Or not.

http://equalityfederation.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=MrpmR3qU%2BnOBc8LawGBDF%2FDqayB71nhL

The marriage discrimination constitutional amendment bill is being introduced tomorrow as Senate Bill 106. Under Dem control it always died, but now that the GOP controls the House and Senate, it has a decent shot of passing.


- It will cost the state 5.7 million to do this during a time of budget crisis, when NC States own budget is being cut by millions, according to the General Assembly's own fiscal note.

-It will mean businesses in the state can't decide their own benefits packages for partners which is something some businesses consider in deciding where to locate, and/or to attract the best talent. This new regulation could be a little bit of an HR nightmare for triangle area businesses especially.

-It means messing with a constitution that doesn't need amending, and wasting time on something largely redundant with existing law.

And I think of all the gay students who have submitted suicide recently, I have to wonder how a whole state voting on just how banned their chances of ever getting married should be (regular banned or super redundant banned) will affect kids in our state like them. So now is a great time to send an e-mail or make a call if you care to.

For example I know couples this will cause to lose their health insurance benefits. For me it would only take away my husbands dental insurance since he's on my plan.

(personalizing it helps, even if its just a little, even if its just the title)

http://equalityfederation.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=MrpmR3qU%2BnOBc8LawGBDF%2FDqayB71nhL

2/23/2011 1:26:00 AM

Quote :

"Senator Tillman, I agreed to send along Equality North Carolina's e-mail regarding Senate Bill 106, but found it lacking, so here's my take: The reality is the state is broke. Amending the constitution is not free. We're trying to attract businesses here, and it seems likely that an amendment denying recognition to same-sex couples is more likely to dissuade successful companies from locating here than it is to attract them. I've spent my entire life defending North Carolina against the assaults of people from other parts of the nation and the world. They think we're racist, and I say, we're not: we've been at the forefront of the civil rights movement since the Greensboro Sit-Ins and beyond. They say we're backwards, and I say, no sir, Research Triangle Park (among other parts of the state) comprises some of the best minds in the nation. Don't force me into a situation where, when "they" say that we're ignorant and backwards on gay rights, I have to say, "Well, yes, but not all of us...and I'll tell you right now I voted against everyone who was." Gay marriage is already illegal in this state. There is no good reason to put in the Constitution what already exists in law. The same will of the people that can overturn the one can undo the other, and in time you may rest assured it will. The great state of North-by-God-Carolina will not be on the losing side of history; I have too much faith in us. I implore you, do not co-sponsor Senate Bill 106. If it comes to a vote, vote against it. I know that my county is a conservative one, but we are damn sure better than this."

That was written as stream-of-consciousness. I'm not fond of it. But it's what I sent in a hurry before bed it's what he fucking got. At least nobody can claim I didn't personalize the shit out of it.

2/23/2011 1:58:36 AM

done.

my senator has heard from me quite a bit lately... I bet she's all like, "WTF?!?! Is this guy a Democrat or Republican?? He's telling me to vote all over the place!"

2/23/2011 7:09:39 AM

Done.

2/23/2011 7:33:23 AM

In progress.

2/23/2011 7:35:50 AM

dickbag republicans

2/23/2011 7:39:50 AM

meh, they're all dickbags

2/23/2011 7:41:59 AM

yes, but republicans are dickbags because they're politicians AND their views are retarded

dems are just dickbags just because they're politicians

2/23/2011 7:46:07 AM

Thread derailment commencing..

2/23/2011 7:46:56 AM

yes, but republicans democrats are dickbags because they're politicians AND their views are retarded

2/23/2011 7:47:52 AM

exactly...it's all opinion

of course, i'd rather err on the side of supporting those that think homosexuals are actually human beings and not abominations to be sent to hell by an all-hating god, but if you want to support those who hold that view, that's certainly your (poor) choice

2/23/2011 7:53:13 AM

sent. keep us posted on how things go.

2/23/2011 7:53:59 AM

oh, if it wasn't clear...sent

2/23/2011 7:56:00 AM

This is so fucked up

I want to pee on the faces of all these representatives

[Edited on February 23, 2011 at 8:07 AM. Reason : Maybe just send the email though]

2/23/2011 8:05:36 AM

I just sent the e-mail

2/23/2011 8:48:56 AM

Thanks to everyone who sent the message! Keep it up!

Now is an important time to do this. Its happening in combination with lots of phone calls, and personal visits with legislators. I've talked to 4 legislators (representing where I live now & the other places I've lived in the state) in person at their offices in the Legislative Building & Legislative Office Building over the past week myself, and I know many others (at least 200 ppl) have as well.

They key is to call out ANYONE just before they engage in dickbaggery. And there may be some serious dickbaggery going on today. So keep up the e-mails, and phone calls if you're game!

