Special Rights, or Equal Protections?

 The Fight over Equal Rights or, rather  the battle of defining difference between equal protections and special privleges, came into the spotlight in the early nineteen-nineties when citizens of Lewiston, Portland, and Maine rit-large urged legislators to pass the equal protections for all Maine citizens. A seemingly routine city ordinance set forth by Lewiston police Chief Laurent F. Gilbert, Sr pushed for city ordinance that ensure people who identified as LGBTQ AI+ would be treated equally in regards to  housing, banking; ensuring  equal access to the private and public space of Lewiston Maine.  Shortly after the ordinance was sent ou,t in flock protests against the Lewiston ordinance supported by the Equal Protections Lewiston. Following five hours of heated debate, the Lewiston City Council approved a queer-inclusive non-discrimination ordinance., but was soon overturned in a citywide referendum the following November, losing 2 to 1. The loss is attributed to the influence of the Catholic Church in this largely Franco-American city. Protesters against the ordinance hold signs saying "No special right!", "Pope John Paul votes no!", "Protect our Children, and "The twin cities- Sodom & Gomorrah" 

Ultimately, Mainers would see this campaign for the lie that it was. However, the organized opposition to the ordinance displayed the lengths some Christian Nationalist Mainers went to present how deeply Maine wanted to remain a sanctioned state where hate crime fueled acts of violence against LGBTQ people with no recourse for the victims. The goal was to legislate queer people out of the city. In the case of Charlie Howard,his offenders spent less than two years in custody. Two of them were not able to be contacted by journalists. “Only one convicted murderer was tracked down, but he was still unwilling to talk to investigators” (Bangor Daily, 2009). Which is what the Christian CIvic League was truly against–the protection of LGBTQ+ individuals. 

In 1992  Our Paper –a queer newsletter– published an article written by Malcom Smith: Playing the Victim, Religious Right Uses Family Values to Spread Hate. Smith highlights that “family values has become the politically correct term for gay bashing. The issue of family values was found, at the time of the Republican Convention- to be a major issue for only three percent of Americans, while the economy was a major concern for one-third of the nation, the republicans chose to use the former issue to help forget the latter and did so with a hate-filled vengeance” Instead of focusing on matter of the nation, the Republican Convention focused on a messaging platform to gay bash.  George Bush the head of the Republican party at the time on LGBTQ marriage sets the tone for the local messaging battle in question. “... a lifestyle that in my view is not normal. I don’t, I’m not, I don’t favor that”.  In that same year, the Sun Journal spotlighted Associated Press writer, John King’s segment called Religion and Politics. Featured is a young republican who has an insightful action-based plan for Christian Nationalist revival. “...This debate over the movement’s long-term course comes in a year in which the Christian right’s immediate agenda is packed with state efforts to limit homosexual rights, restrict abortion access and reshape America’s public schools…we can’t let a misguided army of liberals and homosexuals make a mockery of our country, a mockery of moral values, a mockery of God’s laws…Reed directs the [ Christian] coalition…to run campaigns and influence public policy”

The question of citizenship, of belonging, has always been dystopic for LGBTQ people in America. If their human status isn’t being questioned, their identity or their life would be. Dishonorable discharge for being identified as LGBTQ+, immigration blockades, or unmitigated violence against the marginalized people of a community. LGBTQ+ people for much of history and the present day risk losing protected status on the whim of those in power of legislation.  A big warning light that is evident in Maine’s present legislative authority in the second district is of Senator Susan Collins, a resident of the very city Charlie Howard was murdered, in Bangor, Maine. In 2019, Susan Collins signed a promise to, “The Christian Civic League of Maine that she will oppose any bill that comes through the Senate calling for the inclusion of  LGBTQ people as protected citizens.” The very notion that Collins, the people's representative, would go against is concerning for the citizens she is supposed to support. Or as a Maine journalist noted,  “We had reason to celebrate when Sen. Collins signed on to co-sponsor the Equality Act in 2019. She stood out for her willingness to buck her party's hateful rhetoric and support legislation that would take away the uncertainty LGBTQ+ Americans face.  Now, it feels her support was just an election year plot…the Christian Civic League of Maine, an anti-LGBTQ+ hate group, threw their full support behind Sen. Collins…The Christian Civic League led the opposition to…the Equality Act, calling the bill, “an attempt to eradicate the divinely designed differences between men and women” (Portland Press Herald, Mar. 6th, 2021). Even as the language for and acceptance of LGBTQ people is much higher than it was a few decades ago, we now see a more concerted effort to strip established rights away from United States citizens using extremist talking points, mass media, and division politics as a means to obtain a Maine that looks more like 1986 than 2026. Is this the future that you want to live in?