E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe Daily Rundown's Chuck Todd shares the results of key voters in Indiana, Wisconsin and North Carolina.
Updated at 8:17 a.m. ET: North Carolina voters Tuesday overwhelmingly approved a proposed amendment to the state’s constitution which limits marriage to traditional one man-one woman marriages.
With all of the state's 100 counties reporting, the amendment won in a landslide, with 61 percent of the vote.
Supporters of traditional marriage were encouraged by the outcome in North Carolina and portrayed it as part of a trend in their favor.
“Our position that marriage is between a man and a woman is gaining support, not losing support,” said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage.
“Earlier this week the Gallup poll showed that support for same-sex marriage is down. Actual vote percentages in favor of traditional marriage are rising. In 2008 in California, the Prop 8 constitutional amendment on traditional marriage passed with 52 percent of the vote. Then in 2009 in Maine, 53 percent of voters stood for traditional marriage and rejected same-sex marriage legislation. In 2010, 56 percent of Iowa voters rejected three Supreme Court judges who had imposed gay marriage in that state. And now more than 60 percent of North Carolina voters have passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. There is a clear trend line, and it is moving in our direction.”
Gerry Broome / AP
Signs in support of and against the Constitutional Marriage Amendment greet voters May 8 at a polling location at Leesville Road Middle School in Raleigh, N.C.
On other other side, some gay and lesbian rights advocates portrayed the North Carolina outcome as a case of voters being uninformed or deceived.
The gay and lesbian advocacy group Faith in America said that voters were “duped into believing their religious belief justified bringing harm to the state's gay and lesbian individuals, especially youth and their families.”
The group said, “We acknowledge the right of voters to decide issues but we do not believe such an expression of bigotry should have been put to a vote by individuals who were banking on a win because of the populace's misunderstanding about sexual orientation….”
Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, called the North Carolina outcome “what happens when a preemptive ballot-measure is stampeded through before people have had enough time to take in real conversations about who gay families are and why marriage matters to them.”
For his part President Obama, according to his North Carolina campaign spokesman, was “disappointed” by the result.
Related: Is Obama's gay marriage stance all about suburban voters?
"The President has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same sex couples. He believes the North Carolina measure singles out and discriminates against committed gay and lesbian couples, which is why he did not support it,” said Cameron French, the North Carolina press secretary for Obama’s campaign.
Obama won North Carolina in the 2008 election and his party is holding the Democratic national convention there in September.
One noteworthy pattern was that some majority black counties which had strongly backed Obama in 2008 just as strongly supported the proposed amendment on Tuesday.
For example, Hertford County, with a 60 percent black population, voted for Obama with 70 percent in 2008 and on Tuesday 70 percent of its voters backed the constitutional amendment defining marriage.
And Halifax County, with a 53 percent black population, voted for Obama with 64 percent in 2008 and backed the amendment with 68 percent of its votes.
The amendment says: “Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.” In effect, it would bar the state from giving legal recognition to civil unions between same-sex couples.
Under North Carolina law, same-sex marriages are already banned.
Related: North Carolina amendment could impact gay and straight couples
And opponents of the constitutional amendment did not make the argument that defeating it was a prelude to changing the law so that same-sex couples could legally marry in North Carolina.
“This is not a conversation about a possible change of law down the road,” said Paul Guequierre, a spokesperson for the Coalition to Protect All North Carolina Families, the main group rallying opposition to the amendment, on Monday.
By approving the amendment, North Carolina joins 28 other states that have state constitutional provisions limiting marriage to man-woman unions.
Related: Half of Americans support gay marriage in new Gallup poll
A Gallup Poll released Tuesday showed the American people split on the same-sex marriage question: 50 percent think marriages between same-sex couples should be recognized by the law as valid, but 48 percent think they should not be recognized as legal. Among Democrats, 65 percent say same-sex marriages should be recognized by the law as valid, but among only about one in five Republicans hold that view. Among independents, 57 percent think sex marriages should be legally recognized.
Thirty-eight states have prohibitions of same-sex marriage in their laws. Six states and the District of Columbia allow same-sex marriages.
Leave a Comment:
Marriage is a religious ceremony. Government should get out of the marriage business and support only domestic partnerships as a contractual relationship (1) to insure that domestic partnerships are fair and equitable, and enforceable in court. Too many women are dumped by men they helped become successful for younger women. (2) to insure that domestic partnerships are capable and committed to raising children if they want to have or adopt children (sexual orientation not a condition affecting raising children). (3) to insure that all domestic partnerships have equality regarding civil rights and legal benefits. Conservative Government has no business in personal affairs and promoting other social conservative religious perversions.
You can still get married by a JP.
Excellent win!
@ dls-387641
Pretty much agree wholly.
But this is an area where the "conservatives" and "anti-big government" people refuse to reconcile with their agendas.
They are all for small government and reducing regulation when it comes to protecting people against fraud, pollution, discrimination or unfair business practices (i.e. returning to the Robber Baron-Days) but entirely all about big government when it comes to wars of ideology such as the War on Drugs, expanding the reach of the police-state, and of course legislating their brand of religious bigotry.
As far as I'm concerned, government should have as much involvement in marriage as it does in baptisms and bar-mitvas. I agree about the domestic partnership suggestion, it's important to lay out rules of entitlement, decision and succession of community assets...and leave it at that.
No more of this stupidity over same-sex or polygamy...let consenting adults do as they want so long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of anyone else and is not used for fraud...it's that simple.
Amen to that. Too bad the government will never do this. It would solve too many problems.
This also bans civil unions and strips domestic abuse protections for unmarried women. So, yay! Ignorance has won the day again!
Crazy Republicans, they double-special-banned gay marriage. You know, the one that is already banned! These people are crazy, nuts, and off their rockers.
Why do so many Republicans insist on subjecting other people to their own brand of morality? Why are Republicans self-appointed moral police? I don't get this, but clearly it is their agenda.
We now know the Republican agenda is to subject the country to fundamentalist religious morality and to place all power in the hands of billionaires and corporations. The mechanism by which to do this is to outspend the competition with corporate money and lie, lie, and lie more! Wow, must make right-winger's proud to be part of this Dark Ages movement...
What in the heck does the above sentence mean ? "Sex marriages" ?????
I am an Independent and consider a marriage is between a man and woman ONLY.
So, jack up the percentage points to 58.
So your answer let morality go out the door. Be a nation of heathens. Basically would be all liberals.
Marriage is between a man and a woman only? Well I think Canada would disagree along with several other states.
dls and seriously, you have exactly the right idea. Marriage is truely a religious ceremony, or no concern to the civil government.
I would add one more thought to that line of thinking. What if we just said that there are four sexes? Men who like women, women who like women, men who like men and women who like men. Drop the whole gay, homosexual, lesbian terminology with all of its preconceptions.
@theoverlord...
Crazy Republicans, they double-special-banned gay marriage. You know, the one that is already banned! These people are crazy, nuts, and off their rockers
I MUST AGREE - THE MAJORITY OF NC VOTERS DID JUST THAT, LOL, DOUBLE BANNED GAY MARRIAGES, LOL.
Why do so many Republicans insist on subjecting other people to their own brand of morality? Why are Republicans self-appointed moral police? I don't get this, but clearly it is their agenda
THIS WASN'T A DEMOCRATIC/REPUBLICAN VOTE; I ASSURE YOU OF THIS AS A REPUBLICAN WHO, LIKE MANY OTHER REPUBLICANS, VOTED AGAINST AMEND 1. I HAVE TO ALSO CONCEDE SHOCK THAT THE AMENDMENT PASSED: WALK DOWN ANY RESIDENTIAL STREET AND THE YARD SIGNS CLEARLY SHOW SUPPORT TO OPPOSE THIS AMENDMENT. I GUESS THAT OLD SAYING IS TRUE: BE WARY OF THE QUIET ONES.
Just your brand of hypocritical and cherry-picked "morality"
Factually incorrect. There are 2-sexes because of the differences in reproductive function. The items you're talking about are preferences, hetero or homosexual. Sure, we could argue terminology or definitions, but it doesn't help to really solve anything as far as I can tell.
When did the Republicans become the party of hate? No, seriously, I don't remember them ever being this rabid in their hatred of gays, unions, workers, blacks, hispanics, women and anyone not in their church. Is this is new phenomenon or has it just always been there under the surface waiting to explode in a burst of vitriolic hatred?
If this is the direction of one of America's two main parties we are in HUGE trouble going into the future. The rest of the world will lump us with Saudi Arabia, Iran and North Korea!
Marriage is NOT a religious institution and never has been. Your marriage license comes from the state– no church required. Marriage is not exclusively about procreation either or there would be bills flying to ban elderly and sterile couples from being wed. Justifying discrimination with ignorance in lieu of any rational argument only serves to highlight the underlying bigotry.
The vast majority of Black voters do not support recognizing the rights of the LGBT community to "MARRIAGE". Civil Unions are OK. Let's face it, the LGBT Community is being played by the Obama Administration on this MARRIAGE issue like a 7-string Gibson Guitar.
Joe Biden, Caroline Kennedy and a few more Dumbocrats and Obama minions can say all they want about LGBT MARRIAGE RIGHTS. IT'S A STRAWMAN PROPOSAL for the DUMBOCRATS POLITICAL CONVENTION and CAMPAIGN PLANKS.
After Nov. 6, 2012, regardless of the election outcome, this is a NON-ISSUE for the Dumbocrats.
Seriously? & TheOverlord
Are 70% of the people in Hertford County conservative republicans??
You just can't fix stupid can you?
It seems to me that everytime gay marriage gets a vote of the people it is voted against. So I feel it is a lie to blame it on conservatives.
TheOverlord - Why do preach so much hate. You sound like horses ass Mr. Ed.
Would you expect anything different......its NORTH CAROLINA !
The Republicans had to fully incorporate the old Moral Majority in order to keep winning elections. That is why the party of personal responsibility that rails against the nanny state wants to tell you who you can and cannot love. That is why the party of freedom and liberty is now the party of government control over your love life, and limits on who can be happy and who cannot. Add in the old Dixiecrats who were the southern democrats that fought to tear this nation apart before they let go of slavery, and today's Republican Party is a very different beast from when even Reagan was President.
Because without morality or moral laws, we have anarchy. What if there were no laws, no morality, no government? What if we let everyone do whatever they pleased? The problem really is that the left wants the freedom to do whatever makes them feel good, even if that good feeling is fundamentally wrong with nature, with God, with science, or with whatever else you throw at it. You cannot make an argument that supports homosexuality using any science you believe in, any laws of nature you fall back on because you have no religion, or any God you worship if you do worship a God.
You can only try to make the good people of the world look like they are old fashioned, bigoted, hateful, or intolerant. I am tolerant every day. I let the gay guy at my works cafeteria serve me food every day and I politely chat with him without any hatred, I let the lesbian teacher teach my child every day at school and I thank her for her service, I let the guy on the sex offender registry work on my car when it needs fixing, and I take it only to him because he is a good mechanic.
This law is a step in the right direction for the basic good and morality of the society I live in.
For the last time overlord...this wasn't a Republican vote that mandated this. Most of the precincts that were predominantly black were most certainly Democratic or even left of that and voted to ban gay marriage.
In addition, every time a group feels they are deficit rights they will lobby to get them. Right now in my state the polygamists are lobbying for marriage rights. There are also groups that feel they should have the rights of senior citizens at age 50, overweight people that feel they are discriminated against by airlines, bus lines and car manufacturers because they dont make a comfortable seat for people that weigh plus 300.
The real problem in the US is that everyone feels entitled to everything and if they arent getting everything they desire everyone else is a bigot, a racist, a homophobe, a right wing zealot, an oppressor, a tyrant.....give it a rest. When did we become such a nation of whiners and I want what you got? Thats the real issue here....
That was certainly the case with Prop 8 in CA, what with a massive majority of black and Latinos that voted for it when they voted for Obama.
However, the Democrats don't make things like opposing gay marriage their campaign issues. THAT is why conservatives are targeted for this type of rhetoric, because they DO make it one of their issues, and typically it's conservative groups that sponsor these types of bills in the first place.
Really? You're going to compare based on these and assume that they are relevant analogies? Ugh.
Read up on Loving v. Virginia and think to yourself "how does allowing homosexual or even polygamist marriages infringe on my rights or the rights of anyone else?"
Give us some factual support.
I personally would like to live in a country that doesn't spend time trying to legislate morality that is based solely on religious ideology!
Explain to us why these people shouldn't be free to marry? Provide credible sources
I have always thought we should give North Carolina to China or Japan as payment for our ever growing debt ! They would take care of those "Crackers " real fast !
Marriage is a religious ceremony
No it isn't. Marriage existed before any of the monotheistic religions.
And atheists get married all the time.
Dennis
Which party interned Japanese Americans? Democrats
Which party fought against the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Democrats
Which Congress wrote DADT? Democrat
Which party President signed DADT? Democrats
Which party wants to control your health care? Democrats
Which party has a majority in California? Democrats
How did Californians vote on gay marriage? Shot it down
Your spewing about Republicans is wrong!
Seriously? Conservative rhetoric? Are the majority of voters in Herford County conservatives? If conservative rhetoric leads to the will of the majority you just say it's bad for the country? Try again.
Well, my heterosexual wife and I feel so much stronger in our wedded bliss now that we know, our marriage is being held together by those benevelant voters of the Tar Heel state.
It was touch and go there for awhile. We weren't sure we could make it together through this storm. We almost got a divorce ahead of time, just in case this ammendment failed, so that we wouldn't have to face the trauma of seeing our sanctified union go down the tube by the defeat of this ammendment.
We should have thought of this ammendment-by-popular-demand gimmick back in the 60's and we could have kept the whole civil-rights bruhaha from getting so far out of hand. The civil rights of minorities should always be left up to the will of the majority.
Now for all of you true-believers: It's all a sarcastic rant. Apparently, sarcasm cannot be extreme enough for some folks to swallow it hook, line and sinker. In fact, this disclaimer probably won't dent their fury or their acceptance.
Peace.
To all of you "progressives", this was passed by a majority of voters.You claim to hail democracy yet do not think when voting, the majority rules.And if you do not live in N.C., it is none of your business what the people of that state vote for or against in a state only election.
Hypocrite! The Fundamentalist Reconstructionist Teabagging Republican'ts scream and demand less government, less regulation.
Now the Hypocrits are screaming for massive regulation in Marriage and how people live. The Hypocritical Republican't party passes Laws for more government to make sure people are enslaved to Fundamentalist Reconstructionist Theocratic values.
Welcome to the Dark Ages, Stupid Ignorant North Carolina.
So much hatred in that state!!!
@Palm Springs...
We could give them California but who would take a state with earthquakes, fires, and mud slides that's run by a bunch of liberal old hippies? We'd probably have to pay them to take it...yippie.
Jak-3696747
You are so correct and I voted you up
Hear, hear! Marriage should be none of the government's business. The only way to achieve "marriage equality" is to abolish government marriage.
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take everything you have." -G. Ford.
Magnum
Did you actually type your own words? And then say "so much hatred in that state!!!" LOL
I would say that this vote is actually for LESS regulation.What the hell makes it look like "massive regulation" to you?
Good night libbies, try to sleep well tonight. The election results in Wisconsin should be interesting tomorrow.
To all of you "progressives", this was passed by a majority of voters
I guess if slavery is popular enough then we should bring that back.
Maybe public stoning too.
When you start out your rant with a statement like that, you have already shown your own ignorance.
How do you equate the Dark Ages, Ignorance , and Hatred with passing this law? In the Dark ages there were no laws, you could have sex with anyone or anything you wanted to. Stupid and ignorant are those who didn't know this.
I'm not sure about how you got the hatred thing, I think that is just the old stand by for those who want to discredit the democratic process and try to make good citizens feel bad about making a good choice according to their own conscience.
I don't mean to interrupt the present paranoia, but where are the jobs?
What a waste of 2010 elections.
I wouldn't blame this on dems or repubs
I blame this on stupid people
The education system and the culture of belief are too blame
If I have more money (or moral high ground by my GOD)....I am better than you and should decide your fate
History will repeat it's self if you don't learn from the mistakes of the past
Most people live in a personal bubble and don't understand SH1T
I try to learn everyday and accept things as they are...not how I wish them to be
Unfortunately...perception is reality
Stop pretending this isn't a Republican win, we are not in church. North Carolina is a deeply conservative state and even many "democrats" down there are religious zealots.
One thing is manifestly true: the Republican party opposes gay marriage, contraception, abortion, poor women's health, immigration, and is the party behind this movement. The democrats by a large majority nationally support equality for all people including gays. You aren't convincing anyone that this isn't a Republican move - like so many others just like it across the states and those passed by the US House.
