Full announcement from the Buncombe County Republican Party:
Asheville: In May, our primaries will be held, and in these primaries Buncombe County voters will have the opportunity to forever preserve the definition of marriage in our State. As the only Southern State left that has not done so, we are finally getting the opportunity to take this to the people.
Amendment One modifies our North Carolina State Constitution to say that “Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.” Why is this important? While this definition is already on the books in legal form, voting YES will prevent future Activist Judges and Politicians from taking away, what has been known since the dawn of time, the true definition of Marriage between one man and one woman.
There are many who do not want the preservation of this definition to pass. President Obama has recently injected his thoughts against preserving marriage in North Carolina. Millions of dollars are being poured into North Carolina by outside groups like the California Democrats who have mobilized against this Amendment in OUR State. They are touting this as an Anti-Gay Marriage amendment. It is not. This is an amendment to preserve the definition of marriage in OUR beautiful State of North Carolina; this is why we need your help.
Join us in our efforts. The Buncombe County Republican Party will be actively working to get out the YES vote for this amendment. We have appointed two members as Co-Chairs with the Vote FOR Marriage group, Dorothea Alderfer and Gail Harding; they will be steering our efforts moving forward. If you would like to volunteer or contribute please contact Dorothea Alderfer at dalderfer2567@charter.net or for more information please visit www.voteformarriagenc.com
Sincerely,
Henry Mitchell
Chairman, BCGOP
The dawn of time? Really?
Check on that King Solomon story and how many wives and concubines he had, Buncombe GOP.
So lets say the good people of NC cling to their southern heritage and pass this constitutional amendment double banning legal recognition of homa sex yull relationships. Does the BCGOP think this is going to make their gay children, cousins, aunts and uncles, nieces and nephews, siblings, parents, neighbors and coworkers disappear? No it won’t. Does the BCGOP think this amendment will stop homa sex yulls from loving who they love and forming relationships of their choosing? No it won’t. Does the BCGOP think this amendment will make homa sex yulls stop having sex. Ha ha. No it won’t. Not in their most fevered imaginations. Does the BCGOP think this amendment will lower divorce rates among heterosexuals. No it won’t.
So what good does this amendment really do? It won’t stop anything these people are truly against.
Did it ever occur to you that some people may not have an issue with gays, just with them marrying? In fact that is probably the majority opinion.
So if you really don’t think it will stop anything important, then you shouldn’t care if it passes, right? Which it will, with 60-70% of the vote. I will proudly be voting in favor, and I am gay! I love defeating liberals wayy more than I want gay marriage to be legal. So much for your argument.
“This is an amendment to preserve the definition of marriage in OUR beautiful State of North Carolina”
Mr. Mitchell, if you really mean “our” like your emphasis suggests, then you’d lay off the big government approach to social engineering and allow free people to do as they wish. In fact, you’d recoil at the thought of doing so and find the idea repugnant.
Instead, you’re like many others of any political stripe who find some so-called Christian reason why the government has to legislate against gay marriage.
Now don’t get me wrong. I would protect any church’s right not to marry whoever they didn’t want to marry. That’s freedom of religion.
We got this pesky and lovable little concept going here too, though. It’s called freedom from religion.
Ban legal recognition of all marriages. Why should being married entitle you to special privileges?
More meaningless postering from a discredited political party that yaps about jobs and individual freedoms while focusing exclusively on ‘cultural’ concerns (for them anyway) that always ends up as an effort to use the strong arm of government to suppress individual freedoms.
Not much more than a local clown show really.
Any effort to make ‘one man/one woman’ a law should also make the divorce of such unions illegal. It’s a sacred institution.
A primary reason that ALL North Carolina voters should OPPOSE this amendment has nothing to do with gay or straight, and is related to the blatant disinformation in Mr Mitchell’s letter: “This is an amendment to preserve the definition of marriage in OUR beautiful State of North Carolina”.
I beg to differ, Mr Mitchell, on two points.
Point One: Marriage between same sex couples has been illegal in NC since 1996. This seems like definition to me.
Point Two: The NC Constitutional Amendments Publication Commission is obliged to approve language for an official
explanation of the proposed amendment that can be provided to voters to assist them in understanding the
amendment. The Commission has only three members including Secretary of State Marshall, North
Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper and the General Assembly
If Christians were more like Jesus, who would they hate? Unconditional love for others might be hard but that is what Jesus would do.
Those who think they have a right to tell others how to live, who to be, and who they can love are Not God. Because God Loves All People.
So many problems in Society today are because people are not “allowed” to be themselves. Hated because they do not fit into the stepford cookie cutter of “normal”.
It is the “haters” who make NC a sad state of affairs.
In a day when the number of divorces and the number of marriages are nearly the same, it’s quite hipocritical to say we need this Amendent to “protect marriage”. Here is what I say, let’s re-write the Amendent to state “Marriage shall be defined as the union of one man and one woman FOR A LIFETIME. Any subsequent union for reasons other than the death of one of the original parties in the marriage will not be recognized as a legal union”. Wouldn’t this actually help to protect marriage better? Wouldn’t married couples be more likely to seek help in a distressed marriage if divorce and a subsequent marriage would place them in a second-class category, with most of their original rights now gone? Actually, we all know this Amendment would never pass, even though it would go much, much further toward protecting marriage. Those who are for this Amendment should at least be honest with themselves and others. The Amendment should more accurately be written to say “We wish to formally state that gay North Carolinians should not have the same rights as other North Carolinians and we are so threatened by their prescense that we feel the need to write it into our law.” There, that’s more honest.