Skip to main content

On May 8, the LGBT community will face the first of at least five anti-gay marriage ballot initiatives in 2012. North Carolina, concurrent with both Republican and Democratic primary races, will vote to approve or reject Amendment One to the state's constitution.

The conventional outlook that efforts to defeat this are hopeless was perfectly summed up by the proprietor of this site, when he said on Feb. 16:

Just looked it up latest PPP poll on that amendment, 56% in favor, 34% opposed. It's going to pass.

It'll be a while before we move the needle, on that issue, in any southern state, even the changing border ones.

A closer look reveals that the polling needn't be considered as hopeless as all that. For one thing, support is steadily tracking downward, the January poll was five points less than on taken in September, which showed 61 percent support.

And in fact, another poll, conducted by Elon University in November 2011, showed that 56 percent of adults opposed the amendment.

Ballotpedia has a summary of nine recent polls, four of which show it passing, four show it failing (one shows support leading, but at 49 percent). It's tough, it's foreboding, but progressives have fought—and won—against longer odds in the past.

A look at PPP's cross tabs are even more revealing, only 40 percent of North Carolinians are supportive of the amendment's goal, and what will be its ultimate outcome: absolutely no recognition for any same-sex families' rights, forever. In fact, adding those who support marriage and civil unions shows a real potential for 57 percent opposition. From Public Policy Polling's summary of Jan. 12:

57% of North Carolinians support some form of legal recognition for gay couples- either full marriage rights or civil unions- to only 40% who are completely opposed to any rights for same sex couples.
Tom Jensen at PPP spells it out:
About 20% of North Carolinians support legal recognition for gays and plan to vote for the marriage amendment. Getting those folks to change their minds will be the key for those hoping to defeat it.
The voters are out there. They just are ignorant of what the amendment actually does (bans civil unions, domestic partnership or any other recognition). And in fact they are actively being deceived, opponents are already spreading the misinformation—call it what it is, a lie—that voting against the amendment is voting to help the gays "redefine marriage" (their favorite catchphrase). They depend on misinformation and ignorance to win.

I should confess to being among those who'd written off North Carolina as a fait accompli and unwinnable.

But on Monday, I spoke with organizers and their "Yes, we can!" attitude was truly contagious (remember that?).

But better than their enthusiasm, they seem to have a hatched out a strong pathway to success. At this point they have a staff of 30, 26 in seven field offices, and are making 20,000 voter calls a week. They have also looped in 117 groups into their Truth Squad that will participate in fact-checking the many lies that always emanate from the religious right opponents to LGBT equality.

These organizers are getting increasingly sophisticated and aggressive and learning from mistakes of the past. Protect ALL NC Families has a full-time faith outreach director working with 225 supportive congregations. North Carolina is also only the second time that a state-level NAACP office has engaged in such a battle, and they are doing so aggressively. They brought Chad Griffin onboard as a paid media consultant. Griffin is the driving force behind the successful constitutional challenge of Proposition 8, and founder of Americans Foundation for Equal Rights, and also the incoming President of Human Rights Campaign.

It's important to realize too that another piece of conventional wisdom is also wrong: that the gays always lose.

(Continue reading below the fold)

In fact, in Arizona in 2006, an amendment to the Arizona State Constitution that would have banned marriage equality did fail, opponents of marriage equality never mention that failure though. The state did eventual approve a less draconian amendment in 2008, but the lessons for success can still be gleaned from the earlier battle.

So. How did the state that voted down Martin Luther King Day also come to vote down a gay marriage ban? James Burroway at the Box Turtle Bulletin shared some thoughts here, they boil down to:

  1. a hapless organization supporting the proposition,
  2. a brilliant, well-researched and disciplined campaign against the proposition,
  3. A "de-gayed" message that focused on the proposition’s impact on heterosexual couples,
  4. and the unique climate and circumstances of the LGBT community in Arizona.
Paul Hogarth also did a post-mortem in November 2006: How Arizona Beat Anti-Gay Bigotry.

In truth, Arizona overreached with a draconian ban on any legal partnership recognition outside of opposite-sex legal marriage. This is the same flaw the proposed North Carolina amendment has.

Paul Hogarth spoke to Arizona State Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, chair of Arizona Together, the campaign that worked to defeat the initiative. (Now running for US Congress, by the way.) She said, "We did a better job investing resources in message development and carried it on with ruthless discipline. We had a very articulated three-prong strategy of (a) do the research, (b) tell the truth and (c) always stay on message."

“We called it a ‘bait-and-switch,’” said Sinema. “Our campaign focused on why would you want to take away the domestic benefits and legal protections of unmarried partners.”

Voters don’t think – they feel. ...

By showing how the Marriage Amendment could hurt real people who swing voters in Arizona could relate to, the campaign was able to make their argument more effectively.

As there is no reason to believe North Carolinians are any less open to persuasion and education than Arizonians, organizers there have effectively torn a page from the Arizona strategy.
One sheet
Protect ALL NC Families one-sheet (pdf here.)
The campaign is working hard to disseminate the information that this amendment takes out a lot of collateral damage not just the LGBT community, including:

Single women

In Ohio, a similar amendment lead a judge to conclude that domestic violence laws passed to protect women were not applicable to unmarried partners, who are not unrecognized by law. March 24, 2005:

Ohio Judge Stuart Friedman has held that part of the domestic violence law is unconstitutional under that amendment, and that the domestic violence law cannot be applied to unmarried people.
Amidst the chaos, convictions were overturned and prosecutors were forced to file reduced charges against perpetrators. The NC ACLU agrees (pdf), the amendment could be construed to "Invalidate protections against domestic violence to members of unmarried couples."

Children

Some children will lose their health insurance, it will happen. Amendment One strips the domestic partnership benefits currently offered to unmarried employees by local governments, including Asheville, Carrboro, Chapel Hill, Durham, Greensboro, and Mecklenburg, Durham and Orange Counties.

For this reason, Duke University issued a statement saying, We Stand Alongside the LGBT Community, explaining the commitment they have to treating their faculty and students fairly and extending domestic partnership benefits to all families. These are benefits they will no longer be able to offer.

The elderly

The elderly too may find Social Security, retirement or pension benefits may be affected by the decision to wed. Some may avail themselves of other domestic partnership benefits available to them, while remaining officially unwed. These benefits may be stripped of them as well.

