Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

Various updates on Amendment 1 in North Carolina

Marriage equality

By Scottie ThomastonGoal Thermometer

New Elon poll: 60% of North Carolinians oppose Amendment 1

A new Elon poll released today has an even better outlook than previous polls for opponents of Amendment 1 in North Carolina. The poll of 534 North Carolina residents has a margin of error of +/- 4.24. Some other findings from the poll include:

• 38 percent of respondents say they support full marriage rights for same sex couples. That’s up from 36 percent in February and 33 percent in November.

• 29 percent of respondents oppose any legal recognition for same sex couples. That’s down from 32 percent in February and 35 percent in November.

• Support for civil unions or partnerships for same-sex couples, but not full marriage rights, was at 29 percent. That’s point higher than in February 2012.

Coming a month ahead of the vote on Amendment 1, the polling trend seems to suggest more confusion about what the amendment would actually do; this is something a similar poll released last week from PPP suggested as well.

As Think Progress says:

The seemingly conflicting polling from recent weeks reflects a general lack of understanding about the full impact of the measure. This poll found that 66 percent support at least civil unions or partnerships for same-sex couples, so when asked if they would ban all legal recognition of their relationships, it makes sense that such a strong majority opposes the amendment. There are 37 days until the May 8 vote to continue educating North Carolinians about just how far-reaching Amendment One truly is.

The Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce has come out in strong opposition to Amendment 1

From Protect All NC Families:

The text of the Durham Chamber of Commerce resolution reads as follows:

“The Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce opposes Amendment One for the following reasons:

1. The process by which Amendment One was presented to the voters and questions raised by text of the proposal appear to put at risk domestic partner benefit plans that are common among the Chamber’s members. It is likely to create uncertainty around ongoing employment practices of the Chamber’s members, and create the prospect of unnecessary legal, administrative, and financial burdens for the Chamber and its members. Since there is no compelling or clearly articulated need for such a fundamental change in the law, the adoption of the amendment would be imprudent.

2. One of the Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce’s primary roles is economic development. In that role, the Chamber meets regularly with businesses interested in relocating or expanding in Durham, and with entrepreneurs interested in forming their business in Durham. Through those meetings the Chamber receives the consistent message that a stable and diverse workforce is critical to those businesses in making the decision to locate here. North Carolina currently has the advantage of being the only state in the region without a Constitutional provision of the type proposed by Amendment One, and therefore it is better able to compete for business with states that do not have such Constitutional prohibitions. The Chamber believes that the absence of such a Constitutional provision gives North Carolina, and Durham in particular, a competitive advantage when recruiting new businesses, encouraging existing businesses to expand, and persuading the highly skilled workers those businesses value to live here. Therefore, the Chamber believes that the adoption of Amendment One could discourage economic development and job creation in Durham.

3. Finally, Amendment One is inconsistent with the spirit of Durham. The Chamber embraces diversity as a defining element of the Durham community. Surveys of Durham’s citizens and feedback from companies considering locating here consistently show that Durham’s diversity and tolerance are fundamental elements of its identity and its appeal. Further, studies of successful communities consistently rank diversity as a key component of innovative and economically vibrant regions. The Chamber cannot support any initiative that threatens such a vital component of the community’s economic success.

Accordingly, for the business reasons stated above, the Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce encourages the people of Durham, and all of its members and their employees to vote “no” on Amendment One.”

$25,000 matching gift will go to Protect All NC Families

As Joe Sudbay over at AMERICABlog says:

Okay, one more: Adam also notes that “Opponents of Amendment One have stepped up to help fund the campaign.” – That includes many of you. And, as Pam Spaulding reports today, big donors from within the state are ponying up:
Big announcement from Protect All NC Families this AM: “A generous businesswoman and her husband have stepped up to offer a $25,000 matching gift to our campaign. This means that every dollar that you give to us will be doubled up to $25,000 — which would mean an additional $50,000 for our campaign.” https://secure.actblue.com/page/ncmoneybomb

Pam Spaulding has more on that, as well as more editorials in opposition to Amendment 1.

Beginning April 23, Vote for Marriage NC will begin airing pro-Amendment 1 ads

Via Pam Spaulding’s post we also learn this

We have also received information that Vote for Marriage NC has purchased air time beginning on April 23, very likely to showcase the special kind of ugliness that Frank Schubert can cook up.

Mark Armour and Chad Griffin are producing our ads now and we hope to be able to go on the air soon. The momentum is palpable. Just yesterday we had two major editorials from conservative papers keying on the conservative opposition to the amendment. Our field offices are humming. More and more North Carolinians are stepping up and we can carry this momentum forward.

