North Carolina Passes Amendment Banning Same-sex Unions

[PanzerJaeger]

The religious Right has won another victory.

Voters in North Carolina have approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex unions, according to the Associated Press.

It will become the 30th state to define marriage solely as a union between a man and a woman. With more than half the precincts reporting, unofficial returns showed the amendment passing with about 60% for to 40% against.

Same-sex marriage has been illegal in the state since a law enacted in 1996. The amendment will enshrine the ban in the state constitution. It can now only be amended by another vote by the people.

The amendment declares that "marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognised in this state".

Supporters of Amendment 1 declared a victory for "God's institution" of marriage. "With God's grace we have won at overwhelming victory," Tami Fitzgerald, chairwoman of Votes For Marriage NC, told supporters.

I am really beginning to despise Christians. I know that I shouldn't. I know that applying such a broad brush draws more on emotion than logic, but I cannot help it. They are the single largest driving force behind hatred, ignorance, and discrimination in this country. There was no chance of a gay marriage bill being passed in North Carolina and the content of this ammendment was essentially already law in the state, but the hatemongers, led by forces as prominent as Billy Graham and as distant as the Vatican, wanted to send a message - they wanted to make it known that gays will always be marginalized in their state.

The hypocrisy is mind blowing. These are the same people who throw a hissy fit every time 'Christmas' is interchanged with 'Holiday'. These are the people who declared a War on Religion when Obama had the audacity to require nominally religious businesses to adhere to the same standards that every other business in the country has to. These are the same people that bleat and whine about 'religious freedom' every chance they get. And yet, they are united in imposing their religious beliefs on the country, denying others the ability to enjoy our supposedly free society in the same way they demand for themselves.

I'm sick of it. Christianity receives far too much deference in this country. If gay people's lifestyles are going to be put on public trial, Christians should face the same treatment. Quite frankly, it is asinine to structure your life around the rants and musings of a small group of backwater rubes wondering around the desert thousands of years ago. Why isn't the hypocrisy, idiocy, and outright insanity that runs rampant in the bible challenged more openly? Why, in 2012, is a book of fairy tales about a god with what appears to be multiple personality disorder still affecting public policy? Religion is incompatible with logic, incompatible with science, and incompatible with modern society. Religion should be on the defense.

I believe it is because rational, intelligent people do not speak out against it for fear of offending Christian sensibilities. In our tolerant society, people are welcome to believe any idiotic drivel they like, and such beliefs are not to be questioned in polite company. Secularism is defined by nonjudgmental accommodation and religion is off limits. The only problem is that religious people do not live by the same standards. They are worried about multiculturalism in Europe, but the same permissive attitude over here allows our own religious element to pursue their vile agenda. A war is being fought against reason, and only one side is fighting.

Here is an example of what the Christians in North Carolina were hearing last Sunday:

[a completely inoffensive name]

Agreed! PJ, I am feeling very angry right now, just as I am sure you are. But remember that this is not a war with only side fighting. This is only one battle which rational, freedom loving, tolerant people have lost.

Remember that earlier this year we routed the legalized bigotry from Maryland. Proposition 8 still looks to be on track to fall, and today's youth are more tolerant of gays and lesbians than previous generations.

The long term future is still looking bright for LGBT citizens and allies because we are still fighting.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

It's just a matter of time on gay marriage

I don't agree with your depiction of religion though. Peoples attempts at rational systems of morality fail miserably. Humanity isn't logical or scientific, those are just tools. The too-religious need to value those tools more and and the ideological-atheists need to quit relying on them so much. We all need a bicameral system with a scientific chamber and a non-scientific chamber. It's no good attacking or trying to tear down, you have to replace.

Gay marriage is simply a generational thing and fairly insignificant in the grand scheme of things, no need to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

[CountArach]

The worst part of this? It wasn't even in reaction to anything. It was already illegal but just to make a point these people said "let's make it double illegal!"

[HoreTore]

I agree wholeheartedly with PJ. Every word.

[Fragony]

It's a crying shame. Religious right should stop meddling with other people's affairs.

[rory_20_uk]

Every dominant religion appears to behave in the same way in enforcing their views on everyone else. Their belief that they are saving others by transiently oppressing them appears to be a pay off that is accepted.

If the Church could concentrate its efforts on catching paedophiles rather than worsening the lives of others that woulc be nice.

[Xiahou]

The worst part of this? It wasn't even in reaction to anything. It was already illegal but just to make a point these people said "let's make it double illegal!"

Such laws have a history of being overturned by activist judges. The views of the electorate and the actions of the legislature can, and have been all cast aside by sympathetic judges. This amendment was insurance against that.

As Sasaki said, it's likely just a matter of time before views shift enough to allow same sex marriage laws to be passed- as has already happened in New Hampshire. Pushing the issue in the courts has forced opponents to take steps to protect their views from judicial activism. As a result, in the states that have passed constitutional amendments it will be much more difficult to allow for it when/if opinion shifts.

