coeyagi: CPennypacker: People who are pro gun rights hate it when idiots do stuff like this because it gives rise to reactions like this one that threaten their gun rights.

Guy is an idiot.

And they defend him rather than condemn him. Gun rights advocates who do nothing wrong with their guns but defend morons are the bigger idiots than this guy.

In which specific posting or postings did I offer a defense for the shooter's actions?

Satanic_Hamster: "At what point did this rule about worshiping Jesus come into effect? The day of Jesus' birth? The day of his death? X number of years after his death? At what point did the Grace period end and God started sending people to Hell for not worshiping Jesus. Also, there are communities in the world that did not even SEE a Christian until this century. Are you telling me that God has been sending them all to hell for close to 2000 years just because they've never heard of Jesus?"

And that's why, if anything, you could call me agnostic. I like the premise of religion; Be Excellent to One Another, I don't think God, or whatever you want to call Him is keeping notes on who kneels and stands in the right order, and who genuflects in the right direction. If there is a God, and he even cares, it's all got to be based on you as a person, or large portions of the Earth might as well just set up reservations in Hell from the day they're born, which is just stupid.

residentgeek: RTP_Sith: I have had two signs stolen, obviously by someone against this amendment. If figures, they have been spewing lies about the amendment since it was announced.

Everyone has the right to a belief and to vote their beliefs. It seems the left must also stoop to lying and stealing because they fear their argument about same-sex marriage is invalid. God ordained marriage as a man and a woman. If you deny God, He will deny you. An eternity is a long time to be wrong. God loves everyone. Repent and seek Him.

OK, I'll bite.

First, you'd have to show that opponents of the amendment are willfuly misrepresenting facts to call their objections 'lies.' I doubt you'll do so, but I'm calling you on your BS. Every instance of the problems that this amendment will create, not in the hypothetical, has been demonstrated by previous case law and actual judgements in other states that have passed these amendments. The proponents' answer? "Pssh, that stuff won't happen, nobody's that dumb."

Second, fark your attempt to force me to subscribe to your narrow world-view. I don't mind that you hold it, but I'll be farked if you're going to shove it down my throat, too.

/some things need to be said

residentgeek: RTP_Sith: I have had two signs stolen, obviously by someone against this amendment. If figures, they have been spewing lies about the amendment since it was announced.

Everyone has the right to a belief and to vote their beliefs. It seems the left must also stoop to lying and stealing because they fear their argument about same-sex marriage is invalid. God ordained marriage as a man and a woman. If you deny God, He will deny you. An eternity is a long time to be wrong. God loves everyone. Repent and seek Him.

OK, I'll bite.

First, you'd have to show that opponents of the amendment are willfuly misrepresenting facts to call their objections 'lies.' I doubt you'll do so, but I'm calling you on your BS. Every instance of the problems that this amendment will create, not in the hypothetical, has been demonstrated by previous case law and actual judgements in other states that have passed these amendments. The proponents' answer? "Pssh, that stuff won't happen, nobody's that dumb."

Second, fark your attempt to force me to subscribe to your narrow world-view. I don't mind that you hold it, but I'll be farked if you're going to shove it down my throat, too.

/some things need to be said

Excellent response.

I think the attempt to pass bans on gay marriage in various states is an attempt to subvert the assertion in the Declaration of Independence, that each person has a right to the pursuit of happiness, to manipulate the 10th amendment which assigns all rights not reserved to the U.S. government to the states or the people, to violate the separation of church and state and establish a theocracy.

RTP_Sith: Seems staged, it was probably placed there by one of his friends. If it was on his property or in the right-of-way adjacent to his property, he has the right to remove it per NC law. And depending on his county of residence and proximity to other dwellings, it could have been legal for him to discharge his firearm.

I have had two signs stolen, obviously by someone against this amendment. If figures, they have been spewing lies about the amendment since it was announced.

Everyone has the right to a belief and to vote their beliefs. It seems the left must also stoop to lying and stealing because they fear their argument about same-sex marriage is invalid. God ordained marriage as a man and a woman. If you deny God, He will deny you. An eternity is a long time to be wrong. God loves everyone. Repent and seek Him.

