That's okay, I'm sure they don't want all that gay money anyway.

sammyk: The RTP area voted against. Same with Charlotte, Asheville and any place you may want to visit as a tourist. You will never hurt the hicks that voted for this with a boycott. They actually take pride in being unsophisticated dirt poor knuckle dragger's. Besides, banking is one of our biggest industries and you all have switched to credit unions anyway.

It's not just the hicks - don't congratulate yourself for living in the state's oasis of tolerance. Voter turnout in the cities was terrible. The vast majority of the population in the RTP area, Charlotte, Asheville etc. did not come out to vote.

92,503 voted against Amendment 1 in Mecklenburg county. It has a population of 944,373. So less than 10% of Mecklenburg county wanted to prevent the passage of a truly awful constitutional amendment. Granted, not all of that 944,373 would have been registered voters, but that is atrocious turnout. It was actually in the bottom 10 for turnout in the state.

Or Wake County. 900,993 people. 139,020 votes against - 105,900, for. That really speaks to the overwhelming motivation of the urban educated class to act against discrimination coming from the "hicks", doesn't it? And that pattern is the same across the state, where turnout among the top 10 "No" counties averages 36%, which is only just slightly higher than the state-wide turnout of about 34.3%. The results in these counties is a lot closer than you would expect for urban areas that might tend to lean liberal.

So overall, when it comes the urban, more educated centers of North Carolina where the No vote carried the county, 64% of registered voters abstained from voting. An abstention when the polls show a near guaranteed win for the Yes side means exactly one thing: a ready acceptance of the outcome.

Carth: That is crazy. I could never figure out why more American's don't have a passport I guess that is one of the reasons.

I think it's simpler than that. My guess is that most just don't travel, even within the country. It would be interesting to see some data on how many Americans have a passport and use it.

This infographic is interesting but I don't know how valid it is and it has no bearing on whether the passports are actually being used.

/Has a passport and an enhanced ID
//Has used both in the last year

What is the homosexual population? Two percent? What percentage of that population want to marry? .05 percent? Drtfa, but it doesn't seem logical that such a small population would make an impact on any economy.

beefoe: Gay marriage is only recognized in six states so NC is clearly in the mainstream of the 51 states that don't recognize it.

51 states?

how does gay anything become a presidential issue, sheesh children!!

Mrs. Beasley: But, to reiterate: if you can vote, you'd better damn do so, or you're letting a bunch of mouth breathers like this particular 34% decide policy.

To restate what I said above, they're perfectly content to let the mouth breathers set policy. That is a political stance in itself. It's a cop-out political stance, but it's a stance. They may not bother to get to the polls, but they're fine with what gets decided there; they just don't want to have to take direct responsibility for it. This was a single issue election. They can't claim that they voted Republican because of taxes or they held off because both sides are bad or they really wanted to vote Ron Paul. There was one issue, everyone knew it was going to carry the day, and in that scenario, anyone who didn't use the power they had to vote no was approving the outcome with a yes vote by omission.

51 states, been listening to BO.

worthlessjuan: how does gay anything become a presidential issue, sheesh children!!

Um,

You are retarded.

;)

I'm Too Old For This Shiat: Carth: That is crazy. I could never figure out why more American's don't have a passport I guess that is one of the reasons.

I think it's simpler than that. My guess is that most just don't travel, even within the country. It would be interesting to see some data on how many Americans have a passport and use it.

This infographic is interesting but I don't know how valid it is and it has no bearing on whether the passports are actually being used.

/Has a passport and an enhanced ID
//Has used both in the last year

Thanks that is a cool infographic. It makes sense the states nearer Canada/Mexico have higher % passport holders. Except New Mexico whose residents apparently don't ever leave the state.

Carth:

If ability to procreate were an important part of the definition of marriage the elderly, sterile or voluntarily celibate wouldn't be allowed to wed. I agree that until recently marriage was more of a contractual dealing then something out of love, however since the SCOTUS ruled in 1967 that "Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival." that argument is no longer valid since marriage is and should be treated as right not something to be denied and granted to couples a state decides.



Yes, but the 1967 trial that is so often referred to considered marriage between a man and a woman and it was 'fundamental to our very existence and survival' because without marriage there would be no social construct for procreation. Maybe instead of reading the abridged version you should read the case this line is referred from: Skinner vs Oklahoma which states:

"But the instant legislation runs afoul of the equal protection clause, though we give Oklahoma that large deference which the rule of the foregoing cases requires. We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. "

You also have to take in context the racial segregation of the U.S. Even before the civil war, interracial marriages were commonplace. When Eugenics and racial segregation came into context and these marriages were suddenly not allowed, there was a right taken away. The court overturned the rule because they considered a man and a woman marrying a right that was being denied.

So, from this context, Miscegenation and Gay Marriage are two completely separate issues.