The GOP has a super-majority in the state Senate so it'll be harder to stop it here (although worth trying, because the less it passes by, the less steam it has as it heads towards the House). But they only have a regular majority in the House, which is the best chance to stop it. From my personal reaching out to GOPs I found one libertarian minded House guy who is against it. That is already a lot better than in the past where the House GOPs unanimously voted for this bill.

I'll give this thread another bump with a similar link when it comes time to lobby the House.

[Edited on February 23, 2011 at 9:02 AM. Reason : .]

2/23/2011 9:02:43 AM

done

Also IBT that old man gets caught in inappropriate communication with a young male intern. Sounds like the type.

2/23/2011 9:02:47 AM

It didn't recognize the addresses I entered.

2/23/2011 9:07:42 AM

Quote :

"SUBMITTED SUICIDE RECENTLY"

2/23/2011 9:12:22 AM

Quote :

"It didn't recognize the addresses I entered."

You can look them up here too:

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/GIS/RandR07/Representation.html

Or, if you already know who you need to contact and just need their contact info, you can find that here (this goes for anyone who wants to make calls too - calls are very easy, usually you call for about 30 secs to a couple minutes depending on how much you have to say, speaking to the legislative aid who answers the phone, and just say you're that officials constituent, you feel he/she should vote a certain way b/c of some reason, and you're done):

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/members/memberList.pl?sChamber=Senate

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/members/memberList.pl?sChamber=House

The senate is where its getting voted on today, so that is most important, but it never hurts to get started early on the House if you want to send a message their way too.

[Edited on February 23, 2011 at 9:17 AM. Reason : .]

2/23/2011 9:17:11 AM

Cool deal.

2/23/2011 9:20:46 AM

What time is the vote? I e-mailed Senator Stevens (who I don't think will vote for it, but I could be wrong). I would like to call and see how he plans on voting, but I wasn't sure if the vote had gone through yet.

2/23/2011 11:11:28 AM

It, along with several other items, is on the agenda for when they convene at 3:00pm. I don't know what that means for the progress they'll make on it though.

I went to committee meeting last week on the new restrictive voter ID requirements they are thinking of adding, and they started talking about it briefly, ran out of time, and postponed most of the discussion. Seems as though the schedule is sort of fluid in that way.

For the record I oppose photo voter ID requirements that are as strict as what they're considering which would move NC to being tied for the most restrictive state in the country, along with only 2 other states. For example, students rarely have drivers licenses with current addresses, I mean how many people pay to update their license when they move to college, or every time they change dorms or apartments. I talked one Representative into agreeing to run up an amendment to allow college Student IDs as an exception to the requirement, although she expected such an amendment will probably die pretty quickly under GOP control. Not to mention, that this is another measure that will cost the state millions in a time of budget crisis. They're also talking about ending pre-registration for young people where they sign up to be registered voters before they come of age, then can vote when they do come of age.

Although I can certainly understand the GOPs vested interest in keeping young people from voting. Every poll on marriage equality has our generation and younger in overwhelming support.

Hawaii's governor I believe is signing civil unions into law today, Maryland is likely to pass marriage equality this year (in fact their Senate is debating it today), and Rhode Island maybe too. This poll just came out yesterday for RI:

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/02/ri-supports-gay-marriage.html

Quote :

"Only senior citizens, by a 48/39 margin, are opposed to legalizing same sex marriage. Young voters (under 30) support it 62/31, and middle aged voters (31 to 65) favor it by a 51/42 spread."

[Edited on February 23, 2011 at 11:43 AM. Reason : .]

2/23/2011 11:31:23 AM

Sent. Thanks for the heads up.

2/23/2011 11:41:50 AM

done...this is what i sent

Quote :

"Dear Senator Hunt: It has come to my attention that Sen. Jim Forrester is circulating a bill (Senate Bill 106) that would amend our State Constitution making marriage only recognizable between a man and a woman. I ask that you not to co-sponsor this bill and to stand strongly in opposition to it. The fact of the matter is that as a State we are broke. Amending the Constitution with cost an estimated $5.7 million. As a fiscal conservative I greatly oppose this. North Carolina law already limits marriage to opposite-sex couples and to make an amendment to the Constitution was be frivolous and costly. Please vote NO! Regards, Jared Grinstead"

2/23/2011 12:10:26 PM

Regardless of ones views on homosexuality, I think everyone can agree this would be a complete waste of taxpayer dollars.

2/23/2011 12:15:51 PM

I didn't even mention money in my e-mail for 2 reasons. 1, that's not the main (moral) reason I oppose it, and 2, I don't fully buy that number. I still haven't seen a breakdown of where that number came from with sources or anything.