I am curious: does your evident mental retardation produce physical discomfort, or do you instead experience a continuous sensation of euphoria as a result of your diminished intellectual ability?

RTP_Sith: It seems the left must also stoop to lying and stealing because they fear their argument about same-sex marriage is invalid.

So this guy is a Leftie is what you're saying? He admits in the video that he stole the sign.

Or is it OK because he's on your side?

Wayne 985: For the record, was this reported to the police?

What is the crime? Shooting a sign in what is obviously on his fenced in property? That he has different thoughts then yours? You liberals need to calm down, we still have private property and no thought crime laws. I'm sure you guys will take care of that real soon though.

lordaction: Wayne 985: For the record, was this reported to the police?

What is the crime? Shooting a sign in what is obviously on his fenced in property? That he has different thoughts then yours? You liberals need to calm down, we still have private property and no thought crime laws. I'm sure you guys will take care of that real soon though.

Your established history of lying disqualifies you as a credible source of information.

Never record yourself doing crimes.
Never publish said recordings.
Uh... I mean... don't do crimes.
I'm going to vote this week, against this hateful, expensive albatross. There are some really nice parts of NC, but they're islands of sanity. Cross one bridge, and you're playing banjo with aunt momma and uncle daddy.

coeyagi: Dimensio: coeyagi: CPennypacker: People who are pro gun rights hate it when idiots do stuff like this because it gives rise to reactions like this one that threaten their gun rights.

Guy is an idiot.

And they defend him rather than condemn him. Gun rights advocates who do nothing wrong with their guns but defend morons are the bigger idiots than this guy.

In which specific posting or postings did I offer a defense for the shooter's actions?

I just looked through the entire thread. Neither I nor Cpennypacker was responding to you.... so.... relax?

You claimed that "they defend him". The pronoun "they" was in response to the previous subject of "People who are pro gun rights". I am a person who is "pro gun rights". Therefore, I am referenced by your use of the pronoun "they".

The NC Senate may as well propose another amendment requiring all state residents to breathe oxygen. With all of the apparent brain damage around here (signs of which the guy from the video seems to display), I'd say that's worth more time and taxpayer dollars than comforting the poor oppressed cowards who are afraid of things that can't hurt them.

If the votes go in favor of it, nothing will change other than its supporters thinking that they won another battle in the war against teh ghey. And what's that going to change? Nothing really.

People will continue to be homosexual. Homosexuals will still want to fight for their unions to be legally recognized... don't expect that to go away in any fashion as long as Americans are still allowed to have "rights" by the government. Heterosexual divorce rates will not be magically reduced by this amendment whether or not it's added. This section of the south will simply continue to be a shining paragon of discrimination, idiocy and backwater values.

farking pathetic.

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

Thanks for the demonstration.

Dimensio: lordaction: Wayne 985: For the record, was this reported to the police?

What is the crime? Shooting a sign in what is obviously on his fenced in property? That he has different thoughts then yours? You liberals need to calm down, we still have private property and no thought crime laws. I'm sure you guys will take care of that real soon though.

Your established history of lying disqualifies you as a credible source of information.

Translation: "I once again have no facts on my side so I'm going to call reality lies and resort to personal attacks when people point out the truth or have opinions different then my own."

I wish he hadn't blocked his Facebook page- I would have loved to piss him off to the max by calling him a damned Yankee!

Do you know the way to Mordor: I wish he hadn't blocked his Facebook page- I would have loved to piss him off to the max by calling him a damned Yankee!

Frankly, I'm just shocked to open the article and discover that the man in question was a conservative.

Ring of Fire: Wayne 985: Does anyone know how this bill is faring? It's sad to think, but I'm assuming it'll pass simply because it's North Carolina.

I haven't seen any polls and I'm to lazy to look it up but I can say from driving around and seeing signs I've probably seen about 15 to 20 signs aginst it for everyone for it.

