Here is the last amendment that North Carolina added to its state constitution regarding its rules for marriage, in 1875. About time for an update, you might say? A majority of North Carolinians also agree, time for a constitutional update! Now, who will explain to all those North Carolina voters exactly what an "update" is?
If by "shredded", you mean "mounted the ineffectual campaign against it that hid the gays and had no strategy for minority outreach", then yeah.
<a href="http:\/\/www.afer.org\/" target="_blank">AFER</a> is the driving force behind <em>Perry vs. Brown</em>
Still -- the best thing the Dems could do is go to their Convention, with a vow to keep their wallets shut as much as humanly possible. I swear, if I were a delegate, I&#039;d pack a jar of peanut butter and a loaf of bread, and a bottle of bourbon, and live on it for 3 days.
You know what other place that starts with &quot;North&quot; has labs full of rocket scientists and nuclear physicists? Because I&#039;m equally impressed by their modernity.
Nah, Charlotte is in a pretty part of the state, with a pleasant downtown, and has a lot of decent restaurants (I&#039;ll concede I have not been there in some years, tho). They are actually running (soshulist, communistical) rapid rail transit. I see no reason to punish Charlotte for the nutters outside it. Plus, NC is considered a swing state and Bammerz is going to need it in Nov.
Wouldn&#039;t that be just a bit like writing <i>Loving</i> in a way that allowed states taht already outlawed miscegenation to keep on outlawing it? There&#039;s a right, or there&#039;s not a right, but whatever the decision, it applies in all 50 states.
Yeah, it would. Nevertheless, Kennedy has a track record (<em>Romer</em>, <em>Lawrence</em>) of upholding the rights of gays in only the narrowest ways available to him at the time, and the 9th Circuit ruling explicitly sought to make itself as narrow as possible.<br /><br />The 9th Circuit&#39;s reasoning was that the State of California <em>had</em> recognized a right, and then acted to remove that right from a specific class of its people. A state action to remove a pre-existing right must withstand at least a rational basis test - and because Prop 8 only affected the word \"marriage\" (important as that is; California has everything-but-marriage civil unions which allow all the other rights and privileges the state grants married couples), and because \"protecting marriage\" as an excuse entirely failed to come even close to withstanding objective scrutiny in court, the Circuit found that the only explanation which worked for Prop 8 was anti-gay animus, which cannot be considered a rational basis.<br /><br />Because they&#39;re analyzing based on the act by one of the states to take away a right that <em>it</em>, not the Federal government, had recognized, they wouldn&#39;t be recognizing that right outside of California.<br /><br />This limited approach seems to have been carefully tailored to meet Justice Kennedy&#39;s approval; it even cited <em>Romer</em> many times.
North Carolina is an interesting place. Here is the county map for the <a href="http:\/\/www.wcnc.com\/news\/local\/-Mecklenburg-County-was-1-of-8-counties-to-vote-against--150812515.html" target="_blank">vote</a>. Basically, Charlotte, Asheville, the Triangle counties, the Outer Banks and one mountain county voted against it. The Democratic Convention will be in Charlotte.
If by &quot;shredded&quot;, you mean &quot;mounted the ineffectual campaign against it that hid the gays and had no strategy for minority outreach&quot;, then yeah.
<a href="http:\/\/www.afer.org\/" target="_blank">AFER</a> is the driving force behind <em>Perry vs. Brown</em>
The only boycott they might care about is if high school basketball stars boycotted Duke and UNC. THAT would get their attention, pronto!
Maybe if they weren&#039;t such intolerant fuckwits, they wouldn&#039;t be &quot;persecuted&quot; quite so much.
Melanin LIbel!
Still -- the best thing the Dems could do is go to their Convention, with a vow to keep their wallets shut as much as humanly possible. I swear, if I were a delegate, I&#039;d pack a jar of peanut butter and a loaf of bread, and a bottle of bourbon, and live on it for 3 days.
Who knew the Constitution was a zero-sum game?
You know what other place that starts with &quot;North&quot; has labs full of rocket scientists and nuclear physicists? Because I&#039;m equally impressed by their modernity.
it may be a shitty day to be a gay Southerner (i imagine every day is), but it is a lovely day to read your post on wonkette.
You Oughta Know who she is anyways.
<blockquote>The rural counties just crushed it with numbers not seen since Ceausecu</blockquote>
PUTIN LIBEL!
Nah, Charlotte is in a pretty part of the state, with a pleasant downtown, and has a lot of decent restaurants (I&#039;ll concede I have not been there in some years, tho). They are actually running (soshulist, communistical) rapid rail transit. I see no reason to punish Charlotte for the nutters outside it. Plus, NC is considered a swing state and Bammerz is going to need it in Nov.
Wouldn&#039;t that be just a bit like writing <i>Loving</i> in a way that allowed states taht already outlawed miscegenation to keep on outlawing it? There&#039;s a right, or there&#039;s not a right, but whatever the decision, it applies in all 50 states.
Yeah, it would. Nevertheless, Kennedy has a track record (<em>Romer</em>, <em>Lawrence</em>) of upholding the rights of gays in only the narrowest ways available to him at the time, and the 9th Circuit ruling explicitly sought to make itself as narrow as possible.<br /><br />The 9th Circuit&#39;s reasoning was that the State of California <em>had</em> recognized a right, and then acted to remove that right from a specific class of its people. A state action to remove a pre-existing right must withstand at least a rational basis test - and because Prop 8 only affected the word \"marriage\" (important as that is; California has everything-but-marriage civil unions which allow all the other rights and privileges the state grants married couples), and because \"protecting marriage\" as an excuse entirely failed to come even close to withstanding objective scrutiny in court, the Circuit found that the only explanation which worked for Prop 8 was anti-gay animus, which cannot be considered a rational basis.<br /><br />Because they&#39;re analyzing based on the act by one of the states to take away a right that <em>it</em>, not the Federal government, had recognized, they wouldn&#39;t be recognizing that right outside of California.<br /><br />This limited approach seems to have been carefully tailored to meet Justice Kennedy&#39;s approval; it even cited <em>Romer</em> many times.
Interesting ... this means that God is gay - or maybe bi.
Or give a shit.
North Carolina is an interesting place. Here is the county map for the <a href="http:\/\/www.wcnc.com\/news\/local\/-Mecklenburg-County-was-1-of-8-counties-to-vote-against--150812515.html" target="_blank">vote</a>. Basically, Charlotte, Asheville, the Triangle counties, the Outer Banks and one mountain county voted against it. The Democratic Convention will be in Charlotte.