Singer and North Carolina native Clay Aiken sounds off on the proposed Amendment 1 to North Carolina's state constitution. As Clay points out, it's not just gay couples that would suffer if the amendment passes; straight domestic partnerships would also be adversely affected.
If Amendment 1 passes, it will mean there will no longer be democracy for all in North Carolina.
The churches here are pushi g to get this passed, the same churches that are pushing the illegal Hispanics on us. If the church does not want to marry two people they should have the right to ask the state.
Clay is so incredibly intelligent and articulate. I love his singing, best in the world, but I think he should run for office. We need men like Clay dealing with the difficult issues facing our country today. I hope the NC voters follow his advice here and vote DOWN Amendment 1.
There is no freedom in a state that bans marriage between any two consenting adults. We came here to escape government by religion! Our forefathers set up a 3-branched government and wrote the Constitution to ensure that the state operates separately from any church, and that every citizen is guaranteed "inalienable rights"... so to pass a civil law based on the beliefs or teachings of any particular religion is unconstitutional. NC, don't copy California and take a giant step backwards!!
So sad that this ridiculous amendment is now part of the NC constitution. No religious law should be adhered to by our government which is supposed to defend the rights of ALL its people, not just the Christians. I am Christian, but fortunately I come from a progressive family. All the southern states will soon find themselves as ashamed of this travesty as they are of slavery.
I understand the desire for the gays and lesbians to have the same advantages (disadvantages) that one has in a marriage. It would seem to me it would be easier for so many more people to be understanding of their desires if the word "marriage" was not used and instead the words "marital union".or something similar. I personally believe "marriage" should only be between a man and a woman, but I totallly would be okay with "marital unions" for the gay and lesbian society.
This is totally against the constitution that clearly states there to be a separation from church and state, what happened to this did the politicians forget about this NOW. It seems that when it's convinient to the GOP to include the church in there agendas they do, but when it's not convinient they throw the fact of SEPERATION of CHURCH and STATE out there. This ammendment is totaly against everyones CIVIL RIGHTS, outside of the fact of there sexual preference they are HUMAN BEIGNS first.
Kacy (see above) explained it perfectly. Why cannot religious people understand anyone else but themselves? They remind me of the Taliban. It's so sad.
David: What's your view on this issue? Should this be a state decision or is it a Constitutional issue? I tilt torawd states making their own decisions, but I'm not entirely certain.I don't like Bachmann's response. I don't see how one could be for a Constitutional Amendment, but be unwilling to override state law. A Constitutional Amendment will necessarily override state law. I don't see how you can have it both ways.
Click here to access transcripts from recent shows.
Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.
Join 21,318 other followers