U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
View Poll Results: Amendment 1
Yes, I support it 27 18.49%
No, I do not support it 119 81.51%
Voters: 146. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 04-16-2012, 11:55 PM
 
2,978 posts, read 2,394,328 times
Reputation: 3134

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NativeNCBoy View Post
One man + One woman = God's plan for marriage.
That is YOUR religious view and no one wants to stop you from practicing your religion.

The problem is, you want to impose it on everyone else whether they want it or not.

 
Old 04-16-2012, 11:59 PM
 
2,978 posts, read 2,394,328 times
Reputation: 3134
Quote:
Originally Posted by mm34b View Post
The U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionally of these various state laws or the Federal Defense of Marriage Act signed by President Clinton in 1996.

Vote for or against NC's proposed amendment. It doesn't matter until the U.S. Supreme Court decides. The sooner, the better
.
I realize that.

By "constitutional", I mean that such an amendment violates our basic rights under the Bill of Rights.

Since states are not supposed to make any laws that take away those rights, state judges can overturn such amendments for that reason alone.
 
Old 04-17-2012, 12:50 PM
 
731 posts, read 482,665 times
Reputation: 804
Quote:
The problem is, you want to impose it on everyone else whether they want it or not.
The exact same thing can be said of the gay lobby. They want to impose their own definition of marriage on everyone else whether they like it or not. They want to force you to accept them whether you like it or not. They have decided they can destroy a 2,000 year old societal (not religious) definition of marriage on a whim.

The response to such actions are amendments such as these. Even though we are supposed to have a "new tone", those opposed to the amendment routinely throw out "hateful bigot" against anyone that disagrees with them.

I believe man-woman marriage should be the only valid partnership, not because I hate gays or anyone else, but because a society that loses its core traditions and definitions will fall apart.

Quote:
By "constitutional", I mean that such an amendment violates our basic rights under the Bill of Rights.
Sexual orientation and marriage are not mentioned anywhere in the Bill of Rights nor do they grant anyone special rights. Marriage is not a right, it is a privilege granted by the state.
 
Old 04-17-2012, 01:04 PM
 
Location: The 12th State
22,003 posts, read 39,523,741 times
Reputation: 13225
Quote:
Originally Posted by netbrad View Post
The exact same thing can be said of the gay lobby. They want to impose their own definition of marriage on everyone else whether they like it or not. They want to force you to accept them whether you like it or not. They have decided they can destroy a 2,000 year old societal (not religious) definition of marriage on a whim.

The response to such actions are amendments such as these. Even though we are supposed to have a "new tone", those opposed to the amendment routinely throw out "hateful bigot" against anyone that disagrees with them.

I believe man-woman marriage should be the only valid partnership, not because I hate gays or anyone else, but because a society that loses its core traditions and definitions will fall apart.



Sexual orientation and marriage are not mentioned anywhere in the Bill of Rights nor do they grant anyone special rights. Marriage is not a right, it is a privilege granted by the state.
There is no purpose for this amendment as North Carolina has already a law in it books and is define by DOMA.



This amendment accomplishes nothing except to prove the newly republican legislator rather have social divisive issues rather than create ways to have more jobs in this state.

This amendment does not change anything on gay nmarriage it is already define in our state law.
It is about invalidating domestic partnership benefits offered by countless business and city and county governments.
Setting this state backwards with growth in jobs.

Last edited by SunnyKayak; 04-17-2012 at 01:17 PM..
 
Old 04-17-2012, 02:55 PM
 
2,426 posts, read 2,368,858 times
Reputation: 1174
Quote:
Originally Posted by macjr82 View Post
I belive there should be a third option. "Don't Care" or more politically correct "Neither Support nor Oppose" . Sadly, I htink the majority of people would fall in to that category

There could also be "Don't know enough to make an educated response"
That is actually one reason I am not too discouraged with the percentage of people who vote. I rather have someone who doesn't understand the issues NOT vote, than vote for something because someone told them to, or what they feel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by netbrad View Post
The exact same thing can be said of the gay lobby. They want to impose their own definition of marriage on everyone else whether they like it or not. They want to force you to accept them whether you like it or not. They have decided they can destroy a 2,000 year old societal (not religious) definition of marriage on a whim.

The response to such actions are amendments such as these. Even though we are supposed to have a "new tone", those opposed to the amendment routinely throw out "hateful bigot" against anyone that disagrees with them.

