Monday, September 19, 2011

ASU Students Identify Soucek with Bigotry

College students are not always alert to or even aware of political shenanigans in our state's General Assembly -- because (hey!) they've got their own difficult fish to fry -- but it's reassuring to see that they're quite aware of Sen. Dan Soucek's pet project of writing discrimination against gays into the state's constitution.

This editorial in The Appalachian might give Mr. Soucek pause (along with Mr. Jordan, lest we forget that he marched arm-in-arm with Soucek across the border into Bigotville).

You can read the entire thing at the link. But here are a couple of exerpts:
...This legislation is a bigoted attack on the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community, as well as an ill-conceived attempt to stop the tide of acceptance and tolerance of sexual diversity in this state and around the country. If certified into law, the amendment places North Carolina, again, on the wrong side of history.

...The Appalachian believes it is ... reprehensible that this measure be brought to vote during a primary election.

Rather than “letting the people decide,” as many of the bill’s proponents tout as a fair way to get the amendment passed, The Appalachian believes that the lower turnout overall in primary elections, in particular the historically low turnout of young voters, is a ploy to skew the results.

If “the people” were to decide, a vote would occur during a November general election in which a significantly higher percentage of voters come out to the polls.

One of the central critiques of the bill is that it puts a minority rights issue before the voters....
The editorial goes on to blame Soucek explicitly as the co-sponsor of this travesty. Not since that other Republican politician, David Blust, declared that college students should not be allowed to vote in local elections has an elected official done as much to alienate this large voting bloc.


Anonymous said...

But look at all the jobs this bigot bill will produce.

Anonymous said...

I am opposed to the amendment, but I don't seem to have as big a problem as some of you do with letting the voters in NC decide.

I understand your arguments about comparing this to voting on civil rights, but it isn't the same thing. There is currently NO right to "marry" someone of the same sex.

Personally, I think the government should get out of the "marriage blessing" business. Let gays marry if they want to. Let people have more than one spouse - as long as the parties all agree.

Maybe it's time to quit giving special "breaks" to married people. Why should I have to marry someone in order to pass an inheritance to them. Isn't a lifetime commitment of living with the same person for 50 years enough? Why do I have to get the state to "recognize" my relationship?

Anonymous said...

@ Anon at 11:18am:

I have a huge problem letting a group of statewide primary voters decide whether or not a local government can offer bereavement leave or partner benefits to their first responders or local employees.

This amendment bans civil unions AND strips North Carolinians of benefits they currently enjoy.

It is about MUCH more than marriage.

Read the text of the amendment and VOTE NO.

Anonymous said...

The bill will pass.

Anonymous said...

if bigotry and discrimination were left up to a popular vote, especially with the array of Republican methods for voter suppression, women would have no rights, African Americans would have no rights in this country, native Americans none, Hispanic people none,Catholics would not have any rights,etc. Basically, it would be white Protestant men and corporations running everything. Oh, yeah, that's right. That's already happening.

Anonymous said...

I will vote NO, but I will also vote REPUBLICAN. While I don't agree with the amendment, I have no problem with letting the people decide what they want in their constitution!

Democrats are making a mistake when they attack church going Christians over this issue. A lot of these people are not in support of this amendment but are not likely to respond favorably to all the attacks on them, their religions, and their beliefs ....

Anonymous said...

When liberals are in charge, no one has any rights. They are wards of the state.