if any of my friends are for it they are very cleverly keeping their traps shut

5/8/2012 8:46:10 PM

The should have reworded the amendment:

Quote :

"No domestic legal unions shall be valid or recognized in this State. This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts."

5/8/2012 8:46:16 PM

Quote :

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

The concept of man/woman marriage is grounded in religious beliefs but that doesn't mean this is a violation of church and state any more than a law against theft ("thou shalt not steal") is.

5/8/2012 8:46:33 PM

holy shit, shut the fuck up

5/8/2012 8:47:09 PM

^ Grow up

5/8/2012 8:47:34 PM

I did

and when I did I stopped being a contrary little cunt like you're being

5/8/2012 8:48:04 PM

I'm actually not that depressed over this. It's very small percentage of people who actually voted...most of them got their voting orders from church on Sunday somewhere....


Now I was deeply depressed for George W. Bush. That was fucking awful...truly awful. Being 16 and realizing half the adults around you were complete fucking assholes.

5/8/2012 8:48:50 PM

damn, he just called you a Mary - them's fightin words in this thread

5/8/2012 8:49:36 PM

Snewf has such intelligent, well-reasoned retorts.

Like I said earlier, this is worded very broadly. It will get challenged and struck down. Step away from the ledge folks...

5/8/2012 8:50:53 PM

North Carolina has been in the news all day over this stupid shit...I always thought NC was a more progressive southern state, i guess not...

5/8/2012 8:51:57 PM

too many people getting their panties in a twist ITT

5/8/2012 8:52:08 PM

Quote :

"worded very broadly."

5/8/2012 8:53:40 PM

^^^Really, we were a more progressive state...until Barack Obama was elected.

All of the sudden we're conservative...so I'm kinda concerned about the election for governor coming up.

For more on our history, look into the Wilmington Race Riots and the period before it.

[Edited on May 8, 2012 at 8:54 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2012 8:53:59 PM

It is a constitutional amendment RESTRICTING my rights. That's a bad sign in a democracy.

This has and will cost the government a boat load of cash.

It will hurt NC because it makes us look like a bunch of primitive cave dwellers all huddling together, frightened, worshiping a dead Jew.

But, yeah - it's no big deal.

5/8/2012 8:54:40 PM

5/8/2012 8:56:02 PM

Quote :

"I always thought NC was a more progressive southern state"

maybe a handful of cities are.

5/8/2012 8:56:44 PM

http://www.wral.com/news/political/page/10991843/

5/8/2012 8:57:24 PM

Quote :

"It is a constitutional amendment RESTRICTING my rights."

umm, no, it's not. Are they gonna put you in jail if you decide to live with another man? You don't have a right to gov't benefits, dude.

5/8/2012 8:58:50 PM

up 230k now....

5/8/2012 8:58:54 PM

Quote :

"It is a constitutional amendment RESTRICTING my rights. That's a bad sign in a democracy. This has and will cost the government a boat load of cash. It will hurt NC because it makes us look like a bunch of primitive cave dwellers all huddling together, frightened, worshiping a dead Jew. But, yeah - it's no big deal."

You act like NC is the only state with this sort of law on the books. Newsflash, even one of the most, if not the most, progressive states in the nation -- California -- recently voted in a ban on gay marriage.

The fact of the matter is gay marriage is not yet, but only by a slim margin, commonly accepted by the majority. Things don't change overnight, it will happen, just not today.

And it's not going to restrict YOUR rights. The second part of the amendment, which is usually left out when reported, says that private organizations (employers) can still enter in agreements with people in unrecognized unions. Meaning if you're in an unrecognized union (i.e., not hetero marriage) and your company offers you benefits, they still can (and will -- it's not like they were doing it previously because they were forced to).

Unless you're gay and planning to get married. In which case you still can't do that, just like you couldn't yesterday.

[Edited on May 8, 2012 at 9:00 PM. Reason : ...]

