The Carolinas’ Most Comprehensive Gay & Lesbian Newspaper
Lambda Network to develop
youth leadership Page 7
Drug breakthroughs
offer promise Page 18
Published Every Two Weeks On Recycled Paper • Volume 11, Number 2 • June 15, 1996 • FREE
Do you support federal legislation
banning same-sex marriages?
ly
10%
0%
37%
favor
29%
oppose
34%
not
decided
The above analysis reports the findings from a national
survey of 1,022 adults who were interviewed by
telephone May 31 through June 2, 1996.
Poll finds no consensus on
Defense of Marriage Act
WASHINGTON, DC—There is no clear
consensus among Americans on the so-called
Defense of Marriage Act, according to a poll
conducted for the Human Rights Campaign
(HRC). The survey also found Americans over
whelmingly believe this issue should not be a
legislative priority, and that it will not be a lit
mus test for candidates.
According to the national poll of 1,022
Americans conducted between May 31 and
June 2 by The Mellman Group, 37 percent of
Americans support the bill “defining marriage
as only between men and women for the pur
poses of federal law,” while 29 percent said they
oppose it.
This lack of agreement was confirmed in
another line of questioning. A total of 39 per
cent of those polled said they think this legisla
tion is unnecessary, while 31 percent termed it
necessary; a full 30 percent said they were not
sure of the importance of such a law.
“There is no consensus among Americans
on the Defense of Marriage Act,” said David
M. Smith, communications director of the
This legislation is more
likely to be viewed as
a political ploy.
Human Rights Campaign. “These results in
dicate the Republican strategy of using the gay
marriage issue as a political strategy is failing to
gain traction with voters and has the potential
to backfire.”
While opinion on this bill remains muddled,
an overwhelming majority of those surveyed
agreed there are more pressing issues facing
Congress than attempting to outlaw same-sex
marriage. Only 13 percent said that “passing
this law should be an important priority.” A
total of 73 percent said “there are lots of other
issues” that are much more important than cre
ating a federal statute to define marriage as be
tween a man and a woman.
Further, this legislation is more likely to be
viewed as a political ploy than as an attempt to
strengthen the American family. More Ameri
cans (32 percent) accept the view that “this law
is just an attempt to play politics, scapegoat
gays, and embarrass supporters of civil rights
for gays, and is not really very important” than
adhere to the view that “gay marriage is a real
threat to the American family and it is impor
tant to pass the law” (27 percent). 41 percent
would not even venture a guess on this topic.
This issue will not be a litmus test for can
didates in November, according to the poll.
Only 17 percent said a candidate’s vote against
the Defense of Marriage Act would be a “very
convincing” reason to vote against that person.
By contrast, 54 percent said a candidate’s vote
to cut Medicare would be a “very convincing”
reason to vote against that individual.
Another indication of the low political reso
nance of this issue: Only 10 percent of those
polled said they would be very likely to vote
against a candidate with whom they otherwise
agreed if he or she opposed this law. Six
percent said they would be very likely
to oppose a candidate with whom they
otherwise agreed if that candidate sup
ported the Defense of Marriage Act.
The bill was introduced last month
in both houses of Congress, with Re
publican presidential hopeful Bob Dole
as one of its primary co-sponsors.
“It is sad that after a distinguished 35-year
career in Congress, Bob Dole will end his Sen
ate career with a bill that is nothing more than
cheap election year gay bashing,” Smith said.
The poll results are based on a national sur
vey of 1,022 adults interviewed by telephone
between May 31 and June 2. The study is based
on a random-digit dialing probability sample
of all telephone households in the continental
US, which ensures that every telephone house
hold had an equal chance of participating in
the survey. The margin of error for the sample
as a whole is +/- 3.1 percentage points at the
95 percent confidence level. T
North Carolina joins the
anti-marriage bandwagon
by Eagle White
Q-Notes Staff
RALEIGH—^The ink was barely dry on the
May 20 Supreme Court decision overturning
Colorado’s Amendment 2 when a North Caro
lina state senator introduced legislation which
has mushroomed into what will probably re
sult in a statewide ban on the legal validity of
same-sex marriage.