It seems that some of the Republican posters in this forum missed the Republican talking points. Your party no longer pretends to blame democrats for anti-homosexuality legislation - they now embrace it. There is no need for this charade.
DLS, I think you nailed the issue. Marriage is a religious ceremony that government got involved with for several reasons
1) People wanted some sort of formal recognition outside a religious setting.
2) in the late middle ages, they figured out that you need to track heredity to avoid too close of family inbreeding which causes genetic defects and mental disorders to occur.
3) once hepatitus B was understood to be sexually transmittible, a blood test was added.
4) once we understood that blood type differences can cause maternal issues, this was added so that incompatible blood types could take precautions improving birth survival rates of both mother and child.
5) once aids became an issue, that is now added to the mix.
Gays claim that heterosexuals are forcing their definition on Gay people, but the reality is that it is gay people trying to expand the definition to include them. Many don't seem to understand or even care to understand that they are flagrantly defaming what is really a religious ceremony.
Overlord,
If you don't want to be in church stop invading their beliefs and destroying them!
There can be no peace until each person truly respects the beliefs and cultures of all others.
big mac
Isn't the real problem here that gay people refuse to accept The term marriage and it's traditional meaning the actual source of the problem?
Marriage is a civil contract the clergy get roped into. They never had anything to do with it until the middle ages when it was decided that the clergy should control marriage.
North Carolina should be ashamed of itself today.
This was just religious-Right sniveling. Feel better now that you wasted tax dollars to do it?
DB
I think you have a good point...civil union and all rights as others recieve would be fair
P.S. My GF thinks I am progressive but she wishes I dressed more like a gay man...I like jeans and a tee-shirt (and my nikes)
If government gets "out of the business of marriage", how exactly do atheists get married?
Don't get me wrong....I dressed up as a traveling engineer
I have met so many fine people in my travels across the world...some were GAY and they we just like you and me
Section 1, Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Dear freakshows who say marriage is a religious institution which the government should stay out of...
When those of you who get married in a religious institution get divorced, why do you need a lawyer to divide up all the assets? Why aren't you invoking the same resources of your religion to part ways or stay together? Why do you need to access the legal system to settle your divorce? Perhaps its because you all know that marriage is really a legal institution. How ironic that divorce rates are highest in those states that claim a religious/moral high ground.
To all the gay bashing, serial marriage, Christian bigots out there who think marriage only belongs to religion...when you marry in your church and get divorced in a court of law without your church's approval and you marry again this time at city hall, who should get your money when you croak? Why don't you will the money to the pastor in the church where you first got married so he can disburse (or spend) that money in keeping with religious doctrine so that your widow/widower gets nothing. Afterall, your second marriage isn't legit anyway, right?
Damn I sure wish I could afford to move out of the Southeast..and stay away from the the southern part of the East coast (Georgia, Carolinas etc) I feel as if I'm surrounded by bigots. -__-
Is there a non-religious argument for why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry? Seriously. I'd love to hear one.
There are gay couples that are financially and mentally stable enough to raise a child, so no argument there....
Toasty - Exactly.
As an American and a North Carolinian, I think this thing reeks out both ends. I'm well aware that this got shove down our throats by a bunch of oh so upright religious types who have never understood the golden rule and think it is a sacrilege for me to say that the Bible is a contradictory book of mythology. Oh, it isn't mythology? It is an absolute manual to morality eh?
Go read a few golden nuggets and get back to me:
Leviticus 25:44
Exodus 21:7
Exodus 35:2
Leviticus 24:10-16
Wow that's some good stuff. I'm sure those damn homosexuals wanting to live in committed relationships with each other were going to undermine my wife's and my relationship. Glad you good people are looking out for my well being that way.
Of course we may have to start shooting young people since 70% of the younger demographics view homosexuality like the majority racial relations today. Those young sickos - clearly they need a good dose of mythology errr Sunday school right?
This is a perfect example of how a infinitely small group of people have tried to destroy and change the English language . They have coined and changed the word homophobe to be only about themselves.
Ho·mo
[hoh-moh] Show IPA
noun
1.
( italics ) the genus of bipedal primates that includesmodern humans and several extinct forms, distinguished bytheir large brains and a dependence upon tools. Comparearchaic Homo.
2.
Informal . ( sometimes lowercase )
a.
a member of the genus Homo.
b.
the species Homo sapiens or one of its members.
Origin:
Phobe from phobia fear. Where homophobe should mean a fear of humans the homosexuals have commandeered the word and meant for the word to mean a fear/hatred of homosexuals. "IT ALWAYS HAS TO BE ABOUT THEM!"
Dictionary, if that's your strongest argument, you're not going to get very far in life.
I guess if God can love true Christians like the loving, caring, Jesus-like creatures we appear to have found in North Carolina - then He truly can love ANYONE.
Toasty McGrath You are incompetent to understand any argument. Life has passed you by and you are still stuck in the dregs.
Heads up, Christians. I know how you value your good news... but in this moment I bid you sad news:
Jesus isn't coming. Jesus already came back. Unfortunately, He was drown in a sea of Christians while nobody noticed nor lent a hand.
Because of what a few radicalized religious zealots have done, Christianity can never hold any shine for the world again. While there are still many good Christians, they have mostly remained silent while witnessing the Republican party stomp on one freedom after another; disposing of their own good people brave enough to take a stand against anything not of the party, one by one, as the party progresses towards their stated goal of completely dismantling the United States Government, along with it's constitution. Damning the far Right does no good. So it's shame, shame for your silence, good moderates who cower in fear of the repercussions of the Tea Party Republicans.
Your silence in November can send the Tea Party and their destructive vision for the United States of America they claim to want to "restore" into power - or into the history books. To what period of time would they like to restore America? To 1773 and the time of the real Boston Tea Party, three years before America was even founded? Now there would be an historical rewrite for you. But I think the Tea Party would best be put back where it can cause no more harm - into the history books. You have the power to do that as well in November.
If government is supposed to get out of the marriage business and leave it to the various religions one of the most immediate consequences would be that wives cannot receive a husbands Social Security benefits. After all, government, according to these people should not have a say in marriage, so government should not recognize any religious marriage, due to issues of separation of church and state.
And not tax benefits for marriage, no automatic inheritance for spouses. Custody of children due to the death of one parent may become problematic.
Yes, of course, it's so sensible to take any legal definition of marriage away and leave it to the myth worshiping religions.
Jon-1321288 Stick your head back in your shell. Governments do not recognize religious marriages. Governments recognize civil marriages, you know, license, registration, having an authorized person perform the ceremony who also might be a rabbi, priest, pastor, priest etc?
Now we are into the part where what constitutes a legal civil marriage. 38 states have said it is between a man and a woman. It can not be between a brother and sister. It can not be between first cousins, it cannot be between a man and a baboon. If you need explications why, then you are incompetent to hold a discussion on the matter.
Go back to your advanced onset of alzheimers and have someone try and explain it to you. Take Toasty McGrath with you. That should be fun.
WTG North Carolina, its about time that the majority rise up and make a stand and not cater the " politically correct " crowd.
All you on here talking about ignorance and stupidity. That goes both ways people. The people spoke, the state has every right to stand behind the people. Yes you may not agree with the peoples choice, but the people have spoken. You need to respect their choice, I didnt say you need to accept it.
I dont accept or like the gay lifestyle, but I respect their choice, and have no issues being friends, or anything like that.
Also if you redefine marriage, then it opens the doors to anything. This is the world we live in today, people just dont understand boundaries. If they dont like a rule or law they whine and cry and pressure everyone until their forced to accept it. We may as well live in a lawless, no rules country. Lets see how far we get . You take marriage boundaries away, now those who want to marry their brother , sister, father, uncle, mother, cousin can come forward demanding the same rights, or some person wanting to marry his cow, or Dog, .. Sounds crazy, maybe sick, but hey no limits here, no need to define marriage anymore. Its a free for all.
The thing about this is it was voted by the people. Whether I agree or disagree it wasn't really politics in DC or Raleigh. It was the decision decided by a majority vote process. And I have more respect for that process than some back room DC deals encouraged by some high priced lobbyists.
Good for North Carolina! I'm glad the people spoke and were not influenced by the tiny vocal minority.
It is sad that so many are willing to lay blame, (and most lay it incorrectly as well) instead of accepting the result. The People of NC have the right to determine what goes on IN THEIR STATE.
@ DB Akron, well said post concerning the reasons the govt. got into marriage, but you forgot one other reason.....money. Issuing a license for a fee. If the govt. was not allowed to charge a fee, do you think they would continue to issue licenses? I think not.
As I listened to this debate the last days, one thing struck me, repeated reference to the Gallup poll stating that 50% of Americans now support Gay marriage. If so, then how can the second paragraph below be true?
I think this is a prime example of how wrong a poll can be. The sampling in the voting is far larger, and far more telling than a Gallup poll. The actual results of the States voting does not support the Gallup poll at all. 38 States against equals 76%, not 50%. I'm not saying Gallup sampled to weight the poll, I don't know the specifics of this poll, but, none the less, the poll is wrong.
I'm sure our Founding Fathers never thought our country would come to a point in time where Marriage needed to be defined. It is sad we have to do this.
Phobia means a fear of something. Just because I don't like something does NOT mean that I fear it. I may not like a certain color or a certain kind of music or movie, hell there are people I may not like or I may even hate them but that doesn't mean that I FEAR them or what they do, that doesn't mean I fear a certain color, music or movie. So to call people homophobes because they do not like the actions of homosexuals is grossly inaccurate. They may be self-righteous bigots and or prejudice but that doesn't mean that they have a fear of homosexuality. I have gay friends thay I grew up with (that "came out of the closet") although I myself am not gay and I do not particularly like or choose the actual act of homosex but I do not fear it, I just know that it is not for me, and BELIEVE me they have TRIED to convert me, to the point that it almost ruined the friendship. But that ain't happening, EVER.
Unbelievable. 61% of North Carolina voters are religious bigots who want to dictate to everyone else how they may and may not seek happiness.
I'll thank God when MSN takes away the collapse option..
All of these atavistic state constitutional amendments will become moot anyway once the federal government passes overriding legislation.
We aren't talking about barring same sex marriage anyway. The central issue is whether human rights and equality before the law of a particular citizen or class of citizens can be restricted by a majority vote.
Can you imagine if the Civil Rights Act had been left up to majority vote in the Southern states of the 1960's? There is no valid rational argument for banning same sex marriage outside of religious concerns and therefore this NC vote represents a religious intrusion into civil government.
The Christian theocrats have won this battle, but they will certainly in time lose the larger social justice war...they always do...just ask their kids if they think this was a smart move. Thank goodness bigots eventually die.
Boo hoo: the heterophob Gays have lost one in their agenda to jam their lifestyle down everyones' throat.
They make up less than 10% of the population, yet you see them constantly on TV, their issues embraced by the liberal news media, and anyone that speaks up is called a homophobe and attacked like they are a racist.
Theirs is an agenda: do not buy into the attempt to desensitize to what normalcy is. They want you to believe that the majority of America agrees with THEM: WE DO NOT.
Sick to death of hearing about their issues and their "rights." They don't want rights, they want favoritism! A liberal president also doesn't speak for me or the majority of Americans either, so why add what he thinks to any article? Not on this and not on immigration.
Instead of banning gay marriage, why not ban all divorce? If you are going for that "sanctity of marriage" thing, make marriage forever. After all, marriage is a covenant you make with God that you shall love, honor, cherish 'til death do you part. That would have a greater impact on society then banning gay marriage would.
Hypocrisy.
Greentimer: "I would add one more thought to that line of thinking. What if we just said that there are four sexes? Men who like women, women who like women, men who like men and women who like men. Drop the whole gay, homosexual, lesbian terminology with all of its preconceptions."
I think you're on to something, (although you didn't account for bi-sexuals.) But what you described is, I believe, an accurate portrayal. People who are primarily attracted to those of the same sex have apparently just as long a history as the history of the human race as a whole. They're not going away. And if we did manage to get past the labels and just view the human race as consisting of 4 genders, perhaps we could finally move on and get past all of this anger and animosity.
The passing of this amendment is in direct response to the radical gay agenda. If they hadn't been trying to redefine the word marriage this action would never have been taken. If you are looking for someone to the blame for domestic partners losing benefits you need to place the target squarely on them. As has been said before the redefining of marriage is a slippery slope. If we go down that road what argument can anyone make that my choice to marry my pet goat is not a valid one?
I have a bit of advice for all the radical gays and lesbians out there. You want to have your own unions that's fine. Come up with another word for it. I'll fully support you on that.
This is not surprising from a backwater, bigoted state full of redneck, bigoted voters.
No fear, just like Prop 8, this bill will be struck down by the courts. Grats on wasting more time/money for your state rednecks, you should be so proud...
ah yes, the "radical gay agenda," also known as "wanting the same rights you or I receive."
Oh so radical...
this is the worst argument ever. Straw man anyone?
nonsense, and you know it, and this bill proves it. This bill takes away "civil unions" and doesn't just define "marriage."
Matrimony a word from the Lord.
Here is your problem. You're confusing the Republican party and Conservative. The GOP has at times in US history been the progressive party, while the Democrats have been the regressive conservatives. Indeed the founding of the GOP was based on progressive/liberal ideals. However, in the their zeal to gain the votes of backward southern Democrats (read racists) in the 60's they started pandering to the fears (and they do seem endless) of those southern Democrats. This has commonly become known as the "Southern Strategy".
As the larger Democratic party started to move away from its right wing past the GOP stepped in to harvest those who were didn't want to progress. While a savvy move in terms of voting strategy it was also a deal with the Devil. And today we see that the Devil has called in his dues. The GOP a once great party that held the country together, ended slavery, upheld the authority of the Federal Government, and pushed progress and science. Has now become taken over by every type of shrinking violet and corporatist that our nation can muster.
So yes, while I'm sure you'd like to claim the accomplishments of the old progressive version of the GOP as the property of modern day Conservatives. It doesn't hold water. The GOP is the polar opposite of its old self.
This is about the most accurate description of GOP history for the last 50 years. Good post.
dls-387641,
You have it completely wrong and backwards.
Marriage as a legal entity comes completely form government. Tax breaks, health decisions, and rights and responsibilities comes from government. Prior requirements such as a license and blood tests are set up by government. While government recognizes and authorizes religious ceremonies of marriage, that is regulated and there is an alternative ceremony through a Justice of the Peace. Requiring marriage to be only a religious entity would be unconstitutional and madness.
Religions can have marriage requirements for they religious ceremony. You can't get married in some churches without a process and classes. And religions have many other ceremonies that are legal but are import and wholly under their control. I am Catholic and we have baptism and first communion and confirmation that are church statuses, but not legal ones.
This has been settled a long, long time ago. It would be madness to say marriage is only a religious activity and only conferred by religious institutions.
It's just not good for the children, so it's simple ....... MOVE ...!
"The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice."
- Martin Luther King Jr.
The travesty here, and the question that not one, single, anti-equality person can answer is this...
If SCOTUS has ruled that marriage is a civil right over 14 times, why are we putting it up to a vote?
And all you "gay agenda", paranoid folks...
Lol, I'm fairly sure only us straight people receive copies of this "gay agenda" the conservatives speak of. I've never met a gay person, who's whipped a legal pad out of their briefcase, and started checking off items, "Bring depravity unto the world... Check. Corrupt innocent children... Check. Make sure John Boehner gets turned into a pillar of salt... Check. Burn at least three Bibles... Check."
And who comes up with this agenda??? Do they have a "Yearly Convention of the Gays" where elected LGBT folks get together and decide how they want to destroy morality and the world, that year? Or is it more secretive, like the Masons?
No, I think the "gay agenda" probably goes something like this...
1. Be born.
2. Get educated.
3. Get a job.
4. Get married.
5. Raise a family.
6. Retire.
7. Die fat and happy.
This has been made a political issue by both sides. The problem is larger than giving the rights of two people who love each other, who also happen to be the same sex, the right to marriage. This is an issue of states rights versus federal mandates and the power of the courts to override voted on amendments.
I can understand some of the frustrations of being patient, but if this is something that the gay and lesbian communities really want, I am afraid that they are going to have to wait a little bit longer.
Speeches or rants like the one that Cher has done, and some of the posts on this very topic are not helping. How can you preach being open minded when you go on a hate filled rant?
Trust me, some judge (doesn't have to be liberal, just one that follows the constitution) will be along shortly enough to strike this ridiculous NC bill down.
And rightly so....
