Anti-gay marriage amendment will be on ballot in NC in May 2012

[Mynheer Peeperkorn von Thurn und Taxis-Hohenlohe]

Retarded and disturbing.

[Nhoj]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/10/nc-marriage-amendment-starts-with-lead.html

PPP's first look at the proposed marriage amendment in North Carolina since the legislature placed it on the ballot finds it leading 61-34. Republicans are overwhelmingly in favor of it (80/17) and independents (52/43) and Democrats (49/44) support it as well



Landslide.

Why exactly did the numbers flip since their last poll ?

Last time voters were opposed by 20 points, now they favor it by about 30 ?

Different wording?

[Jacobtm]

So the NC ballot bans marriage and civil unions?

Nate Silver wrote a very detailed post about how there is a real difference between ballot initiatives to ban gay marraige vs. civil unions. Bassically, a bill that ONLY bans gay marriage is far more likely to pass. A bill that bans civil unions is less likely to pass.

Unfortunately, his predictions say that NC will probably vote to ban gay marraige/civil unions:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/29/the-future-of-same-sex-marriage-ballot-measures/

[A cowboy always follows his beard]

Of course. Every time an anti-gay marriage bill is voted on, it passes.

[Verily]

can we get this moved to Nov 2012?...I think the voters need 6 more months to think it over

The GOP would have preferred that, but compromised to May 2012 to get conservative Democrats to go on board.

This would be a lot more likely to fail if it were held in November 2012. Right now, it's the same day as the GOP primary, which means there's basically no chance to defeat it.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

It should be made illegal to have initiatives/referendums to be held on days that are clearly advantageous for one side. They should only be allowed in November, outside of a few exceptions.

[Verily]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/10/nc-marriage-amendment-starts-with-lead.html

PPP's first look at the proposed marriage amendment in North Carolina since the legislature placed it on the ballot finds it leading 61-34. Republicans are overwhelmingly in favor of it (80/17) and independents (52/43) and Democrats (49/44) support it as well



Landslide.

Why exactly did the numbers flip since their last poll ?

Last time voters were opposed by 20 points, now they favor it by about 30 ?

Different wording?

Different pollster. The earlier poll was Elon University. PPP is probably more reliable, but Elon isn't terrible, and it's weird that they're showing such widely divergent results.

[Verily]

It should be made illegal to have initiatives/referendums to be held on days that are clearly advantageous for one side. They should only be allowed in November, outside of a few exceptions.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

So the NC ballot bans marriage and civil unions?

Nate Silver wrote a very detailed post about how there is a real difference between ballot initiatives to ban gay marraige vs. civil unions. Bassically, a bill that ONLY bans gay marriage is far more likely to pass. A bill that bans civil unions is less likely to pass.

Unfortunately, his predictions say that NC will probably vote to ban gay marraige/civil unions:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/29/the-future-of-same-sex-marriage-ballot-measures/

Well, since it also bans civil unions, there's a hope of defeating it. That happened in Arizona before the bigots settled for just banning gay marriage.

I wonder if there'll be a Proposition to legalize gay marriage on the next Proposition election here in California, which is November 2012.

[A cowboy always follows his beard]

So the NC ballot bans marriage and civil unions?

Nate Silver wrote a very detailed post about how there is a real difference between ballot initiatives to ban gay marraige vs. civil unions. Bassically, a bill that ONLY bans gay marriage is far more likely to pass. A bill that bans civil unions is less likely to pass.

Unfortunately, his predictions say that NC will probably vote to ban gay marraige/civil unions:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/29/the-future-of-same-sex-marriage-ballot-measures/

Well, since it also bans civil unions, there's a hope of defeating it. That happened in Arizona before the bigots settled for just banning gay marriage.

I wonder if there'll be a Proposition to legalize gay marriage on the next Proposition election here in California, which is November 2012.

You mean a repeal Propotition 8 thing? Probably not. But the vocal minority who are against it might just push it to the ballot, but it will fail because every time an election that includes a proposition/question/ammendment/whatever against homosexual marriage, the bigots win.

[Rochambeau jk I'm Hamilton]

Fundies are the Spawns of Satan.

[Is JCL in mushy sappy love]

Fundies are the Spawns of Satan.

This fundie begs to differ.

So the NC ballot bans marriage and civil unions?

Nate Silver wrote a very detailed post about how there is a real difference between ballot initiatives to ban gay marraige vs. civil unions. Bassically, a bill that ONLY bans gay marriage is far more likely to pass. A bill that bans civil unions is less likely to pass.

Unfortunately, his predictions say that NC will probably vote to ban gay marraige/civil unions:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/29/the-future-of-same-sex-marriage-ballot-measures/

Well, since it also bans civil unions, there's a hope of defeating it. That happened in Arizona before the bigots settled for just banning gay marriage.

I wonder if there'll be a Proposition to legalize gay marriage on the next Proposition election here in California, which is November 2012.

You mean a repeal Propotition 8 thing? Probably not. But the vocal minority who are against it might just push it to the ballot, but it will fail because every time an election that includes a proposition/question/ammendment/whatever against homosexual marriage, the bigots win those who believe in the traditional family win. Not everyone who opposes gay marriage and civil unions hates those individuals. We love them and want to come to Jesus and leave that life behind.