Proponents of the bill have tried to dismiss these concerns as "ridiculous" but the Charlotte Observer, one of the state's two largest papers says they are very legitimate, and added some more complaints themselves. Friday, the paper published an editorial "Marriage bill jeopardizes rights of more than gays."

"It's a shame this unwise and unnecessary amendment is even on the ballot. It wrongly writes discrimination into the state's constitution - and it jeopardizes protections for straights as well as gays. Voters should reject this legislation."

Reasons for optimism


The initial news that the vote had been moved from the general election to the primary seemed like a death knell. But news coming out of NC since has given cause to be optimistic. In addition to the sinking support in the polls, there will in all likelihood, be a contested primary for the Governor's race, an encouraging sign the larger Democratic coalition will be more inclined to turn out.

And kids on the ground in North Carolina colleges are showing a big interest in the Amendment. Universities across the state are passing resolutions of condemnation, including NC State University, NC Central, Guilford College and UNC-Greensboro, UNC-Chapel Hill, East Carolina University, UNC-Asheville. Not surprising as nearly 80 percent of college age voters oppose Amendment One. It's helpful too that NC has three weeks of open voting prior to May 8, a particularly useful instrument for corralling the youth vote. There isn't a better opportunity for the Democrats to play the politics of contrast than to answer the GOP's call to battle here.

The enthusiasm of the youth vote does offer an opportunity for the larger Democratic coalition to get in on the ground floor with voter registration and early get out the vote efforts, something that Team Obama seems to recognize, as they are almost surely going to be fighting hard for this state in November. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius speaking before 1,4000 folks at a Human Rights Campaign dinner in Charlotte said:

"I know there's an important election in early May in North Carolina. And I think it's a great template for what needs to be done to organize people and turn out people for November. North Carolina is hugely important in this next (presidential) election."
Protect ALL Families NC reports that Organizing For America NC has been very supportive and engaged in coordinating efforts. OFA has been happy to report strong support numbers in President Obama's uncontested primary battle, sometimes outperforming the GOP contest. Amendment One offers an opportunity to piggyback on a GOTV effort that has a real sense of urgency for many young, progressive North Carolinians.

There is still an unanswered ask out to DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz to appropriate some resources to this fight, something she said she'd consider. She might consider this could be fertile grounds for recruiting quite an electoral army in November, in terms of list building and volunteer outreach and voter registration drives.

Custom Avatar
Custom avatar via Protect ALL NC Families
The Protect ALL NC Families coalition itself is cleverly appealing to the youth market devising innovative hooks into social networks like fundraising pages, and customizing avatars on Facebook and Twitter to show opposition. The page also includes downloadable templates for bumperstickers, yardsigns, logos for tee-shirts and other ways Protect ALL NC Families supporters can customize the campaign branding as their own.

There is also a page Protect ALL NC Families supporters can share their own stories of opposition, in words, pictures or video, a vital component to modern social networking.

Race To The Ballot
On Feb. 11 Race to the Ballot drew thousands to downtown Raleigh including NAACP President and
CEO Ben Jealous. Above organizer Jen Jones (center) with friends. (Facebook)
We can hope for generous ad buys and slick and effective commercials, but there really isn't a shortcut to doing the ground work. The campaigns that have prospered in the past did this work, they reached out to communities and just plain had a lot of conversations. And a state-wide coordinated Race To The Ballot program has embarked on a 322 mile run "from the mountains of Asheville, N.C., to the coastal city of Wilmington, N.C.", raising awareness of the harm of the amendment, holding rallies and town halls and with the goal of sparking "1 million conversations."

Given NC Republican Senator Richard Burr's vote to repeal "Don't ask, don't tell," and an increased focus on the injustice of denying family benefits to LGBT military families, the coalition may be wise to work to enlist the support from members of NC's substantial military community to stand up for their own. Such a strategy might have been unthinkable just a few years ago, but the edict of silence has since been lifted for LGBT supporters in the military community, and they are increasingly speaking out.

Kicking into drive


The coalition kicked their work into overdrive this week, releasing the video above, titled "Momentum." It features President and CEO of the NAACP Ben Jealous, the Rev. William Barber President of North Carolina NAACP, President Barack Obama and countless local validators voicing their opposition.

Response from the initial push has been encouraging, Nation Hahn from the Coalition to Protect ALL NC Families had this to report since Thursday's launch:

  • In just the first three days of this week we signed up more volunteers and made more voters contact than in the seven days previous.
  • This week alone we have 378 individual contributors - pushing us above the 2,200 donor threshold. Grassroots donors continue to be the bread and butter of this campaign - and we hope that major donors join them. In state major donors, for the most part, are beginning to contribute - we've received two gifts of 10k plus this week for example.
  • Faith outreach continues to accelerate --- we are the first Southern LGBT campaign, to our knowledge, to have a full time faith outreach director who has built a faith program from scratch.
The clouds are of course on the horizon, National Organization for Marriage, perhaps seeing the falling poll numbers just jumped in on Friday, sending out panicked-sounding, hair-on-fire missive that said (emphasis theirs):
We’ve just learned that gay marriage supporters in North Carolina have been stockpiling mountains of cash.
"Stockpiling mountains" is their usual hysterical hyperbole, but the truth is Protect ALL Families NC's fundraising is currently outpacing their opponents, something NOM probably didn't plan on. This state of affairs surely won't continue as NOM's deep-pocket, tax-exempt "charitable" benefactors will soon be dropping large sums of out-of-state cash into the effort to enshrine discrimination into the NC constitution. The "collections for elections" machine of the Church is a powerful force.

And while Protect ALL Families' $600,000 fundraising so far is impressive, they still have a long ways to go. The goal is $3 million to wage an effective campaign. Ninety-two percent of donors have been in-state, but the national donors, big and small have lagged. Checkbooks aren't closed, but they aren't open, it seems there is an an attitude of wait-and-see. But for the people in the state to effectively exploit their current positive momentum, the waiting must end. Even grassroots efforts benefit from the ability to hire full-time paid organizers.

The LGBT community is sure to break the religious right's winning streak in 2012 among the five battles looming. In some ways, North Carolina could be the sweetest and most resounding victory of all, just precisely because the conventional wisdom has written it off as undoable. I can't imagine a more effective way to strike the fear of God into the hearts of marriage equality opponents than to see (another) southern state vote down an amendment like this. Recall the national shock waves that followed Mississippi voting down the personhood amendment after so many serious people declared it was destined to pass?

