GOP leaders push for same-sex marriage ban

There are better things to utilize their time and effort toward, and this is definitly not worthy of extended consideration.

Every one of you claiming the bible tells you so that this is wrong used that same bible to say a black person couldn't marry a white person.

Hateful, spiteful, find one quote and cling to it, damaging nothing but your soul, and your relgions image.

Patheticaly disturbing is the GOP in NC that would cowardly promote against "The Bill of Rights".  Has anyone taken a look at those folks that are promoting this unconscionable act?  Anyone take a look at the counties most of these people represent?  I can tell you about one who used to be my neighbor, a guest in my home, a patron at my restaurant.  He would be Jimmy Crawford, co sposnor, who represents Vance and Granville counties. Vance and Granville Counties harbor some of the worst schools in the state.  For years children in these schools had to share books because there was never enough money to purchase a book for each student.  Many of the career politicians who signed onto this bill represent counties in the same dire straights with low incomes, continuous high unemployment, and minimum wage jobs.  I first moved to Oxford and lived down the street from Jimmy and his wife in 1985.  The population of Oxford in 1985 was some 8500 people and when I left in 2004, the population was some 8500 people.  While I digress from the main point of what I have to define as a political hate crime if mandated to law, I feel it necessary to point out a simple fact,  this is a bill that incites hate, discrimination, and causes harm to the thousands of gay couples in North Carolina and their adoptive children from heterosexual couples who would not or could not provide safe haven and loving homes for their children.  These couples are families and thousands of gay couples have children.  Politicaly these cowards of justice and judgment are trying legislating their religious beliefs. When asked why he endorsed this bill, Jimmy said he had to protect families.  What does this mean and from what is this state instution protected?  Jimmy could not answer nor can anyone else if the were pushed to respond.  As a former business owner, I provided health insurance to my employees.  As a Gay man I am, for the most part, denied this employment benefit to my partner of some 21 years.  My partner cannot receive my thousands of dollars I paid into social security when I pass on, those monies would go to the surviving spouse of a heterosexual couple or into the general fund for someone elses benefit. Heterosexual couples receive hundreds of tax benefits that gay couples cannot receive.  Their children do not realize the advantages that children from heterosexual couples receive.  Other than religious political zealots looking for votes from the religious right, there is no gain to anyone by obstructing the basic tenants of the constitution and the Bill of Rights that, by the way, these elected men and women are sworn to uphold and to protect.

These men and women follow and narrow and shallow path down a dark and evil road.

We, as a nation, have and are spending trillions in the middle east in an attempt to bring honesty, integrity, and democracy to people who do not even understand democracy yet when these gay men and women from the armed services come home they cannot not even celebrate their own freedom provide to them by the very democracy that states we are free and equal under the law. 

We are gauranteed freedom from religious persecution by the constitution but these folks think that they can legislate their religious beliefs and make every effort to legislate that right away from millions of gay men and women, citizens and tax payers, of this country.

The secondary bill the sponsors of this ban propose would deny any city or county from offering benefits to domestic partners.  So, those folks who receive such benefits as do their heterosexual counterparts would no longer be able to have these same benefits.  The cities who now offer this benefit will have to stop. 

The party that proudly embelishes removal of government intrusion in our personal lives has taken it upon themselves to intrude into our lives.  What kind of hipocracy is this?

Will these people next vote to legislate gay people out of their homes and their jobs as Anita Bryant, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson tried to do nationaly in the 70's?  Before her death, Anita Bryant, the former orange juice spokeswoman , apologized to the gay community for her misguided attitude and actions.  Even Jessie Helms made apologies to the gay community.

The GOP in N.C. voted to remove billions from education and so many other important progressive programs in our state.  Yet the GOP apparently believes that the state can afford this many millions of dollars that the state will spend trying to defend a law that they cannot.  Gay or not, I am tired of the political arm of the church legislating their beliefs into my life.  I donot go to your church, I do not want to go to your church, I do not subscribe to your personal religious beliefs and I should not be forced to.

This is symbolic of this legislature.  So many problems to work on, including hurricane devastation, and they want to waste time with this.

hey, can we get slavery voted on again? 

IonlyTrustOmnivores, Anthropology is the study of humans as it refers to their origin and nature.  So you actually proved my point with your own comment.

The fact that we are having this discussion makes me sick. Hate has no place in a civilized society. There is no point intrying to reason or hold a discussion with the haters. No matter the evidence, their hatred, and often their religion, blinds them to what is just and right. Assertions by haters bear no resemblance to the truth. It just sickens me.

How many more gay people does God have to create before we ask ourselves whether or not God actually wants them around?

What kind of tax breaks will the GOP have to give to companies they want to relocate to 1970's North Carolina? NASCAR is fadding. What company from Cali, NY or Mass would want the issues that come with relocating married people to unmarried status? OK maybe a Bible publisher.  Last time I checked the Bible was written by people not God. Faith is personal not mandated.

Really, this is the big discussion here in NC today when over 1100 homes were just destroyed by the hurricane!  it is actually funny to read the majority of the comments on this subject during such econcomically bad times.  It's interesting to see that we don't won't government interferring in our lives unless it meets someone's individual needs and/or BELIEFS.....Remember that you get a license to get married from the government and then you can choose to get married in a church.  Two very distinct places and requirements, etc.  It is also interesting that "we the people" want to impose either either our secular or regligious views on others but won't step back and really answer the question what impact does a decision, law, etc. really have on me. 