Subnormal,
We're a Republic, so there is not question of state's rights here. SCOTUS, starting in Loving v Virginia ruled that marriage was a civil right. On top of that, the legislation banning gay marriage doesn't pass strict scrutiny and has a religious basis (1st Amendment). On top of that, you can claim gender discrimination in contractual law (Civil Rights Act of 1964). On top of that we have an implied right to privacy in the 9th and 4th Amendments. On top of that we have equal protection under the law (14th Amendment).
Those are civil rights issues, and as a Republic we don't vote on civil rights. And don't give me that 10th Amendment crap, the 14th Amendment incorporated the Bill of Rights to the states, effectively making the 10th all but null and void.
Then I'm afraid people will have to deal with having it "shoved in their faces" a bit longer. The backlash will only increase, the more people realize what a travesty of justice this is.
When your civil rights and equal protection are continuisly denied, I can understand their frustration. BUT FOR, the denial of those rights; BUT FOR, the using of their religions, "morals", and Bibles as weapons to harm an entire group of people who have never done anything to them, those people wouldn't be posting those "hate filled" rants.
Perhaps you should speak to the folks who don't have a BUT FOR?
grilledcheese, you make an interesting point about the history of same sex (counting only 2 sexes, not 4) attraction, which leads to question if that attraction is cultural or genetic.
It would seem that the inability to propagate would eventually lead same sex attraction to disappear from the gene pool. So, does it's continuation throughout the ages mean it's a learned, cultural attribute?
Or maybe same sex attraction is able to propagate genetically because those who carry the genetic code do still reproduce with someone of the opposite sex.
And it may even be the case that homo sapiens actually derives some evolutionary advantage by such a code available in the gene pool.
So maybe there really are four sexes (plus bisexuals, as you say), and it has worked to our benefit. I've also heard tell that similiar sexual attraction occurs among other animals as well.
Hey, maybe sex is more an analog attribute than a digital attribute - a sliding scale rather than just up or down. Aren't there cases of physiologically "ambiguous gender"?
OK, my speculative ramblings are over. Thanks for your response to an already collapsed posting.
Peace.
You're wrong in your claim that Loving v Virginia ruled that marriage was a civil right.
Loving was only tangentially concerned with marriage.
One of the Justices wrote in his OPINION that he believed that marriage was a civil right, but that was not a RULING by the Court.
In a nutshell, Loving ruled that it is unconstitutional to PUNISH a person of one RACE for committing an act that is legal for a person of a DIFFERENT race to commit.
It is not a matter of majority rule, it is simply discrimination, and the courts are bound by the constitution to overturn it. Our constitutions function "is not" to protect the Majority from the minority, but to protect the minority from the majority.
Foolishness,
and...
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/gendersexuality/f/Is-Marriage-a-Civil-Right.htm
Leaving many comments collapsed for trolling a particularly political party. Not quite on topic, folks.
JH-479998, you are suspended for a week for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
You know the rules, cut it out.
PalmSpringsCalif, don't use racial slurs. You are suspended for a day for violating rule # 5 of the Code of Honor.
Marriage has never been a wholly religious institution. There is the one glaringly major flaw in most arguments against gay marriage, and I'm surprised that more people don't catch it.
Marriage has always been more political and economic than anything, religion is just thrown in the mix to officiate and strengthen it. That's not to say that religious marriage isn't valuable or important (because it very much is), but it is absurd to say that marriage is and has always been religious.
You can get married in a courthouse and be married legally. You can't get married in a church and be married legally, you'd still have to stop by the courthouse.
I'm originally from North Carolina and usually talk about how gorgeous and wonderful the state is. But, not today. Today NC is an embarrassment. The ignorance and intolerance shown by this vote is beyond comprehension. The state has been hijacked by the far right and has lost it's direction. It is showing total lack of conscience and that makes me sad. A once great state has truly lost status.
The day will come when all this anti-gay nonsense will go the way of slavery, and those who hate/fear gays will be looked upon with the same derision as any other bigots. That day can't come soon enough. Equality for ALL!
They voted so I guess that they can do this, but if you disagree with what the piss poor state of NC has done then let them feel it economically. Do not travel to there or through there. Do not spend one dime of your money there. This cannot and should not be tolerated. Let them feel it in thier wallets.
It's pretty simple, some say. It's a matter of stupidity. I agree.
It's past time to realize Darwin was right. Random occurrence and natural selection. Homosexual beliefs & thinking may come about from random occurrence but not natural selection. Homosexual confers no survival advantage. Homosexual is NOT natural. Instead, homo is propagated by recruiting/hijacking/enlisting from heterosexuals. Since majority of heterosexuals oppose/dislike/do not favor or choose homosexuality, coercive powers of the state, social pressure, and distortions are employed. That's what is happening. Yes, homosexuals have always existed in insignificant numbers and probably always will - just as may be expected from random occurrence of any unnatural, unnormal phenomena. Society does not embrace/condone most unnatural phenomena, especially in the area of human behavior and conduct. Society TREATS unnormal. Homos self-admit to the pain and suffering of their chosen lifestyle behaviors and thinking. Homosexuals and their supporters distort by blaming society. Homosexuals as people deserve compassion/pity and TREATMENT to alter their unnormal life trajectories in an attempt to restore them to natural behavior and thinking. Make Darwin proud. Be loyal to scientific fact. Help a homo be truly happy & gay. Restore a homosexual back into a normal heterosexual.
Steve,
Neither do infertile adults, people with genetic disorders, yada, yada, yada... Should they too, not be allowed to get married? This isn't about survival advantages, it's about LEGAL advantages.
Yes, by conservatives.
WE don't use gay relationships as an issue in politics, the right does. We advocate for NOT using them, NOT caring, NOT legislating based on sexual orientation. As in treating them the same as straight people.
In order to stop us from doing that. In order to stop us from repealing laws that SPECIFICALLY make an issue out of being gay or not, the right uses they're Bibles, morals, and religions. When, quite clearly, in our nation, those things have no standing.
It was the right that legislated homosexuality. DADT, DOMA, sodomy laws... It is the right that's fighting to keep legislating homosexuality. They need to stop using it as a political issue, and we will then cease to say anything about their methods and how they go about using them or defending them.
Please find me homosexuality in the DSM-IV.
You too Steve, make sure you never see a doctor again and let things NATURALLY take their course.
A sad day for decency in America, but in the long run, not something that will stand in the way of justice. Bigotry and hatred of homosexuals will one day in the near future be reduced to a small minority of haters who claim treating others with any modicum of respect is "political correctness". Young people in the future will wonder what all of this silly fuss about who people were permitted to commit themselves to was about. It's what it's always about: insecurity, hate, and fear.
JH, thats because the Republicans are only worried about MONEY, thats getting all YOUR MONEY and MINE.
Sarah,
Thank you for your thoughtful reply to my post. I think you are aware the coercion I referenced was from the gay supporters. So unfortunately, you've employed some chicanery to make your point while posing as objective. You might also be aware of the fundamental difference between the abnormal physical conditions you mentioned and a gay lifestyle choice. We treat people with genetic disorders, we treat infertile adults in an attempt to make them whole, to restore them to normal healthy functioning. They did not choose their dysfunctions, at least not directly.
You are right. Gay lifestyles and marriage is not about survival advantage. The point is mute since the outcome is incontestable. Nor is it about legal advantages. Gays and their supporters have resorted to courts to have their will done in contradistinction to societal safety. As is evident, the overwhelming majority of parents do not want their children to embrace or choose a gay lifestyle. This is fairly consistent throughout the brief history of mankind. Since gays have no alternative but to recruit from heterosexuals, their advocacy and recent insistence of inclusions threatens a parent's fundamental right of family, including health. Gay marriage is a clear and present danger to the health and normalcy of society, and as such, should be subject to all the treatments and remedies similar threats receive. That you think gayness is a legal issue speaks to the peremptory and coercive remedies such supporters are willing to enlist.
I would thus argue gay marriage is about health and healthy society. And from that a scientific vantage point, gayness is not healthy, not normal. It's very much a choice, perhaps below awareness and environmentally influenced, but choice nonetheless.
The end of your response is disappointing. You probably are aware the extremely liberal APA removed homosexuality from the DSM-III. So it's a recent flip-flop. And mis-characterization of "naturally" from the Darwinian context is more chicanery. But really, you just prove my point. I go to a doctor to cure me of some un"natural" malady. So should a gay person go to a doctor to cure them of their unnatural condition.
And finally, your insistence the right unilaterally legislates against homosexuality is really disingenuous. As I referenced, at no time in history, has homosexuality been championed as a normal, healthy way of being. Societies and governments that transcend the superficial labels of "right" and "left" have seen fit to suppress gayness. To blame the "right" is merely being intellectually dishonest. It is right and proper to those concerned with the gay threat to society to seek guidance from outside of their own opinions. History, other societies, traditions, and bibles are all consulted much to the immediate vilification by gay supporters who recognize the preponderance of human thought and practice is against their post-modernist opinions on this issue.
Gays can try to frame their cause any way they want but little effect on the penetrating conclusion even the most biased of observers will reach when applying Darwinian theory as an explanation of species behaving the way they do.
so Steve, are you gay?
"You might also be aware of the fundamental difference between the abnormal physical conditions you mentioned and a gay lifestyle choice. We treat people with genetic disorders, we treat infertile adults in an attempt to make them whole, to restore them to normal healthy functioning. They did not choose their dysfunctions, at least not directly."
First, being gay is not a choice. Most folks who are gay are aware of being attracted to those of the same sex from an early age. Sexual minorities have existed throughout history and in every culture, so this is not anything recent or anything to do with US culture.
Second, perhaps you could tell me what the preferred treatment for someone with Down's syndrome is? And what kind of treatment do we give to those women who are infertile due to hysterectomies, etc. ? I notice you didn't answer Sarah regarding keeping the elderly from marrying as they are also infertile.
Third, how in the world would you know that the fight for gay marriage is not about obtaining 'legal advantages' as you so quaintly call them? There are over 1100 federal statutes (and many more state laws as well) that pertain to rights and benefits regarding legal marriage. See here:http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf
Last I heard, we don't get to vote on other people's civil rights, and marriage, as Sarah pointed out above, has been acknowledged as a civil right.
"You probably are aware the extremely liberal APA removed homosexuality from the DSM-III."
Yes, if you believe 'liberal' means 'someone who believes in science', because there was absolutely NO scientific evidence that homosexuality was in any way a mental disorder.
And, fyi, you refer to gays as abnormal, which means outside the norm. You're aware that having blue eyes is 'abnormal' as well, right?
Steve D-514317
Sorry I am confused your reference to Darwinian theory is to aid what point?
I'm sure it has already been said, but with regards to the original post in thread, marriage CAN BE religious. It need not be. I agree with the idea of having the government recognize all unions by a neutral label and letting individuals decide what they want to call themselves and what they want to call others. But I won't concede that marriage belongs solely within the realm of religion.
Steve D thank you for such input, I think what you said is quite sound, and factual.
Where should we stop with marriage then sarah ? Would you be for or against a brother and sister getting married ? Would you be for or against someone wanting to marry their Dog for legal advantages. Can a man marry his daughter ? What if they are in love ? You would be against it perhaps, and we know by science it is detrimental to the offspring of such close relation being married ? Then what if you take offspring out of the equation ? Brother and sister get fixed so they can not have kids, is that now acceptable for them to get married ? I mean its not like 2 guys or 2 women are going to have their own kids naturally or have the ability to conceive with out outside help. Im really curious to your stand on that ? Close relation getting married, and marrying animals.
Damon, you really have no clue about the difference between homosexuality -- which is legal and involves unrelated, consenting adults -- and consanguineous marriage and bestiality -- which are illegal due to medical reasons as well as issues of legal consent. That is why those are considered slippery-slope fallacies.
BTW, two gay people CAN and DO have children; just not with each other. But since no state in the US requires proof of either the intent or ability to procreate in order to obtain a marriage license, and two people certainly don't have to be married in order to have children, please tell us what procreation has to do with marriage.
Please dont say its genetic like there is some gay gene
With all of that being said, I am well aware of gays urge to be with same sex. They say that they felt it when they were young, that their attraction to opposite sex was just not there. SO many articles, reviews, studies showing there are reasons or influences that lead to their choice. I will not sit here and say that is the case for all of them.
Another thing to keep in mind that there are many organizations , many ex gays. They led the homosexual lifestyle all of their lives, and chose to be turn from the lifestyle and chose some one of the opposite sex, and ended up having families and are quite happy. Do they still desire same sex ? Its possible, but they did make the choice to turn from it.
And you seem to have no clue of my point being made. The point is the redefining of marriage between a man and woman. If I am going to be forced to accept marriage between gays, then I also want to see the rights of those who want to marry their close kin. They too are consenting adults, and as i said before if you frown upon it because of medical reasons, then I stated what if they close kin couple never have kids because they get fixed, or what if they never have sex ? Who are you to oppose them getting married ? Are you now the bigot , just like us who oppose same sex marriage ? Im seeing just that. As for bestiality, that can also be redefined, since were in an america where we are redefining everything. If a person wants to marry their dog , so it can get legal rights to get medical attention, then so be it. We can redefine consenting adults also, since were redefining everything else.
No gay people can not have children on their own. Your statement contradicts itself. My point about gays not being able to procreate had nothing to do with marriage, the point was being made about a brother and sister getting married and not having kids because of genetic issues. I was saying , if a person can not accept a brother and sister marrying because of offspring, i was saying if they get fixed to not have offspring, now makes them no different then gays who also can not have offspring with each other.
Damon, you still don't get it: sexual relationships between brothers and sisters are illegal for medical and genetic reasons, while sexual relationships between homosexuals are not illegal. In order for brothers and sisters to be able to marry, they would first have to get such relationships legalized -- something homosexuals do not have to do. Again, that is why such arguments are called slippery-slope fallacies. It is hardly bigoted to support gay marriage without supporting sibling marriage, since gay marriage does not carry the potential for harm that sibling marriages do. Furthermore, if gays DO choose to have children, they do not run the risk of passing on the genetic and medical problems that are known to occur when siblings procreate. If you would like to be an advocate for allowing it, knock yourself out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incest#Between_childhood_siblings
As far as the procreation argument is concerned, I did not contradict myself: I stated plainly that gays CAN and DO procreate, just not with each other.
Regarding your "homosexuality is not genetic" bull@!$%#:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/01/homosexuality-genetics-usa
http://esciencenews.com/articles/2008/06/28/homosexual.behavior.due.genetics.and.environmental.factors
DamonWV
Your copy paste contains so many scientific errors I would love to find out where you got it from. You do realize the sex chromosomes are what decides the physical appearance, ie what sex you are. Who ever concocted that ridiculous article has no idea what they are talking about when it comes to human sexuality.
The human genome contains between 10,000 and 25,000, with only a handful of genes assigned a function. As yet the so called "gay" gene has not been identified nor has the "straight" gene for that matter.
Something interesting to also note the genetic basis for hair color has not bee fully identified either. Just because something has not yet been identified does not mean it doesn't exist.
Damon-
Your "evidence" was copied from an anti-evolution blog. Seriously????
And the head of the Human Genome Project said:
"The evidence we have at present strongly supports the proposition that there are hereditary factors in male homosexuality — the observation that an identical twin of a male homosexual has approximately a 20% likelihood of also being gay points to this conclusion, since that is 10 times the population incidence. But the fact that the answer is not 100% also suggests that other factors besides DNA must be involved. That certainly doesn’t imply, however, that those other undefined factors are inherently alterable."
Found here: http://wthrockmorton.com/2008/09/21/dr-francis-collins-comments-on-homosexuality-and-genetics/
And the fact remains that we have laws prohibiting very close kin from marrying bbecause of the higher risk of genetic defects from close intermarriage. But again, these are apples and oranges.
Damon and Steve, If homosexuality is a choice, at what age did you decide to not suck d!(&? You didn't chose did you just knew3 same with gay people. Your argument is moot. Just Saying!
As usual Erinin NJ refuses to understand the psychological damage incurred by a child having two mommies or two daddies. Erin is stuck in her mind with her ideas and refuses to let facts and the nature of families and the whole creation of a marriage meaning one woman, one man and children as being an evolutionary design. If nature made it that homosexuals could self fertilize and create children or some such thing, it would have. Nature makes mistakes and one mistake is homosexuality as it is a 100% evolutionary dead end. I read the writings of Michelangelo and the people who wrote about him. As no one can really say what Michelangelo really said but can only get opinions, from scholars etc, he appeared not to accept the need for children as they were a burden on his time and work. This I could see, children need the time of the parents to develop and Michelangelo definitely did not have time with his work and his constant hiding out and running away from his enemies. It gets so confusing.