2/23/2011 4:30:14 PM

^I agree that money isn't the only reason to oppose it. Being anti-discrimination is a fine reason to. Being pro-only amending an important document like the constitution when its absolutely necessary is a fine reason. There are many fine reasons. But as to the money point, the link below was from an earlier version of it by the same primary sponsor, so I imagine it will be largely the same this time. I can't be sure if the exact number would hold, but even if it was just the cost of their time spent on the clock for this, that would still be a waste of public funds IMO. Especially when their focus should be on helping, not hurting the economy/jobs, and especially when this may negatively affect some companies that are already here or considering locating here.

http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2009/FiscalNotes/Senate/PDF/SFN0272v1.pdf

Quote :

"BILL NUMBER: Senate Bill 272 (First Edition) SHORT TITLE: Defense of Marriage. SPONSOR(S): Senator Forrester"

Quote :

"$5,726,500"

2/23/2011 5:01:57 PM

Quote :

"Regardless of ones views on homosexuality, I think everyone can agree this would be a complete waste of taxpayer dollars."

that would be true were anyone truly capable of being objective, but that's not possible...show me just one person who can demonstrate that their political views are completely independent of their moral ones

2/23/2011 5:10:27 PM

<--

2/23/2011 5:23:19 PM

^ Quagmire is currently calculating all of the different ways he can argue with a directional sign.

2/23/2011 5:30:43 PM

better not have a fucking moral argument in there.

2/23/2011 5:31:12 PM

we were just talking about this last night. thanks for more info! i'll definitely be sending an e-mail

2/23/2011 6:08:05 PM

New poll out today:

http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/a_majority_now_supports_legal_recognition_of_samesex_relationships

Quote :

"Poll: Most North Carolinians support recognition of same-sex couples As some GOP legislators are considering renewing their effort to pass a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, a new poll suggests a majority of North Carolinians now support at least some legal recognition of same-sex couples."

And there's another reason why this is a bad idea. Not only is it unjust, a waste of time, a waste of resources, mean-spirited, hurt businesses, and unnecessary tampering with the constitution, but as public opinion changes it has now possibly crossed the line to being flat out undemocratic/in opposition to the will of the people.

[Edited on February 28, 2011 at 10:27 PM. Reason : .]

2/28/2011 10:24:28 PM

for this thread!

2/28/2011 10:35:17 PM

Mecklenburg County Commissioner Bill James:

Quote :

"The purpose is not just to prevent Massachusetts people coming down"

Quote :

"It's also to put a big letter of shame on the behavior. We don't want them here."

And from Forrester, the primary sponsor of this bill:

Quote :

"Democrats may not like that it will bring out conservative Republicans and conservative Democrats to vote for it"

At least the bill's supporters are making their motives clear. The "your kind isn't welcome in our neighborhood" reasoning and the partisan motivations.

3/1/2011 4:21:34 PM

quagmire right

wdprice can barely formulate a thought why would anybody believe his moral and political views are properly independent lol

3/1/2011 4:33:26 PM

http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/a_majority_now_supports_legal_recognition_of_samesex_relationships

That link I shared before saying a majority of North Carolinians now support some level of recognition (either civil unions, or full on marriage equality) was an Elon poll. It was 57 approve of recognition, versus 35 oppose.

I only mention it because this poll just came out, which backs up that one, in terms of NC having crossed the line to majority support of some level of recognition.

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/03/nc-supports-recognition-for-gay-couples.html

When the House starts getting into, I will post Equality NC's action alert e-mail link, like I did for the Senate at the start of this thread. But I wanted to make sure these new polls were highlighted so they could be a part of that e-mail, because for some waffling representatives, such statistics might help them in making their decision.

3/3/2011 10:33:41 PM

Glen Bradley (Republican State Rep. who already planned on voting against the bill) posted this on his door the other day in Raleigh:



Didn't realize until a short while ago that it was in response to the people who are against the bill coming by his office this past week.

3/4/2011 12:44:51 AM

He has a really bad understanding of what rhetoric is.

3/4/2011 12:54:16 AM

He already responded to someone about that when he posted it. Someone basically said that logos and ethos are not something to be disdained. His response:

"Alexander - like you I am aware of the classical definition of rhetoric, as I studied classical rhetoric when I attended the Seminary in Wake Forest. The modern usage of the word, of course, is not the same as the classical usage. This is similar to the classical vs the modern definition of "liberal." A classical liberal would today find themselves more at home with conservatives and libertarians than modern liberals, which stand for something entirely different than classical liberalism."

[Edited on March 4, 2011 at 11:12 AM. Reason : -]

3/4/2011 11:11:29 AM

thank Zeus our elected officials follow the tenets of the classical world so closely

he'll make a fine Caesar some day


(PS I sent the email)

3/4/2011 11:16:20 AM

I'm not sure what your point is...Netstorm (and someone else where he posted this) was clearly getting on him because he didn't use the classical definition. You know...the one that no one outside of an academic setting.

3/4/2011 11:18:54 AM