I hope you'll vote against Amendment One today.

Comments

[Mad Dog]

I did on Saturday.

MD

[Patrick Eakes]

I did on Saturday, too.

[sittinginthemiddle]

Finally, the day has arrived when the majority of NC residents will have their voices heard. They will, by a large margin, pass this amendment and protect the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman.
Tomorrow we will hear more howls and gnashing of the teeth by a minority of sexual deviants and the morally bankrupt. By thursday all this lunacy will be forgotten and we can get back to focusing on what a horrible job this administration is doing.

[Thomas]

I did at 6:35 this morning. There was already a line.

[Andrew Brod]

SITM, you've already done enough howling and teeth-gnashing for the week, thanks.

[sittinginthemiddle]

Andrew, I have been in a great mood for weeks, knowing this amendment will pass has brought tremendous joy.
But thanks for playing.

[Kim]

Still can't reconcile the "get government out of MY life, and into YOUR bedroom crowd.

[Elliot]

It's not often that I get to legitimately picture someone in a massive chair, stroking a white Persian cat, but the day is here. SITM, it's really depressing to hear someone express outright glee that good people's civil unions will likely be officially repudiated by the state. I don't know what you're sitting in the middle of, but it certainly isn't decency or compassion.

[sittinginthemiddle]

" I don't know what you're sitting in the middle of, but it certainly isn't decency or compassion."- Elliott

It also isn't sexual sickness, perversion or moral bankruptcy. If being considered decent or compassionate means I have to give up all moral standards and accept a deviant sexual lifestyle, I guess you may be correct.

[Elliot]

How do you misspell a name when it's right in front of you? Oh well, I'm used to it. SITM, I don't think anyone cares what you accept or don't accept. The important distinction is between that which you legally stigmatize and that which you do not.

[Sean]

SITM and others like him rail against big government, except when it's time to judge others. such hypocritical positions are common, even as these people argue themselves into downward spirals of deniability. it's like a racist being a fan of magic johnson. you know, he's just... different.

what i would consider disturbing to SITM and his ilk, is that this amendment won't curb people from living their lives as they are born or see fit to live, either. gay people are going to continue to have ceremonies, adopt children, pay taxes and die like the rest of us. straight couples are still going to choose to live together unmarried. and straight married couples? nothing changes, except the divorce rate. so as it stands, SITM is just gloating because he participated in, most likely, a decade long cock block to get this amendment overturned and provide living benefits to his fellow citizens.

congratulations, SITM, you're the top asshole on the block. the gold star for your refrigerator is in the mail.

[sittinginthemiddle]

congratulations, SITM, you're the top asshole on the block. the gold star for your refrigerator is in the mail.-Sean

Thanks Sean! I have been top asshole for quite some time. Never have quite understood the bottom feeders looking up at me and complaining. I know your class of people are proud of your refrigerator trinkets, please understand in my neighborhood we do not adhere to that philosophy. But your admiration is appreciated.

[sittinginthemiddle]

" I don't think anyone cares what you accept or don't accept. The important distinction is between that which you legally stigmatize and that which you do not."- Elliot

Elliot, I beleive the majority of NC residents will be caring of my opinion today as they agree with me and pass this amendment. I know you and your ilk enjoy playing the victim in this issue but nothing is being taken away. We are solidifying a societal structure that has been in place for hundreds of years. You might as well accept it because as of tomorrow it will be the law.

[bubba]

SITM, just remember you're dealing with people people who still have Gore/Lieberman, Kerry/Edwards, Obama/Biden 08/12, Bush Lied/People Died, Coexist, and MANY more irrelevant statements plastered all over the back of their cars.

Their contributions on the various threads about the marriage amendment here are just an extension of that trivial mindset that's made them famous. Their bumper sticker mentality that's always on display is their stab at finding meaning in the cruel world in which we exist.

[prell]

"please understand in my neighborhood we do not adhere to that philosophy."

A nursing home isn't a neighborhood.

[Andrew Brod]

"Coexist" is an irrelevant statement? That speaks volumes.

[Roch]

"SITM, just remember you're dealing with people people who still have Gore/Lieberman, Kerry/Edwards, Obama/Biden 08/12, Bush Lied/People Died, Coexist, and MANY more irrelevant statements plastered all over the back of their cars."

Right! And now they are going to get what they've had coming!

[bubba]

"'Coexist' is an irrelevant statement? That speaks volumes."

None of which is favorable to your worldview, which really isn't interested in the concept of "coexist" unless it's defined as adhering to the standards that advances The Agenda.

[bubba]

"....congratulations, SITM, you're the top asshole on the block. the gold star for your refrigerator is in the mail."

