Could a bill banning bullying against gays and lesbians lead to same-sex marriage?

Yes, according to two N.C. Roman Catholic bishops who have urged their followers in two mass emails this past week to oppose Senate Bill 526, otherwise known as the School Violence Protection Act, Yonat Shimron reports.

While the two bishops say they oppose bullying period, they cannot support a bill that singles out "gender identity and sexual orientation."

Msgr. Michael Clay, the legislative lobbyist for the Diocese of Raleigh, said three states — Iowa, California and Connecticut — have used similar anti-gay bullying laws as part of their "findings of fact," in building a case for same-sex marriage.

"It could be a precursor of actions by our legislature and/or our courts to mandate same-sex marriage," said Clay. "It's more than speculative. This is a result that happens."

Clay said both Bishop Michael F. Burbidge of Raleigh and Bishop Peter J. Jugis of Charlotte believe bullying is wrong and would gladly support a bill without the offending language.

"We're urging people to support the bill and take out the differentiating language," he said.

Other groups, including the Christian Action League and the N.C. Family Policy Council, also oppose the bill, saying it would introduce special legal protections for gays and lesbians.

Update: But not all religious groups agreed with what they said was an exaggerated emphasis on same-sex marriage.

"This is not a theoretical political issue," said the Rev. Jack McKinney, co-pastor of Pullen Memorial Baptist Church. "This is about real kids suffering real pain and too many of them hurting themselves. For it to be used as a political football is a tragedy."

Who polled for the N.C. Family Policy Council?

The conservative advocacy group today announced the results of a recent poll on gay marriage done by Advantage Inc. 

The Arlington, Va.-based company has been described by the Washington Post as a "national political, fundraising and direct-marketing firm" that works for Republicans. 

Its Web site describes its specialties as get-out-the-vote efforts, online town halls, automated messaging and survey research.

The Family Policy Council of West Virginia released the results of a similar poll on gay marriage in October.

A company spokesman would not give further information about the poll, citing a policy against discussing any work done for clients. 

Another poll on gay marriage found high levels of opposition.

A poll by the N.C. Family Policy Council, a socially conservative advocacy group, found that 73 percent of those surveyed supported adding a ban on gay marriage to the state constitution.

Seventeen percent opposed the amendment and 10 percent were undecided.

"We commissioned this survey, first of all, because we wanted to determine the level of support for the Marriage Protection Amendment among registered voters in North Carolina," said council president Bill Brooks in a statement.

The results are in line with previous polls, which have found high levels of support when the question asks about adding a definition of marriage to the constitution, but more of a split when the wording notes this would outlaw same-sex marriage.

The Family Policy Council had questioned a recent survey by the Elon University Poll that used the more results-oriented wording.

The live survey of 5,009 registered voters was conducted on Feb. 26, 2009, by Advantage Inc. of Arlington, Va. The margin of error was not released.

After the jump, the questions.

   Comments (21)

A conservative group has questioned the Elon poll.

Tami Fitzgerald, an attorney with the conservative N.C. Family Policy Council, told the Associated Press that she disputed the methodology of the Elon University Poll which showed 50 percent of North Carolinians opposed a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

She argued that it surveyed all adults and not likely voters.

And she said the poll's question, which asked if the person would vote to "prevent any same-sex marriages," carried a negative tone that may have skewed the results.

"Phrasing it in a negative way probably elicited a stronger response in the negative," she said. Fitzgerald suggested asking if the person would approve an amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

Pollsters with the conservative Civitas Institute, which has polled that wording, also objected to the Elon poll. 

John Rustin will head a business advocacy group.

The Gastonia native, 42, will leave a position with the N.C. Family Policy Council to head the N.C. Free Enterprise Foundation, the successor to the now-defunct N.C. FREE.

"It will be providing similar information and services to N.C. Free, but the board of directors will have some other thoughts about new programs and services," he said. "That's kind of a work in progress." 