5/8/2012 8:59:38 PM

living with is not the same as being married to

this amendment made that pretty fucking clear

5/8/2012 8:59:46 PM

Quote :

"living with is not the same as being married to this amendment made that pretty fucking clear"

Which is why the broad language makes this a target to be shot down easily when it hits the courts.

5/8/2012 9:01:35 PM

are they going to put you in jail if you claim to be married to another man (even though that's not possible, since the definition is one man, one woman, but i digress)? no? well, then, you're rights STILL aren't restricted

5/8/2012 9:01:48 PM

do you have the right to marry someone of the same sex?

5/8/2012 9:02:33 PM

Quote :

"umm, no, it's not. Are they gonna put you in jail if you decide to live with another man? You don't have a right to gov't benefits, dude."

Getting ready to break out the blazing gun that is the "you still have the same right to marry another member of the opposite sex" fallacy?

5/8/2012 9:03:09 PM

is anyone being prevented from claiming such a marriage? I don't see it.


^ it's not a fallacy at all. the gov't gives the benefit. it makes it so that literally everyone is eligible for it it. then people complain when they don't actually do what the gov't says qualifies them for the benefit.

[Edited on May 8, 2012 at 9:04 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2012 9:03:16 PM

Quote :

"recently voted in a ban on gay marriage"

Gay marriage? NC's amendment is really a restrictive definition of "domestic legal union" and not redefining what the state sees marriage as, which is between 1 man and 1 women already.

[Edited on May 8, 2012 at 9:07 PM. Reason : know you are mentioning Callie, but different really]

5/8/2012 9:04:33 PM

personally I advocate for the elimination of all government benefits and entitlements related to marriage

then I don't get a fuck who can and cannot get married

5/8/2012 9:04:44 PM

^ you libertarian you!

[Edited on May 8, 2012 at 9:06 PM. Reason : yeah, soap box we were talking about this]

5/8/2012 9:05:42 PM

^ I agree w/ Snewf

5/8/2012 9:05:48 PM

Quote :

"thoroughly enjoyed voting today, proud of how I voted and I will refrain from disrespecting others opinions on facebook like most of the left wing college students on my news feed"

[Edited on May 8, 2012 at 9:06 PM. Reason : What Facebook Users are saying about Amendment 1]

5/8/2012 9:05:51 PM

burro's argument is that gay men should suppress their feelings and desires to seek out government entitlements by marrying a woman they can barely stomach being around

he's really able to back this position up because that's what he's been doing for years

5/8/2012 9:06:21 PM

I see ECU's county voted 'For'

5/8/2012 9:07:02 PM

Quote :

"Gay marriage? NC's amendment is really a restrictive definition of "domestic legal union" and not redefining what the state sees marriage as, which is between 1 man and 1 women already."

Sort of. It says that marriage between a man and a woman is the only recognized legal union. So by extension that means gay marriage is banned as far as making it a legal union.

The overly broad language is what will do it in when it hits the courts. Honestly I think the effect of this amendment, when it's all said and done, will be to recognize some sort of gay legal union.

5/8/2012 9:07:21 PM

Cause most of the students left to go home

5/8/2012 9:07:34 PM

Quote :

"are they going to put you in jail if you claim to be married to another man (even though that's not possible, since the definition is one man, one woman, but i digress)? no? well, then, you're rights STILL aren't restricted "

I'm sure this was an argument for anti-miscegenation laws as well.

5/8/2012 9:07:51 PM

chapel hill's county 79% against.

haha, figures

5/8/2012 9:08:05 PM

Quote :

"burro's argument is that gay men should suppress their feelings and desires to seek out government entitlements by marrying a woman they can barely stomach being around"

no, that's not my argument. good strawman, dude.

Quote :

"I'm sure this was an argument for anti-miscegenation laws as well."

remind me, again where ANYONE is being thrown in jail for saying they are married to someone of the same sex. do you even understand WHY miscegenation laws were overturned?