It presents a real opportunity to knock the religious right back on their heels. Imagine the panicked spin they'd have to put out in the wake of such a humiliating defeat just six months before they head into Maine, Washington, Minnesota and Maryland to waged the very same battle. Brian Brown President of National Organization for Marriage said Friday:

If our opponents were to steal victory in North Carolina, it would be devastating for the cause of marriage nationwide—and they know it.
There was another man who beat some long odds defeating an anti-gay amendment, the Briggs Initiative, way back in the days of disco. He too was told it couldn't be done. Somehow he and his coalition convinced the voting public of the great state of California in 1978 that it was okay to let gay people teach their children, all the hysterical, hateful hyperbole of Anita Bryant notwithstanding. His name was Harvey Milk, and his catch-phrase was, "You gotta give 'em hope."

I sent a little hope down to North Carolina myself this week.

My friend and fellow blogger, Pam Spaulding, herself a North Carolinian, taped a message on her thoughts, above. Her blog Pam's House Blend, may be one of the best sources for news of this ballot fight (along with Protect ALL NC Families and EqualityNC).

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 02:30 PM PST.

Also republished by DKos Asheville.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Dunno. (8+ / 0-)

    I am a native Southerner, and I will never, EVER, underestimate the ability of the Bible Belt to do whatever it takes to smite teh gay.  Ivory tower liberals in their coastal and college town enclaves simply have no inkling of the power of the "Christian" church in the southeastern quadrant of America, and the church down there is conservative evangelical sharia law scary stuff.  I managed to escape (to the Mountain West, where bigotry is only slightly less intense), so I'm here to tell you, we may limp along in this piecemeal state by state marriage equality bullshit for a good long time, but if any attempt is made to federalize this civil right, we may be looking at a second Civil War.  It's that much of a big deal down there, make no mistake...

    When do I get to vote on your marriage?

    by jarhead5536 on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 02:40:16 PM PST

    •  It could go either way (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      yaque, Charles Hall

      I notice that it's always people who "no longer live in the South", or have NEVER lived in the South, that claim to have such an exact handle on the demographics of Southern states now--especially NC which has always been more progressive than the rest.

      As mentioned, if people truly knew the harms of what this amendment would cause, it would fair with some significant margin. Most people in NC do support at least civil unions for same-sex couples. However, the Right Wing is doing their best to cover up the actual ramifications of Amendment One and claiming that child custody, domestic violence, and other "unmarried couple" issues would not be affected.

      Even people who support marriage equality are misinformed and lots think that there is some possible outcome of this amendment that could allow gay marriage, which of course is very wrong: same-sex marriage is already unrecognized in NC by statute, and that will not change. But many on the correct side of the issue are muddying the waters by starting arguments with people about the reasons they should support gay marriage, rather than the reasons people should vote down this amendment.

      as in every close election, it will be decided by the middle, which in this case are those who are not quite there yet on supporting same-sex marriage, but at the same time see the dangers of such an overreaching amendment. These are the folks who need to be brought in and told the facts, and yet some of our own people are instead wasting their energy trying to engage them in arguments for same-sex marriage instead of hte truly pressing issue of getting them against the amendment.

  •  I follow EqualityNC on Facebook. (11+ / 0-)

    They do seem to be gaining ground. I hope they succeed.

  •  Hmmm? Does the fact that North Carolina is (7+ / 0-)

    a Semi-Closed primary (open to Independents but not to registered voters of opposition parties, i.e. Dems) affect who can vote?

    It seems really fucked up to allow a constitutional amendment for any state during primary voting... especially if not every eligible voter is allowed to vote.

    "Converts are the worst bigots." -- Max Headroom

    by jethrock on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 02:54:34 PM PST

    •  p.s. Obviously there is a Democratic primary (7+ / 0-)

      as-well. But since there is not any challenge to Obama Democratic turn out will be low in all of these states.

      "Converts are the worst bigots." -- Max Headroom

      by jethrock on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:01:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The NC Dems are having (13+ / 0-)

        a contested primary for Gov - the incumbent recently withdrew from her re-election bid.

        •  That will help on Amendment One... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jethrock, Jake Goad

          Whether it helps enough to shoot it down, I'm not sure. Most UNC System schools do have an active chapter of Protect, including UNCW (UNC-Wilmington).

          The General Assembly (now controlled in both Huoses by Repubs) stipulated that the vote be on primary day (May 8) precisely because the thought Democrats would not have contested races for any major state-wide offices. Bev Perdue's decision not to run for re-election changed that--and likely, for the better as far as Democratic turnout is concerned.

          "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."--George Santayana

          by GainesT1958 on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 06:24:18 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Primary voting (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          scotths, jethrock, saluda, Matt Z

          Just to clarify - voting on the Amendment is open to all registered voters, regardless of party affiliation. I would expect in some precincts that unaffiliated voters will be the majority.

          The original intent of the legislature was certainly to maximize Republican turnout, since there was no top of the ticket Democratic primary. That's changed, although the announced Dem candidates for governor are somewhat uninspiring. The Republican presidential primary will be done by May 8. Maybe some Ron Paul supporters will show up on the Republcan side. The good news is that they are almost universally against the Amendment.

          Several weeks of early voting means that we expect to see decent turnout amongst college students who are registering to vote specifically on the Amendment.

          This is not a lost cause. If you can spare 20 bucks to help out in NC, you can help us draw the line in the sand.

      •  Here in Ohio an independent voter is given an (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jethrock, deedogg, scotths, Matt Z

        issues-only ballot for primary elections. Failing to allow any mechanism for non-party-affiliated citizens to vote on a constitutional amendment or any other non-candidate issue would be illegal federally.

        Rakoff for president! "An application of judicial power that does not rest on facts is worse than mindless, it is inherently dangerous.."

        by davidincleveland on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:44:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  This isn't Ohio, it's NC (0+ / 0-)

          What the law is in Ohio is completely irrelevant to the laws in North Carolina (duh). In NC, registered Democrats can only vote for Democrats in primaries; Republicans can only vote for Republicans, and Unaffiliateds can vote EITHER. In every case, a voter can vote on something like a ballot Amendment.

          How other states handle their voting is not relevant here.