Diogenes: Why should it matter? Should you compromise on your morals when they become economically inconvenient?

The ban is a huge crock of BS. But the people behind it, I would imagine, aren't going to be significantly swayed by this argument. If they were to be, it would be evidence that they're motivated purely by bigotry and not some so-called moral objections.

In my experience, there are two kinds of bigots: the ones who are proud of being bigots, and the ones who think they aren't bigots.

In racial terms, for example, you have the skinheads and white supremacists. Those are the ones that are proud of being racist. (Though even then, there was a link on Fark to an article about members of a white supremacy group who claimed not to be racist, so there are exceptions here.) Then you have the "Some of my best friends are Black" crowd.

Here's a video by Jay Smooth on the issue of people who say racist things without thinking they're racist. He also has a TED talk. These are the racists who don't think they're racist.

In terms of the anti-gay crowd, you have the proud homophobes, who proudly declare that they're serving God's will and will consider themselves martyrs if laws against gay marriage in their state hurts them economically, just as you say. To repeat a personal example I gave in another thread: a couple of weeks ago I had lunch with a woman who told me, "I'm not a racist. I just think all Black people are ugly." Probably everyone in this thread could give a similar anecdote about someone who said or did something racist, all while vehemently denying being racist.

But you also have the people who will claim (and honestly believe) that they're not homophobes, and will then go on to deny that anything they said or did was homophobic or hurtful. A classic example of that in recent years is using "gay" to mean "bad" as in "That is so gay," which George Takei mentions in his video in response to the "Don't Say Gay" laws in Tennessee and Missouri.

I've heard people say (defending North Carolina's Amendment One) that it "doesn't really hurt" gays, so it's ok. Yes, there's more than a little cognitive dissonance there. I've also heard people defend their opposition to Amendment One with the claim that allowing same-sex couples to marry would be granting them "special rights." They honestly believe that they're "defending marriage" without denying anyone else their rights.

The hard-core homophobes won't be swayed by much of anything. But there's a lot of people in that middle area, who -think- they're not homophobes, who are going to respond to arguments that won't work on the people you're talking about.

.

Indubitably [TotalFark] 2012-05-11 08:24:12 PM

worthlessjuan: how does gay anything become a presidential issue, sheesh children!!

Um,

You are retarded.

;)

I believe you have it backwards . . . this thread is retarded . . . . .

Fark you if you were too damn lazy to go vote that day. Fark you, gayhard!

worthlessjuan: Indubitably [TotalFark] 2012-05-11 08:24:12 PM

worthlessjuan: how does gay anything become a presidential issue, sheesh children!!

Um,

You are retarded.

;)

I believe you have it backwards . . . this thread is retarded . . . . .

Indeed.

*bow*

it's one of 30 states to pass such legislation, exactly how is passing legislation that 3/5ths of America also has passed going to damage its rep to the point of hurting buisness growth or tourism?

Stupid argument is stupid

From The Farking Article: "Last weekend, former President Bill Clinton took to North Carolina phone lines with a recorded message warning of the perils of a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and civil unions."

What a farking hypocrite. The Defense of Marriage Act defines marriage as being between one man and one woman. It was signed into law on September 21, 1996, by President Bill Clinton.

worthlessjuan: this thread is retarded . . . . .

It's totally gay.

kukukupo: Carth:

If ability to procreate were an important part of the definition of marriage the elderly, sterile or voluntarily celibate wouldn't be allowed to wed. I agree that until recently marriage was more of a contractual dealing then something out of love, however since the SCOTUS ruled in 1967 that "Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival." that argument is no longer valid since marriage is and should be treated as right not something to be denied and granted to couples a state decides.



Yes, but the 1967 trial that is so often referred to considered marriage between a man and a woman and it was 'fundamental to our very existence and survival' because without marriage there would be no social construct for procreation. Maybe instead of reading the abridged version you should read the case this line is referred from: Skinner vs Oklahoma which states:

"But the instant legislation runs afoul of the equal protection clause, though we give Oklahoma that large deference which the rule of the foregoing cases requires. We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race. "

You also have to take in context the racial segregation of the U.S. Even before the civil war, interracial marriages were commonplace. When Eugenics and racial segregation came into context and these marriages were suddenly not allowed, there was a right taken away. The court overturned the rule because they considered a man and a woman marrying a right that was being denied.

So, from this context, Miscegenation and Gay Marriage are two completely separate issues.

I pulled the quote from: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=388&invo l=1. I'm still not sure how anyone can read the courts ruling combined with what we know today about the biological causes of sexual orientation and not see same sex marriage as a 14th amendment issue. 10-20 years ago when people still though sexual orientation was a choice people could try and make that argument but it doesn't stand up today.

Mock26: From The Farking Article: "Last weekend, former President Bill Clinton took to North Carolina phone lines with a recorded message warning of the perils of a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and civil unions."