No one can take Erin seriously as she has been told hundreds of times that her arguments are facetious and lack scientific standing. The facts and evidence have been addressed. Yet she continually states wrong statements and lies. I asked her straight out to meet with her with her principal and a science teacher and a college biologist and she has said she has spoken many times with her principal about these topics. I asked her to tell me his name so I can verify and she refuses. Why she brings up these statements which can be picked apart and disarmed is a mystery to me.
Yes, you have stated your bull@!$%# "hundreds of times" in this public forum -- but you have never provided any facts to refute my facts in this public forum. Time for you to put up or shut up.
The only facts and evidence that have been addressed have been the facts provided by me after much research. YOU are the only liar here.
If you keep demanding personal information about me, as well as posting information about my job, you will be hearing from my attorneys. You are beginning to sound like a stalker, and I will make sure to deal with you appropriately.
Yet you have not "picked apart and disarmed" ANYTHING. You apparently think you can call people out who disagree with you, yet you don't have the balls to provide any supporting data for your claims.
"As usual Erinin NJ refuses to understand the psychological damage incurred by a child having two mommies or two daddies."
Except you have no evidence of this. The evidence demonstrates that children of same-sex parents do at least as well as children of opposite-sex parents. See here: http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20051012/study-same-sex-parents-raise-well-adjusted-kids
Of course we know there is harm from close relations having offspring,, BUT now what if they dont have offspring, what if they are both fixed so they cant have offspring ? Are they still a threat to you ? To your pocket of having to pay taxes for medical expenses for them ?
You call it a slipper slope, I call it, your denying your own bigoted view. If you say one group can marry because they love each other, then you need to allow everyone and anything to marry. When you say close relations cant marry, then your now discriminating against them , because you may find it sickening, or maybe you dont but its just not your preference. How is that any different from how a hetero feels about 2 of the same sex together in marriage ? Its a 2 edged sword that you keep failing to see.
As for the gay gene and others posted after you , show me a study, any study that shows specifically a gay gene. Not studies that gays tend to have certain things about them more then others , using left hand, or maybe one eye is bigger then the other, or most gays are born with purple hair..
I want to see a specific study that shows an exact gene, the gay gene.. it doesnt exist, it is not there.
I remember when I asked my mother how i would know if i was gay or not. I think i was about 12 when i asked her that. I have no idea why I asked her, and really cant remember what answer she gave me. I do have a choice to date who I want. I can easily live with a guy in a relationship then I could with a woman. A guy would probably have more in common with me, would be able to do a lot more things than a woman would, I wouldnt have to deal with menstrual cycle my girl friend now goes through monthly. There are many good reasons to date another guy, and I dont have an issue saying that I think some guys are handsome, just as i know many straight girls who think other women are attractive. With all of them, I choose to be with a woman. I make the choice, nobody puts a gun to my head and says i need to date this type of person only.
If it wasnt a choice, then you wouldnt have once gays , gone straight out there. Im not saying its easy, and in some cases im sure its next to impossible. But i dont want to change anyones ones perference, its theirs and I respect that. But dont tell me that Gay people cant change, because they do, go on to have marriages with opposite sex, have kids, and are quite happy. Do they still desire same sex ? Im sure some do, but not all, which is also moot, because the fact is, they can make the choice and desire opposite sex if they want.
Here is a small part from a study , this study is showing that children do fair just as well as hetero, but here is something that caught my eye about the study that cam make the final result off ..
So take into consideration , 50 percent of the people had children by accident. How many times do we see the accident family have issues ? The parents are not really dedicated to being parents, the upbringing may not be great because of no motivation.
Now if they can take a study with parents who planned and wanted children, and compared it to same sex parents, then that would be a legitimate study. To compare willing adults who are wanting children against adults who dont want children is a different study entirely.
Dictionary and Damon, You guys are a little creepy, its like I went back in time to the 50s. Are you guys old as @!$%# or just bible thumpers. It is really tough to listen to such blatant bigotry.
I have three sisters that have all been with thier partners 20 plus years, they all have children and the one that is gay is the happiest along with her children. I just do not understand why it is ok with homophobes for the other two to be married and not her.
Usually I think people that fight homosexuality( homophobes) so hard are confused in thier own heart and scared to admit it. You should both look into that.
I dont qualify as a homophobe, i know its criteria, I dont fit it. The word is used wrongly. Just like people calling adults who like 13 year olds pedophiles, when its pre pubescent kids that makes a person a pedophile.
So im not a homophobe thank you
Yes, you are: homophobia is the fear of, or strong aversion to, homosexuals and homosexuality.
That's pretty much what you are, Damon.
That's a rather odd argument to try to make, considering the fact that the "tax and spend" people interested in taking all of our money and letting the gov't spend it as IT sees fit aren't typically members of the Republican party...
Exactly. Since two people of the same sex CANNOT unintentionally get pregnant as a result of their sexual activity, comparing how they fare as parents against heterosexual couples who have an unplanned pregnancy as a result of their sexual activity ISN'T a comparison of equivalent samples. What the study SHOULD be looking at for an honest comparison are heterosexual couples that have had planned pregnancies--the closest equivalent sample population.
Why would I fear them ? I work with plenty and we all get along like any one else. Some have tried to pick me up before, they love my bright blue eyes, muscular body, but I have always smiled and chuckled and said that I am flattered, but I am quite straight and well go on having other conversation. Now if i were a homophobe I would take offense, or been irritated, but im not.
Where you keep thinking its homophobia because I oppose them, its not that at all, I dont oppose them, I stand behind traditional marriage. I could say this about anything, Im not against the murder of unborn babies, I stand behind their right to live. You have caught up way too much in the main stream , political correctness of the world. I havent, I believe in a view that includes biblical thinking and an absolute authority of God.
Apparently you did not all of the definition: homophobia is the fear of, or strong aversion to, homosexuals or homosexuality. You embody the "strong aversion" part.
And how does gay marriage affect "traditional" marriage in any way? Will heterosexuals be forced into gay marriages? Will "traditional" marriages be invalidated if gays can marry? What will happen to "traditional" marriage if gays are allowed to marry?
I am not "caught up in the mainstream," I just believe in equality -- and the right of each woman to choose what to do with her own body, and any organisms that are growing in it. You know why? Because God does not make our laws, nor does the bible -- they are the "absolutely authority" of NOTHING, because they are nothing but fairy tales.
You sound pretty main stream to me. Especially in your last paragraph. You are desensitized already into the Politically correct version of " organisms " growing in a womans body.. Its a baby erin, not some organism, it may be just a pile of cells to you, but its a living life that is going to be in your arms one day telling you that they love you. Not some pile of Goo.
I believe in equality as well. gays have the same right to marry as I do. It may not be their preference to marry someone of the opposite sex, but they do have that right by law. I am not allowed to marry someone of the same sex. So tell me how they dont have equality ?
You want the marriage definition changed, and if you want that, then allow it to be changed that anything can get married. Sisters and brothers, cousins, fathers and daughters.. i mean come on its equality for every one.
As for God being the authority, You bet he is . Its a shame so many people reject it, because if they ever believed in God its a whole different life.
Save the sermon, Damon, I've already had all the children I'm going to have -- and until around the 20th-22nd week of gestation, they were non-viable, and the whole time I was pregnant, they were fetuses -- they are not legally "humans" until they emerge from the womb and draw their first unaided breaths. It is a "living organism," NOT a "living life".
That disingenuous argument is so old and tired; did you stay up all night thinking of it? Gays do not have the right to marry the consenting adults of their choosing, as heterosexuals do -- and the equality they demand would also apply to heterosexuals; they are not asking that they be the only ones allowed to marry the consenting adults of their choosing.
Since such relationships are illegal -- while homosexual relationships are not -- people in those groups would first have to get their relationships legalized, then they could start working on being allowed to marry (if they choose to do so). Apples and oranges, Damon; you still can't differentiate.
Saying that does not make it true. I do not believe in fairy tales.
Well thats pretty saddening to think a person just thinks of their growing child nothing more than a pile of cells. Wonder if you would care if someone came up and punched you in your stomach while your were pregnant and you lost your unborn child, or I wonder if you would consider that homicide. Y
Sorry erin, thats not the definition of marriage to marry whom you choose. Its for one man , one woman. So since its already defined as such, they do indeed by law have the same right as I do. Its not thats its disingenuous, its just that you cant seem to comprehend , by law they do have the same right as I do.
Oh so now your playing Judge to consider what is illegal ( not allowed ) vs which is legal and allowed. Marriage by law is one man one woman, and until the definition of marriage is re defined then you have to live with it, or i should say gays do. But if / when it does come, then they better allow everyone who wants to get married be able to, close relations, people to animals, there should be no boundaries, because thats what your trying to get now.
Or you just have no understanding of it.
And now you presume to tell me how I must think of my pregnancies?
Check the dictionary, Damon. And since DOMA has been ruled unconstitutional by several federal judges, and even the President and Attorney General will no longer defend it, it seems that a bunch of politicians trying to define marriage for everyone just won't fly, either. Besides, marriage has been redefined countless times since this country's inception.
Like I said, that argument is old and tired. It's the same one that was attempted when Loving v. Virginia was decided in 1967 ("it's not discrimination because white people can't marry someone of another race, either") -- it was bull@!$%# then, and it's still bull@!$%#.
I'm not "playing judge;" that's the way it is. Incest is illegal; consanguineous marriage is illegal. So in order to be allowed to marry, such practitioners would first have to the relationship legalized -- a couple cannot petition to marry if their relationship is illegal. That's not something I "decided," it was decided long ago.
Clearly you have no understanding of "legal consent". That must be why you resort to slippery-slope fallacies, which are always doomed to FAIL.
And since you know nothing about me or how I was raised, that's a really stupid thing to say. I was raised Catholic; we went to mass every week (often more than once a week), and I had to read the bible. Also, since I work in a library, I'm sure my understanding of written words is far greater than your second-grade level.
and so you use the argument that i know nothing of you and that makes your knowledge of religion far superior, and yet you have idea of my knowledge of it either and yet your calling me some second grader level ? Your are such a hypocrite .. You went to a catholic church, but it seems you never really dived into some deep theological reading . To some church is enough, but to those who want to go deeper in the christian faith they can find so much more reading to support its entire history.
Just wanna say; the GOP/Tea-trolls ran on the platform of financial reform, right? But after being voted in overwhelmingly in 2010; ask yourself, what has been their contribution to the ailing economy? So many bills introduced that take away a woman's right to make decisions that effect their health and every type of legal blocking one might imagine. The Ultra-sound bill, longest possible waiting period before she can decide if she wants to abort. My personal favorite; getting rid altogether of Planned Parenthood. Now the ReSuckians want to argue about same sex marriage and accuse Pres Obama as though he has set a new law in motion to formally allow gays to marry. He voiced his opinion and nothing more should be drawn from what he said. He is in favor of it; but someone will have to turn it into a bill before everybody gets so upset and see boggiemen. Such a bill would have to be submitted and then defended and then argued for or against and then voted upon. Right now however, it is merely a conversation and the opinion of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.
My problem is simple: How did we as a nation get so far away from fixing this economy? THAT IS what the Tea-poodles promised. They would also fix Washington! I don't see how Rust Limpball calling Sandra Fluke a "slut" is fixing ANYTHING! Romney lies about being the one who helped the auto industry, (a known lie) but somehow he is currently leading in the polls. BS! The ReSucks launch a war on women but have now regained the female vote. "Get the people arguing amongst themselves and we will pick up the pieces!" The gay people issue is a distraction. The argument about church and state is antiquated, women's rights is a done deal. All the while, election day in Nov is creeping up. The ReSucks have one agenda at this time; divide and conquer! The stakes in the this election are so very high; stay focused...stay focused!
Here is a meta-analysis of the empirical literature on the outcomes for children of GLB parents, and you will note that they are the same or exceed those of heterosexual parents. http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/parenting.aspx
But I'm sure you'll find something to pick at in all 67 studies as well.
ErinNJ
And now you presume to tell me how I must think of my pregnancies?
Sorry but they may not like it, but they do not have the right to change it. Even if it is some how changed, then every state has the right to refuse gay marriage, and the government can not do anything about it. That is how our country is founded, its not meant to be some super powerful government controls everything nation. Its sickening how our government is slowly taking away all rights to choose or telling people how they need to live. Too much dependence on the government.. Its quite scary.
WRONG, Damon. If that were true, then every state would have "the right to refuse" interracial marriage, and every state would have "the right" to still enforce anti-sodomy laws, and every state would have "the right" to make birth control illegal -- all of those were Supreme Court opinions that struck down state laws. That is what the Supreme Court does, Damon; it interprets the constitutionality of laws.
Which leads to your next piece of bull@!$%#:
Actually, the Constitution expressly states that it is the "supreme law of the land":
Article VI, Clause 2
Clearly you know nothing about the laws and government of your own country. THAT is "pretty scary".
Read this and the links , tell me if you agree or disagree with the intent of our government of the past, compared to what it is today. Im curious if you are opposed to what is said .
Here is a clip from an article.
If the Founding Fathers were to come back, I doubt if they would recognize the United States today. Oh, they wouldn't be surprised by its size or its population or its technological progress. They expected that and encouraged it.
What would disturb them is how fond Americans have become of government. They would be disturbed at how we have allowed politicians and judges to turn the Constitution into an excuse instead of a restraint. They would be uneasy about the large standing army we have maintained since the end of World War II. And they would certainly disapprove of our foreign policy, which can only be described as imperialistic.
The Founding Fathers were suspicious of government and wary of it. They recognized that government is always the greatest threat to liberty. George Washington likened government to fire — "a dangerous servant and a fearful master." The whole purpose of the Constitution they devised was to keep the government divided and weak.
First, they expected the sovereign states to act as a brake against any attempt by the federal government to usurp their powers as defined by the Constitution. Abraham Lincoln nullified that concept with brute force. Under their original plan, U.S. senators were selected by the state legislatures and were clearly intended to act as ambassadors from the states. Later generations foolishly eliminated that safeguard by amending the Constitution so that senators are elected by the people.
Clearly, the Founding Fathers did not approve of the modern concept, imposed by federal courts, of one man, one vote. They designed the House to represent the people, but each state, regardless of size, was given two senators. When federal courts eliminated the states' ability to follow the example of the Constitution, they shifted political power from the rural areas to the big cities. It's been more or less downhill ever since.
The Founding Fathers rejected the parliamentary system, in which the executive and the legislative majority are one. They wanted a House and Senate that were elected independently of the president. They intended for Congress to act as a check against attempts by the executive branch to usurp power, and they intended for the president, wielding his veto, to act as a check on Congress.
The modern two-party system has nullified this safeguard. Both Democrats and Republicans act like slaves to the man in the White House if he shares their party label, thus nullifying the most important of the checks and balances the Founding Fathers built into the Constitution. By acting like lap dogs when their man wins the White House, both Democrats and Republicans have imposed a parliamentary system on us.
Americans, in defense of their own liberty, should make sure that whatever party holds the White House does NOT have a majority in Congress. It is to our advantage and was so intended by the Founding Fathers that the president and Congress be at odds on all but the most important issues.
To ensure an independent judiciary, they made those appointments for life, which has turned out to be a mistake, given how reluctant Congress is to impeach a federal judge. My Confederate ancestors recognized this problem, and in their constitution a federal judge could be impeached by the legislature of the state in which he sat. That would cure a lot of abuses committed by the federal judiciary.
A reading of the Constitution makes it clear that the federal government was designed to be an agent of the states and authorized to act only on behalf of all the states in a few, clearly specified areas. None of those includes education, welfare, medical care, foreign aid and domestic pork-barrel projects.
Future historians, when they come to write the obituary of the United States, will note that we started out with the best system ever devised by man and willingly dismantled it for a bowl of federal porridge.
Also read up on
http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/fall98/original.html ( in depth, and also talks about the fallacy of church and state. )
http://constitutionality.us/TheConstitution.html
so...north carolina is a democrat state
...democrats must be homophobic ? .....what does their president think ?...oh he is against gay marriage too.
...come on mr obama...say that you are for gay marriage, please ?
North carolina is a fence state. They often vote for democratic candidates in the presidential elections, but are fairly conservative on many issues.
My last vacation was in NC. However my family and I will not be returning again. We have agreed to boycott North Carolina when it comes to vacations.
Dennis,
Good, try California...you'll feel right (left) at home.
I think I will take my family on vacation there now that Dennis is not going to be there.