The money is going against the amendment. I haven't seen any reliable polls. It will cost the state actual f*cking cash, if this turkey passes.

Mentat: It was self-defense. He was standing his ground against an aggressive sign.

From assaulting the barriers that kept his confusing feelings at bay!

In my (nearby, red) state you can carry a gun but you can be arrested if your shenanigans are done within 100 ft of a public road. I wonder if NC or the county in which this person resides has such a law.

Spasticus Autisticus: In my (nearby, red) state you can carry a gun but you can be arrested if your shenanigans are done within 100 ft of a public road. I wonder if NC or the county in which this person resides has such a law.

I own many guns but I am not a lawyer. That being said, my understanding of the law is that you can not discharge a firearm within city limits. Once outside the city limits, you can lean against your house in your neighborhood and shoot what you'd like as long as you do not endanger anyone else.

From the video, I'm not sure if he ensured that the down-range area was clear.

/He is still a moran for all intensive purposes

Not sure about the 100 foot rule but I know that you can not shoot deer from your vehicle on the road.

CSB if needed.

Should have known RTP_Sith would ring and run. Even if he was trolling, this needs to be hashed out.

Thanks, Lunaville. I am not entirely sold on Dominionism being an overt national push, but the effects of the many, local "evangelistic" efforts are the same.

/"good news," my foot

Elmo Jones: Ring of Fire: Wayne 985: Does anyone know how this bill is faring? It's sad to think, but I'm assuming it'll pass simply because it's North Carolina.

I haven't seen any polls and I'm to lazy to look it up but I can say from driving around and seeing signs I've probably seen about 15 to 20 signs aginst it for everyone for it.

The money is going against the amendment. I haven't seen any reliable polls. It will cost the state actual f*cking cash, if this turkey passes.

The last poll I saw showed the pro votes still leading the against votes, but the gap was closing quickly. It's going to come down to how many voters actually go vote on Tuesday, I think; the GOP was betting on a low turnout since it was mostly a Republican primary, but the announcement that Purdue wouldn't run for re-election and this amendment have changed the equation.

Dude is getting a citation.
Not that kind. No, not that one either. Nope, still not it.

Posting DIY crime videos on Facebook? It looks like there actually is such a thing as Felony Stupid.

I'm about to fax in my absentee ballot. Most of it doesn't matter(District 4), but I'm going to vote against the amendment.

That's the ONLY reason I'm sending it in.

randomjsa lives in my state. but he can be reasonable.

I don't know what to think. help me Jon Stewart, you're my only hope.

Ring of Fire: Wayne 985: Does anyone know how this bill is faring? It's sad to think, but I'm assuming it'll pass simply because it's North Carolina.

I haven't seen any polls and I'm to lazy to look it up but I can say from driving around and seeing signs I've probably seen about 15 to 20 signs aginst it for everyone for it.

I've seen a lot of "against" signs here too (I live in the Triad). in fact, I've only seen one "for" sign, and a "for" billboard.

the blue "vote no" signs confused me at first, because they say at the bottom "Triad People of Faith." I guess that shows my own prejudices about the religious. but good on them for trying to put the Christ back in Christianity.

Elmo Jones: Dude is getting a citation.
Not that kind. No, not that one either. Nope, still not it.

Public shaming is the only thing that works against closed minds. He "didn't realize" his intimidation video would be intimidating. Well, I'll take him at his word and let him go back into the bigot-closet.

Broad farking daylight, and they scurry like rats.

Elmo Jones: Dude is getting a citation.
Not that kind. No, not that one either. Nope, still not it.

I guess making him drive a crappy car is kind of justice.

/hot hot hot

quatchi: The GOP's Big Tent apparently has Saudi-esque morality police outside the door with small arms ready to shoot at anything that doesn't look white, straight, male, rich and Christian (prosperity gospel heretics only please).

Just when you think they've painted themselves into the tiniest corner possible they pull shiat like this.

*looks around*

Hey, where are the usual suspects to cry about how teh evil libs all wanna take this jackhole's 1st Amendment rights away?

/...or wotever their talking point on this is gonna be.

