...but isn't the current Governor Mrs. Bev Perdue?
"Gov. Mike Easley's signature would also be required to enact the bill into law." -- exactly when was this story written?
Furthermore, Gays aren't trying to 'hijack' anything; we're just trying to get you uptight conservatives to SHARE. You might even find that we could teach you a thing or two in the process.
@ProudlyUnaffiliated -- I could ask the same of Christians about their hijacking the Cross, the Fish, the image of a man with a sheep around his neck and shoulders.......all images they 'hijacked' from other pagan rituals, plus there is the date for Christmas and Easter........shall I go on?
Two presidents speak, but neither does anything more than provide lip service.
Speaking to the debate about how passage of this bill may or may not affect unmarried couples, regardless of gender, and how it may affect children and others in regard to insurance and other protections. My view is that lawyers and litigants are notourious for being clever, tricky and even downright unscrupulous. I say it is better to err on the side of caution. Maybe this law won't have any unintended side-effects; but do we really want to chance that? Will society be any better off even if the only resulting lawsuits don't involve the state?
Also, @ Mr. Rawson: In response to your question, "And what could more excessively entangle government with religion than adopting and elevating one religious group's definition of marriage and imposing it on everyone else?", I'm not sure if this would rank "more" or "less" on your scale, but perhaps the NC Constitutions requirement that one believe in God before being allowed to hold public office? Protestants have long been notorious for preventing non-Protestants from holding office - just consider how hard they fought against JFK because he was Catholic; Christian, but not their brand.
I am a Christian, I am Gay, and I vote. I don't vote based on my religious beliefs - I vote according to my civil tolerance. There are a lot of people and rules I don't care for, but I know that God isn't going to send me to hell because I didn't vote according to religious doctrine. I don't believe God is as petty as people and doesn't need the law of man. I believe that if God is going to send me to eternal damnation because of how I voted, it will be because I voted based on a mean-spirited, spiteful point-of-view - in other words, God knows what's in my heart and knows that I am voting conscience and speaking to my true self - not because I'm following some other human's opinion. "Pay to Caesar what is owed to Caesar, and to God, what is owed to God." I interpret this, as it relates to this amendment, that everyone is entitled to equal civil liberties, even if their lifestyle doesn't jive with MY interpretation of the Bible (or any other standard) and that I have done my duty to God by giving everyone the opportunity to answer to God in their own time and without having done so by first judging them according to my own opinions.
I rejoice in the fact that more and more people want to take part in the institution of marriage and it seems to me that the only real sanctification of marriage can come from within that marriage. The gender of the people involved doesn't change this fact. Marriage isn't like a child or a polar bear; it doesn't need to be PROTECTED. What it needs is to be nourished. No law can help make marriage better; only the spouses can do that.
Have you seen this video from Kannapolis yet?
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2012/04/north…... this is a direct link: http://youtu.be/4OsyacYBIRA
All Comments »
Indy Week • 201 W. Main St., Suite 101, Durham, NC 27701 • phone 919-286-1972 • fax 919-286-4274
RSS Feeds | Powered by Foundation