U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-02-2012, 08:26 PM
 
Location: The 12th State
22,974 posts, read 58,460,862 times
Reputation: 14917

Advertisements

That is what changes with this amendment it prevents civil unions from ever happening.
All the domestic partnership benefits that employees in the city & counties including Mecklenburg will become void January 1st. It also stated a judge can decide on benefits offered via private enterprise.

As high as unemployment, attracting employees is not a real concern to them and the savings a company it works out for them by not offering benefits, they now have a reason in not doing so.

Last edited by SunnyKayak; 06-02-2012 at 09:06 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-02-2012, 08:57 PM
 
1,111 posts, read 1,128,725 times
Reputation: 823
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunnyKayak View Post
That is what changes with this amendment it prevents civil unions from ever happening.
All the domestic partnership benefits that employees in the city & counties including Mecklenburg will become void January 1st. It also stated a judge can decide on benefits offered via private enterprise.

As high as unemployment, attracting employees is not a real concern to them and the savings a company it works out for them by not offering benefits, they now have a reason in not doing so.
Don't muck up these people's "legal" talk with the facts, Sunny!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2012, 09:09 PM
 
1,111 posts, read 1,128,725 times
Reputation: 823
I cleaned up your comment a bit because I think you made a good point, but did so in a way to try to be offensive. You are annonymous here on the internet so you can say whatever you want, no matter how stupid it makes you look and you won't be held accountable, so I get that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpencerMtn View Post
I don't have any religious beliefs. I just get sick & tired of having all these people who are differnt then me always whining "bigot this & bigot that". What a sorry lot of whiners! I don't care what these people do. Just live your own life and I'll live mine!
That's sort of the point, the reason people consider the holier than though judgemental types who say "no, you shouldn't be able to call yourself a married couple, or you shouldn't be allowed the same liberties as everyone else" bigots is because they don't share your philosophy of "I don't care what these people do. Just live your own life and I'll live mine"

Quote:
Originally Posted by 28173 View Post
Excellent post!

Gays should drop the word "MARRIAGE" (since it has a strong religious connotation) and majority of people will be OK with legalizing their CIVIL UNION.
The point kinda is that to ask everyone ELSE "are you okay with how these people live there lives in your eyes when it doesn't effect you, your family, your religious beliefs, your rights or your lives at all?" isn't constitutional at all.

I feel like I am starting to sound like a broken record here, but are you or any of the other defenders of A1 really saying that you don't think gays should pay the same taxes as everyone else, or abide by our laws? Again, if you are expected to have the same civil responsibilities you should be allowed to expect the same civil liberties!
Is there anyone out there who disagrees with that statement, and if so, PLEASE explain why, because I can't fathom a reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2012, 07:51 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 66,993,147 times
Reputation: 22369
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunnyKayak View Post
That is what changes with this amendment it prevents civil unions from ever happening.
All the domestic partnership benefits that employees in the city & counties including Mecklenburg will become void January 1st. It also stated a judge can decide on benefits offered via private enterprise.

As high as unemployment, attracting employees is not a real concern to them and the savings a company it works out for them by not offering benefits, they now have a reason in not doing so.
Absolutely. That is exactly what this amendment did.

Employers are using this an an excuse to deny benefits. If an employer wishes to cover every single medical cost for its employees, it can. This has always been true. Insurance is a huge political stick that has been used to control employs for decades. Employers can offer any benefits they wish to offer, from vacation, to pensions, to insurance. I have never seen employers lined up to fight in court to give employees MORE benefits. If this were true, we wouldn't have unions, lol. It is to employers' advantage to carefully cost-control benefits, especially government entities, which depend on tax dollars to offer healthcare and pensions.

If our government leaders really wanted civil unions, it would have been quietly instituted as the way to form a marriage contract decades ago, regardless of the gender composition of the couple applying for the license.

Last edited by brokensky; 06-03-2012 at 08:04 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2012, 09:32 AM
 
Location: The 12th State
22,974 posts, read 58,460,862 times
Reputation: 14917
Quote:
Originally Posted by 28173 View Post
Excellent post!

Gays should drop the word "MARRIAGE" (since it has a strong religious connotation) and majority of people will be OK with legalizing their CIVIL UNION.

Also true that:

Nothing stops a willing company to add benefits to all employees partners (could be any sex BF/GF, common law) if they wish to attract employees, it is just a matter of changing insurance policy. But keep in mind it is an extra expense, so why would they do it in times when there are plenty of potential employees available. If anything corporations are secretly very happy to not be forced to pay an extra expense for a legalized "marriage", they would have no choice then and this would mean higher overhead costs.
As for the rights to decide for an impaired partner, there are power of attorneys and wills that makes it legal to act on someone's behalf regardless of civil status and sex.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
Absolutely. That is exactly what this amendment did.

Employers are using this an an excuse to deny benefits. If an employer wishes to cover every single medical cost for its employees, it can. This has always been true. Insurance is a huge political stick that has been used to control employs for decades. Employers can offer any benefits they wish to offer, from vacation, to pensions, to insurance. I have never seen employers lined up to fight in court to give employees MORE benefits. If this were true, we wouldn't have unions, lol. It is to employers' advantage to carefully cost-control benefits, especially government entities, which depend on tax dollars to offer healthcare and pensions.

