[The below ballot measure voted on later this week goes along with Romney's foreign policy adviser resigning after he was left to dry in the midst of conservative attacks arising from his sexuality. The guy left something to be desired, including sexist comments made about Rachel Maddow, but this is a "seriously?" moment.]
Chris Hayes yesterday had Rev. Jasmine Brach-Ferrara, executive director of the Campaign for Southern Equality to discuss the matter (see link above), underlining the religious connection here. Some appeal to religious beliefs to limit rights here, but as with other areas, it actually can work the other way, including an equal right to make the private religious, spiritual and moral choices at stake here. They still can privately do such things in this context, but note the resulting burden if they have the "wrong" beliefs, love the wrong people and so forth. This is simply wrong.
I hope the people of NC draw some sort of line here. Some sanity.
Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State. This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts.
-- Proposed NC Constitutional AmendmentA decade ago, Nebraska passed such a "beyond marriage" amendment, which goes beyond simple legislation to ban official recognition of a lot more than same sex marriage. Sort of bigotry on steroids. I noted this when discussing a federal court upholding the Nebraska amendment, including "a civil union, domestic partnership, or other similar same-sex relationship." Thus, as noted by Chris Hayes yesterday (and MHP), even some anti-SSM types think this goes too far.
Full equality should be the rule here, even second class citizenship is violated here. A major concern of the amendment is to prevent the need to give full faith and credit to out of state same sex marriages or perhaps other such relationships. But, the amendment is overbroad in that respect, since allowing same sex couples to have "marriage-lite" type unions such as domestic partnerships with various rights does not require that, lesser protections that many now say they are okay with, even if they oppose SSM. In fact, some want that sort of marriage alternative for different sex couples. Finally, this goes beyond "private contracts" because state based privileges and immunities are involved here.
Chris Hayes yesterday had Rev. Jasmine Brach-Ferrara, executive director of the Campaign for Southern Equality to discuss the matter (see link above), underlining the religious connection here. Some appeal to religious beliefs to limit rights here, but as with other areas, it actually can work the other way, including an equal right to make the private religious, spiritual and moral choices at stake here. They still can privately do such things in this context, but note the resulting burden if they have the "wrong" beliefs, love the wrong people and so forth. This is simply wrong.
I hope the people of NC draw some sort of line here. Some sanity.