Monday, June 29, 2009

Georgia (XI) Congressman Nathan Deal

Today I continue with Congressman Nathan Deal, Republican, representative of Georgia's 9th Congressional District:

Dear Congressman Deal,

I write in protest of your opposition to marriage equality. You have voted in favor of an amendment to the constitution that would have denied same-sex couples across the United States their right to marry. This was not an isolated attack upon their civil rights, moreover, as you have consistently received a rating of "zero" from the Human Rights Campaign for your stance on issues of concern to LGBT citizens.

Marriage to the consenting partner of one's choice is the single most socially significant act that a citizen may freely undertake, entailing 1,138 protections, benefits, and changes of legal status under federal law. The freedom to make this choice is thus among every citizen's most sacred and inalienable rights, one that can not be taken away even by a vote of the majority. Your proposed amendment would have been a tragic black mark on our Republic, as it would have profaned our basic law with the taint of injustice and discrimination.

Unfortunately, too many civic and government leaders share your prejudices. For that reason, I and others propose that the U.S. constitution be amended to read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." Only when our basic law is thus amended or interpreted will the profanity of marital apartheid end, and the family be truly sanctified through the establishment of justice, fairness, and common decency.

I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking sponsorship of this reform. Perhaps on reflection you will see the error of your current views, and come over to the side of right. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and hope this message finds you well.

Sincerely,

Andrew Meyer

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Georgia (X) Congressman Jim Marshall

Today I continue with Congressman Jim Marshall, Democrat, representative of Georgia's 8th Congressional District:

Dear Congressman Marshall,

I write in protest of your opposition to marriage equality. In the last Congress you crossed party lines to co-sponsor a so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" that would have banned same-sex marriage throughout the United States. This decision was exemplary of a larger pattern of antipathy to the interests of LGBT citizens. You have received failing ratings for each of the last three Congresses from the Human Rights Campaign.

Marriage to the consenting partner of one's choice is the single most socially significant act that a citizen may freely undertake, entailing 1,138 protections, benefits, and changes of legal status under federal law. For government to deny citizens the power to make this choice on the basis of gender is senseless and arbitrary discrimination. How can Congress, or any elected body, dictate whom a citizen may love? How can the exclusion of an entire class of people from one of society's most basic institutions be fair? There is no logical answer to these questions, Congressman, and therefore marriage equality is the great civil rights struggle of our generation.

Your efforts against the rights of fellow Americans place you on the wrong side of history. There is yet time to repair your legacy, however. I and others propose that the U.S. constitution be amended to defend all citizens from depredations like the so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment." The surest defense against such oppression would be a "Marriage Equality Amendment," which would read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation."

I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking support for this reform. Perhaps on reflection you will recant your current views and join this good cause. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and hope this message finds you well.

Sincerely,

Andrew Meyer

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Georgia (IX) Congressman John Linder

Today I continue with Congressman John Linder, Republican, representative of Georgia's 7th Congressional District:

Dear Congressman Linder,

I write in protest of your opposition to marriage equality. You have persistently supported efforts to deny same-sex couples of their right to marry, even as far as co-sponsoring a bill calling for the amendment of the U.S. constitution to permanently and universally bar same-sex couples from the marital bond. Such an amendment would have been a travesty of justice and a black mark upon our nation's history, standing as one of the few times when our nation's basic law had been utilized to deprive citizens of their rights.

Marriage to the consenting partner of one's choice is indeed a natural and inalienable right. Such was the finding of the Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia, which overturned state bans on so-called "interracial marriage." The same principle of marriage equality that applied then in the case of race applies now with respect to gender. If two adults come together in mutual love, care, and fidelity, to deny them the 1,138 protections and benefits their compatriots may take for granted simply because they are of the same gender is rank discrimination.

Your actions up to this point put you squarely on the wrong side of history, Congressman. Future generations will look back and judge those who opposed marriage equality in the same light that we view past opponents of the civil rights movement today. There is still time to repair your legacy, however. I and others propose that the Constitution should be amended in the opposite manner you endorsed, to read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." If you recanted your former stance and took up the cause of this amendment it would go a long way toward atoning for your past assaults upon the rights of fellow Americans.

I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking support for this Marriage Equality Amendment. Perhaps on reflection you will lend your voice to this cause. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and hope this message finds you well.

Sincerely,

Andrew Meyer

Friday, June 26, 2009

Georgia (VIII) Congressman Tom Price

Today I continue with Congressman Tom Price, Republican, representative of Georgia's 6th Congressional District:

Dear Congressman Price,

I write in protest of your persistent and strident opposition to marriage equality. Not only did you vote in favor of the Bush administration's so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment," but as chair of the Republican Study Committee you have helped initiate other attacks upon the civil rights of same-sex couples. Last month, at a press conference coinciding with the proposal of a so-called "D.C. Defense of Marriage Act," which would prohibit the sanctioning of same-sex unions in the capital district, you declared, “Nothing can be more important than the sanctity of our families."

If you were truly concerned with the sanctity of families, Congressman, you would not impose arbitrary and unjust hindrances on the conduct of family life. If a couple lives together in mutual love, care, and fidelity, if they commit to work for their common welfare and that of the children in their care, would you not call them a "family?" If you single out that couple because they are of the same gender, and deny them the 1,138 legal protections that flow to families under federal law, would you call that justice? Such callous discrimination contributes nothing to the sanctity of the family, but is the among worst kind of profanity imaginable.

