Myth: Amendment One is about gay marriage. If you vote against Amendment One you are voting to make gay marriage legal in NC.
FACT: Gay marriage has been illegal in NC since 1996. The Marriage Act was passed by the NC Congress in 1996. NC § 51‑1.2. reads: Marriages, whether created by common law, contracted, or performed outside of North Carolina, between individuals of the same gender are not valid in North Carolina. (1995 (Reg. Sess., 1996), c. 588, s. 1.)
FACT: Law books dating as early as 1896 define marriage legally in NC as "between one man and one woman." Therefore, were Amendment One only about gay marriage it would be needless and redundant.
Myth: If I'm not gay, this amendment won't affect me at all.
FACT: Amendment One reads:
An Act to amend the Constitution 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.
This legally defines "domestic" as only existent between a married man and woman. Thus, long term unions and so called "common law" couples will no longer be afforded the meager rights they currently possess. Your sexuality does not matter. Your domestic status (i.e. married or not married) is what becomes legally important. *Note: Common law marriage is not recognized in NC at this time. This term is used colloquially and not legally in this article. Thank you to CT for letting me know my use of the term was confusing.
Potential legal ramifications:
- Current domestic violence legislation would be rendered null and void. "Domestic" violence could legally only occur between "one (married) man and one woman (his spouse)." Single women, therefore, would not be afforded domestic violence protection. If your relationship with your significant other did not include a marriage certificate then you would not be involved in a legal "domestic" union.
- Insurance companies that currently allow carriers to provide insurance for "domestic partners" and the children of "domestic partners" could potentially sever this insurance coverage. Because unmarried partnerships will no longer be legally recognized, many unmarried couples and their children stand to lose insurance coverage.
- Unmarried non-biological parents could find their child visitation and custody rights in question.
- Your long term significant other could be denied visitation rights at a hospital if you were incapacitated.
- You could lose half of what you own if your partner dies unexpectedly because regardless of the fact you reside together, you would have no legal claim to the other person's possessions.
I would also like to point out that all of the aforementioned ramifications have already occurred in Ohio following the passing of similar legislation by their state's congress.
Please educate yourself before going to the polls on May 8th. I intend to vote NO on Amendment One. I hope you will too.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THIS PERFECTLY CLEAR: IT IS YOUR RIGHT TO DISAGREE WITH MY POST, MY OPINIONS, AND AMENDMENT ONE. IT IS NOT YOUR RIGHT TO USE HOMOPHOBIC HATE SPEECH IN COMMENTS. I WILL NOT PUBLISH COMMENTS THAT UTILIZE HOMOPHOBIC SLURS OR BAD LANGUAGE. I WILL ALSO HENCEFORTH NOT BE PUBLISHING ANY COMMENTS FROM COMMENTERS WHO DO NOT POSSESS ENOUGH CONVICTION BEHIND THEIR WORDS TO COMMENT USING THEIR OWN NAMES. IF I CAN WRITE A BLOG EXPRESSING A SOMEWHAT UNPOPULAR OPINION USING MY OWN NAME, THEN YOU CAN COMMENT ON THAT SAME BLOG EXPRESSING YOUR OPINION USING YOUR OWN NAME. THANK YOU.
You should educate yourself before posting false potential claims that have no laws backing them up. You really think only married people can get a 50B? You really think custodial visits are determined by the relationship status of parents ???????
ReplyDeleteAmendment One -- Vote however you wish, but do not let ads and hearsay and other folks Facebook 'WHAT IF's' convince you to vote against or for this. NC Statutes ARE STILL in place. So many many myths arnd scare tactics are being thrown out and folks are not willing to verify these myths. They want to throw 50B at you and scare you into thinking your rights are being taken away, as well as Healthcare benefits, and custodial visitation rights being taken away. READ the NC STATUTES yourself, don't just ignorantly take a side without checking things out for yourself.
Here is a HUGE MYTH: Amendment One would eliminate or diminish domestic violence protections for unmarried persons even persons of the opposite sex.