Thank God for the brave voters of NC. My parents have been married for 65 years and have been terrified at all the reports of hordes of marauding homosexuals rampaging through nearby towns forcing heterosexual couples to get divorced. My folks will be so very relieved that their marriage has been saved and they can remain a couple! Thank you ever so much.
justme
I'm glad you have noticed the hordes of marauding homosexuals. I saw them in Cali when they didn't get their way. As a matter of fact they did rampage and riot and targeted the heterosexual and religious residents there.
Your argument shows your ignorance.
Nobody said it would tear apart hetero marriages, but your sarcasm has brought out the truth about what really happens when homosexuals don't get their way.
Keck...It seems the ones that vote are as stupid as you
I think we should burn gay people at the stake...they must be witches
It happened to me! I was normal once, until I encountered the hordes. Resist as I tried, I was quickly sucked into their evil lifestyle until I came to respect every word that spilled out of their mouths.
It was at a Register to Vote Republican table in front of a Walmart.
My uncle works In a candy factory In NC....guess what he does there. Hint....his favorite football team Is from Wiscon(sin)..;) ;)
@Dennis - I don't think they will miss you or your family.
Link to this gay rampage please. I can imagine the blood stained rainbow flags and the unicorn float crushing cars right now.... throngs of men in short-shorts surrounding billowing black smoke from burning tires as they force you to get divorced and marry them instead.
Kudos to NC!!!! I think I will be moving there :) We needed a state with strong morals
Keck
Liberals don't like it when you expose their hypocrisy.
Reading, JUSTME-123, shows how how uneducated people are and how we need to get our kids a better education now.
I hear there is one of those encompassing the Arabian peninsula. Maybe try that out and see what it's like before creating one here?
big mac-4590839 banned. Not good.
I think he was being facetious.
why are people so stupid and not realize government run by religious authority is a theocracy you know like those ones we have been fighting with since Carter years. oh wait its OK because somehow a christian theocracy is better? i mean its not like the catholic church ever used its power to commit genocide right? oh wait they did remember that whole crusades and Spanish Inquisition and here in America we basically said to the native Americans convert or die and all that other stuff yada yada yada. so maybe government run by religious zealots ISN'T a good idea!
Seriously @!$%# off with your sense of morality i don't follow your @!$%#ing religion so you should not force me to live the way you want me to. its your right to believe in the bible but it is not your right to force others to believe in it so @!$%# off!
Man NC is trying so very hard to win the most bigoted state of the year award this year. Gonna be tough to beat Arizona though. They've been the champs since Alabama lost the title in the 70s but hey its gonna happen eventually.
Votes like this make me not want to live in this country anymore...
You know the Constitution allows you to move freely, go ahead and leave.
You can leave anytime.........
I hope they do. I also suggest people buy nothing made in that state, and I'm not even gay. Hate is anti christian.
Just not in North Carolina...
Honestly, it really doesn't matter what the bigots passed barring their own state constitution's ability to rule on as the federal constitution is and will be the law of the land. If the law suits already pending go to the supreme court and the court sides with them, then it will also in turn repeal this law.
I would have thought if Mexico has taught us anything it is the borders are open.
Nobody is stopping you from leaving.
Let me know where to send your ONE-WAY ticket to anywhere you want to go. I'll pay for it IF you never come back. EVER
You are more than welcome to move to the Netherlands with the rest of the perverts.
Of all the things that we have to worry about in this country. How is this ruling going to affect the economy? Is it going to help the unemployment rate? Is it going to help reduce the growing wealth gap that's making the rich richer and the middle class poorer? Oh, i didn't think so.
Votes like this make me not want to live in this state (NC) anymore
I'm waiting for a repeat of Loving v. Virgina
The Republican party has demonstrated for all to see that Christians are all about hate and control. They aren't content with absolute control of their minions/sheeple but insist the entire secular country follow their dogma. No, hate is Christian and these repeated anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-secular, anti-poor laws prove it.
@childress and the bigoted cretins who voted for this law-
Yes, we still have the freedom to move freely for now. I hope sincerely that a huge amount of businesses will choose to freely move their companies out of NC. And I hope that those who still have tourist dollars to spend will choose to move their destinations to a less asinine state.
It is all well and good for those who choose to discriminate on the basis of a social situation that is absolutely none of their business to do so. (Yes, in America you have a Constitutional right to be an a**-hole.— It is also well and good when those who choose to do this finally come up against the very real world consequences of their actions.
After the bulk of your jobs and tourism are gone, hit us up and let us know how you like living on welfare while your state's infrastructure crumbles around you.
good, leave
Kathy Stuart: As it turns out, we are spending a few days in Blowing Rock at the end of June after we drop our daughter off at Duke for a summer program. As for your contention that NC will lose tax dollars as the result of this, keep in mind, there are very few people who pay attention to what's going on in their neighborhoods let alone another state.
Eric Of Montreal. I do agree with you that to hate someone is wrong. God however hates the sin but loves the sinner. I have relatives that are gay and I love them but they are living in sin. I am also a sinner but by God's grace and the blood of my savior Jesus Christ I have been forgiven of my sins.
Damn it, Kathy! I hope this does not become a reality. NC is a wonderful state! It's a beautiful state, and has such a vibrant variety of people and geography...even the mere thought of losing companies and tourism over a divisive issue such as this is really disheartening.
Not everyone in NC [even Republicans -YES, I'M WRITING DIRECTLY TO YOU, THEOVERLORD, BECAUSE YOU CONTINUE TO ERRONEOUSLY CONDEMN ALL REPUBLICANS] supports the sort of discrimination proported by the passing of Amendment 1, and we don't deserve to suffer because of those that refuse change; those that refuse to open their arms and hearts, and accpet everyone, as their very God DOES.
Although I am dismayed that TheOverLord's constantly suggests that the whole of the NC Republican party moves as an absolute unit, I must agree with him - to a point - with his view regarding some Christians "need for control". There are too many "Christians" declaring, loudly of course, that they ARE Christians - and then ultimately engaging in the decidedly UnChristian act of hate. Too often, it isn't enough for these "Christians" to hold their own views close to their hearts, but they then condemn those with opposing opinions.
NC is a beautiful state but it is also an imperfect state. There are many here in NC that are making definitive progress with change, with truly accepting one another regardless of race, religious belief, or sexual preference, but it is painfully obvious that there is much more to be done.
Myself, I can say without fear of being condemned by God or any WORTHY man, that the number of homosexuals I know that would be considered God Worthy grossly out number the number of "declared" Christians that I would consider God Worthy, and unfortunately for all of NC, those declared "Christians" made it to the voting polls.
Oh, well said Kelly!
It is not erroneous to condemn all Republicans for the acts of the Republican party because you belong to a lock-step political movement that insists on no compromise. If you were really against this anti-gay discrimination you would remove your support from that divisive Republican/Teabag party. See, as a democrat it is accepted to have differing opinions and views but in your party it is not. If you join a radical party you have to take responsibility for all its' reckless actions. Sorry, but you can't soothe your conscience by pretending your party is willing to compromise only when it suits you... they clearly are uncompromising almost without exception and announce that fact daily.
Indy - this is democracy and the way the constitution was designed.
The score is this 12 states that offend those of faith. And 38 that offend homosexuals.
This system permitted a country divided over slavery to exist and one entity for over 80 years. People who believed in slavery moved to the slave states and those that didn't either moved to where slavery was not law or put up with it.
When the time was well past due for slavery to be over, we settled it. How we settled it left scars.
What you have is a people in a minority, making the majority do what they want. That is not what democracy is about. When the majority believes that it is okay for anything to be called marriage, then the laws will be changed.
I find that nothing in my life will be affected if gay marriages are recognized by the 'state'.
What will be accomplished by 'banning' or by not 'legally recognizing' the marriage of two people of the same sex who desire to be married?
It is time to disassemble the Republic and each state pair up with like states or go it alone - This country is broken with hate for one another.
This is North Carolina we're talking about, perhaps interracial marriage is next on the chopping block.
I guess you mean the same thing about California, since there citizens did vote against same sex marriage as well right Toasty....and Maine..and oh...and 25 other states ..
Yep....feels good to live In NC today.:D real good.
Can you Imagine the forefathers of this country reading this article. They would be like.. "WTF are those people talking about". "You want to put what where"? "You want It to be your constitutional right to marry Into the same sex" Holly @!$%#.. good to be dead guy these days
Sorry guys...I know we have really F things up around here. I feel your pain. Thanks for that constitution btw...or whats left of It. :(
How funny these comments are, blaming the GOP for all of this bigotry. 68% of blacks voted for this amendment, last time I checked most blacks were registered democrats
Oh the irony of mentioning the Constitution as you piss on the 14th and 1st Amendments.
Why? Why does it feel good to deny people rights? Sick.
Can you imagine what the forefathers would say if they heard we freed the slaves and even gave them the right to vote? Yeah... sensibilities change dude.
Fact of the matter is, our forefathers knew even then that religiously based arguments are neither constitutionally nor legally relevant.

You're right, put the blame where it belongs - religion.
I really don't see the big deal why in gods name would anyone want to live in that hell hole anyway
Janet, regardless of race, anyone that has been brainwashed by the book of terrorism is bound to vote for bigotry and hate. Tell us Janet, what book is solely responsible for terrorism of the centuries?
Believe me, if they could, they would certainly try.
Thankfully court history and the civil rights act makes attempting to do so foolish because even if 75% of the state agrees it would immediately get struck down....
Just like this amendment will get struck down...
That would be the Koran and the way leftists choose to interpret it.
alternative headlines from the past:
"north carolina allows slaves born in this country!" (despite biblical law on slaves only from other countries)
"vote passes to keep slavery in confederate states and secede!"(despite constitution banning secession)
"nazi germany passes law banning intermarriage of jews and christians" (hard times call for attacking scapegoats)
"100 years after emancipation proclamation vote passes to keep negroes out, and against miscogenation!" (sorry for archaic word)
"150 years after 14th amendment, and despite a clear mandate to keep church and state separate, bigotry is unconstitutionally codified into law in 28 states!"
"minorities not protected from mob rule in 21st century! enlightened aliens decide to destroy human race and start over!"
The GOP Tea Baggers hate Gays, but love their Votes !
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
It is time to disassemble the Republic and each state pair up with like states or go it alone - This country is broken with hate for one another.
I will be moving to the United States of Canada. These other hateful idiots can stay in Jesusland.
http: // en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Jesusland_map (take out the spaces).
I said it before I'll say it again...
First, it was the persecution of anyone not being a White Male.
Then, it was the persecution of anyone not White.
Now, it's the persecution of anyone not heterosexual.
Will we never learn?
And the libs can't stand it when they don't get their way. Get use to it, more to come!
GOOD! then leave! One less idiot in the US!
Stone Mountain - the site of many KKK rallies, is also a very pretty location.
But, it's still the site of many Klan rallies. It's beauty does not diminish that fact.
I guess you're not to happy about this if you're packing fudge....which is really nasty btw.
Women on women???....sounds good to me.:D
So then you are tolerant and accepting of all the Democrats in NC that voted in favor of Amendment One? Hmmm? I'm sure we'd all be flabbergasted to see that it differs from the vile nonsense you spout at Republicans for having the same opinions and views... Yeah, I didn't think so. You have freedom of speech only if they agree with you, that's the mantra of the left.
Gotta love the lefties...if it weren't for double standards, they wouldn't have any at all.
Just give people who are in a domestic partnership the same rights as people who are married and call it a day.
Hows the kool aid big bad wolf? The amendment in NC bans civil unions as well. People are just too stupid to read.
EXACTLY Tag, sorry to call NC my home state this day :(
Tag i was speaking generally. This religous nut jobs clearly won't back down over "marriage" .If the federal government were to claim that civil unions could have the same rights as a married couple, i doubt this would be a huge issue.
Sorry Wolf, but it would. These people just plain hate gay people. They will hang that on any excuse commit their "christianity".
Of course it would still be a big issue bad. If minorities who were born in this country had the same rights as citizens but had to be called legal residents, while whites could be called citizens, i suppose there would be no problem there as well. Labels matter and they have power. Civil unions are a way of saying "Hey gays your not like us and no matter what you do, you never will be"
ckbry move if you don't like it.....
Point taken SPC. But hell I think it would be a step in the right direction.
NC forever - Why should I have to move? Never going to find a place to live where you agree with everything that goes on. Doesn't mean I can't voice my disapproval of the matter, last time I checked NC didn't take away our right to free speech.. maybe that comes next time
Ckbry, you are correct - we still have freedom of speech in NC, we just need to be sure and use it. The Amendment had opposition; it wasn't a landslide vote. Tag is right: there are many that still hide hate behind "christianity", but maybe we can just get Tag to share the Koolaid while we forge ahead with acceptance and equality, lol. Don't even consider moving, Ckbry: NC needs people who can read more than ever now, lol!
Big Bad... the headlines read that this amendment bans gay marriage in NC... but as someone who lives in NC and has read the amendment proposal, the truth is that NC just banned ALL domestic partnerships (hetero ones as well), including business/legal contracts that recognize domestic partnerships (e.g. job benefits for unmarried couples, children, gay and straight alike)!
SPC gay unions are not the same. Why offend 2/3's of the population to give them what they want? Would you give your candy bar to your kid if he/she threw a tantrum?
I think the amendment did to much and went to far. To me stating that marriage is to be between a man and a woman only was all that is really needed to be said.
It's just so ironic that the people who suck so much more than any other Americans at this moment in history - are opposed to homosexual activities.
While you're at it why don't you throw our constitution and laws in the garbage. Go back to your kool-aid.
I know many people in NC and they are very strong against big government ruling their lives. That's why I was a little surprised that this amendment passed since they love their freedom but then again I should never have underestimated the power of the church in politics. I can just imagine the pastor preaching every sermon about the evils of homosexuality. I just don't think people thought rationally about what was restricted in this amendment and how it hurt other people who were not gay. Then again maybe they did because they feel it's a sin for people to live together without being married. So we punish the innocent in order to punish the guilty.
If only someone were so free of sin that they could cast the first stone. And that includes the pastors.
Anytime you change a constitution to DENY a HUMAN right, your WRONG!! This is not about religion, there are many in America, what grown people do in the privicy of their own lives, and homes, is no one's business!! There are too many judgemetal on this vine!!
"The TeaBaggers go by the Koran" ! For Political spin !!
Adios Indy. Nah...you aren't going anywhere. You wouldn't know what to do with yourself in another country.
Amen!
Time for us all to stop pointing to ourselves as a justification for desires and actions.
Rather point to Jesus in repentance and follow Him!
Jesus would have little for you but scorn and pity . Go thump yourself.
Jesus was a homosexual who loved the Apostle John - in Mathew.
OK, peddle your crazy some place else, Thankful.
Jeebus never EVER said anything about homosexuals.
Do you not think there are gay Christians? How does this judgement fall in line with Jesus' teachings. Jesus never spoke of homosexuality, and there were gay marriages in the Bible. Look no further than Ruth and Naomi or David and Jonathan to find positive homo-romanticism in the bible. As an atheist, I suggest that you look through your own book because you are clearly ignorant on the topic! I will not bow down before your dictator! And, you certainly can't call Christianity a supporter of the democratic process. It is always either a Christian's way or no way at all.
You're a bigot like the rest
AMEN to Thankful - 2416829...
We still have to love one another...but SIN is SIN...it will be dealt with eventually, in this life of the next. Not just homosexuality, anything that is against God's Word is sin...NOT Bible thumping, not perfect, just FORGIVEN!
"There fore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error."
@Standing On God's Word (even your internet name is insufferable):
Usually I'm a pretty optimistic person. I believe that most people are rational and aren't guided by delusions or fantasies. But when I read dogmatic screeds like yours (and other like you) here, it shocks me. I mean, you actually believe in that claptrap - and I assume you're able to vote. Truly shocking.
As long as we have crazy people believing in a bearded sky god, human progress will be continually retarded and thwarted - as we're seeing in this country currently.
Hilarious! Hiding your bigotry behind what amounts to be a middle-eastern hobo that stars in biggest book of lies ever created by mankind! Priceless!
CWalker: There were no gay marriages in the Bible. Ruth and Naomi is an allegory of loyalty and trust. Not everything has sexual overtones.
What's truly shocking is the people who were fooled by "Hope and Change" and voted for Barry.
Thankful, my dear, I think you've got this whole Christian thing a little out of whack. As a Christian myself, I don't think there's a thing wrong with people marrying someone they love, regardless of gender. Certainly, as the devoted Christian that you claim to be, you'd be well-aware that it's a double-edged sword to cast hatred toward someone (the Bible tells us not to judge) while telling everyone to follow Him. I think you need to do a bit more thinking before haphazardly throwing out such a statement.
you're a tool
@GoUSA... Marriage is not a license to have sex! A marriage is a bond of spiritual connection and promising to commit to one another. It is you who are assuming that there is a sexual overtone to the marriages of Ruth and Naomi or David and Jonathan. That proves how little you know about gay people, marriage, or the Bible.