          BTW, a lot of Democrats are switching to Unaffiliated thanks to the wingbat Republicans who overtook the NC Legislature in 2010 and caused this amendment. They will be voting on Republican ballots to oust the most right-wing candidates where they can (one reason I've been registered Unaffiliated for as long as they have allowed Unaffiliateds to vote on either ballot)

          •  Why the dismissive hostility? (0+ / 0-)
            This isn't Ohio, it's NC What the law is in Ohio is completely irrelevant to the laws in North Carolina (duh). [snip] How other states handle their voting is not relevant here.
            I began my comment with Ohio's rules specifically to indicate that primary rules differ from state to state, while making the point that every state is federally required to provide a mechanism to allow non-party-affiliated voters to vote on issues (though not candidates). I was hoping to elicit NC-specific rules in response, for our general education about the situation there. You came through with that part magnificently:
            In NC, registered Democrats can only vote for Democrats in primaries; Republicans can only vote for Republicans, and Unaffiliateds can vote EITHER. In every case, a voter can vote on something like a ballot Amendment. [snip]
            BTW, a lot of Democrats are switching to Unaffiliated thanks to the wingbat Republicans who overtook the NC Legislature in 2010 and caused this amendment. They will be voting on Republican ballots to oust the most right-wing candidates where they can (one reason I've been registered Unaffiliated for as long as they have allowed Unaffiliateds to vote on either ballot)
            As you can see from my sig (changed in the middle of this thread) I am a supporter. Some unsolicited advice for you; don't be dismissive of supporters or potential supporters unless you're quite sure you don't and never will need their help.

            Volunteer in NC against the proposed constitutional amendment. Contribute from in or out of the state. Yes, we can.

            by davidincleveland on Mon Mar 05, 2012 at 08:34:48 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  I thought (4+ / 0-)

      anyone can show up and vote on ballot questions, regardless of party?

      •  Yeah... my point (I guess) is that with Demcratic (5+ / 0-)

        Presidential primary being non-existant this year turn-out on the Democratic side will be low.

        But hopefully the primary for the Governor will help.

        I'm just wondering about this out loud as I type.

        "Converts are the worst bigots." -- Max Headroom

        by jethrock on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:08:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm pessimistic (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jethrock, deedogg, Matt Z

          that assuming Democrat = NO is valid. It could end up drawing anti-marriage Democrats.

          •  True. Sadly. nt (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            newdem1960, deedogg, Matt Z

            "Converts are the worst bigots." -- Max Headroom

            by jethrock on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:19:37 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Based on this Gallup poll from last year... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            davidincleveland

            Democrats supported gay marriage by a wide margin nationally 69%

            For First Time, Majority of Americans Favor Legal Gay Marriage  

            "Converts are the worst bigots." -- Max Headroom

            by jethrock on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:56:24 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  True (0+ / 0-)

            Yes, it is true that just being Democratic does not equate to supporting gay rights and/or voting against this amendment. The African-American community is a prime example: while overwhelmingly Democratic, many black churches are VERY conservative on social issues and preaching to vote FOR the amendment.

            OTOH, just being a Republican does not equate to a YES vote. Indeed, the truly "classic conservative", small-government Republican stance on this is very much AGAINST laws that curtail people's rights to define their private relationships--let alone amending the Constitution. More and more conservative groups are publicly speaking out AGAINST the amendment, and one of the first to speak out in the 'I'm not for same-sex marriage, but I also cannot support this Amendment" was Congresswoman Renee Ellmers, a Freshman Tea Party Republican who has just been deemed "the most conservative member of Congress from NC"! So she, at least, is consistent in truly being on the side of "smaller government", and there are other Republicans like her (my own father among them).

            All of this makes it even harder to predict a winner.

        •  It was done on purpose (4+ / 0-)

          It was purposely done this way by Republicans who knew they would have a better chance of victory if the referendum was on the primary ballot rather than the general election ballot.  And it was acquiesced to by Dems who weren't up for the fight.  But they were wrong then, and we are up for the fight now.  So yes, the deck was stacked purposely against us; they're not called the party of Limbaugh for nothing.  As the woman in the first video states, "I rise to oppose this!"

      •  Unaffiliated voters in NC (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jethrock, bootes53

        are most certainly allowed to vote in primaries. They simply request whether they want a D or an R ballot. The Amendment will be on both ballots.

        "Whenever a fellow tells me he's bipartisan, I know he's going to vote against me."-- Harry S. Truman

        by irmaly on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 06:31:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Show NC is still full of Bigots Vote Yes on 1. (7+ / 0-)

    This bill would prevent protection for women from domestic violence in situations where the couple is not married.

    It is just a stupid bill.  All it does is prevent, maybe, the NC Supreme Court from mandating equal marriage.  The NC Supreme Court is no where near that decision.

    Furthermore, this Amendment if it passes will be overturned in less than a decade

    In the mean time it will hurt families big time.

    But I predict it will not pass.  Democrats will be turning out in large numbers for the Gov. primary and we all know turnout for Rmoney will be poor.

    Bob "Trans-Vaginal" McDonnell...just saying...again ... and again....

    by NCJim on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:00:07 PM PST

    •  I know of no tactful way to put this (6+ / 0-)

      but I'll try ... there's a certain segment of registered Dems that are quite anti-gay.

      •  In NC I'd rather bet on a Democrat. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        deedogg, davidincleveland

        Bob "Trans-Vaginal" McDonnell...just saying...again ... and again....

        by NCJim on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:36:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  note the NAACP support. Don't be so sure (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        deedogg, davidincleveland, jethrock

        of what you are trying not to say.

        We're not perfect, but they're nuts! -- Barney Frank

        by Tamar on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:37:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No need to be tactful. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        davidincleveland, kayak58

        There is a very large segment of Dems that are anti-gay.  They are called religious liberals, generally people of color in the evangelical church, and Catholics of every color.  They are with us on poverty issues, war issues, and general social justice broadly, but embrace of teh gay is too much outside what their pastors/priests say to them every Sunday...

        When do I get to vote on your marriage?

        by jarhead5536 on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:24:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Actually, lay Roman Catholics (0+ / 0-)

          (as opposed to members of the Roman Catholic hierarchy) are more supportive of marriage equality than the general population.

          The issue several people are trying to skirt around is that among African-Americans, support/opposition for gay issues doesn't  correlate as strongly with party ID as it does for whites. It's a "range restriction effect"; black Americans overwhelmingly identify as Democrats, so black people with anti-gay attitudes are much less likely than anti-gay white people to identify as Republican. it's just one of the occupational hazards of being the big-tent party.

          Lots of prominent African-American leaders and organizations have, of course, spoken out against Amendment 1, and that needs to be publicized far and wide. We just have to avoid the trap of treating party ID as a surrogate for people's positions on the amendment.