[Lemur]

Such laws have a history of being overturned by activist judges. The views of the electorate and the actions of the legislature can, and have been all cast aside by sympathetic judges. This amendment was insurance against that.

Contra the notion that this was primarily a defensive move meant to insulate NC from the depredations of activist judges:

The amendment also goes beyond state law by voiding other types of domestic unions from carrying legal status, which opponents warn could disrupt protection orders for unmarried couples.

[Vladimir]

Contra the notion that this was primarily a defensive move meant to insulate NC from the depredations of activist judges:

The amendment also goes beyond state law by voiding other types of domestic unions from carrying legal status, which opponents warn could disrupt protection orders for unmarried couples.

Well that's a shame but I'm not surprised.

I'm still a little skeptical without personally diving into the language itself, but I hoped this was more an act of Federalism than a cultural reactionary movement.

@Lemur Because the thread is moving so fast.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I am really beginning to despise Christians.

Well thank you.

[PanzerJaeger]

Well thank you.

I'm sorry. As I said, I was reacting out of emotion and deliberately using a broad brush.

It just seems to me that religion has become a sanctuary for ignorance and hatred in this country, and it wasn't always that way. Nowhere else would the kind of vile rhetoric that I posted in the OP be openly spoken and accepted. (And I could post pages and pages of Christian leaders saying awful things about gay people.) Nowhere else would intelligent design be given any credibility. Nowhere else would abstinence only education, pro-bully anti-bully legislation, censoring teachers, and all the other base stupidity these people push in the education system get any traction.

The absurdities that Christians believe on face value would be laughed out of any fifth grade science class under any other name. These people believe that some Jew two thousand years ago, born from a woman who was essentially raped by their god, rose from the dead and walked around, based on nothing but a consistently contradictory book that sanctions slavery among other things. And these are the people that have appointed themselves the moral arbiters of our society? These are the people who feel confident in judging the worth of other people's lifestyles? People are being denied a sensible, logical extension of civil liberties based on a book of fairy tales.

Why? Why is Christianity given a special dispensation for idiocy? IMO, it is because most of us who do not accept such notions have family or friends that are Christian and do not want to offend. It is just not polite. I remember when I was being taught in Catholic high school by otherwise sane, rational adults that that nasty little wafer and that cheap wine were the body and blood of Christ, not a representation of them, but actual flesh and blood. It seemed so incredibly batshit crazy and so easily disproven, but I kept my mouth shut because I did not want to make anyone uncomfortable. The problem is that Christians have no problem offending. If they want to hold others up in judgment, they should be taken to task for their own views that make far less sense than people acting on a naturally occurring homosexual orientation.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'm sorry. As I said, I was reacting out of emotion and deliberately using a broad brush.

It just seems to me that religion has become a sanctuary for ignorance and hatred in this country, and it wasn't always that way. Nowhere else would the kind of vile rhetoric that I posted in the OP be openly spoken and accepted. (And I could post pages and pages of Christian leaders saying awful things about gay people.) Nowhere else would intelligent design be given any credibility. Nowhere else would abstinence only education, pro-bully anti-bully legislation, censoring teachers, and all the other base stupidity these people push in the education system get any traction.

The absurdities that Christians believe on face value would be laughed out of any fifth grade science class under any other name. These people believe that some Jew two thousand years ago, born from a woman who was essentially raped by their god, rose from the dead and walked around, based on nothing but a consistently contradictory book that sanctions slavery among other things. And these are the people that have appointed themselves the moral arbiters of our society? These are the people who feel confident in judging the worth of other people's lifestyles? People are being denied a sensible, logical extension of civil liberties based on a book of fairy tales.

Why? Why is Christianity given a special dispensation for idiocy? IMO, it is because most of us who do not accept such notions have family or friends that are Christian and do not want to offend. It is just not polite. I remember when I was being taught in Catholic high school by otherwise sane, rational adults that that nasty little wafer and that cheap wine were the body and blood of Christ, not a representation of them, but actual flesh and blood. It seemed so incredibly batshit crazy and so easily disproven, but I kept my mouth shut because I did not want to make anyone uncomfortable. The problem is that Christians have no problem offending. If they want to hold others up in judgment, they should be taken to task for their own views that make far less sense than people acting on a naturally occurring homosexual orientation.

Keep it rolling. A president in favor of gay marriage and backers who attack Christianity and hate Christians because of a vote in a far away state can't be a bad thing in November.

You can call me a Nihilist all you'd like. There is either a "plan" to the Universe or there is not. I balance both ideas in good measure. If there is a plan, you can seek answers to what it might be and the sources you use should have a logical consistency - or a consistency in line with that plan. If not, you can do whatever you'd like and push whatever issue sounds good at the moment, but it's all smoke and mirrors and just keeps you feeling like you're going somewhere when there is nowhere to go. I'm pretty sure that none of you would disagree with the "to be or not to be" possibilities, so what am I missing?

