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.
"measure that would allow some public officials in North Carolina to opt out of performing gay marriages moved closer to becoming law on Monday, when lawmakers voted to override Republican Governor Pat McCrory’s veto of the bill."
I'm not sure who this guy is talking to here...who voted for it? Just because something passes through the legislature doesn't mean that everyone is in favor of it. That's pretty obvious.
I think he/she means a majority of those who voted, voted in the current GOP majority in the General Assembly. And those who did should be ashamed of themselves, although I doubt they have enough sense to do so.
I think he/she means a majority of those who voted, voted in the current GOP majority in the General Assembly. And those who did should be ashamed of themselves, although I doubt they have enough sense to do so.
Some of legislators wasn't really voted in or never had no opposition in Primaries for the last four years in their gerrymandered districts.
It going to be this way for some years.
This vote is just state senate and house is likely to follow suit.
Governor McCrory only seat that is vulnerable so he veto to appease the other side.
I see on some local news station some not happy with McCrory but also see those who think magistrates don't get to pick and chose.
In Alabama and Ican see North Carolina and other states indroducing the same next legislation session is abolish issue marriage certificates all together since SCOTUS will likely make it ruling very soon.
They are replacing marriage certificates with contracts therefore they only have to issue contracts in accordance with their state laws.
I think he/she means a majority of those who voted, voted in the current GOP majority in the General Assembly. And those who did should be ashamed of themselves, although I doubt they have enough sense to do so.
I think, with gerrymandering, we no longer even need a majority of actual votes, do we?
I think he/she means a majority of those who voted, voted in the current GOP majority in the General Assembly. And those who did should be ashamed of themselves, although I doubt they have enough sense to do so.
I think he/she means a majority of those who voted the have different political beliefs than him/her and exercised their beliefs through voting. Therefore they should be ashamed of themselves simply for existing, although he/she doubts they have enough sense to do so.
I think it is an interesting argument. I see McRory's point that if you take an oath you have to honor it (unless you're Roy Cooper) but at the same time the government has no right to make you violate your religious beliefs.
I think, with gerrymandering, we no longer even need a majority of actual votes, do we?
No, just a majority vote in a majority of the districts, which as you point out, could well be less than a majority overall. That's one reason why I don't think the situation is going to improve any time soon, unlike some other posters who frequently state the situation will change sooner rather than later.
I see McRory's point that if you take an oath you have to honor it (unless you're Roy Cooper) but at the same time the government has no right to make you violate your religious beliefs.
Personally, I give far more weight to not violating someones civil rights, as opposed to violating someones religious beliefs. If one's job doesn't mesh with ones religious beliefs, find a new one. If a Muslim took a job at a bbq restaurant, should they be allowed to refuse to serve pork?
Personally, I give far more weight to not violating someones civil rights, as opposed to violating someones religious beliefs. If one's job doesn't mesh with ones religious beliefs, find a new one. If a Muslim took a job at a bbq restaurant, should they be allowed to refuse to serve pork?
Religious beliefs are a civil right. Also your comparison doesn't work, there is a difference between a private business and the government. The government is not allowed to decide which religious beliefs are valid and which ones aren't.
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.
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.