          Banksters are harmful for the same reason neutrinos are harmless: neither are inclined to share what they've got (wealth and energy, respectively)

          by ebohlman on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 07:07:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I've always thought that that is because (0+ / 0-)

            Catholics understand the difference between civil marriage and religious marriage better than the general population does, since divorced Catholics who then remarry generally must accept that they can be legally remarried but will not be able to have a Catholic wedding, and that so far as the Catholic Church is concerned they're still married to their ex-spouse.  (We saw this in Spain too, in which predominantly Catholic voters voted in support of civil marriage equality.)

            Other major denominations recognize divorce, and marry divorced people in a religious ceremony, much more easily, and so religious people attending those churches really do not understand about legal marriage being entirely different from religious marriage.

            •  Plausible (0+ / 0-)

              [Only reason I didn't rec your comment is that the time for doing so had expired]

              Same thing happened in Argentina.

              In the US, there might also be a geographical factor at work. American Catholics are disproportionately a Northern, urbanized population and both living in the North and living in urban areas are positively correlated with support for marriage equality. It would be interesting to run a log-linear model to see if the relationship still holds up when you control for geography (i.e. to what extent are Northern urban Catholics more supportive of equality than Northern urban non-Catholics).

              Banksters are harmful for the same reason neutrinos are harmless: neither are inclined to share what they've got (wealth and energy, respectively)

              by ebohlman on Tue Mar 06, 2012 at 05:30:53 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  No question (0+ / 0-)

        That is absolutely true, but at least it levels the playing field to have roughly equal numbers of Ds and Rs turning out if the Presidential Race is sewn up by then while statewide Democratic candidates are competitive.

  •  rec'd for hope (12+ / 0-)

    If nothing else, force the NOM anti-gay creeps to spend money so they will have less for ME, WA, MN, and MD.

  •  Mississippi, not Missouri-- even better ;) / (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    davidincleveland

    If man could be crossed with the cat, it would improve man, but it would deteriorate the cat. -SC/MT . -9.4, -7.0

    by Amayi on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:09:13 PM PST

  •  Bradley Effect? (8+ / 0-)

    It always seems to show up by a few points.  Nobody wants to tell a pollster they're a raging bigot, but once in the privacy of the voting booth, it becomes apparent.

    Personal bet is that it passes by a small amount.  Which, actually, in NC is a major accomplishment in and of itself.

    I always hate these things.  Yeah, let's put civil rights up to a vote, because what the majority wants is going to be fair.  Sure.

    Let's vote state-by-state on that slavery thing, too, while we're at it.  I guarantee at least five would re-enact it.

    (-6.25, -6.77) Moderate left, moderate libertarian

    by Lonely Liberal in PA on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:14:14 PM PST

  •  It is unfortunate that we have found a way..... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lonely Liberal in PA

    ....to get absolutely every religious nut to the polls. Look, this didn't work in California. It won't work in North Carolina and you will succeed in cleaving further the divide between religious blacks and liberals and progressives.

    I want more (and better!) marriage for all, but you have to look at the bigger picture, too. I want a Congress and a White House that won't make an attack on gays a priority.

    Why are we handing Romney an issue? Why are we handing him North Carolina?

    •  It was the Teabag Republicans (12+ / 0-)

      in the NC General Assembly who forced this issue onto the ballot in May. It was deliberate, and was designed to capitalize on the absence of a contested Democratic primary.

      A guy named Art Pope, affectionalely known here as "Fart Dope", and essentially NC's own little Koch Brother, bought the Tepukes enough seats in the General Assembly to capture majorities in both chambers. It has been a disaster. Sure, NC Democrats have been plagued with a lot of Blew Dawgs over the years, but they've never been as bad as the fetid, rotting garbage disguised in human form that has created such a putrid stench in our legislature.

      It wasn't "our" fault.

      "Bernie Madoff's mistake was stealing from the rich. If he'd stolen from the poor he'd have a cabinet position." -OPOL

      by blue in NC on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:58:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I heard it was "our" fault because they needed Dem (0+ / 0-)

        votes and got them in exchange for moving the vote to the Primary as opposed to the general...

        One should no more deplore homosexuality than left-handedness. ~Towards a Quaker View of Sex, 1964 (Proud left-handed queer here!) SSP: wmlawman

        by AUBoy2007 on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:00:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm not sure what, if any, benefit (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          davidincleveland, FogCityJohn

          the Dems would have seen in a May referendum.

          A Constitutional Amendment question needs only 60% majorities in both houses of the legislature, and cannot be vetoed. It passed in the Senate with the absolute minimum 30 votes required (30-16), with NOT ONE DEMOCRAT voting for it (such is the overpowering Repuke majority we now suffer under here in NC).

          In the House, it passed 75-42 (needed 72 to pass). It got 10 Democratic votes, but we have long been plagued by the rotting piles of garbage known as Blew Dawgs. I suspect that the Dem votes in the house were due more to Blew Dawgishness than any "deal" with the Repukers.

          "Bernie Madoff's mistake was stealing from the rich. If he'd stolen from the poor he'd have a cabinet position." -OPOL

          by blue in NC on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:17:01 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  From what I understand, it was not that (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Iberian

            we wanted it in May, but that we did NOT want in November, or during the general election.

            One should no more deplore homosexuality than left-handedness. ~Towards a Quaker View of Sex, 1964 (Proud left-handed queer here!) SSP: wmlawman

            by AUBoy2007 on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:24:31 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  That is the case (0+ / 0-)

              And you don't need to say "we" because most Democrats didn't want it at all--but enough to get it passed thought that sacrificing this issue in May would make NC Bluer in November, which it almost certainly will--let's just hope it comes out the correct way BOTH times!

        •  THere are (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blue in NC

          a few of pieces of shit D representatives that have voted even to overcome several of the Governor's vetos

        •  That is in fact the consensus (0+ / 0-)

          Yes, it has been pretty much agreed upon that conservative Democrats did in fact agree to vote to pass this through, with the stipulation that it be moved to the primary, where rabid wingbat homophobic Republicans couldn't harm their (Dems') own races. Even "moderate" Dem governor Beverly Purdue supposedly went along with this (not that she had a vote, but she had influence of course).

          And frankly, that could end up a good thing if it ends up getting more Dems elected and throwing NC once again to Obama--while possibly overturning the Amendment after all if the change in competitive races in May evens out.

