North Carolina is going after a gay marriage ban now. I expect we’re going to be seeing this move all over the place, as a lot of rethugs and Christians are now convinced they can kill same sex marriage everywhere now that they broke all the rules to get Gorsuch on the court. Right now, it doesn’t look it did much good to oust McCrory.
Raleigh, N.C. — A bill filed Tuesday in the state House would outlaw same-sex marriage in North Carolina and refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.
According to House Bill 780, the state would declare that the federal government is not legally authorized to regulate marriage. Therefore, the state’s 2012 constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage would remain in effect.
The proposal presumes that the state could simply refuse to recognize the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. According to the bill, that ruling “exceeds the authority of the Court relative to the decree of Almighty God that ‘a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh’ (Genesis 2:24, ESV) and abrogates the clear meaning and understanding of marriage in all societies throughout prior history.”
The bill’s primary sponsor, Rep. Larry Pittman, R-Cabarrus, is a Christian minister. He refused to comment on the legislation he filed.
The bill’s second sponsor, Rep. Michael Speciale, R-Craven, first denied that the bill would outlaw same-sex marriage in the state, then said that, since the constitutional amendment remains on the books despite the Supreme Court ruling, state lawmakers should “do something about it.” He declined to say what action that should be, and he turned down an interview request, accusing reporters of misrepresenting his positions in earlier stories.
Well, there’s rabid Christians for you – their uptight view of things, based on their particular book of psychopathic myths, everyone must comply! I have one simple answer to that one: Fuck No. It would be past nice if Christians would figure out, once and for all, that not everyone believes the same shit they do.
Full story at WRAL.
I think they do realize it. They would just like to force their beliefs onto everyone else. Their freedom of religion, speech, etc. at the expense of yours and mine.
Social justice warriors care more about a bit of paper than the fact over 60% of baby boys have their genitals mutilated for a profit. So sick of you hypocrites.
I’m an atheist and I completely disagree with gay marriage. Mind you, I’m not a naive idealistic libertarian/liberal who opposes all rules and thinks everyone should be able to do whatever they want. I take individuals into account but I also take the collective into account. Liberals and libertarians are like Margaret Thatcher. They think there’s no such thing as society.
That was the weirdest jump to “but what about teh menz” by bringing up a completely unrelated topic that I think I’ve seen in quite a while. Congratulations, Lawrence Newman.
Tabby, great deflection there.
Baby boys (many of whom are going to be homosexual) are strapped down and sexually suppressed by having their primary erogenous organ cut off, causing ED and lack of sexual pleasure for life, so certain religionists can get their jollies and for a profit , too.
But let’s ignore that men (many of whom are gay) are victims of this illegal human rights abuse and focus on the so much more important topic of homosexuals being able to obtain a bit of paper with marriage written on it.
You’re right, Tabby. Don’t mind me. I’m clearly talking nonsense …. It’s a completely unrelated topic because homosexual men being able to engage in sexual activity isn’t a right ……. hur
“Tabby, great deflection there. ”
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHA AHAHAHAHAHA!!! :D
“You’re right, Tabby. Don’t mind me. I’m clearly talking nonsense …. It’s a completely unrelated topic…”
If you edit it down to that, you’d be correct.
Lawrence Newman @ 2 and 3:
Wow, you’re quite the specimen. For the record, I’m opposed to circumcision of children across the board. If a person reaches a sufficient age to decide that for themselves, fine. I’ve been on the record with that one, always, and certainly for the last over a quarter century I’ve been on the ‘net, cupcake. So, you don’t win your hypocrisy point there. What this has to do with marriage, I don’t know. You are aware that all people who marry don’t want kids, right? I would be one of those people.
Yes, yes, you’re an atheist. Right. I see you’re incapable of providing your reasoning for such an unreasonable stance. Unless you oppose marriage altogether, and reject it as a concept. Not seeing that. “The Collective”? Where do you think you are, dear, an episode of Star Trek?