FACT: Under current law, same sex couples already have no standing to seek a restraining order under N.C.G.S. § 50B-1(b)(1) and (2) because with regard to couples in a romantic relationship, the law only applies to married persons or persons of the opposite sex. Amendment One does nothing to change that. However, this really doesn’t mean anything because under N.C.G.S. § 50B-1(b)(5), anyone who is a “current or former household member” same-sex or not, may seek a 50B restraining order. The nature of the relationship between the parties beyond being current or former household members is irrelevant. A brother can seek a restraining order against his other brother the same way as one gay man could seek one against his gay partner with the only criteria being that they currently reside or have resided in the same household. Amendment One does nothing to change that. It is this provision more than any other that highlights the folly of the claims about Amendment One weakening domestic violence laws.
Further, Amendment One would not prohibit the legislature from extending additional protections to same-sex couples in the future because current law already does not require a person to be married nor does it require a LEGALLY recognized or established “union” for enforcement. It simply requires that the parties prove that they have a “personal relationship” that falls within the definitions in the statute whether legally established or recognized or not. N.C.G.S. 50B-1(b). This definition extends beyond just married persons and dating relationships to roommates and even children. The latter three are not legally established or recognized “unions” either, yet they are protected.
Thus, if such a “legal union” is a requirement to enforce the domestic violence laws, then they are already invalid as applied to everyone except married persons. Conversely, if a legal union is not a requirement for enforcement (which it is not) then an Amendment that prohibits certain legal unions would have NO EFFECT on the domestic violence laws.
You don't even have enough conviction behind your words to comment with your own name. I will redirect you to the links to the government and academic documents stating the same FACTS I listed above. Do not call me ignorant and ill-informed simply because I wholly disagree with you. Is our Attorney General ignorant and misinformed? The AG does not support this legislation for the same reasons stated above. What about NC's ADA? She doesn't agree with it either--also for the same reasons listed above. Please read all documents in full before attempting to dispel my facts. FACT: there is no LEGAL reason to alter the NC Constitution. The only reason to alter this legal document is HOMOPHOBIA.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMyth 2: Amendment One will affect custodial and visitation rights of unmarried parents.
ReplyDeleteFact. The right to custody of a child is protected under the United States Constitution and North Carolina Constitution. An amendment to the North Carolina Constitution does not veto federal Constitutional protections.
But most importantly the right to custody and visitation is NOT BASED ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARENTS, but instead is based on the relationship between parent and child. Amendment One has no effect on that relationship.
In fact, our Court of Appeals has awarded custodial rights to a non-biological parent in a same-sex relationship recently in the case of Mason v. Dwinnell.2 That case did not hinge on the relationship between the same-sex couple, but instead on the relationship of each party to the child. The rule in Mason was followed by the North Carolina Supreme Court in Boseman v. Jarrell. The rationale behind the decision in Mason would not be affected by Amendment One because the parties’ relationship was not marital nor was it a legally established or recognized “union.”
Custodial rights can also be obtained through adoption, but the Amendment doesn’t change the status quo which already does not allow for non-married couples, same-sex or not, to jointly adopt a child and thus being able to establish legal rights for BOTH parties as non-biological parents by virtue of the adoption alone. Amendment One would not prohibit legislation in the future that would permit adoption by same-sex couples. The legislature could do this by simply eliminating the marriage requirement for adoptions by more than one person. But again, Amendment One does not change the law in this area either way.
Myth 3: Same-sex couples will be denied benefits that they currently have if Amendment One passes.
This would only be true if those benefits were based on marriage or a legally established “domestic union”. Since North Carolina currently has no same-sex marriage or legally established “domestic union” other than marriage between persons of the opposite sex, then any current benefits cannot be based on either of those relationships. Thus, even if those relationships are prohibited from legal recognition, there would be no effect on these benefits because the legal relationship was never required in the first place to obtain them.
Further, the Amendment plainly states that private individuals, including companies, can contract for to extend benefits to whomever they wish.
mari
Mari,
ReplyDeleteFACT: NON-BIOLOGICAL parents rights are NOT protected by any law. Please read the link to the legal report about the potential legal ramifications of this legislation. This report was created by three highly qualified attorneys and legal professors. I think I'll go with their views, rather than the rantings of some anonymous poster.
FACT: Several NC companies and counties provide "domestic partner coverage" within their employee based insurance plans. This coverage (worded "domestic") would no longer be available to same-sex couples.
FACT: I am very well educated. I am very well informed. I have linked to multiple GOVERNMENT AND ACADEMIC documents that state the very FACTS I offer in this blog. Do NOT accuse me of ignorance simply because you do not agree with my views or the views established by government and legal professionals.
Thank you for the comments.