          As a native North Carolinian right on the trenches, working against this every day, it really is a nail-biter. Please contact EVERYBODY you know in NC and get them to register and VOTE AGAINST ON MAY 8!

      •  It is our fault for pushing this..... (0+ / 0-)

        .....without thinking of the bigger picture.

        •  Dems didn't put it on the ballot. (9+ / 0-)

          Republicans did.

          Dems and supporters of equality are just fighting it.

          Therefore your comments on this thread make no sense. Unless you are advocating for Dems NOT to fight it.

          "Converts are the worst bigots." -- Max Headroom

          by jethrock on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:13:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Who do you mean by "our"? (10+ / 0-)

          If by "our" you mean NC non-blew-dawg Democrats, We didn't put this on the ballot. We didn't choose the May date. We aren't "pushing this", and never were. We opposed this putrid piece of shit with every fiber of our being. We did everything we could do to keep this stinking rotted pile of garbage off the ballot. In fact, even most blew dawgs opposed this filth.

          What did "we" do wrong?

          "Bernie Madoff's mistake was stealing from the rich. If he'd stolen from the poor he'd have a cabinet position." -OPOL

          by blue in NC on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:23:31 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  As Blue in NC states ... (10+ / 0-)

          ... we, North Carolina progressives, fought the legislation that put this on the ballot; and we were nearly successful, it was a close vote and there were passionate voices against it.

          Our state has been devastated in the wake of the 2010 election.  Low Dem turnout resulted in the Republicans taking over the legislature; and as a result, many here in North Carolina have been shocked by the resulting legislation.  I'm hopeful that, now that we have a governor's race on the ballot, that we will be able to get people out to the polls in May.  PPP's polling shows that when voters know the full extent of this proposed amendment, they don't support it.  So it's a matter of educating the voters and then getting them to the polls.  It is worth the fight.

          •  The legislation was the inevitable reaction..... (0+ / 0-)

            ......to something we pushed.  Like Governor Christie, they simply couldn't be HAPPIER that we handed them this issue.

            If you can't "educate" the voters on this issue in California (and you couldn't -- believe me) than you can't educate them in North Carolina.

            In all the black churches, and all the white churches this will be a big fucking deal.

            Now is NOT the time to be pushing this issue. The reaction brings out every voter you don't want for the election.

            •  I'll say it one more time... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              blue in NC

              You know nothing about NC politics, clearly. NOBODY in NC on the progressive side "pushed" this issue, because Democrats correctly know that NC is not ready to address this. The REPUBLICANS have been pushing for this amendment for 8 years and had it held back for 7 of those years until the recession-aided Tea Party Republicans took control and immediately pushed through all kinds of conservative social issues, including this one.

              "WE" did not "push" anything--THEY did all the work and forced this issue which the Dems in NC were letting lie like a hot potato. Learn a thing or two about politics, at least in NC--nothing worse than someone in another state claiming to know the ins and outs of another state's politics, eh?

              Sounds to me like you don't believe gay people are a part of the civil rights movement and you think gays are "dragging you down"?

            •  Nobody pushed for marriage equality in NC (0+ / 0-)

              The GOP has been pushing for this since 2004 or so. They just got the majority to pass it.

              If you mean CA, NY, NH and elsewhere should not have "pushed" for full equality for their citizens until NC was ready, well, that is about the most cowardly and stupidest idea I've read on Kos in ages.

              Yes. Let's put all LGBT progress in the country on hold until North Carolina, Arkansas and Alambama are ready!

              Bah, it seems clear you don't really want to be dissauded from your perspective that the LGBT constituency's place is to vote, donate and support Democrats and just quietly let the Republicans beat up on them because fighting back might cost a Democrat a vote.

              •  I'm gay (as you know). (0+ / 0-)

                1. I support more marriage, including marriage for gays and lesbians.
                2. In California we PUSHED for extending the rights and responsibilities of marriage to gays and lesbians.
                3. I knew what the reaction would be and my worst nightmares were fulfilled.
                4. Get domestic partnerships FIRST in all 50 states.  

                By not putting LGBT progress on hold in an election year, you could set that progress back a decade. The idea that we can win on this in North Carolina is the stupidest idea I have read on KOS since your last comment.

                Think of the bigger picture: Unless you retain the White House and get more and better Democrats elected, any progress we make could find us back at the bottom of the hill with the rock sitting on top of us. Then we have to push it back up again.

                Priorities. Your idealism is not warranted in North Carolina. Ask any Californian.

        •  For pushing what? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blue in NC, Scott Wooledge

          What did "we" push?

          This is not a "let's legalize gay marriage" bill. Same-sex marriage is already illegal in NC and will stay that way no matter what. The Republicans--who gained control on the NC Legislature in 2010 for the first time in a century, due to the recession, promising to think of nothing but jobs--were the ones who wrote this bill and are pushing it to the constitution. "We", whomever you mean, didn't "push" anything.

      •  I thought I read (0+ / 0-)

        they wanted it on the ballot in November, and it was the Democrats who maneuvered a May date instead?

    •  And I want progressive allies who mean it when (7+ / 0-)

      they claim to

      ..want more (and better!) marriage for all..
      without following it with this tired old scare tactic:
      ..but you have to look at the bigger picture, too.
      and preceeding it with this kind of fact-free negative opinion:
      It is unfortunate that we have found a way to get absolutely every religious nut to the polls. [snip] It won't work in North Carolina and you will succeed in cleaving further the divide between religious blacks and liberals and progressives.
      I want allies who live in the real world and don't pretend that 2012
      Look, this didn't work in California.
      is 2008. I want allies that don't wet their pants and wail things like
      Why are we handing Romney an issue? Why are we handing him North Carolina?
      But "we can't always get what we want" so I've learned to imitate the Oscar Meyer Weiner girl who told her off-message cohort, "Next time you just carry the sign, Charlie!" Do us all a favor. Stop publicly quivering in fear of Mittens; that ill becomes anybody's dad.

      Rakoff for president! "An application of judicial power that does not rest on facts is worse than mindless, it is inherently dangerous.."

      by davidincleveland on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:12:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Bullshit (10+ / 0-)

      We aren't handing Mitt Romney anything -- it's the assholes on the right who are the reason why this horrid amendment is on the ballot in North Carolina, which means that progressives are fighting a defensive battle, not an offensive one.