Okay fine, let’s talk “collective”. I do believe in society, we’re social animals. Some of us do better with the whole society concept than others. Frinst., America sucks at it. Marriage is a societal concept, and no, it’s not “a piece of paper”. FFS, I thought that one went out in the 1970s. I was right there with the whole “we don’t need a piece of paper, man!” times. Card carrying hippie here. If that’s all marriage was, there wouldn’t be any problem, would there, you fuckwit? Unfortunately, it’s a knot of legalities, many of which provide serious benefits, which cannot be bestowed on a partner without the blessing of legality.
Okay, enough time spent on you, I have better things to do than attempt to educate a fuckwitted, willful dipshit.
Lawrence Fuckwit!
‘Scuse me, I’m Caine. I’m the blog owner, so pay the fuck attention.
Penises, which are a primary sexual and reproductive organ are not cut off. If you’re going to lie like that, you’ll have to leave, understood? Also, Mr. “Imma Atheist”, the main reason for male circumcision today is habit and specious health/cleanliness reasons, which are bullshit, but a great many circumcisions are carried out by secular parents, you fucking idiot.
No one is ignoring anything. That said, you seem to have missed that this post is not about circumcision. For you, cupcake: THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT CIRCUMCISION. IT IS ABOUT SAME SEX MARRIAGE, WHICH DOES NOT JUST AFFECT MEN.
As for those gay men you are so worried about, why don’t you give a fuck that many of them would like the legal right to marry, without having assholes trying to take that right away every 5 seconds?
Now, the official stuff: If you post about circumcision one more time, you are outta here.
Caine, YOU’RE opposed to circumcision across the board but anecdotes don’t trump the general rule. Homosexuals march the streets for the right to gay marriage. I don’t see them in anything like these numbers protesting the far more important issue of the illegal profit-making mass genital mutilation of males.
I’m against gay marriage because I believe marriage between men and women was the building block of civilisation. In isolation, gay marriage may not seem like a big deal, but it’s the thin end of the wedge. It’s everything it’s connected to, e.g. pretending a man can be a woman and vice versa, transracialism (WTF), 80 genders, gay adoption, etc. Society is losing its mind because of ….. I’m not sure what to call them …. cultural marxists? Liberals? Progressives? Take your pick.
I’m not opposed to change. Not all traditions are good, e.g. circumcision. But change for the sake of change is typical of the progressive mindset. If you disagree, you’re a “reactionary”. I just wasn’t aware that the majority of homosexuals desperately wanted to get married. Oh wait, maybe that’s because they never were.
Bye. -Caine.
oops
Bye-bye Lawrence Newman
Oh, I’ve got a feeling he may end up not being able to reply to this, but I have to address it anyway…
Could it be that gay men are able to decide what’s more important to them and their lives at any given time? Maybe most are more concerned right now that their relationships get the full protection of the law?
Also, I don’t think you know what “illegal” means.
I have to say I’m rather amused by the appearance of
AND
in the same post. FFS, what a messy mind.
Damn! I go away for a couple of hours to do some actual work. Checked back in at lunchtime, and . . . WTF?! That wasn’t even out of left field; it was from the soccer game in the next state.
Johnson catman, I think we left the country on that one! :D
Wow. So the Lawrence Newman post has a lot of strange things in it, but this jumped out at me for some reason: Gay marriage is a thin wedge? A man might “pretend” to be a woman? And then… next utter chaos, I guess? We have pretty much utter chaos and it was not caused by gay marriage. It was caused by hatred and bigotry. What difference does it make if someone that you think of as a “man” is actually a woman? Or whatever? How does that affect society in the slightest? Gah. Not sorry to see this one go.
A little more on topic: “According to the bill, that ruling “exceeds the authority of the Court relative to the decree of Almighty God” ”
which made me stop and ponder: which one? Here’s an idea: get all the religious people in NC together, and 1. have them in a room to come up with one definition of god, and 2. when they can come up with one definition with things like characteristics etc. that they *all* agree on, great, we’ll go with that one. Somehow I don’t think we would ever get to step two on this one, though.
Speaking as a straight, married, circumcised man, if someone offered to restore my foreskin but told me I’d have to tear up my marriage (and all the rights therewith) in return, I’d tell them to fuck right off.
Oh. The building block of civilization? White European civilization, you mean? Seeing as so many other cultures out there don’t adhere to the current religiously favoured model of marriage or definition of ‘family’?