After graduating from UNC-Chapel Hill in 1989, Rustin worked in state lobbying. From 1994 to 1997, he lobbied for companies such as General Electric and Abbott Laboratories at Hunton and Williams in Raleigh.

Since 1997, he has worked at the Family Policy Council, serving as director of government relations and vice president.  

Update and Correction: A previous version of this post incorrectly referred to the N.C. Free Enterprise Foundation as a lobbying group. It does not lobby.

In a press release today, the group also announced that James A. Rouse III will become chairman of the board of directors.

Rouse is director of government affairs for the N.C. Association of Electric Cooperatives.

A new mailer from the Republican Governors Association is attacking Beverly Perdue's record.

The mailer, which repeats the "Status Quo" button motif from its television ads, argues that the Democratic gubernatorial candidate is responsible for "job killing tax increases," "crippling debt" and "lost jobs."

"North Carolina is going in the wrong direction," the mailer says. "And career politician Bev Perdue promises 'I will do exactly what's been done before.'"

As noted previously, that statement is taken out of context, as Perdue was talking about creating an independent panel to look into offshore drilling.

To back up its claim that North Carolina has "one of the highest tax burdens in the Southeast," the mailer cites the N.C. Family Policy Council, a group that advocates for "traditional family values."

An ad by Democratic gubernatorial candidate Beverly Perdue attacks Republican rival Pat McCrory over his position on stem cell research.

What the ad says: Perdue speaks: "I'm Bev Perdue. I'm running for governor and I sponsored this ad." The ad shows images of Sarah Witt, a Raleigh woman who suffers from paralysis because of primary lateral sclerosis. Witt narrates through a voice box: "I used to run marathons, but not anymore. A motor neuron disease has already taken away my ability to walk and to speak, but it hasn't taken away my ability to hope. Hope that stem cell research will let me see my kids grow up. So when I hear politicians like Pat McCrory say he wants to ban embryonic stem cell research, I ask myself, how can he be against hope?" The ad ends with text that says "Pat McCrory: More extreme than you think."

The background: Embryonic stem cells are a type of cell derived from the inside of a fertilized egg, typically at a lab where they were prepared for in vitro fertilization.

Scientists consider embryonic stem cells to be a potential source of new treatments for Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injuries and Lou Gehrig's disease, which are currently incurable.

Opponents condemn the research because it requires the destruction of a human embryo, but supporters argue that the embryos used are those that fertility clinics are going to destroy anyway.

Congress banned the use of federal funds for any experiment that destroys a human embryo. Some states have also banned the practice, while others, such as California, are supporting it with state tax dollars.

The state of North Carolina currently does not subsidize embryonic stem cell research or ban it.

During the Republican gubernatorial primary, the N.C. Family Policy Council, a nonpartisan group that advocates for Judeo-Christian values sent a questionnaire to McCrory and other candidates.

One of the questions was about stem cell research: "Should the stem cells of a human embryo be used for research purposes when the act of obtaining the stem cells results in the destruction of the human embryo?"

McCrory answered "no."

He later said that he supports stem cell research using adult cells or amniotic cells, neither of which involve embryos, but scientists contend those forms of research, while promising, have not yielded nearly the same level of progress.

Is it accurate? It's a stretch. Perdue's campaign cannot produce evidence that McCrory ever said he would ban embryonic stem cell research. McCrory strategist Jack Hawke confirmed, only after Dome asked, that McCrory, as governor, would support legislation that prohibited stem cell research in which the embryo was destroyed. Perdue's campaign gambled on that being the answer, but had no proof when they produced the ad.

— Mark Johnson and Ryan Teague Beckwith

An ad by Democratic gubernatorial candidate Beverly Perdue attacks Republican rival Pat McCrory over school vouchers.

What the ad says: Perdue is shown reading to children, with the words "Endorsed by North Carolina teachers" below. Perdue: "I'm Bev Perdue. I'm running for governor and I sponsored this ad." The ad then shows images of McCrory, a headline from the Charlotte Observer and schools. Narrator: "There's a real difference between the candidates on the issue of school vouchers. Pat McCrory supports private school vouchers, taking 900 million taxpayer dollars away from public schools to pay for kids in private schools. McCrory would have to slash public education or raises taxes." A clip from a McCrory ad is shown: "I'm Pat McCrory. The difference is leadership." Narrator: "You call that leadership? Pat McCrory, wrong on vouchers, wrong for the middle class."

