Good News you can still marry your first cousin in North Carolina

[Ichingcarpenter]

but not the same gender:

States laws regarding first cousins link

http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/human-services/state-laws-regarding-marriages-between-first-cousi.aspx




Polling Place in North Carolina notice the sign which is legal.


?2


A bunch of more Church Polling Places with
signs:

go to the photo gallery: http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20120508/ARTICLES/120509659/-1/news38?Title=Despite-sign-voters-at-church-vote-against-amendment

[xfundy]

1. Yee-haww!

Thanks for that.

[Kablooie]

2. Also if you live with someone for 10 years you are automatically married.

If they are of the opposite sex of course.

[Ichingcarpenter]

3. It banned Civil Unions of Straight couples

Only 46 percent of voters realized that the amendment would ban civil unions for gay couples as well as marriage, according to a Public Policy Polling poll. A majority of North Carolina voters support civil unions


This is because Amendment 1 says "Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State." While it's being called a gay marriage ban, the amendment is more than that—it's an all-out refusal to recognize any kind of partnership or union that isn't marriage. So gay North Carolinians, who couldn't get married anyway, are screwed, and so are straight, unmarried North Carolina couples.

The ACLU of North Carolina released a list explaining how bad things could get for unmarried North Carolina couples if Amendment 1 passes. Here are some rights that could be at risk:

Domestic violence laws protecting people in an unmarried partnerships might be weakened. (This claim has been debated by both sides, and it's still unclear exactly how the law would impact domestic violence victims. Opponents of Amendment 1 say many of North Carolina's domestic violence laws offer special protections to victims who have an established relationship with their abusers. So if the amendment narrows the law to legally recognize only marriages, it might weaken these protective laws for unmarried partners. Supporters of Amendment 1, such as Rockingham County District Attorney Phil Berger Jr., contest this claim. Berger said nothing in the amendment changes any laws on assault, rape, murder, or other crimes.)


Unmarried parents could no longer have the same child custody and visitation rights as married parents.
Private agreements between unmarried couples might not longer have a legal basis. This means, for example, that if a couple who has cohabited and raised children together for years decides to separate, the wealthier partner would not be legally obligated to divide property with his or her partner.

The law could interfere with unmarried partners' end-of-life arrangements, such as wills, trusts, and medical powers of attorney.

Employers would no longer have to provide benefits, such as health insurance, to the partners of unmarried employees.

[Confusious]

5. The hatred of the hOmO-sExual

Outweighs everything, even the teachings of a certain J. H. Christ.

Kind of sad really. The hatred of the "other" is the only thing holding them together. What happens when society moves on?

[xchrom]

4. Du rec. Nt

[pipoman]

6. I'm not sure we should care

who marries whom under any circumstances..

[meaculpa2011]

11. Marriage is a private contract between consenting adults...

I do not recognize the authority of the state to approve or disapprove of ANYONE'S marriage.

[malaise]

7. Sad indeed

[customerserviceguy]

8. Oddly enough, that fact will someday work in our favor

That pair of first cousins who marry in NC can move to a state where first cousin marriage is illegal, and under the FF&C clause of the US Constitution, they would still be recognized as married. What happens when the SCOTUS applies that same rule to a same-gender couple legally hitched in a marriage equality state who moves to a homophobic state?

Ultimately, that's where victory will be found.

[CanonRay]

12. I agree with you

but the current SCOTUS makes me very nervous...they might try to find some very technical ground, or make something up out of whole cloth, to fit their political agenda.

[customerserviceguy]

14. It's tough to ignore that FF&C clause

Especially for those who proclaim themselves to be upholding the original intent of the Constitution. Yes, it might not be enough for Scalia, Alito and Thomas, who might find something out of nothing to support discrimination, but it might not work on Roberts, and it sure won't work on Kennedy.

[JoePhilly]

9. The mentality of these folks is really very sad ... they have the need to set themselves up as ...

the moral superiors of others. That way, they get to stand above, and judge those "lesser" individuals.

Its a sickness that's spread in buildings just like that one.

[joshcryer]

10. How is that legal? Doesn't that violate some polling place politics law?

You can't just have campaign material hanging around a polling place like that can you? I can understand down the street, but on the property? WTF!

[mmonk]

13. I know the image you are trying to paint.

However, the vote for was across all racial and socio-economic lines. The fear of the LGBT community unfortunately, was more widespread than that. The failure also of understanding that civil unions would be made illegal should have been prevented by making clear that would be a consequence. But those of us against the amendment could not be present in the Churches to counter the falsehoods and venom people sat through.