Annie Loyd - Living Life Outloud

I believed it was important to share a perspective that, as of yet, had not been articulated. I asked a dear friend -future attorney (we hope) to write out our thoughts from our conversations - at her requeset her name will remain anonymous. However, we honor her work.

In the past, paying single employees less than married employees was justified because single people did not have a family to support. In the past, it was legal for a landlord to deny rental to opposite gender couples because they were not married. These practices happened not so long ago. Today these practices are defined as discrimination.

Two people of different genders can go to almost any religious institution in Arizona to get married, but no requirement exists that marriages be recorded with the state. Then why do we register marriages with the state?

For benefits: spousal insurance coverage, medical decision rights, tax breaks, and others.
Those who choose not to visit a religious institution to be married can go to a Justice of the Peace. These civil unions are also eligible for corporate, medical, state, and federal benefits. However, single people and those who choose to engage in long-term relationships without marriage are excluded from those benefits.

If marriage is religious mandate, why do we allow civil unions that have no connection to religion? If marriage is a religious mandate, why does the state tie benefits to it? Where is the separation of church and state? According to the citizenship test, America was founded on religious freedom. Tying public benefits to religious interpretations is blatantly against religious freedom.

Instead of arguing about the religious definition and ownership of marriage, why are we not discussing the denial of private and public benefits to individuals based on religious interpretation?

Would denial of benefits to those who choose not to get married be less of a civil rights issue? Further, how can we deny marriage, and therefore access to public benefits, to an entire segment of the population solely based on religious interpretation?

If we allow religion to interpret government regulations, eventually we will have to determine which religious interpretation to follow. As there are 38,000 Christian religions alone, and therefore thousands of religious interpretations of different issues, religious influence on government regulation could become very restrictive to those not part of the chosen religion.

If public benefits were available to everyone, it would be perfectly acceptable for religious institutions to define marriage. However, tying public benefits to religious interpretation crosses the line between separation of church and state – and becomes a civil rights issue.

Phoenix, Arizona - Annie Loyd, independent for US Congress in District 3 of Arizona announced in an exclusive interview with 1190 La Buena Onda on Monday May 12, 2008 that she will be stepping down from running for elected office. Loyd will be directing her energy and focus to address the critical need for leadership in the Phoenix community to bring forth rational, reasonable and equitable solutions to the mounting and divisive issue of how to address immigration.

“We have met with thousands of people during the last one year and three months on this campaign. It became very clear to us that immediate leadership is required right now right here in Phoenix. We can not wait until the November elections.

“I am reaching out to all of the candidates for US Congress and in the state legislature to find the common ground upon which we can demonstrate our collective leadership in shifting our culture of fear to a commitment to prosperity.

“Our campaign for Congress was started as a people’s movement. We have been and will remain committed to bringing together coalitions of individuals, business leaders, community organizations and people of faith to address the root causes of violence, injustice, and poverty of spirit and poverty of resources. What we have started we are going to continue.

“We have a clear understanding of the immediate challenges that are facing our community. In the last several months, it became apparent that running for office was an impediment to having honest and forthright conversations in the critical areas and creating the coalitions we knew were necessary for constructive and long-term solutions.

“Americans are seen as the arbitrators of justice and injustice and our continued silence in regards to the atrocities that are being committed in our communities is unacceptable and cannot continue. Our military men and women are acting with great courage and determination to bring forth liberty and justice and we must honor their valor by following through with those same principles here at home.

“The loud voices of a few are speaking for the many and dividing our community rather than focusing on solutions for the betterment of our state and nation. The time is now for a strong coalition of individuals, leaders in business, the faith community and our not-for-profit service community to unite for a strong and prosperous Arizona, respecting the needs of our community and the rights of individuals. We are committed to empowering the voters of Arizona - they are the ones that can make the most significant difference.” stated Annie Loyd.

“On a final note,” commented Loyd, “I want to specifically thank all of  our supporters, to the media for their exceptional coverage of our campaign and the incredible volunteers that gave hundreds of hours of their time and energy to building this movement for real change. Your commitment to continue forward with this shift in focus is greatly appreciated.”

A visionary political activist, community and business leader for more than 20-years, Annie Loyd began her run for Congressional District 3 of Arizona in May of 2007 and officially announced her campaign in October of that year. An independent, Annie is committed to building bridges and finding common ground to create long-term solutions to the critical challenges Arizonans are faced with daily.

###