COMMENTARY: Freedom at stake in county known for independence

c. 1997 Religion News Service (Tom Ehrich is an Episcopal priest in Winston-Salem, N.C., an author and former Wall Street Journal reporter. E-mail him at journey(AT)interpath.com.) UNDATED _ Freedom is suddenly at stake in a county that prides itself on having been the first to cast off British shackles. Long before Charlotte, N.C., became a […]

c. 1997 Religion News Service

(Tom Ehrich is an Episcopal priest in Winston-Salem, N.C., an author and former Wall Street Journal reporter. E-mail him at journey(AT)interpath.com.)

UNDATED _ Freedom is suddenly at stake in a county that prides itself on having been the first to cast off British shackles.


Long before Charlotte, N.C., became a financial capital _ the city is the brash home to two of the nation’s largest banks _ its surrounding county was the site of the Mecklenburg Declaration. Issued in May 1775, 14 months before Thomas Jefferson took pen in hand, the Mecklenburg Declaration is remembered locally as the colonies’ first declaration of independence from British rule.

Now, Mecklenburg County is fighting over sex. County commissioners recently voted 5-4 to ban county funding for any group that offers”exposure to perverted forms of sexuality.” At first glance, the issue seems to be the arts, specifically any work that would”promote, advocate or endorse behaviors, lifestyles and values that seek to undermine and deviate from the value and societal role of the traditional American family.” But it appears the ban could apply also to Planned Parenthood and other groups working in sex-related areas, such as adolescent pregnancy and AIDS.

If taken literally, the ban is an absurdity. It’s hard to think of a major work of drama or literature in which sexual issues don’t play a key role. From”Oedipus Rex”to”Hamlet”to”The Scarlet Letter”and best sellers like”The Bridges of Madison County,”sexual behavior and sexual identity are critical themes for exploring our deepest motivations and tragedies.

Even the Bible is replete with sexual themes _ like patriarchs turning to domestic servants when wives proved infertile _ few of which would fit neatly into some canon called”traditional American family.” Does the county plan to deny funding to its own hospital, where out-of-wedlock childbirths make up a substantial portion of the case load and the emergency room deals daily with child molestation, wife beating and rape?

Will candidates for county office no longer include the divorced or never-married? Do the commissioners intend to disenfranchise the vast majority who no longer fit the traditional-family stereotype of working dad and stay-at-home mom with two kids? Whom exactly do they claim to represent: an idea of family that hasn’t existed for decades _ if it ever existed _ or people as they actually are?

But the funding ban won’t be taken literally. It has two specific targets: homosexuality and abortion. And the drive behind the ban isn’t to promote an American way of life embodied in a declaration of independence, but for control, for the power of a majority to silence a minority.

If the commissioners are truly concerned about what gets promoted, advocated or endorsed, they might want to examine the impact of their own action.


To our children, the ban says,”Money can be used to control other people, and freedom means having enough money to call the shots.”Now that is something Jesus did preach against. He said hardly a word about sex, but he had plenty to say about money and the ethical morass of using money as if it, or oneself, were God.

To homosexuals, the ban says,”As long as you insist on being different, you don’t belong.”That’s a strange message in a progressive city like Charlotte that has worked hard to shed its plantation attitudes about race.

To inquiring minds, the ban says,”Reality is too frightening to contemplate, so certain subjects that make us squeamish won’t be considered, even though those subjects strongly influence our lives.” To others who diverge from self-perceived community norms, the ban says,”Watch out, you could be next.”Government decisions to make public places more accessible for the handicapped, to make employment accessible to all, and to find humane alternatives to incarceration, among others, are decisions grounded in a national ethic of tolerance and fairness. We have said as a nation that the dominant group may not abuse the rights of the less-powerful.

The commissioners’ ban isn’t just an embarrassment to a city trying to be world-class, but a violation of the very ideals that long-ago colonists vowed to defend. This nation isn’t about sexual norms, it’s about freedom.

MJP END EHRICH

Donate to Support Independent Journalism!

Donate Now!