Bev Perdue Says She'll Oppose Passage Of Proposed Constitutional Amendment Banning Gay Marriage

North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue, a Democrat, signaled on Friday that she'll oppose passage of a proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, according to the AP.

“My top priority is creating jobs," said Perdue in a statement. "Too many people are out of work and I’ve heard from several business leaders who’ve told me that the proposed constitutional amendment will harm our state’s business climate and make it harder to grow jobs here."

She went on to elaborate on her position on the issue: "I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman: That’s why I voted for the law in 1996 that defines marriage as between one man and one woman, and that’s why I continue to support that law today. But I’m going to vote against the amendment because I cannot in good conscience look an unemployed man or woman in the eye and tell them that this amendment is more important than finding them a job. In addition, a number of legal experts have argued that this amendment, if passed, could eliminate legal protections for all unmarried couples in our state, regardless of sexual orientation. Right now, my focus, the General Assembly’s focus, and North Carolina’s focus needs to be on creating jobs."

The AP reports:

State law already limits marriage to a man and a woman. Amendment supporters say the constitutional prohibition would help the state defend itself against legal challenges by same-sex married couples in other states.

The proposal also would bar the state from recognizing civil unions and other same-sex partnerships.

Perdue's indication that she'll oppose the proposal comes just weeks after the measure cleared the North Carolina state House and Senate. Both chambers are controlled by Republicans.

Comments

[laureenholt]

03:19 PM on 10/17/2011

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, NC STATE LEGISLATORS for standing up for marriage as it is now, always has been & always WILL be--ONE MAN, ONE WOMAN!

PRESS ON for the amendment, PLEASE!!

Bev Perdue, get your priorities straight--this is every bit as important as employment! Stand by your assertion that marriage is for 1 man & 1 woman, & DON'T make it the zero-sum game you're thinking.

[David Moore]

08:47 PM on 10/24/2011

Always has been and always will be? I think your history is in error. Massachusetts, Vermont, Iowa, Connecticut, and New York already have marriage equality. If people from those states want to exercise their rights in North Carolina under the "full faith and credit" clause of the US Constitution, no matter what your state constitution says, it will be wrong. As for other nations, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Argentina, Iceland, the Netherlands, Spain, and soon Denmark have not fallen into the sea. Perhaps your ideas will.

[Jennifer Mead]

03:59 PM on 10/10/2011

If they can't beat up Gays then they can give more money to the rich.

[ahoyhoy]

02:33 PM on 10/10/2011

OF COURSE this sensible position of integrity in government comes from a WOMAN.

[gingercurls]

01:49 PM on 10/10/2011

Being a Governor doesn't mean it's about your beliefs. You are supposed to be representing the people in your State. Your beliefs are second to those of your state.

[AFRescue143]

02:35 PM on 10/10/2011

But she also took an oath and that oath includes NOT discriminating against people. And banning Same Sex Marriage IS DISCRIMINATION. And I believe you will find that MOST POLLS believe that Same Sex Marriage should be legalized. Of course those areas that favor Banjo music on the front porch would not vote that way.

[gingercurls]

03:19 PM on 10/10/2011

I agree! I am under the belief that most people would not oppose this Amendment. I approve with her decision to oppose this. What I meant was she should never let her personal beliefs cloud her professional judgement.

[laureenholt]

03:23 PM on 10/17/2011

When you stand for nothing, you'll fall for anything. Take heed, folks.

Bev Perdue stands for traditional marriage. I need to write to her & ask her to disabuse herself of the notion that her signing this constitutional amendment into law comes at the expense of employment in the state....huh...?

[Darryl Hamlin]

09:07 AM on 10/25/2011

So, what do you mean by traditional marriage? Do you mean the marriage between a man, three wives, and 14 concubines? (King David). Or perhaps the marriage between a man and his deceased brother's wife in order to continue his brother's family line?

Or perhaps you'd like something more recent, like 1950. Where marriage was between a man and woman, but only of the same race. Because that's traditional!

Arguing that something should be done for the reason that it's always been done that way is a poor argument. Times change, humanity becomes more enlightened as we carry on. Like I just mentioned, 60 years ago, a white man and black woman who loved each other and wanted to get married would have had to fight just as hard as gay couples are today.

[Drumbeato]

11:50 AM on 10/10/2011

Constitutional amendments against Gay Marriage, ending funding for NPR & Planned Parenthood, sending woman's reproductive rights back to the 19th century, voter suppression laws, protecting America against an influx of "Sharia Laws", & immigration laws that create a hostile environment for many who are here legally are the real agenda of the Republican's currently in power. That, & obstructing everything Obama & the Democrats are attempting to get done.