Well... you had GAT_00 reppin' for ya this time! (*snerk*)

Felgraf: salvador.hardin: Also, Helms would have been defeated 2 terms earlier if it were up to the natives. His numbers declined every term he was in office, but he got huge bumps in his final two terms from recent transplants that were sympathetic to his ultraconservative wackiness and/or susceptible to the groundbreaking negativity of his campaigns, and didn't appreciate the harm he did to the state's reputation. He was also a super nice charming guy who knew how to get things done for his constituents, which endeared him to a lot of individuals.

Yeah, though I wasn't really ever old enough to vote for or against him, I now have mixed feelings about Helms. I used to dislike him thoroughly...

And then I learned that one of the only reasons a friend of mine was in the US (adopted from Korea as a baby) was because he'd helped said friend's parents through some of the hoops. Even though he may have known they'd never vote for him. He seemed to actually believe it was important to help his constituents.

So, I dunno.

When you move from certainty to doubt in politics, you've basically achieved enlightenment. The next step is telling everyone whatever they want to hear and attaining office only for personal gain, but that's a little less enlightened.

lordaction: Dimensio: lordaction: Wayne 985: For the record, was this reported to the police?

What is the crime? Shooting a sign in what is obviously on his fenced in property? That he has different thoughts then yours? You liberals need to calm down, we still have private property and no thought crime laws. I'm sure you guys will take care of that real soon though.

Your established history of lying disqualifies you as a credible source of information.

Translation: "I once again have no facts on my side so I'm going to call reality lies and resort to personal attacks when people point out the truth or have opinions different then my own."

How the hell did you get off my troll list?

*fixes that problem PDQ*

You are really bad at this.

Hell, even RandomJSA was more reasonable on this.

/Your questuions have already been addressed more than once ITT, btw.

Hi all! Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I have a life outside Fark and the internet. I will try to respond to everyone in order. And I am sorry to disappoint you that I am real and not a troll.


Cythraul:
So he's going to hold a Buddhist who may have lived their entire life in a remote area of Asia, never having been exposed to the Christian Bible accountable for being a Buddhist?

God can do whatever He wants. He is sovereign. From my reading of the Bible, God knows the hearts of those that have not heard of salvation through Jesus Christ. ie, if they would have followed and submitted.

Lunaville:
While you are identifying yourself as a Christian, let us be extraordinarily clear that Christianity includes a huge, huge group of people: Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Coptic, Baptists, Methodists, Mormons, Quakers, Jehovah Witness, Amish, Mennonites, Episcopalian, Unitarians, Christian Universalist and on and on.

Some Christians adhere to the same view points that you do. Others suspect you may be destined to burn in your own hell, if you do not turn from hate, turn from rejecting, judging, and condemning, put your stones down, and learn that your priority, after loving the Lord thy G-d with all your heart, with all your soul, and all your strength, should be, per Christ, "Love one Another as I have loved you."

I am Christian also. I believe that all people are children of G-d. I believe that there is that of G-d in all people. And I believe that gay people have a human right to marry whom they choose. I favor full equal rights for gay people. I favor these rights because I think it is the right thing to do and because I think it is the Christian thing to do.

Several of those that you mention do not adhere to the teachings of Jesus and the Bible. They have distorted the word of God. If you want to know what the Bible says, read it...all of it. Then find a church that teaches it. There are many churches that do not hold fast to the word of God, so please be cautious.

But God clearly states in the Old and New Testament that homosexuality is an abomination. It is a sin that goes against God and nature as He created it. God loves everyone, but He hates sin. I can love someone without condoning their action. Jesus told sinners to repent and sin no more. Homosexuals are welcome and encouraged to follow Christ. They cannot if they choose to continue to live in sin. This is not from me but from God. I harbor no ill feelings towards homosexuals. I do hope and pray that they would come to know the same Christ that I know. My love for them, like Jesus' love, is to save them from Hell. Your love approves of their action and condemns then forever. I can see someone drive through a red traffic signal and know that they broke the law with judging them. Some things are obvious.