[President Marokai]

I don't understand why some people seem so surprised that this is going to pass. It may be slightly better than it's more southern comrades, but in the end it's still North Carolina.

[Smash255]

I don't understand why some people seem so surprised that this is going to pass. It may be slightly better than it's more southern comrades, but in the end it's still North Carolina.

NC has changed quite a bit over the years, and if this was held in November I doubt it would pass, especially with the current language, however with it on GOP Primary day it likely does pass.

[Governor Scott]

If PPP changed the wording, this makes it a toss-up.

I smell a legal battle.  The gay rights movement has grown stronger over the years, and they won't just let this happen.

[Governor Scott]

Wow.  The cops sure are busy these days.

[vern1988]

My guess about the best counties against the amendment would be:

Orange
Buncombe
Durham
Watauga
Guilford
Wake
Jackson
Mecklenburg
Cumberland
Forsyth

That seems about right to me. But I don't know much about North Carolina.

[Reaganfan]

If PPP changed the wording, this makes it a toss-up.

I smell a legal battle.  The gay rights movement has grown stronger over the years, and they won't just let this happen.

It'll happen but any challenge is likely to hinder their cause further. There is such a thing as pushing an agenda too far.

In the mid-1990s as a growing child, I learned about gay people and straight people...and didn't think any negativity about it either way. I didn't need to be bombarded by gay marriage, gay reality TV shows and gay celebrities coming out in highly publicized situations to change my viewpoint one way or another. If anything, getting this stuff shoved down our throats is quite possibly making people less open to the idea of gay marriage.

As I've said before, don't put the cart before the horse. You can have too much of a good thing and go too far and that's exactly why we don't have nationwide gay marriage. You're going too far.

Same is true for many other issues, even something like child obesity. Of course we should do all we can to decrease obesity, but by San Francisco banning Happy Meals at McDonalds...something that has become part of Americana....you're going too far.

Having teachers suggest banning white paper because they believe it instills racism at an early age for children...people are going insanely too far. It's making you look more nuts.

PETA wants to protect animal rights, okay...their cause. Let it be. But then to propose that an Oklahoma town of 3,000 named Slaughterville change it's name to "Veggieville" is taking it too far. The majority of people are gonna react by thinking y'all are nuts.

So in the final analysis, I don't think it's as much that people disagree, it's just that you don't want to overstep your boundaries. Liberals always do this, and that for them as equated to 27 of the last 42 years having Republican Presidents and a Supreme Court tilted to the right. The scariest part is that my liberal friends tell me that they see President Obama as not liberal enough.

[Marston]

If PPP changed the wording, this makes it a toss-up.

I smell a legal battle.  The gay rights movement has grown stronger over the years, and they won't just let this happen.

It'll happen but any challenge is likely to hinder their cause further. There is such a thing as pushing an agenda too far.

In the mid-1990s as a growing child, I learned about gay people and straight people...and didn't think any negativity about it either way. I didn't need to be bombarded by gay marriage, gay reality TV shows and gay celebrities coming out in highly publicized situations to change my viewpoint one way or another. If anything, getting this stuff shoved down our throats is quite possibly making people less open to the idea of gay marriage.

As I've said before, don't put the cart before the horse. You can have too much of a good thing and go too far and that's exactly why we don't have nationwide gay marriage. You're going too far.

Same is true for many other issues, even something like child obesity. Of course we should do all we can to decrease obesity, but by San Francisco banning Happy Meals at McDonalds...something that has become part of Americana....you're going too far.

Having teachers suggest banning white paper because they believe it instills racism at an early age for children...people are going insanely too far. It's making you look more nuts.

PETA wants to protect animal rights, okay...their cause. Let it be. But then to propose that an Oklahoma town of 3,000 named Slaughterville change it's name to "Veggieville" is taking it too far. The majority of people are gonna react by thinking y'all are nuts.

So in the final analysis, I don't think it's as much that people disagree, it's just that you don't want to overstep your boundaries. Liberals always do this, and that for them as equated to 27 of the last 42 years having Republican Presidents and a Supreme Court tilted to the right. The scariest part is that my liberal friends tell me that they see President Obama as not liberal enough.

I'm kind of new to this forum but is this person taken seriously around here?...

[Insula Dei]

If PPP changed the wording, this makes it a toss-up.

I smell a legal battle.  The gay rights movement has grown stronger over the years, and they won't just let this happen.

It'll happen but any challenge is likely to hinder their cause further. There is such a thing as pushing an agenda too far.

In the mid-1990s as a growing child, I learned about gay people and straight people...and didn't think any negativity about it either way. I didn't need to be bombarded by gay marriage, gay reality TV shows and gay celebrities coming out in highly publicized situations to change my viewpoint one way or another. If anything, getting this stuff shoved down our throats is quite possibly making people less open to the idea of gay marriage.

As I've said before, don't put the cart before the horse. You can have too much of a good thing and go too far and that's exactly why we don't have nationwide gay marriage. You're going too far.