Ah yes, the "you suck" filter the blog proprietor claims to have in place fails once again!

[Thomas]

"I don't know what you're sitting in the middle of..."

Sitting in the middle of a trolling chair. Don't take the bait.

[bubba]

"Right! And now they are going to get what they've had coming!"

If your referring to the ones that say "When Bush Took Office, Gas Was $1.87", I certainly hope so.

[Sean]

so bubba now knows what the back of my car looks like. sounds like a rear fetish. methinks he doth protest too much on teh gay issue.

[sittinginthemiddle]

"Right! And now they are going to get what they've had coming!"- Roach

This is just the beginning, after the November election we are really going to stick it to you. The free ride for the Parasites is coming to an end.

[Justcorbly]

Wish I knew what so many people are so afraid of that they have to convince themselves that it's OK to hate and usurp God's role in deciding who get's treated like a human being and who doesn't.

[sittinginthemiddle]

" Wish I knew what so many people are so afraid of that they have to convince themselves that it's OK to hate and usurp God's role in deciding who get's treated like a human being and who doesn't."- justcorbly

Let me help you with that, people are afraid of people who think like you and the other morally bankrupt in our state. The thought of your world view and agenda would someday be the law of the land frightens them terribly. That is why today democracy rings loud and clear in favor of this great amendment and it will be the law of the land.

[Ged]

I'll be ironic and extremely satisfying if A1 is defeated today. Especially in the light of hate-filled, discriminatory comments made by anonymous asshats on blogs like this. Even if it doesn't happen today, I take comfort in knowing it eventually will. It's inevitable.

[bubba]

"I'll be ironic and extremely satisfying if A1 is defeated today."

I wonder why Obama cancelled his trip to Asheville today? Perhaps he just doesn't want to be associated with a losing political/cultural proposition, particularly in light of his belief that marriage is between one man and one woman?

[bubba]

"Even if it doesn't happen today, I take comfort in knowing it eventually will. It's inevitable."

Could be, Ged.....perhaps on some brave new world like the Mars Colony, circa 2200 AD, when "progressive" social engineering intersects with bio-genetic engineering, resulting in the reduction of the sexes to one.

[JB]

Or here, in just a few years, like Speaker Tillis said.

[Bill Yaner]

Can't we all just get along?

[CC]

only if you're straight and married

[Ged]

Bubba, somehow I think the Supreme Court will make this decision for you LONG before 2200. Even if it doesn't, it won't take that long. I predict within my lifetime, maybe not yours though.

[Account Deleted]

I agree, Ged. But will you accept their decision when it comes ? It will require them to upset precedent and come up with a new rule that is a landmine of problems unless society is willing to put no restrictions on any marriages between/among consenting adults.

By the way, court opens at 9:00am tomorrow just in case anyone wants to come and watch all of those domestic violence cases get thrown out as a result of Amendment One. The family law "experts" told us so, remember ?

[Ged]

The SCOTUS may not rule in favor of gay marriage, but to BAN all forms of civil unions for same sex couples? Complete and utter fucking bullshit. I cannot see any right-minded, just court doing so. The state basically wrote discrimination into its constitution tonight. So depressing, even for a transplant like me.

[bubba]

"But will you accept their decision when it comes ?"

That will probably happen about the same time Pope Mohammed I assumes the papacy.

[Account Deleted]

The Supreme Court does not have the authority to require civil unions because there is no right to them under the Constitution nor do the lack of civil unions raise equal protection issues. The Court can only determine whether there is a right to same-sex marriage or if rights are violated in states that have traditional marriage but not same-sex marriage.

However, I don't believe that it is possible to find a right to marriage other than traditional marriage or an equal protection violation without extending the same reasoning to all other forms of marriage between/among consenting adults, including polygamy.

This is an issue where the Court either limits marriage to traditional marriage or they rule that there can be no limits on marriage. I have yet to see a coherent, Constitutionally permissible rule that avoids this.

To me, this is the fundamental obstacle to be overcome before this issue can be finally resolved.

[bubba]

"This is an issue where the Court either limits marriage to traditional marriage or they rule that there can be no limits on marriage."

To decide the latter would be a major deviation from precedent. On the other hand, if Kennedy decides consistency is overrated, anything could happen.

[Brian]

It is less about the right to marriage, but those rights that are afforded to people through marriage. So, by choosing to define marriage as only between a man and woman, rights are denied to others, thus creating an entire group of citizens who are deemed less deserving of those rights afforded their peers. I don't believe that "marriage" will ultimately be allowed to remain a vehicle for denial of rights. It simply will not stand the test of time. Rights are more important than the preservation of some fanciful notion of marriage held to by the majority.