I have books and tradition which, I believe, shine a light onto meaning and purpose. You laugh at that meaning and purpose and posit others, derived from Hollywood celebrities and the popular culture of the age. I believe in this dynamic struggle.

Shaming people of faith is useless because you shame them with empty morality. I'm not attempting to shame you, I'm trying to make you see that the accepted ideas of "progress" in this vein are illusory. Some ideas are consistent with my own morality; freedom from theocracy, freedom to determine the laws that govern you, freedom from tyranny around the world, elimination of slavery, reduction of drug laws, some correction for majority rule, etc. Others are nonsense and seem absurd to my morality; veganism, gay marriage, gun control, etc.

I'm actually not a **** disgusting man, "I cant see my name" (BTW, I've been flagged for less). I like to oppose ideas which I see as wrongheaded. I won't be shamed into ending my opposition to what I believe is bad policy. I'll compromise, but you guys have no interest in compromising in any real way. It's all or nothing and I won't give in to you. You are free to argue your case and may continue influencing others, but I don't believe you will be successful in the long term because I believe this is a bad push. I am also free to oppose you, that's because we live in a free society.

NC just made it more difficult for court actions to subvert the established law. You can't blame them on procedure.


BTW, Obama still doesn't believe marriage is a "civil right" and neither do I.

[a completely inoffensive name]

A. Who cares what marriage has been historically. It's a part of government benefit distribution. It is subject to change just as any other part of government is. Appeal to tradition is dumb.

B. The fact that there are other views besides the Judeo-Christian living in the US means that enforcing the mainstream christian view of marriage on others is religious intolerance.

Religion should stick to social welfare or get out of my country, because I want the government out of my life.

[ICantSpellDawg]

A. Who cares what marriage has been historically. It's a part of government benefit distribution. It is subject to change just as any other part of government is. Appeal to tradition is dumb.

B. The fact that there are other views besides the Judeo-Christian living in the US means that enforcing the mainstream christian view of marriage on others is religious intolerance.

Religion should stick to social welfare or get out of my country, because I want the government out of my life.

What a joke. Where do you get your morality from? If you say "it comes from within" with a straight face I will start laughing and might not be able to stop.

People are not entitled to recognition from others. If individuals would like to make the case that end of life visiting rules are draconian or that tax benefits for married people unfairly impact others, i will listen and may be inclined to agree, but saying that a gay relationship is the same as a marriage is a joke and it becomes more absurd the harder you push it.

[a completely inoffensive name]

What a joke. Where do you get your morality from? If you say "it comes from within" with a straight face I will start laughing and might not be able to stop.People are not entitled to recognition from others. If individuals would like to make the case that end of life visiting rules are draconian or that tax benefits for married people unfairly impact others, i will listen and may be inclined to agree, but saying that a gay relationship is the same as a marriage is a joke and it becomes more absurd the harder you push it.

LOL UMAD?You are such a ******* disgusting man. "I'M SICK OF THESE DEGENERATES ACTING LIKE THEY ARE THE SAME AS US!"Btw, I am sorry that your dear leader lost at the Second Battle of Hoover Dam. True to Ceasar!

[Fragony]

LOL UMAD?You are such a ******* disgusting man. "I'M SICK OF THESE DEGENERATES ACTING LIKE THEY ARE THE SAME AS US!"Btw, I am sorry that your dear leader lost at the Second Battle of Hoover Dam. True to Ceasar!

Redicule is normal did you know that

[a completely inoffensive name]

Redicule is normal did you know that

No. Isn't it clear that I am a video game playing hermit? How would I know about such things?Also, before you ask, I think Mr. House was the best choice.

[Whacker]

What a joke. Where do you get your morality from? If you say "it comes from within" with a straight face I will start laughing and might not be able to stop.

People are not entitled to recognition from others. If individuals would like to make the case that end of life visiting rules are draconian or that tax benefits for married people unfairly impact others, i will listen and may be inclined to agree, but saying that a gay relationship is the same as a marriage is a joke and it becomes more absurd the harder you push it.

Thank you for reminding me why I voted against this crap.

[Fragony]

A. Who cares what marriage has been historically. It's a part of government benefit distribution. It is subject to change just as any other part of government is. Appeal to tradition is dumb.

B. The fact that there are other views besides the Judeo-Christian living in the US means that enforcing the mainstream christian view of marriage on others is religious intolerance.

Religion should stick to social welfare or get out of my country, because I want the government out of my life.

Ha, yet you believe in global warming

[a completely inoffensive name]

I am glad people are coming to the conclusion of separate but equal institutions for different people. It's like living in the past. Now if only I can find my time machine.

