- Only 31% of voters correctly identify that Amendment 1 bans both gay marriage and civil unions.
- 28% think that it only bans gay marriage.
- 7% think that it actually legalizes gay marriage.
- 34% admit that they don't know exactly what the amendment does.
Nc Amendment One
Posted 23 April 2012 - 08:19 PM
Posted 23 April 2012 - 08:41 PM
It's very clear what our state government wants to do and I agree. Ultra-liberals out there want to muddy the waters and avoid the main point. ANY union other than man & woman is wrong Biblically, morally, ethically they are wrong. Our Nation was founded on Christian beliefs, ergo, we are doing the right thing by banning gay unions and (attempting to) enforce a morally correct way of living. Sadly there are people out there who can't figure it all out. There's still hope.
Thank God our Founding Fathers saw fit to include freedom of speech in our Constitution. There should be no 'approval' needed from the author, it's my opinion and I'm entitled to it, so you have no choice but to post it or face problems with censorship.
Look it up: Marriage is between a man and woman, nothing else. It's in the Bible, Koran or what have you. God intended us to marry and procreate...how else can you do that other than man and woman? Wake up people, the right way is the only way. How can two men or two women properly bring up a child, much less have one? Short answer: they can't. I hope like hell this amendment banning gay unions passes and we can get on to more important things. Can I get an AMEN out there?
(attempting to) enforce a morally correct way of living: now the government's job
this is my favorite part:
I hope like hell this amendment banning gay unions passes and we can get on to more important things.
Posted 23 April 2012 - 08:58 PM
they don't actually get to make your eyes bleed by hunt-and-pecking their way through an impromptu sermon on the topic like they can on the internet.
Posted 23 April 2012 - 09:01 PM
“For months, the media and opponents of the Marriage Protection Amendment have been spreading false information regarding the affect of the Amendment on current law,” said Tami Fitzgerald, chairwoman of Vote FOR Marriage NC. “Now we have an independent source as well as legal scholars refuting the false claims by our opponents. It’s time to turn the discussion about the Marriage Protection Amendment back to the facts. Make no mistake, the Amendment does one thing and one thing only: it preserves marriage as between one man and one woman in the North Carolina Constitution so that marriage can be safe from the whims of activists who want to redefine marriage for all of society.”
On Wednesday, law professors from Campbell University (who are speaking for themselves, not the University) released a white paper and statement refuting the claims made by Professor Maxine Eichner and other legal sources at the UNC School of Law who have alleged that the Marriage Protection Amendment would strip away protections for all unmarried couples. Law professors Lynn Buzzard, William Woodruff, and E. Gregory Wallace found such assertions to be completely false."
Posted 23 April 2012 - 09:04 PM
even if all the arguments against it are completely false, it is still utterly useless in every conceivable way.
but of course a stupid ballot initiative intended to fire up the base is nothing new.
Posted 23 April 2012 - 09:21 PM
i mean jeez the white paper from campbell actually notes that the amendment should have been worded more clearly. it also contains this at the very beginning:
We begin with a point on which we agree with Professor Eichner and other Amendment
opponents: The proposed Amendment will bar not only same-sex marriages, but also
recognition or validation of civil unions and domestic partnerships that constitute legal
substitutes for the marriage relationship. The question is whether the Amendment will apply to
other domestic relationships beyond marriage or marriage-like legal statuses.
so yes, people who don't like the amendment still have a major, legitimate beef. the white paper doesn't "debunk" what you think it does.
Posted 23 April 2012 - 10:09 PM
And london67 just pwned you
Posted 24 April 2012 - 07:17 AM
A woman talking about how some guy used to beat her up, throw her around and kick her with his steel toed work boots.
She then states that ammenmant one would put her and her daughter in serious danger by erasing this guys restraining order.
WTF is that about?
Posted 24 April 2012 - 07:28 AM
Protecting families my ass.
fug anyone who supports this fuging hate crime of a piece of legislation.
Posted 24 April 2012 - 09:02 AM