.

I would bet that there are more people in this city and (surrounding areas) that didn't even know that there was a vote yesterday than actually went to the polls.

I talked to many that didn't know there was a vote or what would be voted on. The Democratic establishment around here knows of conscious attempts to suppress information from those that would support them (mostly poor, whose time is spent trying to eek out a living without time for politics), yet do very little to to inform or actively seek their support by addressing issues that directly affect them, making them aware that there can be change.

the attitudes in this city that "nothing can be changed by MY ONE VOTE is rampant to a degree that would shock even the midly informed.