[Strike For The South]

I am glad people are coming to the conclusion of separate but equal institutions for different people. It's like living in the past. Now if only I can find my time machine.

Who is coming to that conclusion?

Greek logic and thought predate the bible...

No where near as important as the bible. A fair bit important but not the cornerstone

[Kralizec]

No where near as important as the bible. A fair bit important but not the cornerstone

Okay. I won't argue that christianity has been influential, and that even for those abandoned it and their descendants there is a lingering effect. But to what extent, and to what effect?

Every functioning society in history has outlawed murder, theft and whatnot. Because if those societies didn't, they would have perished and would only be a footnote in history. So A) what is so special about christianity, and B) what is useful to preserve from that from a secular perspecive?

[Strike For The South]

Okay. I won't argue that christianity has been influential, and that even for those abandoned it and their descendants there is a lingering effect. But to what extent, and to what effect?

Every functioning society in history has outlawed murder, theft and whatnot. Because if those societies didn't, they would have perished and would only be a footnote in history. So A) what is so special about christianity, and B) what is useful to preserve from that from a secular perspecive?

I haven't figured that part out yet. I AM ONLY A CHILD

I go to school
I work
I try to get the pretty girls to look at me

There is only so much time for musing!

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Okay. I won't argue that christianity has been influential, and that even for those abandoned it and their descendants there is a lingering effect. But to what extent, and to what effect?

Every functioning society in history has outlawed murder, theft and whatnot. Because if those societies didn't, they would have perished and would only be a footnote in history. So A) what is so special about christianity, and B) what is useful to preserve from that from a secular perspecive?

C.S. Lewis' answer to A was "Grace", that God will give you something you don't deserve because he loves you, and humans are called to echo this.

The correct answer to B is "nothing", In believe. The only important part of Christianity is that God loves all his children equally, completely and wihtout reservation - all the rest is just window dressing which is completely shawn of meaning without that central truth.

You want to take something useful from Christianity? Either love God or do what the Muslims did and keep some Christians around to do their thing.

[Papewaio]

No where near as important as the bible. A fair bit important but not the cornerstone

Except just like the pagan rituals that were incorporated post the editorial process of the bible so were myths and legend incorporated from the mix available.

Obviously the old testament is the base of this perfume. Throw in some of the other beliefs of the Roman empire such as an anointed one with 12 disciples and a traitor (story format predates Jesus). Etc

Then look at the philosophical traditions of the Church and it never operated in a vacuum. All thought, philosophy and logic did not spring new from that institution. They were widely read scholars too and used idea systems that predate Christain thought.

In the end it is a product of its environment and it used Hebrew, Greek and Roman thought systems to perceive itself. The bible is not the wellspring it is a leaf on the water flows from tributaries that feed into a much bigger environment.

Love thy neighbour is just one form of the golden rule which is found in many other thought systems that predate the bible.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I am glad people are coming to the conclusion of separate but equal institutions for different people. It's like living in the past. Now if only I can find my time machine.

Want to drive a car? Get a driver's liscence.

Want to fly a plane? Get a pilot's liscence.

[Strike For The South]

Want to drive a car? Get a driver's liscence.

Want to fly a plane? Get a pilot's liscence.

Want to eat ice cream? Get some ice cream.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Want to eat ice cream? Get some ice cream.

Puny Troll.

Mine was better.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Who is coming to that conclusion?

The argument that is everything is ok as long as we don't call it marriage means that in practice we will have two institutions. One for the heteros and one for the homos. The marriage and the union. You are making a separate but equal case here when you want a change in terminology. This is why the LGBT movement is specifically arguing for marriage, they don't want to potentially suffer under the law for decades like blacks did before things are corrected again.

The evangelical movement is anything but rational here. The sad joke about this whole NC affair is that there was no threat to NC about same sex marriage legalized. The evangelicals took their hate one step further where they could and decided that a statute wasn't enough, it had to be written into the State Constitution. If even the LGBT movement and it's allies were to switch gears and win over middle america by dropping the case for marriage and simply argue for equal civil union that confer the same benefits, how long would it until the Southern Baptists (because lets be honest, they seem to be the most egregious violators here), managed to work the system into their own Jim Crow version targeting LGBT. The inequality won't stop unless you rout out the Christians completely and utterly in government on this issue. Such is the benefit of a Christian nation.

Want to drive a car? Get a driver's liscence.

Want to fly a plane? Get a pilot's liscence.

Dumb argument. Same as the one you threw at me about your depression. One has a test that doesn't reject based on arbitrary factors, if you pass the test, you pass the test. No one asked me if I was gay when they gave me my provisional. And the DMV wouldn't reject me based on those grounds because I have shown to be a good test taker err driver. Gay couples have shown to be loving couples, and loving parents. They pass the test, let them have what is theirs.