If two people of the same sex get actually get a marriage certificate from the state (NOT A CHURCH), what is the impact on me personnally....ANSWER, with the exceptions of being against my belief and lower tax revenue for the state and federal government due to tax breaks, absolutely freakin nothing....

Get off your high horse, go assist with the clean up efforts and actually do something productive for your community...

Old sport.  Nobody is forcing their beliefs on anyone.  It's simply the fact that marriage is only between man and woman.  Anything else is a relationship of sorts, perhaps special, perhaps not, but not marriage.  It's the same as declaring two unrelated men brothers.  They may love each other, have each other's back, and all of that, but they are not brothers and never will be.  But the state can decide one way or the other, so let's get it to an up or down vote and move on.

If those in politics pass this the only thing I can say is it is against what God's Words defines as marriage and they will only have to answer to God for this.

This is against Bibical principles and if NC wants to finish off the state - go ahead and vote for it. You people don't fear the Lord's Word on this. God help our nation and particular our state.

Before you are finished with North Carolina, we'll look just like we did in 1954.   We will be the 'most progressive' State in America, assuming South Carolina and Utah are the only other States in the Union of course.

If this goes to referendum, then the vote should be the following:

a. Define marriage as between one man and one woman

b. Allow same-sex marriage

I also think that if "a" gets voted, there should be a penalty for any man and woman who gets a divorce. If the sanctuary of marriage is so precious, divorce should be severe and substancial.

I think this is ridiculous and moronic.. and think that if history is a predictor.. it will pass and be comparable as NC wanting their slaves too.. nothing will change until it comes from the Federal government to trump state governments.. I can't fathom what has so many lawmakers fearing the "gays" just to find out that a decent amount of them are "undercover" and using these laws to hide their activities.

But I guess gays could just do like others.. marry someone from the opposite sex and sleep around on them with someone from the same sex. It's about as prevalent as booty shorts on teenage girls. I mean, it's EVERYWHERE...

I look forward to this Amendment being passed.  Apparantly House Minority Leader Joe Hackney doesn't know his history very well when he said "This proposed constitutional amendment runs against the tide of history, and has become a form of hate speech".  Throughout all of human history marriage has been defined as being between a man and a woman.  God defined marriage and humans cannot change the meaning of it. Trying to change the definition of marriage is like me looking at my cell phone and calling it a car. The manufacturer said it is a cell phone so therefore it's a cell phone. As far as the argument of 'Seperation of Church and State' goes, that was a letter (not a law) written by Thomas Jefferson with the intent to protect the Church from the State not vice versa.

yeah because 'the people' did so well ~ 40 years ago when it came to people with different skin color.   I mean Umstead Park had a whites/blacks entrance until '66.

If 'the people' gave such a real care about 'marriage' and 'protecting it' they'd make divorce a hell of a lot more harder to do.   Two people getting married doesn't destroy marriage, but a man leaving his wife for a younger woman has ruined more families than any single gay person I know.

Before the 21st Century, not one country/society has/had recognised/accepted gay marriage. To portray North Caroilna as backwards, is showing ones ignorance of history.

nm

I would really like to know what House Majority Leader Paul Stam means when he says this amendment "protects the children of the next generation". 

Is he homophobic, thinking that gays turn kids gay?  This statement he made is simply inane. 

He is making himself look bad when he states " the issue is different from laws that once banned interacial marriage.  "Misengenation laws never had a basis in morality, " he said "...People can't change their race.  They can't choose their race.  Theis was no biological basis to begin with."

He is clearly stating that this is a morality issue, and I would like to know since when is the CHURCH suppose to be involved in our government?  I was brought up that there is a seperation of Church and State.  Is he insinuating that people who are gay have a CHOICE to change what they are?

Why don't the heterosexuals want the homosexuals to be as miserable in marriage as they are?

But being able to be committed in a realtionship has NOTHING to do with SEX.  It has to do with having the SAME EQUAL RIGHTS as those who are married have.  To be able to take care of a parteners child.  To be able to step in and take care of a partner when they are sick in a hospital and not have hospital staff turn you away because in the eyes of the law you have NO rights.

Instead of Hetero SEXUAL Or Homo SEXUAL, lets call it HeteroEQUAL and HomoEQUAL.  It has NOTHING to do with SEX......But has EVERYTHING to do with RIGHTS!!!!

Libs are always raging on this forum about how "they" represent the great majority of voters in this state (aka "the enlighted ones") .... that Repubs/Conservs are a dying irrelevant minority .... blah blah blah.

So if thats the case, this amendment will be easily voted down and the enlighted will of the liberal majority will prevail .... correct?  So why all the whining?

The Republican majority has already turned back the clock on so much of what made North Carolina better than the other suth'run states.

I see no reason why they shouldn't do this too.

We never really wanted brains here, anyway.

Just tobacco growers and towel-makers. (And those who owned them, of course.)

Won't yawl hay-uv sum of mah dee-licious bible-thumpin' pie?

Mmmm, mmmm, good cracker.

The government should have zero involvement in the matter of marriage...anyone's. As for raising this particular issue, don't our representatives have more pressing matters, e.g. the economy? It's utter stupidity like this that drove me away from the republican party many moons ago.

Yes, let's do! Because everybody knows that constitutional rights should be governed by what 51% of the people who turn out to vote thing is correct.

"Down with big government!!"

(unless I think what you're doing with your naughty bits is icky, and angers the magical sky people.)