CJHardin:
So the Buddhists will be held accountable for being Buddhists and your god will lovingly send them to burn in hell because they do not worship your particular deity?

/People with invisible friends are stupid and should be mocked publicly and loudly.
//Keep your invisible man and self righteous illusionist out of my government.

Buddhist reply above.
God established government. Christians are allowed the same rights to vote and be active in promoting their beliefs. That is one reason we have separate states. So each state can make laws according to their, and their citizen's, beliefs. People are free to live an a state that supports and promotes their beliefs.


Cythraul:
I'm pretty sure he is a troll. Or at least, I hope he/she is. The 'RTP' (Research Triangle Park, in NC) in the name probably suggests otherwise. Thought I'd put that out there in case others decide whether or not to respond to him/her.

Research Triangle Park is correct, but I am not a troll.


CapeFearCadaver:
Good. Because your 'decision' places me directly harm's way. I hope that you can live with yourself when my psychotic stalker realizes I have no more protection from him and decides to burn my house down while I sleep.

/single, hard-working, professional woman in my 30's
//individual religious views hold absolutely no bearing on Constitutional law.
\Discrimination in any form is bad, mmkay?

This is one of the scare tactics that the left is using. If this amendment passes, no law will be changed. You will be afforded the same protection under the law that you currently have. I'll post the actual amendment below.
//Many of our fundamental laws came from God.
\No discrimination. A homosexual man cannot marry another man, a straight man cannot marry another man. The law is equal.


residentgeek:
OK, I'll bite.

First, you would have to show that opponents of the amendment are willfuly misrepresenting facts to call their objections 'lies.' I doubt you will do so, but I am calling you on your BS. Every instance of the problems that this amendment will create, not in the hypothetical, has been demonstrated by previous case law and actual judgements in other states that have passed these amendments. The proponents' answer? "Pssh, that stuff will not happen, nobody is that dumb."

Second, fark your attempt to force me to subscribe to your narrow world-view. I do not mind that you hold it, but I will be farked if you're going to shove it down my throat, too.

/some things need to be said

The actual amendment. "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."
The opposition is saying that widows will have to remarry to have insurance, continue to receive benefits and draw social security. They claim that single women will no longer be afforded their right to protection under the law. They claim that children will be striped of their insurance. All lies.

As is stands in NC, marriage is between a man and a woman. But a law can be challenged and changed by one activist. That is hardly fair. If the amendment passes, it will add the definition to the constitution thus protecting it. If it does not pass, the law will still be in place, although susceptible to change.

I have the same right to vote and further my belief, the same as you. It still holds true that the majority of Americans do not agree with or condone homosexuality. Due to the extremely small percentage of people that are homosexuals, it is thus a deviant behavior and will not be excepted in all areas. I am glad that there are areas and states that do support them, and I am glad that I do not live there. As a Christian, I love everyone. I would never harm anyone. I wish them no ill will.

I served 5 honorable years in the military to protect our freedom, including your freedom to speak, have a belief and to further your causes. That is what makes America great.


Dimensio:
I am curious: does your evident mental retardation produce physical discomfort, or do you instead experience a continuous sensation of euphoria as a result of your diminished intellectual ability?

My IQ is 148, and I ham quite happy abiding in the LORD.


Mikey1969:
So this guy is a Leftie is what you are saying? He admits in the video that he stole the sign.

Or is it OK because he's on your side?

Sorry, I kept the sound down when I watched the video. I could barely understand an occasional word.


residentgeek:
Should have known RTP_Sith would ring and run. Even if he was trolling, this needs to be hashed out.

Thanks, Lunaville. I am not entirely sold on Dominionism being an overt national push, but the effects of the many, local "evangelistic" efforts are the same.

/"good news," my foot

Sorry to disappoint you. I am quite real.

And coming up next, there's a two-figure bidding war for Alex Wiles hot gay sex vid.

"So, somebody decided it'd be a good idea to put their penis near my mouth. They outta know not to put stuff like that near my mouth."

RTP_Sith: Hi all! Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I have a life outside Fark and the internet. I will try to respond to everyone in order. And I am sorry to disappoint you that I am real and not a troll.

