North Carolina & Gay Marriage:
A Long Way To Go
A Long Way To Go
Yikers.Â
An overwhelming majority of North Carolina voters support amending the state constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman, according to poll results released this week by the Civitas Institute.
The poll of 600 registered voters from Feb. 16-19 found that 76 percent support a constitutional amendment outlawing gay marriage, while 21 percent are opposed to such an amendment.
State law in North Carolina defines marriage as being between a man and a woman, but a measure being pushed in the state legislature calls for a constitutional amendment on the issue.
It is too bad they didn’t poll on the question of civil unions, too.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
23 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Considering that NC is a ‘New Blue’ state, that both of our Senators are Democrats and that the state was gerrymandered to produce Democrat districts by Federal order…
…that’s an awful lot of queer-hatin’, gay-bashin’, homophobic Democrats.
Anyone really surprised?
Comment by DaveP. — March 1, 2009 @ 4:16 pm - March 1, 2009
Ok I’m going to be totaly racist here. Are these Mormon voters or Black Obama voters we are talking about?
Comment by leah — March 1, 2009 @ 5:01 pm - March 1, 2009
I hate polls. They provide little more than a shallow sample of peoples’ opinion (read: knee-jerk reaction).
Few people have thought deeply about this issue (present company excepted). I suspect these polls reflect negative reaction to the more vocal prop-8 opponents in California and (reasonable) fear people have that some judge is going to impose this from the bench.
That being said, it angers me when politicians trot out some bogeyman issue in order to alarm the populace (listening, Barry? Algore?).
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. – H.L. Mencken
Comment by SoCalRobert — March 1, 2009 @ 6:01 pm - March 1, 2009
I agree. The Prop 8 opponents have set us back (pro-civil union and/or pro-marriage gays). And there’s a long and sorry track record of gay marriage being imposed from the bench, so it’s rational for people to fear that.
Give the man a prize. It was, after all, Kerry voters who passed those initiatives in 2004 – and Obama voters who provided the margin of victory of Prop 8 in CA.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 1, 2009 @ 7:49 pm - March 1, 2009
North Carolina only has one Democrat Senator! The Witch of the West, Kay Hagan. Our other Senator is Republican Richard Burr.
Comment by Mark — March 1, 2009 @ 8:02 pm - March 1, 2009
I love the glee that permeates here when certain people people of this country can’t enjoy equal legal rights. Why not coin the term “uppity homos”? that could harken back to a bygone era.
Comment by Kevin — March 1, 2009 @ 8:14 pm - March 1, 2009
So, Kevin, since you think not being able to marry anyone with whom you want to have sex is denial of “equal legal rights”, then why aren’t you speaking out against bans on incestuous, polygamous, and child marriage?
Oh, that’s right; you and your fellow gay liberals are advocating exactly that.
And you wonder why people support constitutional amendments against you.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — March 1, 2009 @ 8:28 pm - March 1, 2009
I’m sorry Kevin,
I’m sorry you are so insecure you need government recognition of your relationship. I’m sorry you don’t know the meaning of the word ‘right’. And I’m sorry you can’t seem to reply to Bruce’s point that they didn’t ask about civil unions.
Most of all, I’m sorry that you can’t see that pushing the same hostile attacking of those who disagree with you produces the same results.
Comment by The_Livewire — March 1, 2009 @ 9:32 pm - March 1, 2009
How many states have now amended their constitutions to prohibit gay marriage? 20? 30?
None of which would have happened if gay liberals hadn’t been trying to circumvent the people and cram gay marriage down everyone’s throats by activist judicial fiat.
Way to go lefties! You have set gay marriage back decades!
Comment by American Elephant — March 1, 2009 @ 9:39 pm - March 1, 2009
Congratulations Kevin, Your approach is working AWESOME!
Comment by American Elephant — March 1, 2009 @ 9:40 pm - March 1, 2009
Was watching a thing on ‘sucker bets’ in Vegas on the Travel Channel. They had a contest between a professional odds player and a guy who took the sucker bets. The sucket bets won, in that instance.
