8/2/2019 Why Amendment One Passed in North Carolina

1/2

When North Carolinas General Assembly proposed Amendment One last fall, agroup that opposed the amendment proposed a campaign called One Million Conversa

tions. They suggested that each one who opposed the amendment talk to 10 people,to have open, frank, and friendly conversations about their concerns about the

proposed amendment. And if everyone who opposed the amendment spoke to 10 people who in turn spoke to 10 people, and so on down the line, there would have beena million conversations against the amendment.

That campaign idea was a good one. Rather than viewing those who supported the amendment as enemies, it viewed them as friends and co-workers and relatives who could perhaps be persuaded to change their minds.

I have no idea how many of these proposed conversations happened. But in the wake of the amendments passage, its worth looking at some of the reasons whyit passed. Because I think that this amendments passage gives a lesson for the

future. There were crucial mistakes made by this amendments opponents. Both ofthem were problematic. Together, they were fatal.

The first mistake was to view those who supported this amendment as bigoted, hate-filled people. In any legislative process, those who support and oppose do so for a variety of reasons. We are fortunate that most people in North Carolina are neither bigoted nor hate-filled. But over and over, the amendments opponents made these charges. It happened in person, in newspapers and magazines, and online. I witnessed an exchange in a restaurant where an amendment suppor

ter made a quiet, thoughtful case for the amendment, and an opponent proceeded to scream that the supporter was hateful, evil, and bigoted.

Not surprisingly, the conversation stopped.

In a political discussion, keeping conversations -- even among those who disagree -- friendly, civil, and pleasant is important. And assuming that those we disagree with are well-intentioned is perhaps even more important.

Next, the religious question. Those who put forth this amendment didnt frame itin religious terms, and it would have been wrong if they had. But a lot of theamendments supporters did. Thats because North Carolinians -- and Southerners, in general -- are often deeply religious. And that religion is often something t

hat informs day to day life. Anyone who has lived in the South for a length oftime has had the experience of being asked -- even by casual acquaintances -- about ones religious life, church attendance, and other such matters.

Those who made religious arguments for this amendment usually did so out of firmconvictions. The amendments opponents may have disagreed, but the arguments nee

ded to be answered. I was shocked by the mockery unleashed online, in print, and in person against those arguments. Opponents failed to take amendment supporters religious views seriously. And when the arguments werent taken seriously, the supporters stopped talking.

Beware when those you disagree with stop talking. It doesnt mean they agree withyou. It just means they have stopped listening to what you say. And mocking d

eeply-held religious beliefs (of whatever variety) guarantees that you will notbe taken seriously.

Religious people in the South are often well-versed in their Bibles. Even whenthey are not otherwise well-educated (although they certainly might well be) they know their Bibles. Those who opposed the amendment often failed to respond seriously and thoughtfully to the biblical points. Even clergy and others who should have been able to answer seemed to revert to not taking the biblical arguments seriously.

8/2/2019 Why Amendment One Passed in North Carolina

2/2

Now that the voting is over, what can we all (those who opposed this amendment,and those who favored it) learn?

First, takes ones opponents seriously, and listen to them. Assume the best aboutthem. If possible, get to know them.

Second, dont mock deeply held beliefs, religious or otherwise. You can certainlyexpress disagreement, but mockery and sarcasm dont work, and will usually work a

gainst what one is trying to accomplish. If you dont have the ability (for whatever reason) to respond to anothers beliefs, try to find someone who can respectfully do so.

Third, realize that although your opponents may vote as a bloc, they are not a group. They are individuals who have differing life experiences, motivations, andreasons for their actions.

What can we take away from this? I think our biggest lesson is to remember thatour opponents are not our enemies. We as a society have lost an ability that w

e need to re-gain -- that of listening to and taking seriously those who disagree with us.

Listening to someones arguments and considering them is not compromise. Its taking them as individuals seriously, and appreciating them as individuals and not casting them as faceless members of a group.

We can learn to listen. We can learn to understand what others are saying evenwhen we disagree. Our neighbors are not our enemies.