Comment # 6 restored for clarity.
lefty2thumbs, kaily, you are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
so calling someone a tool, not acceptable. But all of the times I've been called an "ignorant bleeding-heart liberal"... that's ok. Ok. Got it. Thanks.
Thankful: You are no different than the Shariah Law fanatics that you so much despise. The only difference is maybe a turban...
It's the South folks, the land of discrimination, backward thinking, right wing and so on. Thankful just above is emblematic of how they think. They believe they are appointed by Jesus himself to mandate how everyone else should live and what they should think, kind of like the Taliban.
30 states ban same sex marriage. Are there 30 southern states?? Is Maine a southern state?
This didn't bane Same Sex Marriage btw it was already banned! Read the article
Amendment One enshrined the ban on same sex marriage in the NC Constitution so a activist judge couldnt declare the law unconstitutional
@ BamBamFunkhouser
That's true, stupidity and ignorance is not limited to the South. It's everywhere.
The biggest mistake is allowing states to put these types of things up to a popular vote.
Civil rights should not be at the discretion of the majority to approve or disapprove of. This is why we are a representative-republic and not a pure democracy.
William-360414, being from the South, (born in AL, living in GA) I find this amendment offensive. I find it most disheartening that our country, which prides itself on Freedom, thinks it's okay to deny those freedoms to someone just for the reason that they love someone of the same gender.
@Seriously,
Marriage is NOT a civil right...being treated equally under the law is...can you understand the difference?
Logic, the Supreme Court has ruled that marriage is a "basic civil right" under the 14th Amendment -- I think their word trumps yours on this.
logic4U
its so ironic that your name is logic4U but you don't even know the constitution or the amendments and you only seem to spread ignorance and lies. so please change your name to onewhospeaksbeforethinking but that is probably too long to fit so just make it stupid.
More faith-based bigotry. Every day I become more ashamed of this wacko superstitious country.
You and Indy-2550614 are free to leave you know.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
You first Child... rex
I will stay and fight as always.
We people of reason are needed in this country to vote your dogmatic & hateful ilk our of our government. Though it does seem at times that this country has already seen its best days and is now being driven by an overwhelming mass of stupid & ignorance back to the dark ages when religion ruled the world.
What bible are you reading Timothy1Mil? Any reference to homosexuality was meant to be unconsented rape - not consensual sex. Didn't Jesus once say in Mark 7 that "There is NOTHING from without a man, that entering into him can defile him" The translation, "As long as anything is consensual, it is not sinful!. Jesus said it himself.
And besides, if these people aren't getting into heaven, then what is the point of punishing them here on Earth other than pure hatred? Is that what Jesus wanted? Us to hate and disadvantage our neighbors? I don't think so. Jesus would welcome the gay community as he did all the other "lessers" of the Roman Empire of the day.
Childrex, your kind rise up like plagues and we have defeated you and yours over and over. Right always wins in the end. It just keeps getting attacked, but we will always fight you.
The roll-back for human rights has begun in America. The issue isn't sexual orientation, but denying civil rights to everyone but the extreme right-wing social conservatives. Jesus was a homosexual and loved the Apostle John. Mathew
And you know this how??
Really? You know this how? I know, you hung out with Jesus AND you have a Jesus Christ starter jacket. If you can't provide documentation or you are not an eye witness then it's really just your own very misguided opinion.
FYI...Jesus loves every single human being on this earth...even you.
He knows that about as well as you know that everything in the bible is true.
"FYI...Jesus loves every single human being on this earth...even you." Really? You know this how? Were you hanging out with him?
BTW - A christ starter jacket would be awesome...it would really highlight my passion for sci-fi.
Really? You know this how? I know, you hung out with Jesus AND you have a Jesus Christ starter jacket. If you can't provide documentation or you are not an eye witness then it's really just your own very misguided opinion.
And THAT statement sums up your entire religion. ZERO proof, anywhere but in the Big Story Book. Pretty sad, reading 2 people using the same mythology to argue over nonexistent characters and their fabled statements.
Actually, it's like two schizophrenics arguing over what, exactly the voices said.
“Marriage remains an essential social institution which unites men and women to provide for the reproduction of the human race and to provide mothers and fathers for children. . ."
Marriage was not providing mothers and fathers for children in the typical sense BEFORE this amendment. Fewer people are getting married. Nearly half of marriages end in divorce. There are more single, female-headed families. More children live in poverty than ever before. The institution is just as broken now as it ever was. The amendment provides no solutions.
Really? Is marriage really "safe?"
I look forward to this state banning divorce and placing that in their Constitution.
Of course that wont happen they want to protect their view of who can get married not who can get out.
Hypocrisy written into a state constitution. Shame on them. Shame.
If they really meant this, then all childless marriages should be annulled, and no sterile or elderly people should get married, and no one should be allowed to be divorced until all their children are adults.
Otherwise, they are hypocrites hiding behind false statements.
Really, it provides no solution??? Children live in poverty because of poor decision making by parents. This law, which was passed by the majority, protects children from being raised in unnatural family settings, and is based on what God, which we were founded under, finds to be an abomination. We have left our first love and have sought after strange flesh, which will lead to our demise if we don't get back to the basics of what and how freedom remains in place. We do not gain freedom by forcing immorality into our constitution and laws. You are free to be gay or whatever preference that you want. When you tell me that you want to be the same as me, but yet you are not, then that becomes an issue. If i were to cheat on my wife and she found out, do you think that she would be willing to accept it just because I think that it's ok??? No, because it would have been a selfish decision on my part. She would have every right to divorce me because I would have broken our vows that I made before God. You see, God made everything and everyone and gave them a place. If we get out of place then chaos reigns. I like peace and order which our Country was founded to provide. Go back to the shadows with your dark lifestyle, because that is where evil lurks. God Bless America
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
@Jason, this might be too much for your simple brain to handle, but this is not about God! People live in poverty for many social, racial, economic reasons that have nothing to do with marriage. The world is changing everyday, a society MUST move forward when it comes to human rights. Religion DOES NOT make, or pass laws that control a society as a whole. That's where you get lost in this. I'm happy your married. Don't ignorantly deny other humans the right to do the same.
Good! Common sense prevails.
BACKWARDS f*&k
common sense is talking, burning bushes and men who live inside whales for days at a time?
Common sense will prevail - in the end, when these bullsh!t state laws get repealed by the SCOTUS (like many such laws before them have). Let the 'small-government' (BS) states-rights mouthbreathers enjoy their little victory, for they may have won the battle but they will surely lose the war.
This is not what our democracy is about or should be about. We should not be letting the majority vote away the rights of a minority group. It is wrong and not in the spirit of the US Constitution.
The US is no longer the beacon of freedom which we imagine. It is embarrassing to think as a western country we one of the least free.
Our country is not a democracy, please understand that. Democracy is all mob rule. Our country is a democratic republic, in which the law rules the land, but democratic processes must adhere to law. If the US isn't the beacon of freedom you're thinking about, the middle east wouldn't want to still obliterate us.
Correct I was referring to the form of democracy where the public vote in representatives, who should represent the majority and protect the minority.
As I stated and i stand by it we are not the beacon of freedom we think we are. Most western countries have and offer more freedoms than we do. Lets not get into why radicals want to obliterate us its probably more to do with our cluster bombs then our clusters of free thinking happy people.
Lets not get into why radicals want to obliterate us its probably more to do with our cluster bombs then our clusters of free thinking happy people.
The writer/historian Shelby Foote loved quoting little quips between the Blues and Greys during the Civil War. One that comes to mind is during a rainy period with North and South divided by a swollen river. A Blue yells across the river
"Hey Reb!"
"Yeah, Yankee?"
"Why you fightin', Reb?"
"Why, 'cause y'all down here!"
More than anything, THAT is why "they" seek our destruction. WE are THERE, exploiting, subverting, manipulating... We supported injustice against their people, at the hand of tyrants, because it was profitable (as it still is). Add to that, there is this ancient hostility that started during The Crusades, and you have a recipe for retribution, divine or otherwise.
What's creepy is how this same flavor of imperialism fuels the religious radicals here in the USA as it does with Islam: convert of die, live as we dictate or die, and many other versions of the same dogma and the drive to take over the world. Don't believe it, with respect to the Christians? Look up the New Apostolic Reformation. They really DO seek a Christian Theocracy, seized through legal means, and imposed like a wave around the globe. And the really, really scary part? They are BIG, and GROWING and extremely well funded.
it's not a gay marriage ban, that's already illegal. it's a domestic partnership ban so heteros...get ready to remove your kids and your girlfriends/boyfriends and financee's from your health insurance. insurance runs north carolina....haven't you recognize that!!!! and don't even think about social securtiy benefits!!! you did it to yourselves!!!
Well observed 49. This goes back to the "consequences of actions" that I posted about earlier. I had not thought of that actually, although I was a victim of it in MS many years ago when my fiance of several years, the father of our child, could not claim me on his state income tax because we were not married.
Up until recently most insurance policies did not allow unmarried partners to be covered on an insurance policy. Then the world changed, became less constricted by ancient superstitions, and many companies found that preventing committed couples from having the same insurance rights as married couples lost them good quality employees. Insurance companies also backed off because those same committed couples were going to take them to court for discrimination, as the refusal to cover a partner would have been discrimintation and thusly unconstitutional. Hmmm, should be interesting to watch.
Good for goose, good for gander I say.
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
@ Theresa Durham - I don't think "peace" is what you're striving for honestly. This whole article is about how a gay marriage bill didn't pass. It's people like you who give your party a bad name. What is a Demecrate? You spelled it that way several times. I'm just curious.
Do not agree with homosexuality myself, but to each their own. Let there be civil unions or the equivalent.
Will we get our own drinking fountains too, along with special seats at the back of the bus?
Except the amendment bans "civil unions and the equivalent" in NC.
Negatory Rickers. We can't afford to cede anymore ground to the progressive institutions that are simply raping our constitution and assaulting family values. The generation of 20/30 somethings simply don't understand where this country came from and have zero appreciation for moral values and the religious foundations of this great nation.
While we have a chance to lock in this critical vote and maintain the people's voice in this fight, YOU TAKE IT!! I am in complete agreement with many of the critics of this bill that it isn't perfect. And I would indeed vote for pieces of legislation in the future to fix some of the flaws I see. But it's a fantastic day in Dixie and I for one will enjoy watching the restoration of marital values in this state for many years to come.
@CarolinaConservative Don't get too comfy! We 20/30 somethings outnumber the babyboomers nearly 3 times over!
@burgunberry And this group still can't manage its way out of a wet paper bag. Not picking on you personally as we don't know each other, but I'm 44 and simply amazed at the difference in logic that spans the 10-15 years between "you" and "me". I see the light bulb going on with my children as they begin to think through the issues of the day without the influence of the public school system. I encourage you to seek the truth in all things. Not just on this issue, and not from the rubbish that our modern day "teachers" refer to as a text book. Dig deeper. I've been 20 and knew everything. I've been 30 and learned the hard way. I've been 40 and realized how wrong I've been. And now by 50 my life will be on track, with clarity, respect for those who have come before me and sympathy for "you" knowing that arrogance and ignorance are the only two things standing between your generation and a brighter future. You'll come around my friend. Give it 10-15 years.
Just because w're going to be collecting all that 20/30 something FICA is no reason to paint all babyboomers as religious myth following wackjobs. This bill will be struck down by SCOTUS as violating our US Constitutional right to freedom from religion. In the meantime, people who voted for it will be temporarily denied insurance because of it. That's what they get for being narrow minded.
Perhaps you should try reading the Constitution. There is no Constitutional right to freedom FROM religion. What you have is a Constitutional right to freedom OF religion--the free exercise of the religion of your choice (or to not have a religion), as does everyone else.
Small difference in wording, but huge difference in practice and meaning.
Jim, the Constitution guarantees us freedom OF and FROM religion -- we have the freedom to worship or not, as we choose. That is what freedom FROM religion means. It also means that you do not have the right to inflict your religious beliefs on the rest of us (we have the right to be free FROM the religious beliefs of others, including you).
There is no freedom OF religion, without freedom FROM religion.
Please point out what article and section (or amendment) of the U.S. Constitution says that you have freedom "from" religion. Should I save you the trouble and point out that you won't be able to because it isn't in there? I clearly identified what it actually says, and it doesn't support your interpretation.
I get that you are apparently an atheist or anti-religious. That is your Constitutional right to the freedom OF religion (or lack thereof, as the case may be). However, those who are religious have the Constitutional right to the free exercise of their religion, and the right to free speech about it. Those who are not religious have the right to ignore or disregard the speech (or to speak against it, as you are). Simple exposure to the free speech of others does not constitute an infringement on your rights.
Next!
It's the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," and a number of constitutional scholars believe it means just that.
The establishment clause of the first amendment simply means that Congress cannot establish or force anyone to join a particular religion (i.e. the Church of England). It says nothing of being free from exposure to any religion, so your response didn't address what I said to ErinNJ in the slightest.
No one is talking about being free from "exposure" to any religion; freedom FROM religion means that we have the freedom to NOT WORSHIP AT ALL. You can't have freedom OF religion without freedom FROM religion -- if you force people to worship something, that's not freedom at all.
However, your freedom to practice your religion ends where my right to practice another religion -- or to practice NO religion -- begins.
Nobody was talking about forcing someone to worship anything, but SonofMollyM and you both specifically referred to a "Constitutional right to freedom FROM religion" although the Constitution says no such thing. Nobody disagreed that you are free to worship (or not) as you choose--I specifically said that this is what freedom OF religion means in the prior post.
As for the equivocation on your part about the meaning of "freedom FROM religion"--that phrase is typically used only by people objecting to ANY religious activity/speech in the public square (i.e. claiming that being exposed to religion violates their freedom "from" religion--which was the viewpoint from where SonofMollyM's claim derived). That concept is directly in contrast to the founding fathers expressed intent and understanding of religion's role in government and society.
Some examples (emphasis added):
You might also want to read Senate Report No. 376, 32nd Cong., 2nd Sess., I., which was generated in response to petitions to Congress to abolish the office of Chaplain--the Senators directly address the question of the meaning of the establishment clause and the place of religion in the public square, including the following:
This is by no means an exhaustive listing...just some specific samples.
You want to know what the Founding Fathers' thoughts on religion were? You asked for it:
"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?" --- John Adams, letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816
"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved--the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" --- John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson
"What havoc has been made of books through every century of the Christian era? Where are fifty gospels, condemned as spurious by the bull of Pope Gelasius? Where are the forty wagon-loads of Hebrew manuscripts burned in France, by order of another pope, because suspected of heresy? Remember the 'index expurgatorius', the inquisition, the stake, the axe, the halter and the guillotine." --- John Adams, letter to John Taylor
"The priesthood have, in all ancient nations, nearly monopolized learning. And ever since the Reformation, when or where has existed a Protestant or dissenting sect who would tolerate A FREE INQUIRY? The blackest billingsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolence, the most yahooish brutality, is patiently endured, countenanced, propagated, and applauded. But touch a solemn truth in collision with a dogma of a sect, though capable of the clearest proof, and you will find you have disturbed a nest, and the hornets will swarm about your eyes and hand, and fly into your face and eyes." --- John Adams, letter to John Taylor
The clergy...believe that any portion of power confided to me [as President] will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly: for I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion." -- Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Rush, 1800.
