Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RedKing]

Sorry for double post but really in this case:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/08/politics/north-carolina-marriage/index.html
The North Carolina Constitutional Amendment defining marriage between a man and woman passed. [sigh].

I keep hearing about "progress" in the attitudes towards gays/same sex marriage.... When people vote though....

I apologize on behalf of my state. Seriously. I will never be ashamed of being a North Carolinian, but I'm incredibly disappointed with about 61% of its population right now.

[kaijyuu]

re: progress.


This stuff is reactionary. Whenever change is happening, those who don't like it aren't going to take it sitting down. Like GlyphGryph said, they're doing this because they feel threatened, and all this should be seen as the gears creaking as they move.

[Truean]

re: progress.


This stuff is reactionary. Whenever change is happening, those who don't like it aren't going to take it sitting down. Like GlyphGryph said, they're doing this because they feel threatened, and all this should be seen as the gears creaking as they move.

61% of the voting population though.... You gotta admit that's a valid concern. Ohio had about the same percent in 2004 when this happened here. It may eventually change, but I'm thinking in about 10... maybe 20 years.... That's a long time. Transsexual rights are even further behind gay rights too....

I dunno. My personal experiences. I really hope they aren't the norm. People say they are for gay rights so they don't get some funny looks (and I wonder how many people only give those funny looks because they are "supposed" to) but when they're alone.... I've had straight guys between the ages of let's say 22-32 ish not be cool with a gay guy hanging around their girlfriend. Sometimes they push it into a "your gay friend or your boyfriend" choice for her. Guess which one she picks....

[GlyphGryph]

But the thing is? Look just at the last ten years. Sure theres a bunch of states that have said this is double-plus ungood, but thats functionally meaningless. Meanwhile, you have other states that actually HAVE allowed full marriage rights. Where you couldn't get married before.

Thats progress.

[Jervill]

Also, remember, that's 61% of primary voters; turnout was somewhere in the 30% range.  Perhaps if it was during the general, it may have been closer.

[GlyphGryph]

And its more popular among the younger voters who have a significantly harder time trying to vote. (I didn't vote last election because I had no residency, for example)

[Moghjubar]

Gotta love those constitutional marriage bans. 

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Those who cannot learn from history....

[sluissa]

Also remember just because on the ballot people are against it, doesn't mean it's an all out "everyone hates gays" thing. Plenty of people might be perfectly fine with gay people, but just because they aren't gay themselves, the measure doesn't directly affect them and they don't end up caring, being informed, or otherwise finding their own reason to go out and vote against stupid stuff like this.

It matters to me, but I can't believe with certainty that ever would have been the case if I didn't have so many friends that it does affect.

[Twi]

Also remember just because on the ballot people are against it, doesn't mean it's an all out "everyone hates gays" thing. Plenty of people might be perfectly fine with gay people, but just because they aren't gay themselves, the measure doesn't directly affect them and they don't end up caring, being informed, or otherwise finding their own reason to go out and vote against stupid stuff like this.

It matters to me, but I can't believe with certainty that ever would have been the case if I didn't have so many friends that it does affect.

This. People have a history of being apathetic, and if the anti-gay people become threatening enough it doesn't matter how many people believe in rights if they're afraid to vote that way.

But I have no idea about the latter

[EveryZig]

I apologize on behalf of my state.

Same here.
On the marginally less terrible side, the votes percentage supporting the amendment is quite likely inflated compered to the proportion of the actual population that supported it, because the amendment was voted on during the primaries, which last I heard had less priority for democratic voters (though that may have changed with the various drop-outs from the presidential race).

[Jervill]

So, apparently Richard Mourdock supports repealing the 17th Amendment, the one that allows direct elections of senators.

Campaign event: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdTEtqiNqFc

The stupid, it hurts.  PLEASE MAKE IT STOP

[Urist Imiknorris]

The only comment so far is a conspiracy theory...

[Twi]

So, apparently Richard Mourdock supports repealing the 17th Amendment, the one that allows direct elections of senators.

Campaign event: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdTEtqiNqFc

The stupid, it hurts.  PLEASE MAKE IT STOP

Sooooo... why exactly might he want that to happen?
 
Doesn't seem like he'd get a TON out of it. Unless he figures that smaller groups of people are easier to influence. (Which is probably true.)

[MonkeyHead]

This is a pretty big deal, right?

[Truean]

This is a pretty big deal, right?

[Jawdrop]