This is the real record of the Republican Party. The Record, and not the Rhetoric, does not lie. It speaks for itself, & you can't hide from your record. Is this really what Americans want for their country, or is this actually the agenda of a very small segment of the population? It is clearly the latter & not the former. Americans did not get what they bargained for when they put these ideological extremists into power in the last election.

Even if the people put them out of power in 2012, will Democrats have the wisdom to reverse the hundreds of draconian measures enacted by Republicans? It is doubtful because while it is easy to pass laws, it is another matter entirely to reverse them. There is no closing Pandora's Box once its open.

[Drumbeato]

12:34 PM on 10/10/2011

I forgot Union busting and declaring English as the "Official language" of the US. Everything and anything BUT what they should be focused on.

[HippieChick]

12:54 PM on 10/10/2011

I completely agree with you - fanned and faved

[HermaO]

11:47 AM on 10/10/2011

I don't see how people can think this is good news for gay rights.
She opposes the amendments, good, but she knows that this amendment is not that necessary, since there is already a law banning gay marriage, and she says herself she won't do anything to change it.
So it's like "It's already illegal anyway, so why give our state an even worse reputation? Things are fine the way they are".
If she supported gay marriage, she would have come out against the amendment, and for a repeal of the law already in place, but she clearly does not.

[Jennifer Mead]

04:01 PM on 10/10/2011

She said exactly that too. So did you read the article? Repubs won't support anything that doesn't prop up their own standing or fill their bank accounts.

[HermaO]

05:31 PM on 10/10/2011

Yes, exactly. My point was that it's nowhere near good news for gay rights

[laureenholt]

03:39 PM on 10/17/2011

HALLELUJAH!

THANK & PRAISE GOD ALMIGHTY THAT SHE DOESN'T "SUPPORT" HOMOSEXUAL "MARRIAGE"!

Thank you, thank yu, Beverly Perdue!

Puts to DEATH the assertion by some liberals that "Democrats are progressive & liberal, all the way!"

NO, THEY'RE NOT & THEY CAN--YES, THEY CAN!--GET ELECTED TO MAJOR OFFICES IN THIS COUNTRY!

IS A GOOD THING!

[Punzelda]

11:35 AM on 10/10/2011

She's had a crazy term this time trying to keep the idiots from running amuck--they want to take our state back in time to when black people couldn't vote, rich people controlled the elections, and civil rights were scorned--but Perdue continues to fight and I appreciate that. I may not agree with everything she says or does, but she's held strong for education, women, poor people, and now the LGBT community. We just need to be sure we get the idiots out in the next election. We have important votes in NC for the next year and I hope Huffers in NC will come out and bring friends and family.

[laureenholt]

03:40 PM on 10/17/2011

To what?
Where?

[David Moore]

08:52 PM on 10/24/2011

My guess would be the middle ages, but I could be wrong.

[troyrobertdavid]

10:21 AM on 10/10/2011

The US is a lot smaller than it used to be, so to speak. People these days are more willing to move to a different part of the country for jobs or just a change of scenery. We are more connected on every level, and families spread out more than ever before. With transportation where it is and social media it is easier to keep in touch with your family and friends. People are moving around the country at much higher rates than ever before. When my spouse and I were moving out of DC we moved to MD instead of VA on purpose because of the unfriendly laws in VA towards us as a gay couple. VA is beautiful and we would not have minded living there but we will not live where we are not welcome and recognized. VA does not get our income tax money, MD does, and we shop in MD all the time, (sales tax money.) These states need to realize that they are disenfranchising an entire group of people with money. People will not move to these states for the same reason we picked MD over VA.

[Jennifer Mead]

04:01 PM on 10/10/2011

Agreed.

[laureenholt]

03:51 PM on 10/17/2011

You mean HOMOSEXUALS will not "move to these states...", not "people" in general

You omitted @ least 1 thing, troyrobertdavid.....

Homosexuals aren't exactly the "biggest" voting bloc here, comprising only some 3% of the population nationwide. Ya get an even smaller # when you go state-by-state.

I, for 1, would not live in a state where homosexual "marriage" is on the books, or is even tacitly acknowledged.

I'm doubtful that state legislators are overly concerned about the tho'ts/beliefs of a small percentage of the population. Homosexuals are not that big in number, after all.

[David Moore]

08:54 PM on 10/24/2011

We actually comprise about 6 to 10% of the population. When one includes bisexual people, the number goes higher. As for how much money we spend, last year, GLBT people had the free income to spend over $6 Billion on tourism. TOURISM! You dolt, if we gays have the kind of money to toss about on tourism, imagine how much we disposable income we could spend if we lived in your state? Never mind, I would never dream of living in NC.

