Gay marriage ban will be on May ballot in NC

By GARY D. ROBERTSON
Associated Press

RALEIGH, NC (AP) -- North Carolina voters will get to vote next May on a proposed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in the state.

The Senate voted 30-16 Tuesday in favor of putting the question on the statewide primary ballot. The number of yes votes was just enough to approve the constitutional amendment. The House approved the measure Monday.

While 30 states already have similar prohibitions in their constitutions, North Carolina is the only state in the Southeast without one.

State law already defines marriage as between a man and a woman, but amendment supporters argue traditional marriage would be better protected against potential legal challenges by same-sex couples in six other states.

Opponents say the question will diminish the state's business climate by perception that gays and lesbians aren't welcome.

(Copyright 2011 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

STATEMENT FROM SENATOR THOM GOOLSBY:

"Our vote today will place this issue on the May ballot and allow the people of our state -- not some activist judge -- to defend marriage. I completely trust my fellow North Carolinians to make the right decision."

Disclaimer: Comments posted on this, or any story are opinions of those people posting them, and not the views or opinions of WWAY NewsChannel 3, its management or employees. You can view our comment policy here.

Next they will try to say I have to have permission from a preacher to have sex with my wife. Get politics out of everyones sex life,and marrage, because it is none of your DAMN business. Take your morial minority Jerry Fartwell crap and preach it to some one who cares. The old morality laws were written by a bunch of jackasses who thought sex was dirty and only for reproduction. I'll bet if the truth was really known many preachers and so called Christians are closet sex freaks and or Gay.

In the end... we WIN! To God be all the glory!

No one hates better than a Christian...

...except a non-Christian.

Church and state is supposed to be separate. Why is the state even involved in this issue? I am a heterosexual male, so much so that I will chase any woman I think I could catch, but it makes absolutely no difference to me if men want to "marry" men or women want to "marry" women. They don't bother me or meddle in my affairs, so why should I, or anyone else meddle in theirs? The state needs to stay out of everyones bedroom. And, the church needs to do the same.

North Carolina has not legally defined what "marriage" is, unlike most of the other states around us. This should have been done long ago. It's a "legality" issue.

Dear American Taliban,

Last time I checked, we were not a theocracy. That means your religious beliefs do not dictate our government nor do they dictate the rights allotted to citizens.

And you know that book that you hold so dear also says that slavery is a-ok. And that eating shellfish is wrong. That's your moral compass? I'd love to hear your reasoning for how you pick and choose which parts to follow and which parts to ignore.

The Bible does not condone slavery; it talks about how slaves ought to be treated (well) and how you should behave if you are a slave.

"I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a SLAVE to sin" (Jn. 8:34). Since "the wages of sin is death", bondage to sin is the worst of all forms of slavery.

As far as not eating shellfish, that was a law given to the Hebrews only. They had a long list of laws to do and not do, but it applies to no one else except Hebrews.

Just goes to prove....a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Commenting on how slaves 'ought to be treated' doesn't exactly convey that slavery is wrong, does it? But since you wish to minimize the Bible condoning slavery, I'll remind you of Leviticus, Exodus, Ephesians, Timothy, or Luke:
"Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear."

"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are"

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way."

All of these passages (and others) were used by the pro-slavery crowd in our country to justify that institution. Hmm, using the Bible to justify immoral actions, now why does that sound familiar?

Goes to show the book is outdated, biased and not really well written. It doesn't prove anything other than the people who wrote it were flawed. Thus, we shouldn't push its contents on our entire society.

Your post just goes to show how ignorant you are about the Bible and that you don't have enough intelligence to know when you're wrong or enough courage to admit it.

Give me a break Lee, every one of your whining posts just takes quotes from someone else. I love your use of quotes.com and google. Shows your intelligence to type in a few commands on famous quotes. I know enough about the bible, I attended a Christian University. However, I know that its about as reliable as a 1990 Hyundai.

The Bible is very explicit about gender. LOOK IT UP. If you are not capable, let me know and I will tell you what verses to read. God does not condone man to be with another man and woman to be with another woman. Neither should we!

However, you live in a country governed by a constitution that is secular in nature and insures equal rights to all, even homosexuals and Lesbians.

As far as your not "condoning" homosexuality, good luck. I believe that you would find every heterosexual who respects and understands the Constitution rising against you. Should they have the right to redefine the word marriage? No. Should they receive every single legal right and protection that a heterosexual does? Absolutely. That's hy the government needs to register domestic partnerships only and get OUT of the marriage approval business.

Here's what you seemingly don't understand. A man or woman has a legal right in this country TO BE A SINNER. They have a right to drink. They have the right to be as flamingly gay or alarmingly butch as they want to be. They don't need your approval. They don't need the church's approval.

The Bible and Christianity clearly condemn homosexuality, but neither is the law governing this land.

Perhaps you'd do better joining the Taliban?

I may just kiss you common ;). You are so very right!

"...you live in a country governed by a constitution that is secular in nature and insures equal rights to all, even homosexuals and Lesbians."

It's unfortunate that your phrase doesn't include Christians. Why is it that every group under the sun has equal rights EXCEPT Christians. What about their rights? When do the rights you give to gays overstep the boundary and become "inequality" to Christians?

