|
The "Defense of Marriage" amendment on the floor of the North Carolina General Assembly for the 2005-2006 legislative session is Senate Bill S8 and/or House Bill H55. Both versions contain virtually the same wording.
See it on the General Assembly website
SECTION 1. Article 14 of the North Carolina Constitution is amended by adding the following new section:
"Sec. 6. Marriage. Marriage is the union of one man and one woman at one time. This is the only marriage that shall be recognized as valid in this State. The uniting of two persons of the same sex or the uniting of more than two persons of any sex in a marriage, civil union, domestic partnership, or other similar relationship within or outside of this State shall not be valid or recognized in this State. This Constitution shall not be construed to require that marital status or the rights, privileges, benefits, or other legal incidents of marriage be conferred upon unmarried individuals or groups." |
In addition to writing discrimination into the constitution of the State of North Carolina, this is poorly written legislation for a number of reasons. - It's redundant. NC General Statutes chapter 51, section 1.2 was added back in 1996 to cover the same subject matter. Since the election campaign of 2004, other states have added such discriminatory amendments to their state constitutions; the General Assembly seems to not want North Carolina to be left out.
- The wording is overly broad. The words "...shall be recognized as valid in this State..." and "...shall not be valid or recognized in this State...." can be interpreted in very unconservative ways.Many companies in North Carolina offer domestic partner benefits to their employees. Should this legislation become enacted and passed by the voters, lawsuits could arise that could force these companies to withdraw these benefits. The NCGOP platform states that "...Government ought to provide an unencumbered environment for individual initiative and private enterprise..." yet this wording gives the State—not individual companies—the right to decide what benefits a company can or cannot offer its employees. In the instance of medical insurance coverage, an employee who can cover their partner whose employer does not offer medical insurance willingly takes on the responsibility for that partner's medical expenses. Without that coverage, the non-covered partner has no choice but to either go without medical attention, pay the expense out-of-pocket or turn to the State for assistance through Medicare. Less intrusive wording would be "...by this State...."
Defending marriage should be about protecting marriages from self-destruction, not discriminating who can make the choice to be in one. In North Carolina, it takes up to 30 days to purchase a gun, yet a marriage license is granted immediately, and which can do most harm to a family? There are no requirements for premarital counseling, no "cooling off period" or no mandated pre-divorce counseling to promote reconciliation of a troubled marriage. If marriage is to be truly defended, wouldn't these be more appropriate legislative actions to take?
|