The background: Vouchers are a traditional Democratic-Republican divide in North Carolina.

About 20 vouchers programs are in use across 14 states around the country, according to Jeff Reed, director of the education task force at the American Legislative Exchange Council, a nonpartisan association for conservative lawmakers.

Vouchers or programs where parents can take tax credits for private education are typically limited to disabled or disadvantaged students in failing schools, Reed said. No state has a universal voucher program.

This year a bipartisan group of N.C. lawmakers pushed for a tax credit for special-needs students that would be worth as much as $6,000 per child each year. The bill died in committee.

McCrory has consistently supported vouchers, but recently he has also said he would limit them. During the Republican primary this year, he pitched vouchers as a way to increase competition among schools and offer parents more choices.

"The more competition we have, the more choice you have in education, the better our education is going to be for our kids," he told a Hendersonville crowd in March. "And parents must have these choices, both with charter schools, school vouchers, and also more choice at the local school."

In a candidate questionnaire distributed by the N.C. Family Policy Council, McCrory answered "yes" to, "Should parents who choose to educate their children in private, religious, or home schools receive a voucher or tax credit from the state?

The $900 million figure is based on calculations that assume that every student home schooled or enrolled in private school in North Carolina would get a voucher. That would be a much more extensive program than is available in any other state.

Perdue has been endorsed by the N.C. Association of Educators in the primary and the general election this year.

Is it accurate? Yes and no. McCrory has voiced support for vouchers, but the $900 million figure is misleading.

— Lynn Bonner

The anti-bullying bill, which would have listed gay students as potential harassment targets, is dead, said a state senator who worked on proposal.

The Senate had the bill on its list of issues to vote on today, but sent it back to committee.

Another controversial bill that appeared dead this week was twice given new life and passed, but Sen. Doug Berger, a Franklin County Democrat, said the bullying bill is really gone.

The bill was controversial because it listed "sexual orientation" and more than a dozen other characteristics as reasons school children might be bully targets. Groups interested in socially conservative issues such as the Christian Action League and the N.C. Family Policy Council did not want the term "sexual orientation" in state law, saying that gay-rights groups would use it to leverage other rights.

The bill would have required teachers, students and volunteers to report bullying and have local school boards establish anti-bullying policies.

Ironically, supporters said they had enough votes to pass it, but only if everyone showed up. As a courtesy, the Senate allows members who cannot be around for votes to "pair" with another senators who are going to vote the opposite way. When senators "pair," their votes cancel each other.

Berger said the bill's opponents pressured senators who were going to vote no not to accept pair requests from senators who would have voted for the bill.

Bullying is already against school policies, Berger said, but the only way it is going to be seriously addressed is if people talk frankly about who gets targeted.

"The failure of this bill to pass, I think, it sends a bad message," Berger said.

The state House will push to Thursday a vote on a anti-bullying bill that would include gay students in a list of potential harassment targets. It had been scheduled for yesterday, then today.

Rep. Rick Glazier, a Fayetteville Democrat, said the House is trying to coordinate its vote with the Senate, which has put off its vote to Thursday.

The anti-bullying bill would require local school sytems to develop policies to combat bullying. At issue is a description of bullying targets that includes "sexual orientation" as a reason school children might be targets.

Socially conservative groups oppose the bill, saying it is a way to get gays into state law as a protected class. Senators have reported receiving hundreds of cards and emails from opponents in the last few weeks. The Christian Action League this week asked people on its mailing list to keep up the pressure on senators.

The bill's supporters deny the claim that it would give certain groups special rights, saying that specific language guarantees that no new protected classes will be created.

Supporters say about two dozen state school systems that have adopted anti-bullying policies similar to the legislative proposal.