It was election night, 2004.  In spite of the fact that the rest of America was gathering around their TV sets, anxiously awaiting the results of what many believed to be the most important presidential election in perhaps 50 years, the Bettendorf City Council was holding its regular meeting.  But it was an important meeting; one during which they would decide upon one of the more volatile issues of our day - Gay and Lesbian Rights.

An organization called Equity Quad Cities - an organization dedicated to insuring that all Quad Citians enjoy same rights and protections as other Americans, regardless of sexual orientation - had called upon the City of Bettendorf to join the other 5 cities in Iowa, Davenport being among them, which have expanded their civil rights ordinances by adding sexual orientation to their list of protected groups.  Equity Quad Cities understood that in Bettendorf, this was going to be a difficult struggle.  Several years ago, when the issue was before the Davenport City Council, the public debate was heated and disturbing.  They expected no less in Bettendorf.

The process for getting this passed was as follows:

First the proposed amendment had to go to the Bettendorf Human Rights Commission.  There, according to the rules set by that commission, it had to win a super majority vote of at least 5 to 1.  So in July, this issue came before the Human Rights Commission, but was defeated by a vote of 3 to 2.  After much public outcry, the commission reconsidered and passed the amendment by a vote of 4 to 2.  Still, this was not the required super majority.  However, the matter still went before the city council.

Bettendorf Mayor Mike Freemire proposed conducting a public referendum to see how the majority of residents felt on this issue.  However, the members of the city council rejected that proposal, in favor of their dealing with this amendment as they would any other city ordinance.

The protocol in the Bettendorf City Council is that such a matter requires three consecutive public readings, with open discussion, and after each, the amendment must be voted upon and passed.

As many of you know, I am the co-chair of the Quad Cities Anti Hate Coalition as well as a member of the Religious Concerns Committee of Quad Citians Affirming Diversity.  It was in those capacities that I attended and participated in these city council meetings.  In fact, the Anti Hate Coalition had already taken a public stand on this issue, writing a letter to the Bettendorf Human Rights Commission, urging its passage.

The first city council meeting was held on October 5^th.  When I entered the chambers, there was a moderate size crowd present.  I sat next to Karen Metcalf, my Anti Hate Coalition co-chair.  Bill Zessar, another member of our Coalition, was present as well.  Not being a resident of Bettendorf, I had decided to refrain from speaking as long as the situation did not call for it.  And, if I felt the need to speak, I would speak in my capacity as one of the co-chairs of the Anti Hate Coalition.  Much to the surprise and delight of the supporters of this amendment, of all the speakers that evening, only one spoke against it.  Karen shared the text of our letter to the Human Rights Commission and informed the council that they would be receiving a similar letter.  There were some wonderfully articulate presentations from some Bettendorf residents who happened to be lesbians.  A member of the Bettendorf Human Rights Commission spoke as well.  When all was said and done, the city council voted 5 to 2 in favor of the amendment.  While we advocates left the council chambers elated, we knew that it was not going to be so easy the next time around.

The next reading took place on October 19^th.  As expected, the forces of opposition had rallied.  On this particular evening, the speakers pro and con were about evenly split.  Those speaking against the amendment primarily were speaking from a particular religious perspective - the religious perspective that considers same sex behaviors as sinful.

Prior to the meeting, Bill Zessar and I had a serious discussion about one of the major arguments we could expect to hear from the opponents; the argument that homosexuality is fundamentally sinful because it is a life choice.  Bill and I agreed that this myth needed to be debunked.  We understood that this myth of choice was pivotal to the beliefs of right wing Christians.  Their entire “sin” argument was based upon it, for sin, by its very nature, is the result of the choices we make.  If sexual orientation is not a choice, then how can it be sinful?  Indeed, if it could be successfully demonstrated that sexual orientation is not a choice, then those on the religious right would be forced to confront their own bigotry.  Indeed, they would be forced to confront the ultimate theological irony - that our sexual orientation is part of the way in which God created us, and therefore to discriminate against someone on the basis of sexual orientation is not to proclaim God’s will but rather to deny God’s creation.  It was to this purpose that I came to that meeting prepared to share a text taken from the website of the American Psychological Association, which states: “No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.”^[1]

As the meeting progressed, and the arguments on both sides were offered, it became increasingly clear that I would need to make this presentation.  What we were hearing from the opponents was frighteningly similar to other expressions of prejudice; statement which, if you replaced in them phrases like “gays and lesbians” and “homosexuals” with phrases like “blacks” and “African Americans,” there would be no doubt but that these statements would be considered racists in nature.  If you replaced those phrases with the word “Jews” then they were chillingly antisemitic.  The proponents of the amendment once again spoke eloquently and movingly.  While there were Christian clergy speaking in opposition, there were also Christian clergy speaking in favor; one set thumping the Bible, the other set speaking of God’s love, and compassion, and justice.  When it came time for the vote, there were some council members who felt the need to explain why they were voting the way they did, and there was the Mayor who felt the need to explain his position - standing opposed to the amendment - even though he did not have a vote.  We all held our breath, and in the end the 5-2 majority in favor of the amendment stood.