I also wonder how it was that marriage made civilization -- I don’t recall much out there about all those married couples working together to find common solutions to big issues involving large social groups. I always thought there was some other method of civilization-building at work, my bad. :P
(For the record, against circumcision here, too. Except for explicitly medical emergencies or a choice made as a consenting adult fully aware of the consequences.)
rq:
That rationalization irks the hell out of me, because for many ‘civilizations’, marriage was a means to express the very worst of misogyny. Women were little more than property to the Romans, those great civilization builders, something to be handed down from a father to a husband -- “here’s your new owner, dear.”
Caine, #17
I have a feeling this dude is perfectly fine with misogyny too.
Yup, I was right.
It’s people like Lawrence who give atheists a bad name.
Damn it, Saad! Now I can see his albums and his profile pictures are… enlightening. He REALLY likes Nigel Farage.
And yup, throw racism in there with the homophobia and misogyny.
Yeah, he has some scary shit in there. Anyone who holds up Elliot Rodger as an ideal, yikes.
It’s funny how the very people who hold up heterosexual marriage as The Most Important Thing Ever™ also always think that it’s the most fragile thing to exist. Something you need to protect soooo much. Something that is so good, you literally need to force people into it or they’d miss how good it is.
Me, evil liberal cultural and literal Marxist, cis and mostly hetero and also heterosexually married with children, on the other hand, am completely calm about the prospect and fact that people can marry whom they love, give children a loving home or live as their actual gender regardless of anatomy and assignment. NOne of that threatens me the least.
Funny, the earlier troll never bothered to show evidence that the Redhead’s gay cousin marrying his long time partner had any effect of on either his marriage, or that of the Redhead and myself. They never bother with evidence. But the get a few feet off the ground with all that handwaving. Pitiful display of bigotry.
You perfidious, unmitigated dastard, Caine! You thawed Lawrence Newman’s peach!
I had to fish a couple of comments out of the spam filter, and saw that li’l Lawrence posted several more times. He’s also anti-choice (anyone surprised?), and seems to think I was triggered by his bigotry. Tsk. I imagine he’s fuming over not having the last 1,000 words.
Why is it these doorknobs never seem to know what “triggered” actually means? For some reason they just think it refers to someone being angry and/or upset.
But then, this particular doorknob kept misusing “illegal” as well, so I’m not too surprised here.
Oh, Lawrence is the type to pick up what he thinks are buzzwords, and put his own definition on them, but you know that. I’m never surprised that anyone like Lawrence can’t ever manage to refresh a thread and read first. If the fuckwit had done that, and not brought up circumcision again, he might have managed to stay around a bit longer.
Caine @27: Haha, it is fine with me the way things worked out. :-)
And thank you for fishing my comment out of Spam Hell. It was getting hot in there. :-D
Au yes, compulsory heteronormativity and forced reproduction for cis women and others with uteri. The only way those guys can get what they want because nobody will put up with them if they have a choice.
And it’s of course telling about the integrity of which type of bodies he is worried, granting that his concern about circumcision be true and not just a poor attempt at gotcha.
I wonder if straight people were all of a sudden banned from marrying, would they be criticized for marching for their right to marry while circumcisions are still a thing?
But wait, how can you march against circumcisions if domestic abuse is still a thing!?!
Oh, no.. wait.. how can you work to prevent domestic abuse while school bullying is still a thing???
AAAAAAHHHH
This is the idiot that filed the bill in the NC General Assembly: http://www.wral.com/nc-lawmaker-likens-lincoln-scotus-to-hitler/16640853/
So sad that we have such people that get elected in the state. At least the House Speaker, even though he is a republican, commented here on the bill:
In other idiot NC republican news, they are trying to keep the NCAA and ACC from “interfering” in NC politics, and want to force the state schools to withdraw from the conference if the conference tries to make a political stand: http://www.wral.com/nc-lawmakers-take-shots-at-ncaa-acc-/16640487/
Fortunately, I heard on the news this morning that the State of California is not going to lift its ban on travel to NC because the repeal of HB2 left some odious restrictions in place. Good for them.