Jump to content

North Carolina: Argument Against Gay Marriage


Recommended Posts

As some know NC voted yesterday to make gay marriage unconstitutional in the state.

 

I've read many articles today and have watched some interviews.

 

More than once the argument against gay marriage centered around the Bible and procreation. The argument was that the Bible said that procreation is by married couples and that couple consisted of a man and a woman.

 

If procreation is the driving force why not ban pre-marital sex? Birth out of wedlock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If only they'd banned it sooner John Edwards wouldn't have cheated on his dying wife. The Edwards' marriage was an unfortunate casualty of that states' reluctance to protect traditional marriage. Thank God marriage is safe now.

 

/Sorry for being a smart aleck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a few know in one of the forums on this topic, I wrote a 25 pg. paper regarding the unconstitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act that gives states the rights to pass these statutes. This is wholly unconstitutional. The California cases will make its way to the Supreme Court and overturn it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The people of NC have spoken loudly and so it shall be. The amendment will close the door on this issue. NC becomes the 30th state to recognize marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The vote was a landslide.

 

Not sure what's sadder....That 30 states have passed unconstitutional bigoted laws banning this or that the tone of your post is almost giddy that this was done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link with lots of information...

 

North Carolina Same-Sex Marriage, Amendment 1 (May 2012) - Ballotpedia

 

Interesting issues such as having the vote during the primary season or during the general election.

Many 'conservative' groups opposed it.

 

One impact for NC or any state that 'outlaws' any legal relationship could cause headaches for companies that provide 'partner benefits'. Lots of big companies that do that are located at Research Triangle Park in between Raleigh and Durham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link with lots of information...

 

North Carolina Same-Sex Marriage, Amendment 1 (May 2012) - Ballotpedia

 

Interesting issues such as having the vote during the primary season or during the general election.

Many 'conservative' groups opposed it.

 

One impact for NC or any state that 'outlaws' any legal relationship could cause headaches for companies that provide 'partner benefits'. Lots of big companies that do that are located at Research Triangle Park in between Raleigh and Durham.

 

Question....wouldn't health insurance issue be regulated by the state in which the company were headquartered?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question....wouldn't health insurance issue be regulated by the state in which the company were headquartered?

 

Not that I believe. States regulate insurance for their residence. So a large company that has employees in 50 states has to work with 50 different sets of laws. I suspect that is why the large companies like the idea of nationalized healthcare. Either they get out of it all together or they only have to work with one set of rules.

 

Here you have a state saying that it is illegal to recognize a relationship that looks or acts like 'gay marriage' or even 'civil unions'. So does that put a company at risk that does recognize the union? If so, how? What is penalty for violating the constitution. Especially if the violator is a corporation. I see lots of legal fees in someones future.

 

I think you know I am fairly agnostic on this subject. I wish the government would get out of the marriage game all together. Everything should be just be a civil union if even that in the eyes of the government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not sure what's sadder....That 30 states have passed unconstitutional bigoted laws banning this or that the tone of your post is almost giddy that this was done.

 

Just so glad we live in a democracy where the voice of the people counts and can be heard. I hope you don't have an issue with that, do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just so glad we live in a democracy where the voice of the people counts and can be heard. I hope you don't have an issue with that, do you?

 

I do when the voice of the people trample on human rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Let it be written, let it be done". But, like I said somewhere else let them have benefits for their special person. Its funny none of my debaters have brought up that I have said that many times.

 

Not even sure what this means. NVM, I understand now that I am writing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Let it be written, let it be done". But, like I said somewhere else let them have benefits for their special person. Its funny none of my debaters have brought up that I have said that many times.

 

It's just another form of separate but equal. I think that everyone would be ok w/ religious organizations not recognizing marriage. However, outlawing a fundamental right???? I'm not ok w/ it. I'm also not ok w/ hiding behind the majority rule. (I'm not saying this is the same level of severity at all, but...) the majority had no problem in the late 1700's through 1863 keeping a certain group in chains, so to speak. The majority also kept blacks and women from voting until the 1920's. The majority even outlawed the sale of BEER and BOURBON for God's sake. The majority too often votes w/ passion, not w/ any sense of justice and right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.