Vote for marriage Minnesota?

Posted on May 4, 2012 by Andrew Payne

It appears that the majority of Vote for Marriage NC coalition’s “staff” are based outside of the state. This includes the campaign’s communications team.

Honest NC received an email from Vote for Marriage NC Communication’s director Rachel Lee. Typically these emails are from the @voteformarriagenc.com domain. But this email, titled “We Must Reach This Goal,” came from info@minnesotaformarriage.com.

Curious isn’t it. We looked a little more into it and discovered even more. Take a look at Minnesota for Marriage’s website:

Look familiar? Here’s Vote for Marriage NC’s website:

The arguments are the same as well as much of the copy. They even share the same abouts:

ABOUT MINNESOTA FOR MARRIAGE
Minnesota for Marriage is a broad coalition of leaders, both inter-faith and people outside the religious community, who support the Minnesota Marriage Amendment and asked the Legislature to place it on the ballot. These leaders have assembled a campaign to ensure this amendment passes.

About Vote FOR Marriage NC
Vote FOR Marriage NC is a bi-partisan, broad coalition of leaders, including leaders of various faiths as well as people outside the religious community, who support the North Carolina Marriage Protection Amendment and asked the Legislature to place it on the ballot. These leaders have assembled a campaign to ensure this amendment passes.

I’m curious if Amendment One supporters are aware that the “broad coalition of leaders” is actually a small group of outsiders? Not only do they wish to write discrimination into our State Constitution, but they are also willing to take North Carolinian’s money to support their out of state operation.

At least they could have brought some jobs to North Carolina while they spread their message of hate.

Tami Fitzgerald supports gay marriage

Posted on April 22, 2012 by Andrew Payne

In an unexpected turn of events – Vote for Marriage NC chairwoman Tami Fitzgerald has publicly announced her support for gay marriage:

Her comments were made in a column in the Durham Herald Sun. There is no word from the Vote for Marriage NC coalition as to when Fitzgerald will be asked to step down.

Tami’s tiffs

Posted on April 2, 2012 by Andrew Payne

Tami Fitzgerald, chairwoman of the Vote for Marriage NC campaign, is having trouble keeping her tiffs in the closet. Tami recently sent a message to her supporters outlining the public policy benefits of writing discrimination into North Carolina’s Constitution.

I’m not sure Tami wants her tiffs publicly exposed, but here they are:

“Think about it: if same sex marriage becomes the law in North Carolina, what will happen in North Carolina’s schools if teachers are required to teach from books that brainwash our kids into believing that ‘Mommy and Mommy’ and ‘Daddy and Daddy’ is the new normal?

“What will happen to marriage certificates if there is no husband and wife?

“Would churches have to allow same-sex marriages in their facilities?

“Would Christian wedding professional [sic] or inn-keepers be sued for refusing to recognize same-sex ceremonies?”

Now that Tami’s tiffs are in spotlight – I’ll quickly respond:

1. parenting is not a subject taught in public K-12 education in North Carolina;
2. marriage certificate forms can be revised (might I suggest Adobe Acrobat);
3. churches WOULD NOT be required to hold same-sex marriages in their facilities – a point made clear by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America;
4. anyone can be sued for anything at anytime, and fortunately for us – the process of recognition is not governed by law.

Thanks Tami for showing us your tiffs.

Voices of Bigotry

Posted on March 28, 2012 by Andrew Payne

The coalition supporting Amendment One, Vote for Marriage NC, recently released a video titled, “North Carolinians Voice their Support for the Marriage Protection Amendment.”

I have renamed the video, “Voices of Bigotry.” As titles are not protected by copyright, I urge you to make your own… the video is below.

Baby License

Posted on February 22, 2012 by Andrew Payne

“Protecting the interests of children is the primary reason that government regulates and licenses marriage. After all, government does not license or regulate any other form of intimate relationship – not friendship or dating. People are free, under the law, to live as they choose.

“But marriage is a special relationship reserved exclusively for heterosexual unions, because only the intimate relationship between men and women has the ability to produce children.

“By encouraging men and women to marry, society helps ensure that children will be known by and cared for by their biological parents. Marriage is society’s mechanism of increasing the likelihood that children will be born and raised by the two people responsible for bringing them into the world – their mother and father.”

The words of Rachel Lee, communications director for Vote FOR Marriage NC, a coalition of Amendment One supporters.

Sorry Rachel, my parents failed to get a license before having me. Perhaps that’s why I’m a vocal supporter of marriage equality? Rachel’s underlining logic automatically places some one like me in a “lower” category. And despite my “radical” views on equality – I would argue that I contribute the same, if not more, to my community as my friends and colleagues who were “licensed babies” do.

It’s okay to be a bastard. It’s okay to be gay. It’s okay to be straight. And it is okay for anyone to want to marry.

This issue is not about raising children – it is about equality.

In their own words – the “threat” to marriage

Posted on January 25, 2012 by Andrew Payne

“The marriage amendment is simple and straight-forward. It’s about preserving marriage as we’ve always known it and making sure that activist judges can’t redefine it in the future.” said Rev. Mark Harris, president of the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina.

THE THREAT TO MARRIAGE
by Vote FOR Marriage NC

The threat to our state’s definition of marriage is real. In fact, North Carolina is the only remaining southern state that has not protected the definition of marriage in its constitution. As we have seen happen in other states, the first of what will be many lawsuits was filed in North Carolina challenging our marriage laws in December of 2011. Each of these lawsuits demands that the definition of marriage for everyone be permanently changed to suit the needs of just one same-sex couple. The lawsuit filed in Guilford County, is just another example of why the Marriage Protection Amendment is needed and should be passed by North Carolina voters in May. If activist judges or politicians were to succeed in redefining marriage in North Carolina in the future, there would be profound consequences for religious organizations, individuals, medical professionals, and small businesses—and for society itself.

Contrary to what some people think, same-sex ‘marriage’ would not exist in the law alongside traditional marriage; as if it were a different expression of the same marriage institution they have always known. Marriage will be redefined for everyone. Our historic understanding of marriage as the union of one man and one woman would be replaced by a new paradigm for marriage as the union of two adults, regardless of gender.

This new, redefined version of marriage as a genderless institution would be the only legally recognized definition of marriage in North Carolina. Such a radical change in the definition of marriage will produce a host of societal conflicts that government, exercising its broad enforcement powers, will have to resolve. Citizens, small businesses and religious organizations whose own beliefs, traditions, morals or ethnic upbringing are at odds with the new definition of marriage will find themselves subjected to legal consequences if they do not act according to the new legal orthodoxy.

Continue reading →