—–

With one month to go before the vote, let’s hope we can spread the word enough to win this thing.

10 Comments Leave a Comment

  • 1. RAJ  |  April 2, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    This is all very encouraging news and I want to urge all marriage equality supporters in NC (and elsewhere) to not even —THINK— about being complacent at this point. Once the April 23rd ads start running I would expect an immediate drop in our numbers unless our ads hit back HARD and fast. I live in California and I remember all too well the summer of 2008 when some complacency started to set in because polling and other indicators looked good for our side. I was also part of a group that was tracking Yeson8 donations from individual Mormons and it was MIND-BOGGLING to see the freight train that was heading towards the gay community without much real concern from our leadership. I know we won't make the same mistakes again (wherever the money and messages are coming from).

    I should add, at that time I also interacted with more decent and far-minded Mormons, who were on our side, than I thought existed. I just want to make the point that we should never take anything for granted and just keep working hard.

  • 2. StraightSupporter  |  April 3, 2012 at 5:11 am

    The church I attend (and am getting increasingly sick of) is trying to encourage it's members to be in favor of Amendment 1. There was another meeting I didn't attend at a different church Monday just about that. Then again, this is the same church that was screaming 'tolerate us' a couple weeks ago. They want Christianity to be tolerated, yet just this Sunday the pastor was basically preaching intolerance, that Jesus was intolerant and they should be to and who they vote for/etc on that. Funny/hypocritical in a way "Tolerate us tolerate us, but we will not tolerate you" is basically what they are saying and the way they want it.

  • 3. Kate  |  April 3, 2012 at 6:54 am

    Yours is the voice that the other members of that church need to hear………..

  • 4. grod  |  April 3, 2012 at 7:18 am

    As RAJ stated above, there a fair-minded Mormons, as there are persons of your and other faiths. The ‘Hosanna’ of Palm Sunday followed four days later by ‘Crucify Him’ illustrates the hypocrisy of the public and potentially each of us. I find myself also being told ‘Christians are called to be a tolerant, caring people, in a world that is increasingly intolerant of us’. Yet the public face of some denominations including my own is one of polished intolerance. Consider the videos made by the two bishops of NC seeking to be spokespersons on this civil rights matter. Yet their clergy annually marry no more than five percent of marriages in the state. Do you think these guys have insight into their behavior? …. I’ve read here the difference that makes a difference is an individual speaking to one or two others, making the case. Perhaps your conviction on the amendment is strong enough that you have or plan to do so.

  • 5. AnonyGrl  |  April 3, 2012 at 7:56 am

    What gets me is that in the face of intolerance, Jesus did not curse or condemn those who were killing him. He forgave them. He didn't say "Father, forgive them even though they are horrible sinners and should be sent to hell unless they repent". He just said "Father forgive them." And he didn't say it to them. He didn't preach at them, or try to convert them, he simply offered up a prayer to his god.

    Would that all Christians could handle "intolerance" thusly. I bet they'd get a lot less of it if they did.

  • 6. Bob  |  April 10, 2012 at 10:44 am

    change from within,,,,, the preachers initiative within the Catholic Church
    http://www.austriantimes.at/news/General_News/201

  • 7. Bob  |  April 10, 2012 at 10:46 am

    the popes response http://www.austriantimes.at/news/General_News/201

  • 8. Bob  |  April 10, 2012 at 10:48 am

    sorry about that,,, here's the pope's response
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/06/world/europe/po

  • 9. jonforjustice  |  April 11, 2012 at 7:02 pm

    "While this bill is meant to hurt gay couples, which it clearly will if passed, it will also hurt many, even primarily, straight couples, though discrimination hurting anyone, straight or gay, is equally bad. This harm will result from the vague wording of the bill: “Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union.” Is it worth hurting so many people, including straight couples, just to further hurt gay couples? The more the anti-gay rights community hurts all those people, the more anger all those gay and straight couples will express. This will lead to protests in the streets, personal attacks from both sides, and more people leaving the state reducing the work force and hurting businesses. And if all unmarried couples in domestic partnerships and civil unions lose their financial benefits, they will have less money to spend on essential needs in an economy that really needs it. Therefore, passing this bill will hurt both the gay and straight communities. As Martin Luther King Jr. wrote in his Letter from Birmingham Jail, April 16, 1963, “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (africa.upenn.edu)."
    http://jonforjustice.wordpress.com/2012/04/06/ame

  • 10. Matt  |  April 23, 2012 at 7:57 am

    My thoughts….. http://www.old67.com/the-twisted-passions-of-dr-m

Leave a Comment

(required)

(required), (Hidden)

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL  |  RSS feed for comments on this post.

Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!