What a farking hypocrite. The Defense of Marriage Act defines marriage as being between one man and one woman. It was signed into law on September 21, 1996, by President Bill Clinton.

To only address one thing wrong with what you said: For shame! A person's position on something may change in 16 years? The thought!

Why is an amendment that defines marriage between a man and a woman a "ban" on gay marriage.

I'm going to boycott NC because of the ban on Bigamy. That shiat ain't right!

LabGrrl: Carth: That is crazy. I could never figure out why more American's don't have a passport I guess that is one of the reasons.

Our passports are some of the most expensive in the world and you have to submit original id documents and let them hold them to get one (they are mailed back with the passport.) It's crazy.

/Yes I have one, but my 20 yop doesn't.

$135 for a passport that is good for 10 years is high but not excessively high. And, if you are only traveling back and forth to Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, or Bermuda you do not actually need a passport. You can get what is known as a passport card, which only costs $55. The renewal price for each is $25 cheaper.

hbk72777: How many different ways are you going to biatch about the same damn thing? Should it be banned? no, but goddamn , you people have been repeating yourselves for the last week.

Feel free to stay out of threads whose topics don't interest you.

North Carolina: "We'd rather live in poverty, than be tolerant of people who love each other."
Us: "We're happy to let you pay the price for your intolerance. Please feel free to serve as an example of the rewards of bigotry."

31 states have banned gay marriage.

This is the part where you just suck it, and shut up already.

Pantubo: 31 states have banned gay marriage.

This is the part where you just suck it, and shut up already.

I see what you did there.

hbk72777: How many different ways are you going to biatch about the same damn thing? Should it be banned? no, but goddamn , you people have been repeating yourselves for the last week.

Oh hell, you should stop by an atheist thread sometime.

LDM90: hbk72777: How many different ways are you going to biatch about the same damn thing? Should it be banned? no, but goddamn , you people have been repeating yourselves for the last week.

Oh hell, you should stop by an atheist thread sometime.

And you people have been repeating yer bullshiat for thousands of years...

I call clowns.

;)

Indubitably: LDM90: hbk72777: How many different ways are you going to biatch about the same damn thing? Should it be banned? no, but goddamn , you people have been repeating yourselves for the last week.

Oh hell, you should stop by an atheist thread sometime.

And you people have been repeating yer bullshiat for thousands of years...

I call clowns.

;)

P.S. Mind.

kukukupo: In today's world people marry 'because they love each other' instead of procreation or joining families together. Women don't have kids at the age of 25-35 instead of 16. Marriage in this day and age can be much different than it was only 20-30 years ago. Some want the definition to change and be broadened to include same-sex couples. Some do not. This is completely a social issue an should be decided at the local government level.

Are you denying the position that 'Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival'?

And if you aren't contradicting this position, then how do your justify leaving one of the "basic civil rights of man" up to individual states, or to popular vote?

Welp, the yadkin valley wine labels will plummet I imagine.

ciberido: kukukupo: In today's world people marry 'because they love each other' instead of procreation or joining families together. Women don't have kids at the age of 25-35 instead of 16. Marriage in this day and age can be much different than it was only 20-30 years ago. Some want the definition to change and be broadened to include same-sex couples. Some do not. This is completely a social issue an should be decided at the local government level.

Are you denying the position that 'Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival'?

And if you aren't contradicting this position, then how do your justify leaving one of the "basic civil rights of man" up to individual states, or to popular vote?

Something tells me that Mr. Moogle has a RON PAUL yard sign.

JVO.

Pantubo: 31 states have banned gay marriage.

This is the part where you just suck it, and shut up already.


1st of all.... By that lousy logic we should never have engaged in ANY of the civil rights struggles in our history.

2nd... This is something that the overwhelming majority of Americans support. Just because it's been enshrined into law doesn't mean we should just accept it quietly. When the oppression of a minority group is enshrined into law is when we should get LOUDER, not quieter.

3rd... Something wrong being done more times doesn't magically make it right.

Pantubo: 31 states have banned gay marriage.

This is the part where you just suck it, and shut up already.

And 31 states will un-ban it, in time. You will lose. Your kind always do. If you didn't, we'd still be living in trees.
Learn to love your fate.

hbk72777: How many different ways are you going to biatch about the same damn thing? Should it be banned? no, but goddamn , you people have been repeating yourselves for the last week.

Yeah, how dare they want the equality that the Constitution says everyone should have. How dare they become angry at yet another bigoted, evil attack on their rights and freedoms for the "crime" of loving someone who happens to have the same set of genitals.



"How DAAAAAARE they!"

mongbiohazard: Goodbye bigoted Outer Banks, hello tolerant and verdant Vermont!

I live in Vermont and used to spend thousands every summer in OBX.
Never again.