"In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson, to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814
"Is uniformity attainable? Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth." --- Thomas Jefferson, from "Notes on Virginia"
"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." --- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, Aug. 10, 1787
"It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one. But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests." --- Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1803
"But a short time elapsed after the death of the great reformer of the Jewish religion, before his principles were departed from by those who professed to be his special servants, and perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind, and aggrandizing their oppressors in Church and State." --- Thomas Jefferson to S. Kercheval, 1810
"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." --- Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt, 1813
"On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the comprehension of the human mind." --- Thomas Jefferson to Carey, 1816
"But the greatest of all reformers of the depraved religion of his own country, was Jesus of Nazareth. Abstracting what is really his from the rubbish in which it is buried, easily distinguished by its lustre from the dross of his biographers, and as separable from that as the diamond from the dunghill, we have the outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man. The establishment of the innocent and genuine character of this benevolent morality, and the rescuing it from the imputation of imposture, which has resulted from artificial systems, invented by ultra-Christian sects (The immaculate conception of Jesus, his deification, the creation of the world by him, his miraculous powers, his resurrection and visible ascension, his corporeal presence in the Eucharist, the Trinity; original sin, atonement, regeneration, election, orders of the Hierarchy, etc.) is a most desirable object." --- Thomas Jefferson to W. Short, Oct. 31, 1819
The Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually the same god as the many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes; fools and hypocrites. To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson
Accustom a people to believe that priests and clergy can forgive sins ... and you will have sins in abundance. I would not dare to dishonor my Creator's name by [attaching] it to this filthy book [the Bible]. Thomas Paine
Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon than the Word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind. Thomas Paine
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church. Thomas Paine
Let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religions. George Washington
Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society. George Washington, letter to Edward Newenham, October 20, 1792; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983, p. 726]
Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. George Washington, letter to Sir Edward Newenham, June 22, 1792
If they are good workmen, they may be from Asia, Africa or Europe; they may be Mahometans, Jews, Christians of any sect, or they may be Atheists.... George Washington, to Tench Tighman, March 24, 1784, when asked what type of workman to get for Mount Vernon, from The Washington papers edited by Saul Padover
...I beg you be persuaded that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny, and every species of religious persecution. George Washington, to United Baptists Churches of Virginia, May, 1789 from The Washington papers edited by Saul Padover
As the contempt of the religion of a country by ridiculing any of its ceremonies, or affronting its ministers or votaries, has ever been deeply resented, you are to be particularly careful to restrain every officer from such imprudence and folly, and to punish every instance of it. On the other hand, as far as lies in your power, you are to protect and support the free exercise of religion of the country, and the undisturbed enjoyment of the rights of conscience in religious matters, with your utmost influence and authority. George Washington, to Benedict Arnold, September 14, 1775 from The Washington papers edited by Saul Padover
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." - James Madison (Memorial and Remonstrance against Religious Assessments, 1785.)
"The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretence, infringed.'' - James Madison (Original wording of the First Amendment; Annals of Congress 434 (June 8, 1789).)
I have examined all the known superstitions of the World, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the world...The clergy converted the simple teachings of Jesus into an engine for enslaving mankind ... to filch wealth and power to themselves. [They], in fact, constitute the real Anti-Christ. Thomas Jefferson
It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. Thomas Jefferson
Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear. Thomas Jefferson
"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people. Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries. A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." - James Madison, 1785
"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise." James Madison, letter to Wm. Bradford, April 1, 1774
"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries." James Madison, 1803 letter objecting use of gov. land for churches
". . . Some books against Deism fell into my hands. . . It happened that they wrought an effect on my quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist." Benjamin Franklin
"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish Church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. They found it wrong in Bishops, but fell into the practice themselves both here (England) and in New England." Benjamin Franklin
"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." Benjamin Franklin
"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin, in Poor Richard's Almanac
BTW, I guess you haven't noticed that the Constitution does not mention God, Jesus, the bible, or any other religious text or deity, either -- because the Founding Fathers wanted this country to be a secular nation, with freedom OF and FROM religion.
Does the phrase "circular argument" mean anything to you? Because you went right back to the original claim that was already disproved, and then used a number of out-of-context quotes to "support" your claim--despite the fact that a reading of the full quotes directly contradicts your assertions.
I noted most of the quotes were not referenced, so if you'd like to provide actual citations, that would be helpful. I did note that one of your Jefferson quotes (which you didn't cite the source) is actually from the same document as one that I cited...just a different portion. I also noted that most of your quotes do not directly support your claim, nor directly contradict what I said, nor refute the contents of the cites I provided. Quite a few of them are actually irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I'm afraid you'll have to do better than regurgitating random un-referenced quotes that you seem to have culled from someone's website.
I also found it hysterical that you seem to think the James Madison quote of the draft 1st Amendment either supports your argument or refutes mine. If anything, it reinforces what I've already said to you. The same goes for the quotes from G. Washington--the one you pulled from his Farewell Address (again, not referenced by you) is taken out of context and missing the critical lines before and after it that undercut the very argument which you just tried to make.
Please try reading the quotes in their proper context...then talk.
You have disproven nothing, Jim -- but go ahead and keep telling yourself that, if it helps you to sleep at night. Keep your delusions; you obviously need them.
I'm afraid YOU'LL have to do better than trying to denigrate factual evidence simply because it totally contradicts your misinformation and lies.
I could quote Supreme Court opinions on the subject, too, but frankly, you're not worth the time or the effort any more, since you seem to be married to your own dogmatic and erroneous belief that there is no separation of church and state in this country, and that we do not have freedom FROM religion -- even though it has been amply proven to you that there is no freedom OF religion without freedom FROM religion. BTW, the Constitution does not use the words "freedom of religion," either -- but that is exactly what the First Amendment guarantees, along with freedom FROM religion.
You seem to have this idea that you are some kind of constitutional and/or biblical scholar; however, if you were either, it would not have been so easy to disprove and refute your pathetic claims. Actually, if you were in fact a scholar of either kind, you probably would not have made such baseless claims in the first place.
Today was a good day! I wish the rest of the country would get on the same page as NC.
I wish they would ban idiots too but your still here.
If by 'the same page' you mean denying gays and women rights that they should have and have had (respectively) instead of dealing with jobs, the economy and social justice (i.e. persecuting the banks and Wall Street for their roles in the financial meltdown) then yes, many state legislatures in this country (especially the ones run by Republicans) are on that very page, unfortunately.
@ SHFB,
I wasn't aware the vote was against women's rights or are you off your meds again?
Good for NC- You other morons who do not like it ship off to Africa- enjoy.
@Ed - Could we go to Japan instead? I mean, we missed the Sakura picnics this year, but we could all make reservations to enjoy true natural beauty next year. Y'know, when the bigots crown their new king?
I'd be all for going to other nations in the world too - how about Mongolia? Jamaica? Ireland? What about Spain? Or how about Malaysia? Maybe Brazil?
I mean, the only places I hear you suggesting us to pack off to are China, Mexico and anywhere in Africa. Mayhaps you're going to plan a massive scale nuclear bombardment once your king comes and is finished sorting out those for his "holy land"?
Nuclear arms do more than just incinerate, y'know - radiation poisoning corrupts and defiles all it touches. Could this be the fabled "Seven Bowls of Wrath" or the Swords of Judgement I hear so much about in Revelations?
Is it possible the Bible was nothing more than a handbook for the Supreme Tyrant of the Universe? I have to wonder - where is the domain of love and where is the domain of hate? What is light, and what is darkness? What is good and what is evil?
Answer me - if God was going to take your people away to Heaven, what need then is there to repopulate in the first place, when your new children won't even be able to prove themselves worthy of getting in in the first place?
Think on what I've said for a while.
Yeah Louis, it's not every day a state unconstitutionally deprives its own citizens of a basic human right...
Logic4u (a misnomer if there ever was one):
I was speaking generally about the Christian Taliban's agenda in totale, not just specifically about the NC Amendment (it's called nuance - look it up). You obviously haven't been paying attention to what's been going on in Virginia regarding the assault on the reproductive rights of women (vaginal probe, anyone?). Not to mention the BS contraception kerfuffle that the U.S. Congress thought was so important until they saw their support amongst women tanking.
And the only 'meds' I partake in are the occasional wee drams of Laphroaig.
And the religious right takes NC back 150 years. Will they want women in burkas next. Would not be surprised. The religious right is similar to the Taliban they want the country run on religious grounds. What other country vilified gays, Nazi Germany. Look in the mirror NC voters, you are either hypocrites, closet gays or just plain STUPID.
Stephen Hawkings Football Boots.
You are the one that really must keep up. The Gov of Virginia vetoed the bill for Vaginal probes.
By God, North Carolina got it right!!!!!!!
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
The Gov of Virginia vetoed the bill for Vaginal probes.
And you think that ends it? They'll be back, with an even worse bill and even slicker tactics next time. Kinda like crabs in the crapper.
@Janet - what sk-nitroWV wrote. The governor only crapped out when public opinion turned against him. He certainly didn't have an epiphanic moment of morality.
@Theresa - I tried to keep up with your (derailed) train of thought, but your atrocious grammar, spelling and run-on sentences almost made it nigh impossible. But here goes:
1). I'm a Southern, happily married heterosexual Democrat that supports gay marriage. I'm finally glad that Obama came around to what will undeniably be the majority viewpoint in the future. Gay marriage will happen within 20 years (at the latest) - I'm certain. And guess what? The sky won't fall and gay marriage then will have the same effect on you and your relationships as it does now - i.e. none.
2). The biggest challenge to this nation right now is the economy and jobs. The Republicans have done NOTHING constructive in that arena, which is why they're stirring up the idiots who continue to support them at the peril of their economic self-interest with social issues. If Obama loses I hope it's based on that and not these BS social issues that - at the end of the day - really don't impact your daily life.
3). I also call BS to your declaration that you were a 'Demecrate' (sic) under Clinton. Anyone as hung up on god and the 10 commandments as you seem to be has been and always will be a Republican. Though 'god' knows how anyone can think the Republicans are the more 'christian' party is beyond me. They reward corporations that screw us over, cut services to the poor, disabled and needy, and worship at the altar of unencumbered greed.
4). If you're so worried about the President holding the 10 commandments 'scaried' (sic), then where were you when W. started the Iran War (probably cheering on the sidelines like a sheep)? Killing and falsehood (not to mention the coveting of oil) were just some of the commandments broken by the Bush administration. And guess what, the 10 commandments aren't in the Constitution. In fact, Article VI, paragraph 3 of the Constitution states:
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
If you want to live in a theocracy, move to Iran.
Another state I have added my Do Not Buy Anything Made There list. I'm not even gay, discrimination is ugly no matter from who or where .. and the only way to address it is with your wallet.
I now will google a list of products make in NC to make sure I do not support these evil people. I encourage you all to do the same.
I think NC will survive without your 12 bucks per year.
Organizations I do not buy from:
UAW
Teamsters
Any labor union
Democratic Party supported organization
This vote shows the true America! To scream discrimination just show how looney democraps really are
I'm also adding NC to my no buy don't visit list. I may not spend a lot of money but if you add up the amount not spent there by others like me it adds up to a pretty good sum.
Not your money anyways lib it's the taxpayers. Hooray N. Caroline. Happy days are here again.
We do not need your support. I promise.
Yeah, that will show them not to vote their own minds and opinions. Vote the way we think you should or we won't buy anything you make or visit your state.
Good grief are you that immature and self-righteous? Or is it your just ignorant enough to think that's how the whole voting thing should work, you know with black mail and threats? I am beyond disbelief that people like you even exist.
so if your gay in nc you can not marry and now because of people like you they may earn less money from loss of business. This helps the gay businessmen and women how?????
Well there's always carpetbagging if you have a problem with boycotting.
^_^
Just cancelled my two week vacation to the Outer Banks.
12 bucks a year is A LOT of money in North Carolina!! That is clothing for a year in that state LOL!! You have already banned gay marriage and have one of the highest unemployment rates in the country and instead of dealing with that issue (and there are no unions there to blame it on either!) you take time and resources to ban gay marriage again. That is just a plain dumb waste of money.
Good, where were you going to stay...maybe I can get a good deal on your cancellation.
You $2 purchase will not have any effect- JAC@#!@.
why would I cancel going there, I always believe in taking the fight to the enemy where he lives and make him fight in his land rather than mine.
Good for you...that will show those bad people In NC not to mess around with you and your nastiness.
Hi there Logic4U... I'm wondering, since you are looking for a good deal and all. My husband and I travel, well used to after this, to NC (the Outer Banks) 4 times a year, spending $20,000 each time for just the rental house. Now multiply that times 4... So we are at $80,000, adding in all the other money spent would typically add up to a collective $20,000-$30,000 extra, so we are now at least at or over the $100,000 mark. Yeah, I think NC might miss that tourism money, especially since the other 3 couples that do and spend roughly the same won't be going there anymore either. Adding to this, I am positive there are others who will no longer travel to NC for vacations, spending their money in a state that voted for hate and discrimation. But anyways... back to that deal you wanted... Shall I tell the owners of the house that you would like our weeks there? That way you can spend your money supporting this beautiful, yet very backwards state.
Now, with all this said I will say that I have never witnessed or encountered any negative feelings in the many years we have been taking these vacations. The people are all very nice and welcoming, and I don't think anyone would deny the beauty of NC, especially the Outer Banks. It is a shame that this dispicable law was passed, because it is truly filled with hatred and discrimation on many levels... A true shame.
If you spend 80K 4 times a year you are obviously part of the 1%. You should be saving your money for the massive tax increase you are about to receive because of the current president
Donna, I hate to hear about your change of plans to our Crystal Coast. Myrtle Beach is...wait, SC has an amendment too. Virginia has Virginia Beach....oh, they have an amendment too. Tybee Beach in Georgia...nevermind. Florida is out for vacation destinations as well (poor kids can't go to Disney World, Universal, Sea World, the Keys). All of the Gulf coast states have amendments so those beautiful beaches can't be enjoyed either. Maybe you can cruise to the Caribbean...no can't do that either because ports are located along those coastlines too and that would support our racist economies. Good luck in your travels and hope you can work out the logistics for great vacations in the future.
Janet-489369... Read what I actually wrote first, then do the math... I said it added up to $80,000 a year, not $80,000 4 times a year. And no, we are not in the 1%, however we are all set with the current President, especially compared to anyone else in the running. However, this was not about taxes, or the President. It was a reply made to someone else being rude to another poster.
Tom from Carolina... We will miss our trips to the Outer Banks, greatly... I am not denying that, I never did. As for all the other places you mentioned... Sorry, none of them are on our list for trips to begin with. I can't help it that your state, one that yes, I do love... unfortunately passed a law filled with discrimination and hatred. One that I, as well as others, can not support. However, I will miss.
wow, even the democrats are homophobic now......barak obama included
Hey keck: love your avatar! Great movie! hate your comment though. I don't think the Dems are homophobic at all. It sure looks like the people of North Carolina are though. It's disappointing that the fair people of N.C. will not recognize people that are fellow workers, neighbors, repairmen, servicemen, firefighters and teachers. They graduate from the finest Universities and treat you when you are sick. Then you deny their rights as Americans.
We digress.
We're not homophobic as you and so many others are so quick to decry all who disagree with you. We're not afraid of homosexuals, as the "phobia" or "phobic" describes. We simply do not approve. There's a difference.
Don't worry about it dumb asses! There is nothing made in North carolina anymore thanks to the democrat governors we have had the last 20 years!!! Save your pocket change for someone else!
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
MaxfromScottsdale, great comment. I hope someday we'll all play nice and will all be treated as equals...
Not really. Tell me what the difference in effect is.
You might also explain why should any gay have to seek or want your approval?
Do you consider your the standard by which all things should be judged or something? If so that's pretty naive and audacious Even worse, it's wholly arrogant and tyrannical to try to enforce your disapproval by way of legislation, wouldn't you say?
Max, certainly NC is being painted as homophobic but I can assure you, as someone who lives here, that there are many diverse communities here. My county voted in the majority against this POS amendment, but it still passed because although there are existing pockets of cultural diversity, they tend to be limited to college towns and urban areas...a much smaller percentage of the population compared to rural areas. I and many others are very angry about this, as well as embarrassed.... and Teuja, speak for yourself!
Constitutionally-mandated discrimination, inequality, and bigotry.
It's a sad day in America.
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
Theresa Durham... Your comment, that has been repeated already, speaks volumes as to why there is, well I should say, why there is meant to be a Separation of Church and State. If you want to talk about following and standing with God, and teaching your children... Well have you heard about Do onto others as you would have done onto you? I don't believe, but I could be wrong, that you would be very happy if you and/or your family was faced with this hatred and discrimination. I know it sure doesn't teach anyone to Love Thy Neighbor. Religion, as much as I do believe, well it shouldn't have anything to do with Government.
shame
CA is sinking fast.
They still respect the Constitution in California, Ed.
Maybe...but most there in CA don't give a crap about marriage, much less one between a man and a woman. Just check the stats.
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
for the love of pete Theresa we get it you posted that like a 100 times already.
Theresa, god does not make our laws; we are a secular nation, and always have been. I have seen your post everywhere. I have always been a registered Democrat (note correct spelling; you get it wrong in every post) because the Democrats understand the separation of church and state, which you and Repuglicans do not seem to get -- and never have.
FYI, the Constitution does not mention God, Jesus, the bible, or any other religious text or deity -- for a very good reason: we are a secular nation, not a theocracy. Everyone in this country does not believe in god, or any book of fairy tales (i.e., the bible).
Also, please note that the word is "sacred," not "scaried". And you type like a 12-year-old; it seems that you can't even spell a simple word like "you". How can you expect to have any credibility when you cannot even express yourself like an adult?