      And if you think that the LGBT community in NC should just roll over and play dead for fear of offending the religious right, my response to you is basically unprintable.  In essence, your comments are analogous to an alleged "progressive" telling southern blacks that they shouldn't be stirring up the segregationist nutjobs by trying to sit at those lunch counters back in the fifties.

      Yes, the LGBT community will probably lose in NC in May.  I wish I could share the optimism that it might go otherwise, but I recognize a long shot when I see it.  But if you don't fight, you don't move the window so that you can win future victories.  And when you look at how polls have been shifting when it comes to public support of marriage equality, what's happened in the past four years or so is truly amazing.  We are winning this battle, even if we don't win it in North Carolina this year.

      Political Compass: -6.75, -3.08

      by TexasTom on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:12:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Are "we" handing them an issue. (5+ / 0-)

      You appear confused. Republicans put it on the ballot.

      Are we handing them an issue by fighting it? Should the LGBT community just let it quietly pass without a fight, are you saying?

  •  I hope we in NC can join the modern world with.... (7+ / 0-)

    equal rights for all citizens.  I will be contacting friends and hopefully getting them to vote for what is ethically and morally right.

    We shall see.

    “The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    by LamontCranston on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:23:44 PM PST

    •  I am really tired (0+ / 0-)

      of this bringing into the modern world crap. Do I wish gay marriage was legal across the country yes, do I feel every state that doesn't is full of redneck hicks, no, and I really wish everyone would stop denigrating all states don't agree with you on everything. It will come eventually but going on about the south and midwest are full of digenerates isn't going to help anything.

      •  While I agree with you in principle, I recced both (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        davehouck

        Lamont Cranston's and NCJim's comments, because they were talking about their own state, and they have the right to do so. Similarly, if a fellow Ohioan rips my birth state for some deed or attitude, I'll rec it if I agree or ignore it if I disagree. We Ohioans are allowed to publicly criticize ourselves, but don't try it at home if your home (state) doesn't fly a pennoncel.

        Volunteer in NC against the proposed constitutional amendment. Contribute from in or out of the state. Yes, we can.

        by davidincleveland on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 05:20:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  OT / IOU (0+ / 0-)

    write your OWN news story. FEEL FREE:
    google and co. will scarf it up.

    gulfwatchers know how NOT to get scammed.

    we watched foolishness, disguised, run rampant.

    disclaimer: have not yet read this particular article, but will follow-up shortly, after close examination, similar to what i used re the magnificent "A WHALE" hogwash-foofaraw.
    ------------------------------
    LGBT lose ? gee, i don't remember that. let's ask barney !
    let's also ask THESE GUYS, for Pete's sake -- they wrote the book on "zappery" and how the few can hit KO quality punches against the many.
    ------------------------------

    Addington's Perpwalk: TRAILHEAD of Accountability for Bush-2 Crimes.
    Give: NETROOTS FOR THE TROOPS 2012 * Join: OBAMA'S TRUTH TEAM

    by greenbird on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:23:55 PM PST

  •  You've got it exactly right (6+ / 0-)

    that 20% who support recognition but oppose marriage are marriage supporters.  They just don't realize it yet.  Vermont went the same path-- it took a few years of having civil unions and the sky not falling for the state to be ready for same-sex marriage, but then we won it with overwhelming support and very little collateral damage in terms of anti-marriage blowback.

    "The first rule of pillow fight club is do not talk about pillow fight club." --Keith Olbermann

    by Julie Waters on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:31:54 PM PST

  •  NCers here have opposed Operation Hilarity (3+ / 0-)

    Because in theory it kept Santorum alive longer and gave his supporters more of a reason to go to the polls and vote for Amendment One if Romney hadn't sewn it up by May 8.

    At lot of people have worked hard in a grassroots effort to get people to vote against this monster. Regardless of the outcome, my hat is off to them.

    Take the high road.

    by esby on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:33:12 PM PST

  •  Great diary with all the specifics for (6+ / 0-)

    understanding and fighting this ballot initiative.
    You really give me hope.
    Questions:
    1) is there any voter ID stuff going on in NC that could cause problems for the college students?
    2) you said that there's a 3 week early voting period before May 8. Many students leave as soon as their semester is over so it's possible that if some don't vote in the first week or 2 of the early voting, they might be gone after that.  Any thoughts?

    We're not perfect, but they're nuts! -- Barney Frank

    by Tamar on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:35:05 PM PST

    •  Our new Tepuke-majority legislature (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      davidincleveland, Tamar, Odysseus

      tried to ram a Voter Disenfranchisement Bill through the general assembly, but thank God our Democratic governor vetoed it and it has been one of her few vetoes that has not been overridden (thanks a lot, NC Blew Dawgs).

      So, no, the poor, and the elderly, and the African-American, and the student voters have not been disenfranchised by the obscene "Voter ID" law...yet. The Pukers are still trying, though. They may have succeded by November, but not by May.

      "Bernie Madoff's mistake was stealing from the rich. If he'd stolen from the poor he'd have a cabinet position." -OPOL

      by blue in NC on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:02:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Re: students leaving (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tamar, jethrock

      I guess I just hope, and really do trust college organizers are aware of the challenges getting the mobile population of students to the polls. I have to trust they've helped voters plan appropriately. That is GOTV 101: make sure your target has a specific and workable plan for voting.

      I remember doing calls and quizzing folks, "so you are voting before work? Will you boss be ok with you if you're late? Maybe you should warn him..."

      Help them brainstorm roadblocks so they comitt to overcoming them.

      •  OT -- just helped my almost 12 year old finish an (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jethrock, Scott Wooledge

        essay for school in which she wrote the word "lead" instead of "led." After we fixed it, I was reading your diary and there it was "lead" instead of "led." So I was able to tell her (since she's very sensitive to criticism) that even a wonderful writer on Daily Kos makes this same mistake! (it's good to help kids do better, but you have to be careful not to make them feel they aren't good enough if they're less than perfect).

        We're not perfect, but they're nuts! -- Barney Frank

        by Tamar on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 06:33:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, race to the Ballot has been... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Scott Wooledge

        Race to the ballot (Google the term for the website and more info) has specifically been targetting college campuses in NC getting them to set up early voting sites in the many universities we have here, since May 8 falls right in the middle of exams or even after graduation in some cases. They are also reminding folks of absentee balloting which does not require a reason.

  •  Keep fighting (7+ / 0-)

    I live in Mississippi.  Many people (the experts included) thought the personhood amendment would pass here with no real problem.  But we fought and kept going and defeated it.  You got to keep hammering at the overreach and the poor drafting and anything that discredits the amendment until enough people have questions about it to defeat it.

