A Simple Explanation of North Carolina's Amendment 1: Vote AGAINST

[jaxx]

May 07, 2012
Milt Shook
A Simple Explanation of North Carolina's Amendment 1: Vote AGAINST

<..> First of all, the language in the ballot measure does not match the language in the section that will be added to the North Carolina Constitution. That alone should earn an "against" vote.

<..> This means, if a man and a woman are living together, but aren't married, they essentially lose any rights they might have had before. A woman who is beaten by her boyfriend probably won't be able to bring domestic battery charges against him and protect her, because the state isn't allowed to recognize their relationship as "domestic." What rights will their kids lose, because their parents aren't seen as "domestic partners"? It's even possible that employers who currently provide benefits to "domestic partnerships" will no lonr be able to do so, because such arrangements will be against current law.

This isn't just a homophobic law; it's a poorly written law that could have extremely negative consequences that go far beyond simply making "gay marriage" illegal. By the way, same sex marriage is already illegal in North Carolina, so you should be asking "What's the point of this?" anyway.

http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main...ainst.html

Damned GOP, fooling the people one more time and relying on the bigots to vote for the amendment.

[jaxx]

NC House leader says anti-gay hate group 'overruled' him on same-sex marriage amendment

By Chris Fitzsimon, NC Policy Watch

<..> Stam, the Raleigh lawmaker, said he wanted a more narrowly worded amendment but was "overruled" by "national experts" he identified as the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal advocacy group.

I don’t recall electing the Alliance Defense Fund to represent me or to overrule members of the North Carolina General Assembly. Apparently Stam’s first allegiance is to a hate group, not the people in Wake County that he is supposed to represent.

The president of the Alliance Defense Fund is Alan Sears, who along with Craig Osten, wrote a book a few years ago, “The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today.”

<..> The amendment that the Alliance wrote reflects their offensive philosophy that gay couples deserve no rights -- not marriage, not civil unions, not employee benefits, not even privacy in their own homes.

http://www.southernstudies.org/2012/05/n...dment.html

Ah yes, the religious fringe once again showing how ugly they are.

[Still a Democrat]

Ugly stuff. It expressly forbids even civil unions that would give gay couples legal rights.