On Tuesday voters in North Carolina decided that simply having a law saying something is illegal is too ambiguous, so they had a voter referendum on an amendment to their constitution that made gay marriage super, ultra illegal. The referendum, which passed overwhelmingly with 61% of the vote, reinforces the existing statute (passed in 1996) that defined marriage as between one man and one woman.
Despite the fact that this changes precisely nothing about the current situation in the state, this turn of events has made huge waves across the country. Since I'm only gay when I'm with the military, and I don't live in NC, this has very little to do with me; but since when has that stopped me from having an opinion?
If you want to know where I stand on gay marriage in general (hint: I'm for it), I refer you to this blog, written jointly by Jonathan Rauch (a gay liberal) and David Blankenhorn (a straight conservative Christian). I'd also encourage you to read another excellent piece Jonathan wrote on his own, which is actually the article that changed my opinion on the subject. Both are persuasive because they do not start with the assumption that anyone who is against gay marriage is a hate monger. Quite the contrary, it admits and brings up a variety of completely legitimate arguments for not tampering with marriage, then addresses them.
In the specific case of North Carolina, I do not agree with how they stand. After all, what do I care who you make out with? That being said, I err on the side of the 10th Amendment, the one that tells the Federal Government to get the eff out of the State's business. The State's can and should decide this issue on their own. It is my belief that over time the views on homosexual marriage will soften, and society will come to accept it as an alternative in the future.
If you are currently gay, wish to become married, and live in North Carolina, I counsel you to move to somewhere less hostile. I say this not from the standpoint of "If you don't like Amurika you can get the hell out!" kind of rhetoric we usually hear. What I mean is, leave, and deprive the state of your talent, taxes, and resources. If states such as North Carolina lose otherwise fine, upstanding citizens due to decisions of this nature then over time it may effect change.
Despite the fact that this changes precisely nothing about the current situation in the state, this turn of events has made huge waves across the country. Since I'm only gay when I'm with the military, and I don't live in NC, this has very little to do with me; but since when has that stopped me from having an opinion?
If you want to know where I stand on gay marriage in general (hint: I'm for it), I refer you to this blog, written jointly by Jonathan Rauch (a gay liberal) and David Blankenhorn (a straight conservative Christian). I'd also encourage you to read another excellent piece Jonathan wrote on his own, which is actually the article that changed my opinion on the subject. Both are persuasive because they do not start with the assumption that anyone who is against gay marriage is a hate monger. Quite the contrary, it admits and brings up a variety of completely legitimate arguments for not tampering with marriage, then addresses them.
In the specific case of North Carolina, I do not agree with how they stand. After all, what do I care who you make out with? That being said, I err on the side of the 10th Amendment, the one that tells the Federal Government to get the eff out of the State's business. The State's can and should decide this issue on their own. It is my belief that over time the views on homosexual marriage will soften, and society will come to accept it as an alternative in the future.
If you are currently gay, wish to become married, and live in North Carolina, I counsel you to move to somewhere less hostile. I say this not from the standpoint of "If you don't like Amurika you can get the hell out!" kind of rhetoric we usually hear. What I mean is, leave, and deprive the state of your talent, taxes, and resources. If states such as North Carolina lose otherwise fine, upstanding citizens due to decisions of this nature then over time it may effect change.
1 comment:
This notion that the President did something "brave" in endorsing SSM is silly nonsense, IMO. Four years ago it would have been brave; it may have cost him electoral votes, probably not the election but certainly some Congressional coattails. In this case it is opportunistic; a transparent fundraising effort that risks what, maybe the Senate seat Jim Webb is vacating?
Post a Comment