If our government leaders really wanted civil unions, it would have been quietly instituted as the way to form a marriage contract decades ago, regardless of the gender composition of the couple applying for the license.
It was stated gays should have requested civil unions but gays didnt bring this up the Republican legislator did and worded so that will not occur either. Instead hid it behind DOMA that was already the law.
It was hate legislation to treat gays as second class citizens and deny equal rights.

All it will take for one private company to deny domestic partnership then a lawsuit goes in front of one of this state's conservative judge then that stipulation in amendment is ruled on denying domestic partnerships of affordable insurance.

This use of bigotry denying the rights of gays by straights will come to end one day.
The hatred and bigot behavior will not as seen by those showing there true colors in this and similar threads.

Hats off to retailers who have accepted Gays are people too.
GAP has pro gay ad 'Be One' , JC Penny has a Pro gay Father's Day ad with two dads with there 2 adoptive children,
Target and Macy's both are selling Pride T-shirts.
If big corporations don't fear financial repercussions for supporting the LGBT community then
it's really becoming mainstream and it will be easier to gain equal rights.

It may take time but it might occur sooner now that a federal judge panel consist two appointed by President Bush ruled DOMA unconstitutional.
Supreme Court is now the final stop.

Sure bigotry and hatred will still exist just like it still happens today with other minority groups,
but America cant go on by not offering equal rights to all of it's citizens that is what the founding fathers wanted.

Last edited by SunnyKayak; 06-03-2012 at 09:45 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2012, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Southern NC
1,920 posts, read 4,333,811 times
Reputation: 2517
So, what if we did take the word marriage out of the mix....the word would still be used.
So a gay couple has a civil union ceremony.....they are still going to say they got married.
Get over it....it's a word. You religious people are so controlling, you're fighting over a WORD.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2012, 04:37 AM
 
3,914 posts, read 3,939,005 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post

If our government leaders really wanted civil unions, it would have been quietly instituted as the way to form a marriage contract decades ago, regardless of the gender composition of the couple applying for the license.
We are talking about 2012 and beyond and not events of decades ago. Until 1967 it was illegal for a Black person & White person to get married in NC yet they can get married now. Laws change to reflect the times but this constitutional amendment removes the people's right to allow for these changes to be made to the law.

I haven't heard one good reason amending the constitution to again deny people the right to get married.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2012, 05:48 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 66,993,147 times
Reputation: 22369
Quote:
Originally Posted by frewroad View Post
We are talking about 2012 and beyond and not events of decades ago. Until 1967 it was illegal for a Black person & White person to get married in NC yet they can get married now. Laws change to reflect the times but this constitutional amendment removes the people's right to allow for these changes to be made to the law.

I haven't heard one good reason amending the constitution to again deny people the right to get married.
I feel like you think you need to convince me about this and I am totally for equal rights for all. If I had it my way, this would be a non-issue, as everyone would be legally married who wanted to be legally married.

I have simply attempted to get side to see where the other is coming from and stop with the hateful rhetoric. It is not serving to bring folks together--it is divisive and inflammatory.

There is always a way to change a law. Even amendments can be amended. Instead of casting dispersions b/n groups, we need to find a way to get where we need to be and to find a common ground of agreement so we can move forward and guarantee equal rights for all people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2012, 09:34 AM
 
3,914 posts, read 3,939,005 times
Reputation: 1272
Sure, the constitution can be amended again and I will predict that it will happen. Future generations will repeal it just as they have with all the other amendments and laws have which were created specifically to deny rights to law abiding citizens. When the Speaker of the NC House, Thom Tillis, (R) Mecklenburg, was asked why he let this amendment resolution come onto the floor of the House, he had an interesting thing to say before the resolution was passed:
...“It’s a generational issue. The data shows right now that you are a generation away from that issue.” (He was speaking to students at NC State) "If it passes, I think it will be repealed within 20 years,"....
He correctly predicted that it would pass by at least 54%. It's unfortunate this is what they are talking about instead of what NC is going to be reaching towards the future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2012, 10:34 AM
 
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
21,848 posts, read 27,118,777 times
Reputation: 8920
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
I feel like you think you need to convince me about this and I am totally for equal rights for all. If I had it my way, this would be a non-issue, as everyone would be legally married who wanted to be legally married.

I have simply attempted to get side to see where the other is coming from and stop with the hateful rhetoric. It is not serving to bring folks together--it is divisive and inflammatory.

There is always a way to change a law. Even amendments can be amended. Instead of casting dispersions b/n groups, we need to find a way to get where we need to be and to find a common ground of agreement so we can move forward and guarantee equal rights for all people.
That was the whole purpose, Ani. The Republicans grabbed the legislature by swearing that they would work tirelessly to bring in jobs. Instead, they worked tirelessly to oppose Bev. The purpose of the ammendment was to get people at each other's throats, because people have been hopping mad at the legislature. It's a diversion tactic.

I voted for a couple of those Republicans. They had helped with some business acquisions. They seemed moderate. They've voted in lock-step with the teaparty, & have done nothing about jobs since then. So. . .now I'll vote for their Democratic opponents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top