    Never give in to dark side.

    Hey! glad to see you. Hope you are doing well.

    by deedogg on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 03:48:28 PM PST

  •  Clapping in church (11+ / 0-)

    At church today, this issue kinda came up after the Minister finished talking about the time in Matthew when Jesus is cross examined at the Sanhedrin and Peter denying Christ.  

    He then told a story about refusing to kick out a three year old girl from the church run pre-school because she had two mommies when one of their oldest and biggest givers demanded that he do "something".  She left and never returned.  

    There was more about bringing the message of love to everyone and that Jesus hung out with sinners and not those running the Temples.   The congregation clapped when he finished.  This was in Raleigh NC.

    •  That makes me want to say "Amen!" and sing (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Scott Wooledge

      Amazing Grace, or the Doxology. Officially, I'm an atheist but I was raised by missionary parents and early training dies hard. Even at nearly 70, the good news of a Christian's testimony of love usually brings a hymn of praise to my thoughts.

      Volunteer in NC against the proposed constitutional amendment. Contribute from in or out of the state. Yes, we can.

      by davidincleveland on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 05:32:50 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Great news about your church in Raleigh -- (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      foresterbob

      our minister got a big round of applause here in Charlotte when he preached on the issues behind the amendment several weeks ago. He was careful NOT to tell the congregation how to vote, and given the makeup of our congregation he probably didn't need to anyway, but it was a ringing call for equality and "love thy neighbor" and all kinds of good stuff. Maybe we would all have voted against it already, but it definitely inspired many of us to get out there and work hard.

      Come on, North Carolina -- make me proud on May 8!

      "So keep fighting for freedom and justice, beloveds..." -- Molly Ivins

      by goheelsgodems on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 07:22:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks, Scott. A diary which begins with momentum (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jethrock, davehouck, Scott Wooledge

    and ends with Pam and is filled with more goodies than a fruitcake. Spectacular. Your optimism is persuasive and contagious; I'm beginning to think we could win. For sure though, even in a loss we need to have given it our best efforts. I'm going to contribute what coin I can, and I'll put that fundraising link in my sig line. The current sig is overdue for replacement but I like to have a good reason to post a new one.

    Rakoff for president! "An application of judicial power that does not rest on facts is worse than mindless, it is inherently dangerous.."

    by davidincleveland on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:44:45 PM PST

  •  Because of the overreach.... (6+ / 0-)

    That is, because the amendment as written would outlaw any recognition for any domestic partnership, including hetero couples....this has a chance of failing. But it will require people who are against it to turn out to vote at a time that's not on a lot of people's election radar.

    You get what you deserve, even if you don't deserve it (Issan Dorsey, Zen teacher)

    by kayak58 on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 04:47:49 PM PST

  •  Thanks Scott; great diary! (5+ / 0-)

    The local office here in Asheville has been doing great work; and I'm planning to do a table event with them next week.  I greatly appreciate your diary; North Carolina wants to get back on the right track after the disaster of November 2010, and we can use all the help we can get.

  •  Around the triangle (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jethrock, bootes53

    there are many sings of Another Family against the Amendment. There needs to be a good campaign informing when to vote about it

  •  I wish... (3+ / 0-)

    ...you had bothered to do a little research and put some effort into this. /endsnark

    Outstanding post.

    Okay, you've got me all excited to help out on this.  Just sent some hope ($) myself. I encourage everyone reading this to do the same if you can.

    If not please make sure to give a rec and a tip to get eyeballs on this diary. A share on Twitter and Facebook can really help too!

    California*, Conneticut, Iowa, Maryland*, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, Washington*. (and District of Columbia) *pending

    by cooper888 on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 06:22:10 PM PST

  •  Well, we're working it in Boone! (5+ / 0-)

    Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
    By irmaly at 2012-02-06

    "Whenever a fellow tells me he's bipartisan, I know he's going to vote against me."-- Harry S. Truman

    by irmaly on Sun Mar 04, 2012 at 06:43:17 PM PST

  •  Jen Jones with Nancy Petty, MaryBe McMillan (4+ / 0-)

    FYI, in that picture of Jen Jones above the friends are, on the left, Rev Nancy Petty, Pastor, Pullen Memorial Baptist Church in Raleigh, and on the right, MaryBe McMillan, Secretary-Treasurer, AFL-CIO-NC, and they're pictured at HKonJ in Raleigh.  This campaign has broad support but it also needs a lot of money to get the message out so help out all you can by donating to the Coalition to Protect North Carolina Families

  •  Shouting at the rain (0+ / 0-)

    In the movie “The American President,” the President (played by Michael Douglas) has a great line where he accuses the Republican candidate (Richard Dreyfuss) of shouting at the rain. I think that’s a wonderful metaphor for useless and/or insane posturing by Republicans against the inevitable.

    Here are some of the ways the Republicans are shouting at the rain:

    When the judiciary strikes down anti-LGBT/anti-equality laws because they’re unconstitutional, as in California or Iowa, Republicans shout about activist judges who are legislating from the bench. They say only legislatures should pass laws. Sometimes they even claim it’s unconstitutional to declare a law unconstitutional. Which, if you think about it, is just bizarre.

    When a legislature passes a pro-equality law, as in New Jersey, people like Chris Christie claim that such weighty matters should be put to a vote of the people. He even suggested that we could have avoided all those troubles in the 1960s by letting people vote on civil rights for African-Americans. In other words, the majority should decide if the rights of a minority are enforced. Which is also bizarre.

    When the people of a state vote by a majority for equality, as in Washington state’s everything-but-marriage referendum, the anti-gay forces go back to the courts (in this case, they claim that if their names and addresses are made public, those awful gay people will persecute them and call them names).

    So when Republicans don’t like a judge’s decision, they want the legislature to act. When they don’t like legislation, they want the voters to decide. When they don’t like a vote, they go back to the courts. I think they know that ultimately they will lose this battle.

    In the meantime, the rain keeps coming.

    But the angle said to them, "Do not be Alfred. A sailor has been born to you"

    by Dbug on Mon Mar 05, 2012 at 06:57:35 AM PST

  •  I am with PNCF... (0+ / 0-)

    ...and we need your help. In state donors have powered us to nearly $650,000 but we need more help from all of you.

    You can help here: http://protectncfamilies.ngpvanhost.com/

    Please let us know if you have any questions.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site