How does it feel to live in a state of hate North Carolina?
You do realize the vast majority of states ban gay marriage?!
They used to ban blacks too. Doesn't mean it's right.
See what happens when you stop burning people at the stake? Let's bring that back now that we're going against the tide of history. This vote will be looked upon in a few years as sheer bigotry which it is.
What the Hell. North Carolina brought us Jesse Helms, too, right?
And OMG! Wisconsin brought us Joe McCarthy! California Brought us Ronald Reagan! And for the love of Christ-- Texas brought us W!! See? America is rife with idiots and their brainless minions. Always has been, always will be, until they change the name and get on with whatever form of government replaces the current one.
A sad day for civil rights and I am embarrassed to be a North Carolinian associated with this kind of narrow minded legislation. Just remember it wasn't that long ago blacks and whites could not marry in the grand scheme of things.
To you I apologise .. but I will not buy anything made in your state. I'm not gay .. hate is ugly and needs to be put down. The only way I can do this is with my wallet.
Best of luck.
@lefty2thumbs...
Don't equate interracial marriage with gay marriage. You show a steep level of ignorance doing so. States barred interracial marriages as a way of preventing blacks from advancing in society as a whole. Any gay citizen of the US can advance at any level, with or without civil unions. The argument against interracial marriage was one of permission, not physical compatibility. People simply didn't want them to be married, but this did not change the fact that marriage is possible (under definition of the word) between mixed races. On the other hand, gay marriage is an issue of physical possibility. Under the definition and etymology of "marriage", it is impossible for two males, or two females to marry. There is no conjugal union, and the very fact that you use the qualifying term "gay" in order to describe it, proves that it indeed is not the same. It's a logical issue, it's a societal issue, and it's a physical issue - religion plays only a small piece of this argument only because it enforces societal norms. Just as many secularists oppose homosexual marriage as do religious people.
@Fivel: no offense but you lack any logic at all.
If preventing interracial marriage prevented blacks from advancing, then it does the same for gays.
And your conjugal physical possibility makes not sense either. If it did, then fat people shouldn't be allowed to get married, or physically disabled, etc. And of course gays and lesbians can have plenty of conjugal possibilities.
And if you really mean making children, then all childless marriages should be void -- you should only be considered married legally after you have children. Otherwise, all the childless people obviously aren't conjugally possible. No elderly people should be married either, in fact they should automatically lose marriage benefits as soon as they are proven sterile. And no divorces until kids are adult. Unless you also support all this, you are a hypocrite.
Just pointing out how ridiculous your logic (what there is of it) is.
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
Americans are good at hating each other aren't we?
As a native Tar Heel...Do not think for one moment that the conservitive turnout today was only for gay marriage...this was also a direct shot across the Obama bow.
lets hope.
I'm sure the people whose constitutional rights you just denied will be happy to know that it wasn't just because they're gay, but because North Carolina also is racist.
@toasty...
Your comment is further proof that some liberals simply don't understand that other Americans don't think like you, but have opinions that are just as valuable as you...regardless of what you may think of them. I, for one, can't wait to see the responses from the likes of you when Obama is defeated this November because he sucks as a President...not because he's half white. The only racist here is you toasty.
Oh...and Marriage is NOT protected, or mentioned, in our Constitution. It is NOT a Federal right so you just hold your breath on that one racist...
And your argument is what, exactly?
(This is where the Teabaggers usually stop responding to my posts for some reason...)
"And your argument is what, exactly?"
Please point out the part about "Marriage". Life, liberty and all that does not have anything to do with Marriage. The Constitution does not protect Marriage. There is a very LEGAL reason the Supreme Court has not waded into this issue...there is no Federal right to Marriage.
And I am not a tea party member nor did I vote for this bill. I am simpy pointing out facts about the vote as a NC resident.
You are a tool toasty...
Ugh, yeah....it does
Loving vs. Virginia
The court ruled that Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute violated both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In its decision, the court wrote:
“Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
I see the Loving vs Virginia case brought up often. Why has the Supreme Court refused to hear a gay marriage rights case?
Gay and Race are not the same. States have the right to establish "States Rights" for every element of marriage including how old you must be...different in each state. The Supreme Court has shown zero interest in weighing in on this issue.
Interesting point, the court said it best, Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.. This supports the decision of the voters. What on earth does same sex marriage have to do with the our existence and survival? Two my knowledge it takes a man and a woman to breed. Not 2 women or 2 men. Thank you for bringing this up. I feel much better about the results now.
They haven't. It just hasn't gotten there yet but it will NOT hold up to Supreme Court Scrutiny. The one case that did was sent back on technical grounds.
It doesn't matter that Gay and Race aren't the same thing. There again, the 14th Amendment. States cannot, I repeat, CANNOT infringe on the rights of a minority.
Why do you think that you should have greater access to government than any other American? What makes you think you have the right to dictate how my government should represent me when it has ZERO effect on you?
Tether when are people like you going to get it through your thick, thick skull? You don't have the RIGHT to infringe upon my rights. This government doesn't belong solely to you anymore than it does me but I have every right to expect equal representation under the law.
Procreation is not required in order to marry. The court ruled that marriage is a fundamental freedom for ALL.
@long
I think you are wrong. The court has to prove that being gay is natural and not by choice. If the court determines that being gay is by choice, there is no chance they rule on any side other than the States. If somone can prove to the court that being gay is natural, there is a chance they will agree and the Loving vs Virginia case would be a great template. There is no choice in ones Race...
That, in my opinion, is why the Court will not take this issue for many more years.
The court doesn't have to prove anything. All they do is hear the arguments, unless you think that somehow, on August 13, 2016 at 6:04 PM (Central time) every single gay person, the world over will somehow snap out of their trance and declare their sudden heterosexuality. Do you think that might happen? Homosexuality has existed in every culture throughout history since the beginning of time. Do you actually believe the the courts might hold some notion that it might suddenly change? Do you think that if every straight person closed their eyes and wished really, really hard that gay people would just disappear from the face of the earth?
How about this, do you foresee the courts arbitrarily revoking marriage equality in the states that have approved it, thereby stripping a significant minority of American citizens of rights they've already deemed "fundamental" and have already been granted? Doesn't it seem more likely that the courts will implement those rights, nationally?
Do you think that gay people will all suddenly surrender the fight and say, "Okay, we'll go back into hiding and continue to pay our full share of taxes even though we're not represented equally. That's alright, we're used to being kicked around anyway, but golly gee, thanks for trying!"
I've watched friends lose a partner and in their grief, then lose everything else, including homes, cars, bank accounts etc. to grieving, spiteful "in-laws". I had a friend who was a NASA engineer die in an auto accident but his partner of 12 years wasn't allowed to have any say in the funeral service and was subsequently denied the opportunity to attend. They thought they were protected by a will but the parents somehow managed to get it overturned. The partner was frozen out, the house and car sold out from under neath him and he was left with a $40,000 life insurance policy. 12 Years of sharing and loving and mortgage payments and car payments only to be left with a pittance in the end.
What's really sad is that the laws already exist that could have protected them. With a minimum of fuss, existing family laws could have included same sex couples without spending additional tax payer dollars or legislative time spent arguing to appease the bigoted masses. It wouldn't have then, nor would it now have any effect, whatsoever on anyone else.
that is so sad,that is why we want to make it equal across the board,not special rights ,just equal.....thank you
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
NOT Born Gay: Homosexuality Caused by Emotional Trauma:
Author and AIDS victim Jerry Arterburn said: "I was involved in the homosexual world as a blatant attempt to obtain the affection from other men that I did not receive from my own father."
Due to his sensitive nature, he was more deeply affected than most boys when his own father rejected him early in life. Without a loving father figure, he yearned for affection from other boys by the age of six. His yearning became sexualized at puberty. He said being abused or severely neglected in childhood was "too common a thread to ignore" in the gay community and his female mannerisms were due to his mother, his only role model. He was NOT born gay.
I have a loving and healthy relationship with my heterosexual, happily married mother and father. I am gay. I am happy and contribute to society. Know what I do for a living? I teach at a school in a rehabilitative setting for children who were so victimized by their (overwhelmingly straight) families, they can't live at home anymore. It's my job to help them. I am very successful....despite being gay.
So. Yeah.
That's just one anecdote. That isn't the case for every gay person. Nor should it matter. Why does it matter? Gay marriage doesn't hurt anyone, bottom line.
True LGBT-4192908
I would appreciate you to stop spreading your out dated unproven and untrue rhetoric it is not helpful or welcome.
Is it difficult having to go through life hiding from your won homosexual desires?
All your quote proves True LGBT is that you were dropped on your head as an infant.
Anyone who believes you can choose to be gay is by definition gay themselves. Any straight person knows that under no circumstances are they remotely interested in being gay, and in fact wouldn't be gay for millions of dollars.
If you are actively choosing whether to be gay or not you are gay, because straight people simply don't even consider the possibility. Furthermore, there is only hardship in being gay today -- why would anyone choose to be regularly derided, beaten up, discriminated against, disowned by family and church, in order to do something that is gross to straight people?
I really laugh at people like you who think that straight people are straight because they are resisting gay temptations.
Gay people are definitely born that way, and you were obviously born that way.
Got any peer-reviewed studies to back up your claim, True?
True LGBT appears to be a bot operated by NOM or some other anti-gay hate group. It'll never reply, much less defend the debunked nonsense it posts. All it ever does is a hit and run on Newsvine forums involving gay rights issues.
Julian; If what you say is true then please explain the heterosexuals who, when sentenced to long prison terms, engage in homosexual intercourse and then return to exclusive heterosexuality upon their release. What about bisexuals, are they "born" both straight and gay?
The science of it is that sex is a mechanism for reproduction and sexual desire is the desire to reproduce. It is pleasurable because if it weren't, we would not do it. Yes humans have sex when they do not intend to reproduce, they also eat when they are not hungry, but eating is still just the mechanism used to fuel our bodies.
Some people are "born" thieves, but we say it is wrong to steal and deny them certain freedoms if they steal. Research suggests that some pedophiles are born with this desire. Being "born" with a particular trait does not make that trait normal.
For those who like to eqaute priests with pedophiles, you should remember this abuse was male on male and that the perpetrators were homosexual as well as being pedophiles.
Milgram, you just got pretty much all of that wrong.
Milgram ignores the fact, which is both legally and scientifically sound, that the rights of one end where the rights of another begin; that consent is necessary for any relationship, gay or straight, and that thievery and pedophilia are (by definition) violations of the rights of others, while homosexual relationships by consenting adults is not.
In fact, Milgram loves false equivalency, the slippery slope, and probably many other logical fallacies, too.
Are you agreeing that being raised without a Mother and Father is detrimental to the healthy upbringing of a child. I believe this is what many pro-marriage activists believe, why they believe the recognition of the union of homosexuals grants them rights to adopt children.
Whether or not we agree on whether raising children in a homosexual union is healthy or not, it shows that others are affected (be it positive or negative).
There is a lesson here, maybe... When you are in the minority (gays that want to get Married) and want to convince the majority to yield something or vote in your favor, don't insult and berate them(Calling folks teabaggers, racist homophobes, etc.) or lie about your position (Amendment one hurts children!).
I agree with you on this one. Although I live in NC and voted against the amendment since it is redundant and also took away other civil unions.
But I do agree that they (gay rights groups) could not leave well enough alone and accept the domestic partnership status. They ended up shooting themselves in the foot so to speak by trying to shove it down the throats of others in the majority and now they potentially lost the domestic partnership status.
Yeah, I'm sure if the gays and gay-friendly people had been a little more reserved in their rhetoric, all the homophobic voters out there would be perfectly happy to let them get married. Yeah, that's it.
Yet we have no choice in the rhetoric that we have to hear day in and day out from people with phobias... phobias can be overcome by counseling, you know. You should seek it out.
Strange that gays wouldn't accept 2nd-class citizenship, eh?
Even stranger since NC doesn't actually have domestic partnerships, only a few communities do.
I know Jwoop, how evil those gays were for asking you to respect their equal rights under the Constitution...
The blatant misapplication of language is all anyone really needs to know about how weak the marriage corruption argument is. First you say men who like to rub their reproductive organs against other men are "gay", and then you come back and reference all sexual deviants as "gays."
You had to of known you were on the wrong side of this debate when you found yourselves completely dependent upon blatant falsehoods, a constant revision to the definitions of the words in support of, and out right lies in defense of your demands for a special rights for sexual deviants.
Randy, how does denying marriage to gays prevent them from "rubbing their reproductive organs" against each other?
And why when you hear the word "gay" do you only think about men's penises? Gay women also have naughty parts, but they don't seem to be on your radar.
skrekk,
LGBT:
(L)esbian: Women who like to rub their reproductive organ against women
(G)ay: Men that like to rub their reproductive organ against men
(B)i-sexual: People that like to rub their reproductive organ against everything
(T)ransgender: Confused
There is no such thing as a "Gay People." You folks can't even agree upon the words you use as self descriptive - though you do agree that no descriptive is too ridiculous.
Well at least we all know where President Obama stands on gay marriages...........
Presdent Obama is for gay marriages, therefore the American people who are registered Demecrates have 90 days before the election to change thier party to the Republican party or thier electorial vote will be counted for President Obama and if he continues to be President he will allow gay marriage bills to pass and we can not have that. So if u r a registered Demecrate u HAVE TO CHANGE U'R PARTY TO REPUBLICAN. Please help save American and change u'r party to Republican. When President Clinton was in office I was a Demecrate but after he admitted to the world that he broke one of God's 10 Commandments I could no longer support him and I changed my party to republican. How can we teach our children to follow the 10 Commandments if the President of the United States of America doesn't even hold GOD"S word scaried. For a better America, change to Republican TODAY. Go to the county clerks office in U'R county today and change to Republican. We must let our elected officials know that we stand with GOD and his 10 Commandments and vote out the ones who bring unacceptable behavior to our world! Peace be with U
He's so out in 2012. At least NC figured it out ... Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.
I guess its going to be what NC has to do. Obama needed to shut his cake hole (concerning the Bill of Rights Ammendment protecting states) trying his bagering upon NC deciding not to have homosexual marriages.
To THeresa Durham:
The spelling is DEMOCRAT.
maria I you sure the spelling is not dumbocrat>
And this Sunday they will grab their pitch forks and hunt down those evil warlocks and witches!
The Church needs to stay out of other peoples lives. Sad day for America.
max from scottsdale
you've been out in the sun to long. i never saw a church vote but i have seen people vote. and people who don't like the results usually ridicule the democratic process cause they can not accept being out of touch.
Color it like you want, your church is preaching hatred and that my friend is not a church for the people. The people you hate and prosecute are human beings. They hold jobs, graduate from our finest Universities, fix your pluming, make your car, on and on. They are Americans. And I'm out of touch?
Your hatred of fellow residents, neighbors of yours is pitiful.
There does NOT have to be hatred to simply say, "No, I don't want the kind of behavior of a vastly small minority to be forced onto everyone." I don't care if you quote sacred texts or not, the vast majority simply said "no, this is not for me and I don't want this to be part of my childrens and future generations possibilities." Hatred does not need to be part of that process.
Why does North Carolina have one of the highest divorce rates in the country? Don't tell me that it's because one spouse found the other to be gay.
max from Scottsdale
you are proving your small mindedness as you assume i have a church, which i do not. i treat people as they treat me. i don't hat anyone however person like yourself who do not understand history or traditions annoy me. billy carter as an example graduated from one of our best institutions but when it came to logic and economics he proved very inept. i assume the car makers you mentioned worked for the big three and produced in the 1970's POS. as you will note 61% voted against your position and now you whine that its hatred and bigots. get real you are a minority and msnbc tells you the numbers are with you until there is a democratic election which proves they are full of it.
demmie 155521
you got it wrong from two ways according to the census of july 1 quoted by the wall st journal north carolina is not in the top 15. Second in order to have divorce rates you need marriage first which tip many of the statistics. as the gay community and children are not subject to counts
@Chetan.. how exactly is this "forcing this on you, your children and future genenerations"? How exactly does a marriage of a gay couple next door or half a world away effect you? Minus the Bible passages, please.
Sincerely,
Married, hetero male.
Really, the vote was to grab pitchforks and hunt people down? Christians are grabbing pitchings and having Salem Witchhunts? Because people saying they are Christians have done this in the past, all Christians are doing it? That is so easy to say..
Honestly, I believe your anger is getting the best of you.
So if they were included, what do you think the percentage numbers would be for them? The divorce rate numbers are higher down South because of more marriages, but what makes the higher divorce rate so acceptable compared to the Gay community and the DOMA act? Aren't those results just as bad as your thinking of gay families having children?