NC vote: No legal rights for partners in ANY civil union, gay or straight

[ProgressiveEconomist]

I wonder how many heterosexuals voted today to diminish their OWN legal rights by a hard-to-overturn constitutional amendment.

WHAT'S YOUR OPINION?

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/08/11584860-north-carolina-marriage-amendment-could-impact-gay-and-straight-couples

"North Carolina marriage amendment could impact gay and straight couples

By Miranda Leitsinger, msnbc.com

Updated at 10:30 p.m. ET: North Carolina voters approved a constitutional amendment Tuesday night banning gay marriage and – going a step further than most other states with an anti-gay marriage amendment – scrapping civil unions for gay and straight couples. The state becomes the last southern state to approve an anti-gay marriage amendment and joins 30 others with similar measures. Incomplete returns Tuesday night showed the amendment passing by 60 percent of the vote.

The amendment, also known as Amendment 1, would make marriage the only legal domestic union that would be valid in the state. But opponents say the measure is unnecessary because a state statute has banned gay marriage in North Carolina since 1996. They say domestic partners – both straight and gay – and their children could lose health benefits. ...

... John Dinan, a political science professor at Wake Forest University, ... said the amendment’s impacts would not be immediate. “The one place it could make a difference is in eight or nine cities in North Carolina that give out insurance benefits to same-sex couples,” Dinan said. “Lawyers might have to start taking a real close look at those insurance benefits that are given out and they might have to change those.” ...

Jeremy Kennedy, campaign manager for Protect All NC Families said he worries that the eight or nine cities that currently offer domestic partnership benefits to public employees may drop those benefits if the amendment passes. “We know the consequences that we’re listing, but there’s a whole bunch of unintended consequences that we probably haven’t even thought of yet that will come up in the courts after this,” Kennedy said. ..."

Msnbc.com's Isolde Raftery contributed to this report.

[Warpy]

1. When the Roberts court has the decency to retire or die off

we'll be back at the Loving vs. Virginia scenario when the USSC has to force Dixie to recognize legal marriages in other states the way Loving forced them to recognize interracial marriage.

I'm not a bit surprised by today's shameful vote in NC, I used to live there and the social and political climate are why I don't live there now.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

9. You're assuming NC ultimately will become more like NY, forgetting that 30

states now have laws like Amendment 1. A few more and there will be enough anti-gay states to ratify a national Constitutional Amendment that would force NY to become more like NC, rather than NC becoming more like NY. And future USSC justices may be coming that will make John Roberts look like Thurgood Marshall.

[Warpy]

11. Excuse me?

I'm talking about the US Supreme Court while you're blathering about amendments to the constitution.

Amending the Federal constitution is an arduous process. They have been unable to attack abortion through an amendment because of this. The haggling over semantics and conditions takes many, many years, often long enough for it to become a non issue.

The biggest mistake anyone can make in life is thinking conditions are permanent. The Roberts court is an aberration. The current insanity on the right is going to be impossible to sustain long term.

This too shall pass, albeit painfully. Anybody who's ever been constipated can tell you that.

[jmowreader]

2. The funny thing about NC heterosexuals...

a LOT of people down there will gladly damage themselves if it also damages some group they hate--in this case, gays and lesbians.

[guitar man]

4. Exactly

&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[provis99]

6. yep. I saw the same attitude in the South of poor whites about blacks.

too many whites would rather be poor and oppressed as long as they could thereby make life miserable for their black neighbors.

[cin63]

3. Well,

You could adopt each other. No really I'm serious, there is no age limit and it will be legal, and you will have all rights. Just saying.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

7. "Adopt each other". Might work in some cases, but wouldn't some judge and/or state agency

have to approve any adoption?

I've heard of this, but only involving the extremely wealthy, who can afford "Dream Team" attorneys.

[dballance]

5. So NC Just Whacked Rights for Heterosexual Couples too

Do you think the idiots had a clue they were smacking down unmarried heterosexual couples too? Or were all the churches just cumming all over themselves they could take a swipe at those hetero sinners living together out of wedlock in addition to the gays so they never mentioned it?

This is what happens when an uninformed majority votes on the rights of a minority whose actions in no way affect the majority - oh except for bringing talented people in to NC to work and contribute to the tax base.

It sure feels good to pass judgement on others doesn't it NC voters?

You backwards ass fucks.

[xchrom]

8. Du rec. Nt

[HillWilliam]

10. Mecklenburg County Commissioner couldn't wait to lob the next volley:

Here's one link

Here's another.

From the article:

In that light, James is already pushing Mecklenburg to scrap its policy that provides domestic partner health insurance benefits to employees in same-sex relationships. The county has been offering same-sex benefits to employees since commissioners approved the policy in 2009.

James fired off the following email to County Manager Harry Jones and county legal staff early Wednesday morning:

Since Amendment One has passed when will we get a memo or something that outlines what changes we need to make to our health plan to be in compliance? I recall when the Democrats on the Commission forced the issue and added these benefits for homosexuals that a number of legal experts said it was illegal then – including the City attorney. Now that Amendment one has passed it obviously is illegal to offer this benefit as there is now only one ‘domestic legal union’ recognized in the state.

Prior to the vote most scholars (left and right) said that Amendment One would eliminate local faux ‘marriage’ benefits for homosexual employees. I would cite them but you know them all too well.

Still, I would like to know when the Board can expect information on the changes Amendment One wrought (or are we going to break the law and spend scarce resources on litigation we will likely loose)?

The misspelling belongs to the bigot. I just quoted him.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

12. TDS Wednesday, 1st five minutes: John Stewart cracked a joke about

how NC voted for "marriage equality"--now unmarried heterosexual couples will have the same "non-rights" as gays.