Same is true for many other issues, even something like child obesity. Of course we should do all we can to decrease obesity, but by San Francisco banning Happy Meals at McDonalds...something that has become part of Americana....you're going too far.

Having teachers suggest banning white paper because they believe it instills racism at an early age for children...people are going insanely too far. It's making you look more nuts.

PETA wants to protect animal rights, okay...their cause. Let it be. But then to propose that an Oklahoma town of 3,000 named Slaughterville change it's name to "Veggieville" is taking it too far. The majority of people are gonna react by thinking y'all are nuts.

So in the final analysis, I don't think it's as much that people disagree, it's just that you don't want to overstep your boundaries. Liberals always do this, and that for them as equated to 27 of the last 42 years having Republican Presidents and a Supreme Court tilted to the right. The scariest part is that my liberal friends tell me that they see President Obama as not liberal enough.

I'm kind of new to this forum but is this person taken seriously around here?...

Short answer: No, he isn't.

Also, in before 'Classic Naso'.

[President Marokai]

If PPP changed the wording, this makes it a toss-up.

I smell a legal battle.  The gay rights movement has grown stronger over the years, and they won't just let this happen.

It'll happen but any challenge is likely to hinder their cause further. There is such a thing as pushing an agenda too far.

In the mid-1990s as a growing child, I learned about gay people and straight people...and didn't think any negativity about it either way. I didn't need to be bombarded by gay marriage, gay reality TV shows and gay celebrities coming out in highly publicized situations to change my viewpoint one way or another. If anything, getting this stuff shoved down our throats is quite possibly making people less open to the idea of gay marriage.

As I've said before, don't put the cart before the horse. You can have too much of a good thing and go too far and that's exactly why we don't have nationwide gay marriage. You're going too far.

Same is true for many other issues, even something like child obesity. Of course we should do all we can to decrease obesity, but by San Francisco banning Happy Meals at McDonalds...something that has become part of Americana....you're going too far.

Having teachers suggest banning white paper because they believe it instills racism at an early age for children...people are going insanely too far. It's making you look more nuts.

PETA wants to protect animal rights, okay...their cause. Let it be. But then to propose that an Oklahoma town of 3,000 named Slaughterville change it's name to "Veggieville" is taking it too far. The majority of people are gonna react by thinking y'all are nuts.

So in the final analysis, I don't think it's as much that people disagree, it's just that you don't want to overstep your boundaries. Liberals always do this, and that for them as equated to 27 of the last 42 years having Republican Presidents and a Supreme Court tilted to the right. The scariest part is that my liberal friends tell me that they see President Obama as not liberal enough.

I'm kind of new to this forum but is this person taken seriously around here?...

Only by other posters you also shouldn't take seriously.

[Governor Scott]

If PPP changed the wording, this makes it a toss-up.

I smell a legal battle.  The gay rights movement has grown stronger over the years, and they won't just let this happen.

It'll happen but any challenge is likely to hinder their cause further. There is such a thing as pushing an agenda too far.

In the mid-1990s as a growing child, I learned about gay people and straight people...and didn't think any negativity about it either way. I didn't need to be bombarded by gay marriage, gay reality TV shows and gay celebrities coming out in highly publicized situations to change my viewpoint one way or another. If anything, getting this stuff shoved down our throats is quite possibly making people less open to the idea of gay marriage.

As I've said before, don't put the cart before the horse. You can have too much of a good thing and go too far and that's exactly why we don't have nationwide gay marriage. You're going too far.

Same is true for many other issues, even something like child obesity. Of course we should do all we can to decrease obesity, but by San Francisco banning Happy Meals at McDonalds...something that has become part of Americana....you're going too far.

Having teachers suggest banning white paper because they believe it instills racism at an early age for children...people are going insanely too far. It's making you look more nuts.

PETA wants to protect animal rights, okay...their cause. Let it be. But then to propose that an Oklahoma town of 3,000 named Slaughterville change it's name to "Veggieville" is taking it too far. The majority of people are gonna react by thinking y'all are nuts.

So in the final analysis, I don't think it's as much that people disagree, it's just that you don't want to overstep your boundaries. Liberals always do this, and that for them as equated to 27 of the last 42 years having Republican Presidents and a Supreme Court tilted to the right. The scariest part is that my liberal friends tell me that they see President Obama as not liberal enough.

That's... no.

You aren't pushing an agenda "too far" by asking for equality.  And most of the stuff you said is just irrelevant.  What does the media glamorizing something have to do with something as basic as marriage equality?  Challenging the amendment, if it passes, isn't pushing it "too far".  It isn't impossible to overturn, either.  Just look at what's going on in California.  Prop 8 isn't even on the books anymore and got thrown in the court system to be dealt with.

This amendment is a complete waste of time.  All it will do is waste time and make the state of North Carolina viewed very unfavorably.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

My prediction is it'll pass 54-46.

[nclib]

bump for predictions with the election Tuesday.

[A cowboy always follows his beard]

It'll pass. Like I said earlier in the thread, every time gay marriage is voted on directly by the people, it fails. If this fails, it won't legalize it though, right?