NC Senate Bill 1302, introduced May 23
by Gaston County Republican James Forrester,
has resulted in a flurry of homophobic grand-
standing in the General Assembly’s short ses
sion. The timing of the bill’s introduction in
dicates that its reasons for being are two-fold
— conservative backlash against the Supreme
Court’s Colorado decision, and panic about the
effects of an anticipated ruling in Hawaii’s Su
preme Court, which would uphold the legality
of same-sex marriages in that state. The Ha
waii decision would potentially affect all states,
because under Article IV, Section 1 of the US
Constitution, “Full faith and credit shall be
given to the public acts, records and judicial
proceedings of every other state...” Much like
the “quickie” marriages and divorces performed
in Nevada, same-sex unions performed in Ha-'
waii would be legally binding in other states.
North Carolina is not alone in introducing
legislation banning same-sex unions. Accord
ing to NC Pride PAC for Lesbian and Gay
Equality, at least 36 states have introduced simi
lar legislation. In 17 states, the measures have
been defeated, while nine states (the most re
cent being South Carolina) have approved leg
islation which invalidates same-sex unions.
North Carolina already has a law which says
marriages may only take place between a man
and a woman.
Shelter offers
a safe place
by Susan Tedder
Q-Notes Staff
CHARLOTTE—Her shoulders were
pinned to the bed by her lover’s knees. The bar
rel of her own .38 caliber pistol rested between
her eyes. “Go ahead, pull the trigger,” she said
to the woman who had shared her life for two
years, “You’ll have to scrape my brains off the
sheets.”
Melodramatic lesbian fiction? Unfortu
nately, no. But, rather, an all-too-common re
ality. That was 1981.1 survived to tell this story,
but every 21 days, another woman doesn’t.
Statistics show that domestic violence, while
all too prevalent in society at large, is much
more pervasive in the lesbian community. One
study shows that 52 percent of lesbians suffer
some form of abuse at the hands of their lov
ers. A woman is beaten every 15 seconds. Men
suffer, too, but at about one-tenth the rate.
These numbers are excessive, particularly when
most abuse is never reported to anyone.
For lesbians in particular, there has been a
hesitancy to ask for help. United Family Ser
vices (USF) Shelter for Battered Women in
Charlotte wants the gay and lesbian commu
nity to know that help is readily available.
After receiving a phone call from another
professional asking where a lesbian could get
help dealing with an abusive situation. Shelter
counselor Jane Taylor realized that the message
Senator Forrester has used underhanded tac
tics and a lot of double-talk to get this issue
before the General Assembly. To circumvent
legislative rules which allow only local legisla
tion to be introduced during the Assembly’s
short session, Forrester introduced his bill as a
measure for Iredell County, a portion of which
he represents. Local bills, once introduced, may
be adopted by other counties. Other state sena
tors, sensing a high-visibility issue which could
prove controversial during this election year,
have set upon the issue of same-sex marriage
like a pack of rabid dogs. Lawmakers from 11
counties — Alamance, Caswell, Cleveland,
Davidson, Davie, Gaston, Lincoln, Person,
Rowan, Rutherford and Surry— quickly signed
on to the “local” bill.
In a May 23 press release, NC Pride PAC
Executive Director MK Cullen said, “This un
derhanded attempt to prohibit same-sex mar
riage county by county is offensive to the les
bian and gay community, our supporters and
anyone who believes in the Constitution. An
attempt to discriminate against gays and lesbi
ans in this calculated manner is a direct affront
to the spirit of the ruling the Supreme Court
handed down...saying that a specific group of
people cannot be denied their rights.” Addi
tionally, the American Civil Liberties Union of
North Carolina (ACLU-NC) issued a written
statement which calls SB 1302 “unconstitu
tional” and “bad public policy.”
SB 1302, which Forrester inexplicably says
is not intended to discriminate against gays and
lesbians, was referred to the Senate Committee
on Local Government and Regional Affairs,
chaired by Luther Jordan (D-7th District).
On May 30, Forrester, whose seat in the 39th
See MARRIAGE on page 9
of help and hope was not being relayed to the
lesbian community. She wants that to change.
Taylor said, “The Shelter serves lesbians, always
has, always will. But, evidently no one else
knows that. Even if it is known, lesbians are
not calling, probably for safety reasons. Just
saying we serve lesbians is not enough.”
Abuse takes many forms. It can be physi
cal, emotional, sexual, stalking, or even simply
destruction of property. If these things are tak
ing place in a relationship, there |s a problem,
and it should be addressed before it escalates.
Abusers do what they do to maintain power
and control over their partners. The abused
person often feels at fault, alone, isolated and
See SHELTER on page 30