TBH, I'm rather grateful that you took the time to do so. Thanks. I'll address your comment in parts.

The actual amendment. "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."
The opposition is saying that widows will have to remarry to have insurance, continue to receive benefits and draw social security. They claim that single women will no longer be afforded their right to protection under the law. They claim that children will be striped of their insurance. All lies.

Like I said, you haven't addressed the points by saying anything except that they are lies. The line below the ballot text, the bit about the "contracts," is superfluous. Here's what I mean when I say that each of these points is backed up by concrete evidence, and maybe you can take a cue from that:

PDF from UNC Law school

As is stands in NC, marriage is between a man and a woman. But a law can be challenged and changed by one activist. That is hardly fair. If the amendment passes, it will add the definition to the constitution thus protecting it. If it does not pass, the law will still be in place, although susceptible to change.

How would one man marrying another man harm your marriage, or anyone else's? What specifically about heterosexual marriage requires that bona fide discrimination against other marriages be written into the constitution?

I have the same right to vote and further my belief, the same as you. It still holds true that the majority of Americans do not agree with or condone homosexuality. Due to the extremely small percentage of people that are homosexuals, it is thus a deviant behavior and will not be excepted in all areas. I am glad that there are areas and states that do support them, and I am glad that I do not live there. As a Christian, I love everyone. I would never harm anyone. I wish them no ill will.

I'm not saying you don't have the right to vote. I'm saying that your vote, based on your interpretively Christian conscience is an act of harm to the freedoms of a non-trivial percentage of North Carolinians who don't believe in your religion, and aren't obligated to (and, indeed, many who share your faith as well). We shouldn't need to kowtow to a line in the Bible we don't even subscribe to--and your gentle arrogance that we should, just because enough of you say so, is what the First Amendment was intended to protect against.

I served 5 honorable years in the military to protect our freedom, including your freedom to speak, have a belief and to further your causes. That is what makes America great.

Good for you, thanks for your service, etc. That has absolutely no bearing on the discussion.

CapeFearCadaver: RTP_Sith


Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.


Your IQ is 148, and yet you still cannot grasp reading comprehension, have absolutely no foresight and hold no skills in deductive logic... Ok.


/my IQ is bigger than yours
//nanny nanny boo boo :P

There are still basic laws and rights for roommates, whether intimate or not, to afford them protection. That will not change. General statute 50B-1 does not depend on the marital status of the victim or her relationship to the abuser. Cut and dry.

/good for you
//I'll bet your teacher is proud.
///school will get harder when you hit middle school.:p

Cythraul: RTP_Sith: Hi all! Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I have a life outside Fark and the internet. I will try to respond to everyone in order. And I am sorry to disappoint you that I am real and not a troll.

Oh, okay. Well then I'll just take you off my 'troll' list and put you on my 'idiot' list.

I'll gladly be an idiot for the LORD, Who's idiot are you?

Cythraul: residentgeek:

Give it up. RTP_Sith is a passive-aggressive, religious, completely closed-minded nutbag. I've tried to argue with people like this before. There literally is no fact you could offer them that would make them change their literalist religious beliefs. He, or she, will continue to be willfully ignorant the rest of their life. Move on to a more open-minded target. Someone more capable of reason.

Call it tilting at windmills, but I can't judge the guy. I don't know him. He's come to the table; why spit in his face? At least I might learn something about religious thinking for the future.

Feel free to check out. But winning hearts and minds means recognizing that the "other" has a heart and a mind, too. We might just win this thing.

residentgeek:
RTP_Sith: Hi all! Sorry it took me so long to respond, but I have a life outside Fark and the internet. I will try to respond to everyone in order. And I am sorry to disappoint you that I am real and not a troll.

TBH, I'm rather grateful that you took the time to do so. Thanks. I'll address your comment in parts.

The actual amendment. "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."
The opposition is saying that widows will have to remarry to have insurance, continue to receive benefits and draw social security. They claim that single women will no longer be afforded their right to protection under the law. They claim that children will be striped of their insurance. All lies.