5/8/2012 9:09:11 PM

you can't claim to be married to a man when you have no proof, I mean that's such a stupid fucking argument I can't even think of how to respond

WELL GEE YOU CAN CLAIM TO BE MARRIED TO AN ALIEN AND YOU CAN'T BE ARESTED FOR IT THARFORE YOUR RIGHST AREN'T RESTRICTED DURR DURR

5/8/2012 9:10:19 PM

Quote :

"personally I advocate for the elimination of all government benefits and entitlements related to marriage"

Yep.

and to accomplish that, we'd also have to divorce (for lack of a better word, haha) health insurance from employment, which would require an overhaul of the tax code. Everyone should be buying individual health insurance policies, just like if you were self-employed. Then we could eliminate government benefits related to marriage, and get government out of the business of marriage altogether.

5/8/2012 9:10:21 PM

5/8/2012 9:10:27 PM

Military marriage benefits can stay, amirite Duke?

[Edited on May 8, 2012 at 9:12 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2012 9:11:17 PM

ITS OFFICIAL, AMENDMENT 1 IS EXPECTED TO PASS!

5/8/2012 9:11:34 PM

Quote :

"you can't claim to be married to a man when you have no proof, I mean that's such a stupid fucking argument I can't even think of how to respond"

yeah you can. you just make the claim. either way, I'm not sure where you are going with this. are you trying to say that people are only "married" if the gov't says they are?

5/8/2012 9:11:41 PM

Quote :

"remind me, again where ANYONE is being thrown in jail for saying they are married to someone of the same sex."

Dude, to be fair, it's not about fighting for the right to not get arrested for being gay.

It's about having gay unions recognized in some manner similar to regular marriages, because there are legal and financial ramifications associated with that.

5/8/2012 9:12:20 PM

sure it's not the end of the world, but it's a backwards step in an already fragile social dynamic

it's not that anyone's in danger of being sanctioned for living as if being married, it's that the state could be choosing to deny rights to nontraditional living situations where it freely grants them to others.

what if I want to spend the rest of my life with my woman and start a perfectly normal family, but neither of us requires the social insitution of marriage for validation? are we less deserving of these rights because we're not Christian? Isn't that kind of discrimination exactly why the US as we know it was born?

And the point that companies still have the option to independently recognize the now-voided civil union...how many do you think are actually going to do that? Insurance is expensive. So now we have many couples that were previously on the fence contemplating marriage "for the benefits." What's going to happen to the divorce rate? Where's the "sanctity" in that?

5/8/2012 9:12:49 PM

Quote :

"are you trying to say that people are only "married" if the gov't says they are?"

UM... yes.

that's sort of the legal definition of marriage in this country

are you an idiot or what

[Edited on May 8, 2012 at 9:13 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2012 9:13:08 PM

Quote :

"It's about having gay unions recognized in some manner similar to regular marriages, because there are legal and financial ramifications associated with that."

i'm aware of this. but people don't quite comprehend that no one has a right to gov't recognition of their choice of life partner. society said, through gov't, that it would give recognition to a certain set of qualifications. every one is eligible, no one is thrown in jail otherwise. this is open and shut. now, does society want to change the qualification? fine, then society just votes in a new law.


^ ahhh. I see. so I guess no one was ever actually married before the US came into existence and had the brilliant idea to recognize it. got it!

[Edited on May 8, 2012 at 9:16 PM. Reason : ]

5/8/2012 9:15:29 PM

I told someone that when the Amendment officially passed, I would log in to the Wolf Web to rub you people's noses in it. See, there are liberals I like and liberals I don't like. I'm being nice to the liberals I like, but all the liberals I don't like congregate here on the Wolf Web.

So here goes...


rubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrubrub


That's all. I'm out, see you in another 10 years

5/8/2012 9:15:30 PM

Quote :

"And the point that companies still have the option to independently recognize the now-voided civil union...how many do you think are actually going to do that?"

Well, here's where I take some issue with this line of thinking... if your company is providing benefits for civil unions / domestic partnerships, they're certainly not doing it today because they're being forced to by the government. They're doing it because they believe in doing so. I think that's unlikely to change with the passing of this amendment (and the numerous others that have already passed throughout the country).

5/8/2012 9:15:33 PM