If you are naive enough to believe that the Constitution can "insure" equal rights to ALL (even Christians), then you're not as smart as I thought you were. It can certainly make a good attempt to do so, but it will never completely, in actuality, happen...never has, never will. When Christians are the group that doesn't have equal rights under the Constitution, what kind of "equal rights" is that? And, unfortunately, you won't hear half the people shouting to defend their rights as you will hear shouting to defend homosexuals and lesbians. Equal rights? No such animal.

So, not being able to force everyone to live by what your religion dictates is somehow infringing upon your rights? When there is a law that says that Christians can't get married, or vote, or adopt children, or buy property, or get an education (all of which has been the situation for certain groups in our history) - then you truly have something to whine about.

What rights are Christians being denied......? I'm dying to hear this.

Go ahead, all you religious fanatics who think this is a positive move. Those same who want to go to church on Sunday and ask for forgiveness for sins.

Call it a union, call it a legal joint agreement but whatever you do, do not ban it. This only makes the state creep further into the homes of those who are heterosexual and homosexual. The state wants to stand as this ultra-religious, holier then the rest of the country, pride of the south, bible thumping, holy warrior state. However, this is just another way to treat people as outcasts and make them feel unwelcome.

Its another way where bible carrying politicians FAIL TO DEAL with real problems such as 12% of North Carolinians without a job or our ever failing public education system nearing worst in the entire country. No, instead our elected lawmakers are concerned with what people do in their bedrooms.

I'm not homosexual, but I have friends who have been born this way. Most of them would change it if they could, others embrace their lifestyle. In any case, they should not be judged by the state of North Carolina or anything else. If these lawmakers want to say that gay marriage is a sin, do it in your damn church on Sunday.

God doesn't care. Neither do most of the citizens, just the paranoid ones who are afraid that someone else who is different might drink the same water they do.

Its 2011, 50 years ago we did the same thing to African-Americans, now they are doing the same thing to homosexuals. This is a step in the wrong direction and we continue to lose our unity as residents of this state.

Disappointing, very disappointing.

Everyone on this forum is Christian bashing. Did it ever occur to you that there are many people who may NOT be Christians but who favor this ban because they believe that, morally, marriage should be between a man and a woman. You can have morals without being a Christian you know.

"Opinions alter, manners change, creeds rise and fall, but the moral laws are written on the table of eternity." - Lord Acton (1834-1902) English historian.

Just another right-wing ploy to cause anger and diviciveness against America's most hated minority. Hate, hate, hate. The rightwingers can't stir up enough of it.

Instead of focusing time and energy on improving the economic and job climate here in our state, the legislature goes after the gays!

And the Democrats who joined the Republicans to approve this stupid and expensive amendment should hang their heads in shame.

Anyway, a federal judge will strike the amendement down as unconstitutional. Thank God for the federal judiciary!

You said, "Thank God for the federal judiciary"???? Do you realize what you said? Hey, keep God out of the government!!!

Most if not all of those who just voted to put this mean, cruel and unnecessary vote on the ballot pretend to be Christians. That means a follower of Christ, right? Then let me quote what Christ had to say about gay people in general and gay marriage in particular:

That's right. Absolutely nothing.

While it is true that there is no New Testament record of where Jesus explicitly stated that homosexuality is wrong, He did in fact condemn the behavior. A careful study of the Bible will bear this out.

And He answered and said to them, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ “and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?’” (Matt. 19:4.)

What did Jesus say about God’s creative work? Did God make Adam and Joseph? Did He create male and male, or did He create male and female? According to this passage, what has been God’s plan for sexual union [one flesh] since the beginning of time? Was His plan for a male partner to be joined to another male partner, or was it for a husband to be united to his wife? According to this passage, is a man to cleave to his male partner, or to his spouse?

Since Jesus was born Hewbrew and lived under the Law of Moses, and since He endorsed the Law of Moses, and since the Law of Moses explicitly condemned homosexuality, then Jesus also condemned it.

Anyone who believes the New Testament doesn't condemn homosexuality is either reading some politically correct Cliff-Notes version or has the worst reading comprhension in the world.

Those that say they are christian and are supporting this bill are nothing more then bigots pro-porting a ruse to attempt to deflect their discriminatory viewpoints.

According to Webster's Dictionary, a bigot is "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance".

Christians are also a group; therefore, according to Webster's Dictionary and your intolerance toward Christians, you yourself are a bigot.

"The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer." - Albert Einstein.

Thank you for showing your ability to use a dictionary. However, you didn't understand my comment. I am not bashing or hating on Christians, I am saying that they are using Christianity as a veil of cover toward hatred.

I have nothing against Christians, I believe in God. I do however; have something against people who use religion as a shield for what is really hatred and discriminatory viewpoints.

Oh yeah, and Albert Einstein was agnostic, so that really doesn't help your argument. Next time do your homework a little more thoroughly.

I understand your comment that you "have something against people who use religion as a shield for what is really hatred and discriminatory viewpoints". I feel the same. However, we need to be sure that's what, in fact, they are actually doing, and not just assume they are.

I realize Einstein was an agnostic; however, his statement most closely epitomized my feeling that non-believers can be just as bigoted as believers. I was merely trying to make a point; I wasn't trying to specifically choose only quotes from believers.

Keep your sexual fetishes in the bedroom and you won't be perceived as bad for business.