Like I said, you haven't addressed the points by saying anything except that they are lies. The line below the ballot text, the bit about the "contracts," is superfluous. Here's what I mean when I say that each of these points is backed up by concrete evidence, and maybe you can take a cue from that: A

PDF from UNC Law school

As is stands in NC, marriage is between a man and a woman. But a law can be challenged and changed by one activist. That is hardly fair. If the amendment passes, it will add the definition to the constitution thus protecting it. If it does not pass, the law will still be in place, although susceptible to change.

How would one man marrying another man harm your marriage, or anyone else's? What specifically about heterosexual marriage requires that bona fide discrimination against other marriages be written into the constitution? B

I have the same right to vote and further my belief, the same as you. It still holds true that the majority of Americans do not agree with or condone homosexuality. Due to the extremely small percentage of people that are homosexuals, it is thus a deviant behavior and will not be excepted in all areas. I am glad that there are areas and states that do support them, and I am glad that I do not live there. As a Christian, I love everyone. I would never harm anyone. I wish them no ill will.

I'm not saying you don't have the right to vote. I'm saying that your vote, based on your interpretively Christian conscience is an act of harm to the freedoms of a non-trivial percentage of North Carolinians who don't believe in your religion, and aren't obligated to (and, indeed, many who share your faith as well). We shouldn't need to kowtow to a line in the Bible we don't even subscribe to--and your gentle arrogance that we should, just because enough of you say so, is what the First Amendment was intended to protect against. C

I served 5 honorable years in the military to protect our freedom, including your freedom to speak, have a belief and to further your causes. That is what makes America great.

Good for you, thanks for your service, etc. That has absolutely no bearing on the discussion. D

A. 1. The Marriage Amendment Will Not Affect The Enforcement Of Domestic Violence Laws. Opponents would have you think the Amendment obliterates our domestic violence law. The cases they use as authority are Ohio appellate cases later overturned by the Ohio Supreme Court which found the domestic violence statutes consistent with the state's marriage amendment. In Kansas the outcome was the same. Marriage amendments have had no effect on the enforcement of domestic violence statutes. 30 other states have marriage amendments. In all 30 states domestic violence laws continue to be enforced.

2. Legally Recognizing Only Heterosexual Marriage Isn't Discrimination Against Homosexuals Wanting To Marry. Marriage between a man and a woman has existed in virtually every known society. It has served the purpose of channeling procreative sexual activity into an institution which will provide a stable environment for children produced from the sexual union of the partners in marriage. Recognizing that heterosexual marriage has provided the best environment for the rearing of future citizens North Carolina has regulated marriage for at least 340 years. Same sex marriage is an entirely different relationship with a completely different purpose. Expanding the marital institution to other relationships which serve completely different purposes ultimately undermines the institution which has proven to be the best and safest environment for children.

3. The Amendment Will Not Nullify Medical Powers of Attorney (MPOAs), Wills and Trusts if the parties are homosexual partners.
Under G.S. 32A-18 "any competent person who is not engaged in providing health care to the principal for renumeration, and who is 18 years of age or older, may act as a health care agent." The relationship between the patient and the designated agent does not matter. The intent of the testator and trustor is the "gold standard" in NC for interpreting wills and trusts. The Amendment does not change the intent of the testator in either type of these instruments. The Amendment explicitly states that it will not affect the rights of parties to enter into private contractual agreements.

4. The Marriage Amendment Will Not Determine the Custody and Visitation Rights of Unmarried Parents Unless Their Behavior Affects the Child. Custody orders are based on the "parent"/child relationship, not on the domestic relationship between the "parents". Courts have based custody and visitation on the "best interest of the child." NCGS 50-13.2(2007) The sexual behavior of the party petitioning for custody or visitation is not determinative except as it affects the child.

The "de facto parenting doctrine" was applied in 2010 in Boseman v. Jarrell. The Supreme Court refused to allow adoption to an unmarried same sex partner but did award joint custody and visitation rights to that non-biological same sex partner who had become a de facto parent to the child.