[chtrek]

09:55 AM on 10/10/2011

If any right wingers out know why any of these issues are important to anyone except those personally involved, please, explain. How does preventing two gay people from having a marriage make your life worse? When a planned parenthood clinic in your town is taking care of women's health issues, please tell me how that has a negative influence in your life. Do either of these things prevent you from paying your bills or sending your children to a good school. Are are unable to afford health care because a gay couple lilves on your block?

[JessWonderin]

12:46 PM on 10/10/2011

Excellent questions . . . and would not the "Christian approach" be to "love and forgive" your neighbor, rather than hate them???

. . and if Gay marriages effect your OWN marriage . . how secure was it in the first place???

. . and isn't "divorce" the key reason marriages fail? . . shouldn't outlawing 'divorce" be the real focus??

[gingercurls]

01:52 PM on 10/10/2011

They are not afraid that Gay Marriage rights will affect their marriages, they just want to control people. It's all about control.

[chtrek]

12:33 PM on 10/12/2011

I think we should take all things Christian out of government. People should live their Christianity not scream about it from a pulpit while, at the same time, doing things with their power that go against everything Christianity stands for.
Forgive your neighbor because he's gay? I don't think there is anything to forgive but Christianity says love your neighbort. I think a contract renewable every few years would be better than a marriage. It's unrealistic to think you have to stay with somebody you grow apart from or who chests on you, etc. People change and should not be bound by marriage and made to feel like failures when it doesn't work out.

[dayzee10]

09:14 AM on 10/10/2011

The gay marriage agenda........http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-id4GKsaQk

[FreedToChoose]

09:14 AM on 10/10/2011

The difference between politics and philosophy is that politicians must be elected to be effective. Opposing a gay marriage ban amendment is the right thing to do philosophically. Opposing it based on a peripheral issue, harmful to the business climate, is the politically expedient position. Let's remember she is Governor of North Carolina which may be fifty years behind the times in social justice... and gaining.

[laureenholt]

03:59 PM on 10/17/2011

Nothing wrong w/being "50 yrs behind the times" when it comes to the homosexual agenda.

I rather like & prefer it that way....& am fighting to maintain the status quo.

[new beginning]

08:47 AM on 10/10/2011

Not commenting on the merit of the constitutional amendment, but the Governor says she can't take action on this issue because she is "focused on jobs"?

But the question to ask her is, why can't she walk and chew gum?

[beingthebest]

12:35 PM on 10/10/2011

Not defending her in any way ( think she's awful for even having a law banning it), but she clearly states that one has to do with the other. A full ban on gay marriage would stop employers from coming to the State.

[laureenholt]

04:02 PM on 10/17/2011

I'd sure like to see the research that leads to that conclusion!

[JessWonderin]

12:48 PM on 10/10/2011

could be she realizes, once "passed" it would draw MILLIONS in taxpayer dollars to defend, not to mention use of state legal resources . . . and loss of tourist and investment dollars.

[laureenholt]

04:03 PM on 10/17/2011

What kind of evidence are u relying on for that statement?

[Wild Thang]

05:11 AM on 10/10/2011

So she'll oppose passing that Amendment that bans gay marriage
based on a greater need to focus on job creation. OK, so that's the
politically correct way of allowing gay marriage. Whatever! There's
no need to debate the fine print so long as the Amendment fails.

Nuff said. Let anyone who wants to get married in North Carolina have
at it. I'm not saying y'all will like it, but go for it if it that's what you want.
If it's moving in the direction of democracy in the Tar Hill State so that those
who love each and want a lifelong commitment sanctioned by the State, then
do it, get 'er done.

And, now, let's do concentrate on getting jobs for all the newly married couples
and get on with life. Signed, sealed and delivered! Period. The end.

[beingthebest]

12:36 PM on 10/10/2011

NO, there is a law ther banning the marriages. No one will be allowed to marry there. That is why she feels safe in opposing the constitutional amendment.

[Wild Thang]

06:12 PM on 10/10/2011

I know. I read the article. But, the article clearly states,
and I shall quote for you, "[The NC Governor said that]
she'll oppose a proposed constitutional amendment
banning gay marriage." That means, that she is not
going to support the "ban" on gay marriage. Does
that compute for you"

[laureenholt]

04:06 PM on 10/17/2011

Thankfully, NC is not a state where the oxymoron known as "homosexual marriage" exists.

May that always be the case.

[tjconkster]

10:16 PM on 10/09/2011

One thing that you Tea Vangelicals fail to recall from your Bible Readings....

Jesus had 2..count them 2 Fathers....

[laureenholt]

04:07 PM on 10/17/2011

Really?

So what does that mean to homosexuals?

[helicalbevel]

08:45 PM on 10/09/2011

Can you say "one-term" gov? She is an embarrassment to NC.

[laureenholt]

04:09 PM on 10/17/2011

She's great to stand up for marriage being 1 MAN, 1 WOMAN.

She'll get my vote!