http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/08/1089905/-The-bigots-win-North-Carolina-passes-Amendment-One?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+dailykos%2Findex+%28Daily+Kos%29

For those not in the know, there was a voting in North Carolina to pass a bill known as "Amendment 1"

Basically what it does is it bans gay marriage, which is already banned there, thus creating a sort of "Super ban"

It also makes civil union illegal, for straight and gay couples. Unions started out of state will not be recognized in NC either

Cases that would normally be considered "Domestic violence" will now be just "Assault"

I'm assuming this means that battered wife syndrome is no longer applicable as a defense either (Unless it is within a heterosexual traditional marriage)

Other benefits removed include hospital visitation rights, healthcare benefits

Basically NC voters thought that these basic rights were worth sacrificing in order to make sure gays REALLY can't marry, as opposed to just being unable to marry

Discuss

Horrible

While Barack Obama has gone through a wonderful change in opinion over the last 5 years,

The recent video showing him saying "I support gay marriage" also conveniently doesn't include any sign of action

I'm p. sure he's still in favour of it being a state by state affair, until further notice

The problem is that people keep making this out to be an issue with gay rights. At its heart, it is. Obviously the entire sentiment behind this bill is endless amounts of bigotry, but Barack is going to cleave to his "Let the individual states decide" until at least after this next election. Unless it's presented as an issue that affects all people in NC instead of just gays (which it is, it affects heterosexual civil unions as well), Barack isn't going to touch it

And regardless, this was a democratically instilled law, voted on by all registered NC voters. Even if the voters were misguided by their own frothing bigotry, Barack Obama taking a stand against democracy would not go over well in the public eye

8 states confirmed, add Washington (passed Feb. 14, 2012; effective June 7, 2012), Maryland (passed Mar. 1, 2012; effective Jan. 1, 2013) and the District of Columbia (Mar. 3, 2010).

I've been out of the world too long; 'it feels like home when it comes crashing back' (lyrics from 'Aftermath' by R.E.M.).

I don't see how it's not discrimination.  Interracial marriages weren't legal in the entire USA until a supreme court decision in 1967.  Which is unsettling in how recently a black and white couple couldn't marry.  The 'sanctity of marriage' is a hollow political buzzword with no non-subjective or relevant meaning, like 'too big to fail' (was that line in Titanic?) and 'war on terror'.

Gay marriage rights will keep gaining support and power over time.  Now is when people have to standup for their rights/equal rights.  After all, political systems come from the root word 'politics' which is more about how one plays their hand than solving issues, sadly.  I'm just saying people are the force that shapes a country to represent the best interests of the people.  And people are (finally) taking action (99%, occupy, etc), gay rights is no exception.


(finally activity on the forums )

Ahh, I didn't know that!

I heard about the discussions of legalizing gay marriage in Maryland but never knew it passed there. And yeah, I knew gay marriage was legal in Washington D.C., didn't know it was legal in Washington State now~

I would have expected this from South Carolina, but not NORTH CAROLINA???

While we're on this topic, let's look at some other ways NC protects the sanctity of marriage
http://www.dumblaws.com/law/734

Holy ****

See, at first I was going to say "Sanctity of marriage is such BS, they probably allow divorce and stuff"

But wow I think this state is actually taking this bible stuff seriously

So kudos, North Carolina, for at least being consistent in your war on peoples right to marry

You definitely see a lot of parallels between the gay rights movement and the african american rights movement.

Except black people could marry each other, but homosexuals can't! Unless they're of different genders.

One important thing to have in mind is that this is not "Christianity vs gay rights" as I've noticed "arguments" degenerating to on for example twitter. It IS "Interpreting the Bible literally vs gay rights", yes, but I can safely say that NO ONE arguing against homosexuality because of the Bible is actually following all the rules and philosophy in it. In fact, they are going against much philosophy (borderline rules, I suppose, depending on how you see it) by arguing. Christianity, like every religion, is more than its scriptures.

Almost all (if not all) Swedish Christians I know are for gay marriage.

So if you're Christian or a member of any other religion, and you oppose gay marriage: This is NOT about giving up your faith.
If you're atheist and you are for gay marriage: Don't use the "Stop believing fairy tales" argument; most of the time, it will get you nowhere, and will only bigotify (yes that is a word) people more.

This is about human rights, about allowing people to be with who they love.


(Note that I don't really mean people shouldn't argue for or against religion if they want to (as fruitless as that is, for the most part), but this is not where it should be, as it SHOULDN'T be a question of religion or no religion.)


I'm not sure if I got my full point across here, but if you're confused or don't agree or whatever, I'd be glad to respond.

Oh! And also, if you're one of the "Well as long as it doesn't affect me they can do what they want" people, please take a firmer stance. This is not about allowing a "victimless crime", it's about justice, human rights, and all sorts of other glorious sounding words and phrases.

To expand on what Eki is saying,

Christianity, Islam, whatever, pretty much all the major religions

They all carry heavy messages of love and tolerance. In literally every major religion, you will find some variation of "The Golden Rule", Do unto others as you would have done on yourself.

Contradictory to this are a few passages in the bible, and I'm sure in some other religious texts, that denounce homosexuality, inter-racial marriage, People of different ethnicity/creed, etc. as abomination. But, as Dan savage so inappropriately said at a journalism convention quite recently, Christians have learned to ignore the bull **** in the bible

And it all stems from how the religion has evolved, becoming more and more progressive as society marches on. Social issues that were once taboo are now discussed and becoming accepted. As the western culture becomes more accepting of different things, so do the beliefs of the people (sorry for focusing on Christianity, the Bible is the only religious text I've read any of)

So in this progressed religion, we see some people who still have an issue with gay marriage. Why?

Well, to understand why you have to ignore the religious aspect. its a RUSE.........

These people dislike gays, and will justify it any way they can. If the bible said "God is a-okay with gay people" these people wouldn't care, they would cite some other text that demonizes homosexuals

To provide an anecdote, a friend of mine recently confided in me "I'm depressed because of existentialism"

He said to me, "If everything is pointless what's the point in being happy"

And I responded simply: "Well then what's the point in being sad"

This is what I'm getting at, when you can use these peoples logic against them, they don't actually subscribe to that logic

Just as my friends depression didn't stem from existentialism, and instead the existentialism stemmed from depression

These "Christians" have bigotry that doesn't actually stem from mainstream christianity, Their brand of it stems from their bigotry

That's why you can say "well the bible is also radically pro-slavery" against them

North Carolina is a Southern State~

The entire South is against gay marriage~

^ Can you show me some scriptures where it denounces interracial marriages? I'm curious to see this~

Thanks~

Ezra seems to mention this, for example chapter 10. It looks kind of funny in the King James version when out of context: "Ye have transgressed, and have taken strange wives, to increase the trespass of Israel." But in some new translation it seems to be "foreign" instead.

I was more using it as an offhand example, without actually knowing

but this site says that there is an argument against interracial

What ever happened to separation of church and state?

^ Good point there!

That is a part of our Constitution~

The South is pretty much basing this decision off of religious views (in my opinion)~
Nothing wrong with religion but is wrong to use religion to discriminate or deny rights to any certain group of people~
Freedom and diversity is what made America the most powerful and greatest nation on earth. Some people don't seem to realize/recognize this~ :x