B Would it harm McDonalds if another burger joint opened up and offered a completely different product and called themselves McDonalds?

C There shall be no government mandated religion. That does not mean that the majority and their religion will not find its way into the government.

D I merely pointed out that I honor and support you and your voice. It seems that Christians are not afforded the same privilege.

RTP_Sith:

Concerning A, That's just copypasta of Skip Stam doing the same denial you're doing. Domestic abusers walked free in Ohio, or had their convictions overturned The later ruling of "consistency" did for battered women thanks to the amendment. If you don't think that won't happen hear, think again.

Concerning B, a loving, committed relationship is the same between heterosexual and homosexual couples. A marriage is not a burger joint. Care to try again?

Concerning C, but it does mean that majority can't enforce its religion on us non-believers through government mechanisms. Care to try again?

Concerning D, thanks for the honor. By continuing this discussion I have honored yours as well. Please don't feign victimization. It suits you ill.

Concerning A, That's just copypasta of Skip Stam doing the same denial you're doing. Domestic abusers walked free in Ohio, or had their convictions overturned The later ruling of "consistency" did nothing for battered women thanks to the amendment. If you don't think that won't happen here, think again.

Woops, I got a little hasty. FTFM.

residentgeek: RTP_Sith:

Concerning A, That's just copypasta of Skip Stam doing the same denial you're doing. Domestic abusers walked free in Ohio, or had their convictions overturned The later ruling of "consistency" did for battered women thanks to the amendment. If you don't think that won't happen hear, think again.

Concerning B, a loving, committed relationship is the same between heterosexual and homosexual couples. A marriage is not a burger joint. Care to try again?

Concerning C, but it does mean that majority can't enforce its religion on us non-believers through government mechanisms. Care to try again?

Concerning D, thanks for the honor. By continuing this discussion I have honored yours as well. Please don't feign victimization. It suits you ill.

This is not Ohio. Our citizens are afforded the same protection under the law regardless of their marital status, or lack thereof. That will not change.

Reducing marriage to something other than the union that God ordained does mitigate its covenant nature. Would you like for someone to steal your identity? We don't want our covenant with God diminished. Marriage was ordained to honor God and to reproduce.

Like it or not, if the amendment passes that is exactly what will happen.

Your are welcome.

RTP_Sith:

This is not Ohio. Our citizens are afforded the same protection under the law regardless of their marital status, or lack thereof. That will not change.

Indeed, it's not Ohio. In fact, the term domestic legal union is completely fabricated language that appears nowhere in NC law. Given that law is based on specific terminology, how would you say that this amendment is not subject to heavy and potentially incorrect interpretation?

Reducing marriage to something other than the union that God ordained does mitigate its covenant nature. Would you like for someone to steal your identity? We don't want our covenant with God diminished. Marriage was ordained to honor God and to reproduce.

So don't get gay-married. That's how you don't diminish your covenant with your (not my) God. Are you saying that atheists, also, aren't married? Because guess what, that's also recognized by the state of North Carolina.

Like it or not, if the amendment passes that is exactly what will happen.

I've already asked you how. You've responded with simple assertions. Again: how would two men getting married undermine your marriage? What determines the authority of your religion over marriage? Are all religions that are not Christian able to marry people? Why should 2/3 of the world be excluded from something as fundamental and basic to human sociology as marriage?

Simply put: marriage doesn't belong to religion only; otherwise, atheists would not be able to marry. I'd like to see some support for your assertion that it does.

Satanic_Hamster: RTP_Sith: God established government. Christians are allowed the same rights to vote and be active in promoting their beliefs. That is one reason we have separate states. So each state can make laws according to their, and their citizen's, beliefs. People are free to live an a state that supports and promotes their beliefs.

Hmmm. Really going to have to go with: "LOLWAT."

Pretty sure Man established government.

Romans 13:1 Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.

I choose to act according to the law to further my beliefs and causes. I do not condone violence toward homosexuals or abortion clinics or anything else with which I disagree. But I will act to change those things within my legal rights and ability.