Unfortunately, too many civic and government leaders share your prejudices. For that reason, I and others propose that the U.S. constitution be amended to read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." Only when our basic law is thus amended or interpreted will the profanity of marital apartheid end, and the family be truly sanctified through the establishment of justice, fairness, and common decency.

I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking sponsorship of this reform. Perhaps on reflection you will see the error of your current views, and come over to the side of right. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and hope this message finds you well.

Sincerely,

Andrew Meyer

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Georgia (VII) Congressman John Lewis

Today I continue with Congressman John Lewis, Democrat, representative of Georgia's 5th Congressional District:

Dear Congressman Lewis:

I write seeking support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Such an amendment would read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." This reform would not entail an expansion of federal power at the expense of the states, but like the Supreme Court's ruling in Loving v. Virginia, would merely safeguard the intrinsic rights that all Americans possess and should justly enjoy.

Your own struggles and sacrifices in the cause of civil rights are renowned, Congressman. Unsurprisingly, you have spoken out strongly condemning attempts to permanently undermine marriage equality within our legal system. In response to the Bush administrations so-called "Marrriage Protection Amendment," you declared: "I have fought too long and too hard to abolish legalized discrimination in America to be silent when the President of the United States advocates writing it into the U.S. Constitution."

As you rightfully observe, denial of marriage equality is discrimination, pure and simple. Unfortunately, such is the reality throughout much of the United States. A constitutional amendment is the surest and most durable means to achieving basic fairness for all Americans with respect to family law. Would you sponsor a Marriage Equality Amendment in the House, Congressman? You speak with a profound and hard-earned moral authority. If you lent your voice to this cause no one could fail to give it due respect and consideration.

I trust you to act conscientiously with regard to this issue. In any case I thank you for your attention to this matter and your great service to our nation, and I hope this message finds you well.

Sincerely,

Andrew Meyer

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Georgia (VI) Congressman Hank Johnson

Today I continue with Congressman Hank Johnson, Democrat, representative of Georgia's 4th Congressional District:

Dear Congressman Johnson,

I write seeking your support for a Marriage Equality Amendment that would recognize the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. Such an amendment would read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." This reform is the surest and most durable means to bring fairness to our society and justice to the operation of our laws.

Your record since your election in 2006 has been solidly in support of the rights of LGBT citizens. You earned 95% positive ratings from the Human Rights Campaign for your first term in office. Moreover, you joined other House Democrats in co-sponsoring a bill to re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment, thus you clearly understand the urgency of civil rights issues pertaining to gender and sex.

A Marriage Equality Amendment would accomplish some of the goals of the Equal Rights Amendment. Though it is less ambitious in scope, its concerns are made pressing by the sustained campaign of discrimination and exclusion manifest in policies like Proposition Eight in California or the so-called "Marriage Protection Amendment" advocated by the last administration. If the champions of intolerance can advocate profaning our constitution with their discriminatory agenda, it is incumbent upon those of us who see the right to point out that the fundamental spirit of Republic will only be preserved by protecting, not obstructing, the inalienable rights of our citizens.

Though only beginning your second term in office, you have demonstrated great energy and seriousness of purpose. I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking sponsorship of a Marriage Equality Amendment. Perhaps you will see fit to lend it your voice. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and hope this message finds you well.

Sincerely,

Andrew Meyer

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Georgia (V) Congressman Lynn A. Westmoreland

Today I continue with Congressman Lynn A. Westmoreland, Republican, representative of Georgia's 3rd Congressional District:

Dear Congressman Westmoreland,

I write in protest of your opposition to marriage equality. You made opposition to marriage equality a cornerstone of your election campaign in 2004, and once in Congress were co-sponsor of a constitutional amendment that would have denied the right of same-sex couples to marry throughout the United States. More generally, you have established a shockingly poor record on issues relating to the rights of LGBT citizens, earning ratings of 0% for both of the last two Congresses from the Human Rights Campaign.

Marriage equality is the civil rights struggle of our generation, and your opposition to it demonstrates your tone-deafness to the spirit of our times just as your description of President Obama as "uppity" did during the general election campaign last year. No one can fault your religious beliefs as to what constitutes a legitimate marriage, but you may be criticised for attempting to unfairly impose your beliefs at the expense of the rights of your fellow Americans. According to many Christian denominations my wife and I, who were married by a rabbi, are living in sinful adultery. Should the state then refuse us a marriage license? If your answer is no, then the logical case for your opposition to marriage equality becomes quite obscure. If being Jewish does not disqualify two people from the equal protection of the law, why should being of the same sex do so?

The logical imperative of marriage equality is pristinely clear, yet discrimination remains effective through most of the Union. For that reason I and others propose that the federal constitution should be amended to read: "The right to marry shall not be abridged or denied by the United States or any state on account of sex or sexual orientation." Only when the constitution is thus amended or intepreted will our laws and institutions be brought into alignment with the basic rights of all our citizens.

I have set out to write every member of Congress seeking sponsorship of this reform. Perhaps on reflection you will see the error of your current stance and join our righteous cause. In any case I thank you for your attention on this matter and hope this message finds you well.

Sincerely,

Andrew Meyer