Caution: this blog post details some seriously slimy crap being pulled by the Neanderthals in the state GOP. The anti-gay marriage amendment is now even worse than before.
Someone — it’s unclear which GOP strategist thought this up — left out the second of two sentences in the amendment when putting together the language to be used on the ballot next May. Voters now will be asked to approve or reject a constitutional amendment "to provide that marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state." The second sentence in the bill made it clear that the amendment would not bar businesses from offering benefits to domestic partners; that sentence has now — somehow — disappeared.
The GOP added the second sentence to reassure business interests who feared the amendment would alienate out-of-state companies looking to move to N.C. Apparently, it was a mere ploy. But here's a question: How do you justify passing a proposed amendment and then leaving out half of it when it’s put to N.C. citizens for a vote? What I really want to know is: how in hell is this legal?
Again, the original bill was bad enough. As UNC Law Professor Maxine Eichner writes, the original amendment “would also certainly ban civil unions” and “invalidate the domestic partner benefits now offered by several local governments, including the municipalities of Chapel Hill, Durham and Greensboro, and Mecklenburg and Orange counties.” Now, thanks to this latest GOP slimeball move, even businesses’ benefits programs will be “gay-proofed,” making North Carolina’s proposed amendment the most extreme anti-gay legislation in the U.S. At the very least, if the amendment is approved by voters, businesses would have to go to court to defend their non-discriminatory policies. That will bring those high-dollar corporations running to N.C., huh?
And in case you missed it yesterday, House Majority Leader "Skip" Stam, architect of the "We're All Barefoot and Ignorant Down Here" Act — er, rather, the anti-gay marriage amendment — engaged in a debate at UNC-Chapel Hill’s law school. During the debate, the Skipper explained that it's OK to discriminate against gays because, “different things can be treated differently if the things or people are in a very different relationship.” In other words, gays are now "things." We already knew you were pitifully backward, Skip; now we can thank you for confirming it.