I have to think that this hateful Amendment 1 is going to be overturned by the courts

[LynneSin]

I'm reading some of the stuff it outlaws and it's all bullshit. And personally, if a company wants to offer domestic partner health insurance what business is it of the government to say that is illegal? And personally, I think that any person, regardless of sexual preference, should be able to create a living will that says 'these are the people I want by my bedside' when I am in the hospital. Someone could have an abusive parent they don't want in the hospital and that person could be gay or straight.

The law is just beyond harsh, it's very unconstitutional and a perfect test case for in front of the courts.

[HockeyMom]

1. 15 years ago my niece worked for a national company

which offered domestic partner benefits. She covered her live in boyfriend when he was out of work. They didn't want to marry at that point in their lives. Why should they they be penalized for NOT marrying? NC is a popular retirement state for Seniors from the NE. How many of these retirees (straight) have gotten domestic partnerships so not to lose their benefits if they marry?

These laws will affect unmarried straight couples also.

[mmonk]

2. I think it will because it nulifies rights already provided and established.

It's discrimatory nature and recognizing only chuch unions as legal are problematic on its face. No District Court is going to go along with this.

[xchrom]

4. You can still get married by a JoP but it

Has to be 1 man, 1 woman.

[mmonk]

12. This list from the Bishop's office of The Episcopal Diocese list families affected

http://s3.amazonaws.com/dfc_attachments/public/documents/3157447/AmendmentOneLetterfinal.pdf

[xchrom]

15. +1

[mmonk]

14. See also my civil unions post as I put it in the wrong place.

[mmonk]

13. Civil unions have been legal but are now illegal.

[Ship of Fools]

3. question:

Draconian pro-life legislation is going pell-mell, but because of 5-4 SCOTUS,
most, if not all, legislation is being unchallenged right now. Would 5-4 SCOTUS
be a problem with NC Amendment 1 as well? I'd like to know what
anyone else thinks. Thank you.

[xchrom]

5. Companies will still be able to offer domestic partner benies

I think - but not cities, counties or state government.

They're already going after municipal domestic benefits - somebody called them 'faux marriage' benefits.

[jeff47]

6. The constitution can't be unconsititutional

Since it's literally part of the NC constitution now, state courts have to follow it.

At the federal level, I don't see how it would be overturned - being cruel is not unconstitutional.

[yardwork]

7. Yes. It is constitutional by definition.

There seem to be only two ways to overturn it. The state legislature would have to approve an amendment by a 4/5 majority, and then the people of North Carolina would have to vote to approve it. We see how unlikely that is to happen.

If the Supreme Court found a right to marriage in the U.S. Constitution, I suppose that that would overturn all the states that have written discrimination into their state constitutions. Or if the U.S. Congress passed a civil rights act that guaranteed rights to marriage for gay people, and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld it (because it would be contested in the courts), I suppose that all states would have to go along with that.

Obama's statement that these rights are left up to the states signals that the Democrats have no intention of doing anything like this. IF the Defense of Marriage Act is overturned in Congress, all that would do is ALLOW states to approve equal marriage rights if they chose. It would do nothing to force states like North Carolina to change their constitution or laws.

[rbixby]

8. wouldn't their other discriminatory constitutional amendment be a good place to start?

What happened with the amendment in the NC constitution that banned interracial marriage? Was it overturned by the courts or repealed?

[jeff47]

9. Overturned via Loving v. Virginia. (nt)

[jeff47]

10. DOMA doesn't do that

IF the Defense of Marriage Act is overturned in Congress, all that would do is ALLOW states to approve equal marriage rights if they chose.

DOMA doesn't require states to forbid marriage equality. DOMA says the Feds won't recognize same-sex marriage. States are free to do what they want.

Repealing DOMA means the Feds would recognize same-sex marriages. While that wouldn't require states to recognize same-sex marriages, it could lead to a lawsuit against the anti-marriage-equality states on an equal protection basis, much like Loving v. Virginia with interracial marriage.

[yardwork]

11. Good point. I realized that I misstated that when I posted. Should have corrected.

[Initech]

16. It's way past time to overturn DOMA

Considering the man who passed the act was cheating on his wife with cancer qt the time doesn't that alone make it a moot point?