It hit me this is kind of the left/right arguement when it comes to same sex partnerships.
The conservative, societal change approach is slow, not as fun but has better odds. Moving though the legislatures and referendum process, one state at a time. California, with its ‘civil unions’ has paid off.
The far left is on tilt, playing against the odds (0 and 30, maybe about to become 0 and 31) because the one time they win, and make it stick, they get a big payoff.
Bruce, it sounds like NC is about to make a pre-emptive defense, much like Ohio did. We had a ‘Defense of Marriage Act’ on the books, but the referrendum process changed it to an ammendment, in part because it’s been shown time and time again that courts could care less about ‘acts’ (They don’t care about ammendments either, but that’s a rant for another blog)
Comment by The Livewire — March 2, 2009 @ 8:51 am - March 2, 2009
Addendum, forgot to add. The supreme court of MA reaffirmed the state’s right to restrict marriages, upholding the 1918 law saying that if you’re not eligible in your home state to be married, you can’t get married in MA. So the court’s tyrany resulted in saying “You can regulate who gets married, legislature, we just get to tel you if we like it or not.”
Seperation of powers my pasty white aft.
Comment by The Livewire — March 2, 2009 @ 8:59 am - March 2, 2009
It’s the big secret of Democratic gays: that, everywhere Defense of Marriage Acts have been proposed, they’ve passed- with the indispensable help of a huge percentage of Democratic voters.
Comment by DaveP. — March 2, 2009 @ 9:10 am - March 2, 2009
I wish the poll had included “confirmed bachelors sharing a house” or “devoted friends splitting expenses” or “maiden aunts who’ve been together simply forever”–this way of identifying yourself would lead to legal recognition. Who would object? Don’t say “people who hate gays no matter how they identify themselves” because no one here has said anything about their orientation. These are couples who have valid reasons for wanting a legal civil union without having to reveal anything about their private sex lives.
Comment by Ashpenaz — March 2, 2009 @ 9:46 am - March 2, 2009
Ashpenaz,
For most of those examples, there are legal remedies. (I’m having my roommate come in tomorrow to get my POA noterized, for example)
Comment by The Livewire — March 2, 2009 @ 11:14 am - March 2, 2009
And in all of those cases, the couples could be having wild, crazy sex. The point is, there is no legal reason for them to reveal that. People should be able to form legal partnerships without having to explain their reasons for wanting to do that. When the gay community pushes sex into people’s faces, they undermine all same-sex couples who want legal status. I should be able to have a civil union without having to make a political statement about my sexuality.
Comment by Ashpenaz — March 2, 2009 @ 1:00 pm - March 2, 2009
Ah, I misread your point. Appologies.
Comment by The Livewire — March 2, 2009 @ 1:15 pm - March 2, 2009
“Not the marrying kind” is my favorite.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 2, 2009 @ 11:26 pm - March 2, 2009
#9: “Way to go lefties! You have set gay marriage back decades!”
I thought that would make you happy.
Comment by Attmay — March 3, 2009 @ 6:29 am - March 3, 2009
I wish the poll had included “confirmed bachelors sharing a house†or “devoted friends splitting expenses†or “maiden aunts who’ve been together simply foreverâ€â€“this way of identifying yourself would lead to legal recognition. Who would object?
Ugh! Most self-respecting people would.
I’ll stick with Bruce’s idea. Why not poll on the question of civil unions?
Comment by Pat — March 3, 2009 @ 7:08 am - March 3, 2009
“Way to go lefties! You have set gay marriage back decades!”
The recent votes in Vermont and Connecticut would seem to refute that conclusion.
Comment by Antigone Rising — April 26, 2009 @ 12:18 am - April 26, 2009
Why must all conservatives speak from a place of hate and anger? why must everything be polarized and black & white? when will you understand that as gays we are all brothers and sisters?
Comment by Sloan ROllins — April 29, 2009 @ 6:35 pm - April 29, 2009
I think marriage might be different but they should at least allow a civil; union or partnership
Comment by William — August 8, 2009 @ 7:10 pm - August 8, 2009