Pantubo: 31 states have banned gay marriage.

This is the part where you just suck it, and shut up already.

31 states have legalized slavery.

31 states have ruled that first-born children will be sacrificed to the crop gods for good harvests.

31 states have banned single parents from keeping their children.

31 states have decided that you must lose all your money, possessions, and house for the good of the governor.

31 states have declared that police can shoot you in the head whenever they feel like it.

This is the part where you just suck it, and shut up already.

Pantubo: 31 states have banned gay marriage.

This is the part where you just suck it, and shut up already.

My state (CO) banned it in the 80s and was working hard this year to repeal the ban... but when the speaker found out Republicans were for the repeal, he sent the issue back to committee so they would never get the chance to vote on it. DOMA is failing in the courts, more states now than ever allow gay marriage and civil unions... so... why don't the other 31 just give up on being stupid bigoted farkwits and just get on the bandwagon now so we don't have to look back disfavorably on your ignorance.

beefoe: Gay marriage is only recognized in six states so NC is clearly in the mainstream of the 51 states that don't recognize it.

kukukupo: Oh no! North Carolina is just like 29 other states! What will they do!?

aegean: unlike almost all the other states - including California - that passed the same legislation?

Little.Alex: Article is complete bullshiat fantasy, and a good example of why NYT is going out of business.

Are the other 32 states that don't recognize mentally ill marriage bankrupt too?

In 1887 a minority of states were right and the rest were wrong.

/ones that were still wrong in 1967 lost the right to figure it out for themselves.

God dammit, old christian assholes. Start dying already.

North Carolina is trying to hold on to something they never had. As I grow older, I realize that most state legislation is written by people who are completely divorced from reality. We will all suffer for that. NC seems to think their laws create a new reality, when in fact, the new reality is already here.

It is like the continental congress debating whether or not land-rights should adhere to a european inheritance model. The fact that it is being discussed means it is over. Over.

North Carolina, biotech and all, can go to hell. I hope they suffer for this piece of bullshiat cowardice.

Submitted First With a Better Headline: God dammit, old christian assholes. Start dying already.

Frankly, I'm kinda surprised Mecklenburg Co. voted against this POS. I moved to Charlotte from Durham about a year ago. There are more churches than gas stations in this town. The worst thing you could possibly do is make plans for 12:30 on a Sunday. There are so many God botherers that the cops have to direct traffic on the main roads for an hour after church, and you can't get anywhere in a reasonable amount of time. With that many xtians, I thought this would be ground zero for the "Support Marriage" types.

August11: North Carolina, biotech and all, can go to hell. I hope they suffer for this piece of bullshiat cowardice.

Would you mind making the distinction of not insulting all of us? There are many, many progressive people who worked their asses off to fight this thing living here, and you lumping us in with the knuckle-dragging troglodytes isn't helping.

calm like a bomb: August11: North Carolina, biotech and all, can go to hell. I hope they suffer for this piece of bullshiat cowardice.

Would you mind making the distinction of not insulting all of us? There are many, many progressive people who worked their asses off to fight this thing living here, and you lumping us in with the knuckle-dragging troglodytes isn't helping.

The fact that they blame the whole state just shows they are just as mentally tiny as the midget-minded bigots they claim to hate.

lewismarktwo: calm like a bomb: August11: North Carolina, biotech and all, can go to hell. I hope they suffer for this piece of bullshiat cowardice.

Would you mind making the distinction of not insulting all of us? There are many, many progressive people who worked their asses off to fight this thing living here, and you lumping us in with the knuckle-dragging troglodytes isn't helping.

The fact that they blame the whole state just shows they are just as mentally tiny as the midget-minded bigots they claim to hate.

Herpity derpity doobadee doo

We're glad that you fought against it, but since most of the state apparently didn't even vote, you'll forgive us for being a bit pissed.

Evil wins when good men do nothing.

Keizer_Ghidorah: lewismarktwo: calm like a bomb: August11: North Carolina, biotech and all, can go to hell. I hope they suffer for this piece of bullshiat cowardice.

Would you mind making the distinction of not insulting all of us? There are many, many progressive people who worked their asses off to fight this thing living here, and you lumping us in with the knuckle-dragging troglodytes isn't helping.

The fact that they blame the whole state just shows they are just as mentally tiny as the midget-minded bigots they claim to hate.

Herpity derpity doobadee doo

We're glad that you fought against it, but since most of the state apparently didn't even vote, you'll forgive us for being a bit pissed.

Evil wins when good men do nothing.

Is poor voter turn out a new thing? This isn't like in California where there was a lot of press or ads or wooing of the voters. This was pretty much under the radar for anyone who didn't go to church.
Anyway, the law is actually so poorly written and overreaching it will actually do more for gay rights in the long run than it can ever hope to accomplish against them.