That brings us back to that election night meeting.  I went to that meeting wondering how many would show up on such a nationally significant night.  Though I arrived at City Hall early, there was not a seat to be had in the chamber.  People had brought signs with them, all in opposition.  As with the other two meetings, Karen was there and we found ourselves standing together in the coat closet.  No sooner did I enter the room than a little old lady handed me a sheet of paper.  Karen and I read it together and we were aghast.  It was a letter to the city council, signed “A Concerned Citizen,” and there is only one word to describe its contents, “pornography.”  It purported itself to be a description of homosexual sexual practices.  It was sick and perverse; so much so that there is nothing from that letter that I could even consider reading to you in this sacred sanctuary on this sacred day.  One of my colleague, Greg Moore, a Presbyterian minister, turned to the little old lady and asked, “Madam, did you write this?” to which she nodded “Yes.”  “Then don’t you think you ought to sign it?”  To which she shook her head “No.”  But I refused to let her go that easily, and asked, “If you aren’t ashamed of this letter, then why won’t you sign it?  And if you are ashamed to sign it, then why are you distributing it?”  She walked away.

When it came time for public comments, there was a veritable firestorm of anger and prejudice and unadulterated hatred.  As I stood and listened, it shook me and shook me deeply because it sounded so much like the rhetoric of antisemitism, only today’s target was the homosexual community.  There was one man who stood up and ranted about the international gay agenda - a treacherously conceived plot to destroy the very fabric of family life throughout the world.  He even held up a document and claimed that this was a copy the that agenda.  I looked at that booklet help high in his hand and it just as easily could have been a copy of “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion,” that 1905 Czarist forgery of a set of minutes of a secret meeting of a supposed international Jewish conspiracy.

I heard speaker after speaker stating that the passage of this ordinance would grant homosexuals “special rights,” as if the protections offered here were not the protections the rest of us already enjoyed; as if they would be giving the homosexual community an advantaged position over the rest of us.  I thought about the other groups already protected by these laws.  We, the Jews, are among them.  Do these people think that we Jews have been granted “special rights” as well?  And as I listened to their arguments, I could not help but think of another time when we Jews were accused of seeking “special rights.”  It was in the 1930's.  The situation for the Jews in Germany had seriously deteriorated.  Yet they could not flee, for the doors of the free world were closed to them.  The doors of the United States were closed to them.  There was a protest rally held in Madison Square Garden, and it was so well attended that the free governments had no choice but to respond.  So they held an international conference on refugees, the Evian Conference, for it was held in Evian, France.  And in the end, they decided to do nothing to save the Jews of Germany, for to do something would mean that they would be granting “special rights” to Jewish refugees over other refugees.  We know the rest of that story.

I heard speakers accusing gays and lesbians of being pedofiles, offering strident warnings that if job discrimination against them wasn’t permitted, we would be placing our children in dire danger.  I listened and I thought of a children’s book that was published in Nazi Germany, a book entitled THE POISON MUSHROOM, in which there is story after story, replete with pictures, about how the Jews prey on innocent children and young women.

If the bigotry wasn’t enough, what really shook me was the lack of shame.  These people were standing up and publicly stating these horrible things as if they were the absolute and unquestionable truth.  These people were bigots of the worst order, confirmed in their bigotry and proud of their bigotry, yet at the same time completely convinced that there was no bigotry, no hatred, in anything they said.  Indeed, they kept assuring the gays and lesbians present of how much they loved them.  One woman proudly talked about her gay brother and how much she loved him, and then went on - without batting an eyelash - with her message of exclusion and discrimination.  As before, there were those who spoke of sexual orientation as a matter of choice and it mattered not what all the credible experts say on this subject.  They wholeheartedly believe it is a choice, and as Mark Twain said, “My mind is made up.  Don’t confuse me with the facts!”  What was fundamentally frightening was the depth of commitment these people had to their beliefs.  It is unshakable and there is no reasoning with them.  And when challenged, their behavior can be less than what some would call “Christian,” for they can turn pretty nasty.  One fellow called down a curse on the City of Bettendorf.  Others, as we found out later, had threatened members of the City Council.