I believe man-woman marriage should be the only valid partnership, not because I hate gays or anyone else, but because a society that loses its core traditions and definitions will fall apart.

Sexual orientation and marriage are not mentioned anywhere in the Bill of Rights nor do they grant anyone special rights. Marriage is not a right, it is a privilege granted by the state.
So what is your stance on divorce? I think divorce has done 100x more damage to its "its core traditions". So I would put you down for a yes to a no-divorce amendment?

The Bill of Rights also doesn't mention race, age, gender, height, weight, nationality, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity. So I guess we should dump that.

Only thing marriage is, is a contract. Period. You can't keep two legal people from making a contract, while allowing two other people form a contract. That is crazy. And its crazy to think it.
 
Old 04-17-2012, 05:52 PM
 
16,310 posts, read 14,498,578 times
Reputation: 7969
Quote:
Originally Posted by netbrad View Post
The exact same thing can be said of the gay lobby.
No they don't, and you would be able to see that if your homophobia or bronze age superstitions didn't blind you.

Gay marriage would in no way impose upon or change anything in regards to the other 90% of citizens. But you and many others are perfectly willing to impose your phobia, bias, and ignorance on them.

It is not your place, nor is it your right to legislate laws that has no other purpose, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.
 
Old 04-17-2012, 11:11 PM
 
731 posts, read 482,665 times
Reputation: 804
[quote]No they don't, and you would be able to see that if your homophobia or bronze age superstitions didn't blind you.
[/QUOTE

Thank you for illustrating my previous point that any disagreement with the gay lobby results in name calling. My point was the gay lobby is trying to force acceptance of their lifestyle on everyone.

Quote:
Gay marriage would in no way impose upon or change anything in regards to the other 90% of citizens. But you and many others are perfectly willing to impose your phobia, bias, and ignorance on them.
Thanks for proving my point again. It is not possible to have an honest dialog if you are going to resort to name calling. Gay marriage redefines the traditional societal definition of marriage. Notice I said societal not biblical. But what do I know, I'm a biased, ignorant, superstitious bronze-age person.

Quote:
It is not your place, nor is it your right to legislate laws that has no other purpose, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.
And it is not your place, nor it is your right to force everyone to accept a homosexual lifestyle, or to force your own definition of marriage on the rest of society. People have the right to disagree with that and doing so doesn't make people homophobic.
 
Old 04-17-2012, 11:18 PM
 
731 posts, read 482,665 times
Reputation: 804
Quote:
It is about invalidating domestic partnership benefits offered by countless business and city and county governments.
Setting this state backwards with growth in jobs.
Good. Vague terms like "domestic partnerships" allow people to game the system and should be eliminated. Also, the government does not create jobs, it can only create an environment that encourages job creation. Private employers are still allowed to offer benefits to whomever they want in whatever format they want.

Quote:
So what is your stance on divorce?
Divorce is unfortunate, but it makes no sense for two people who hate each other to remain together.

Quote:
The Bill of Rights also doesn't mention race, age, gender, height, weight, nationality, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity. So I guess we should dump that.
The Bill of Rights applies to everyone and does not grant special rights to anyone.

Quote:
Only thing marriage is, is a contract. Period. You can't keep two legal people from making a contract, while allowing two other people form a contract.
I guess we'll find out in May.
 
Old 04-18-2012, 12:44 AM
 
16,310 posts, read 14,498,578 times
Reputation: 7969
Quote:
Originally Posted by netbrad View Post
And it is not your place, nor it is your right to force everyone to accept a homosexual lifestyle, or to force your own definition of marriage on the rest of society. People have the right to disagree with that and doing so doesn't make people homophobic.
It doesn't do that, and you know it, but why are you so determined to send your message of fear, ignorance and hate to people you don't know, and effect your life in no way.

Why does religion demand that followers not only hate, but express that hate in some very disgusting ways. They are no better than the Westboro Baptist Church, just without the signs.
 
Old 04-18-2012, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Eastern NC
12,857 posts, read 8,243,670 times
Reputation: 10287
[quote=netbrad;23910099]
Quote:
No they don't, and you would be able to see that if your homophobia or bronze age superstitions didn't blind you.
[/QUOTE

Thank you for illustrating my previous point that any disagreement with the gay lobby results in name calling. My point was the gay lobby is trying to force acceptance of their lifestyle on everyone.
And the Christian right is trying to force their lifestyle on everyone too with this amendment.
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.


Closed Thread




Over $84,000 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

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

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 - Top