Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: kabar

Right, I think that is the same reason the Va amendment passed by so little(57% in 2006). Even taking into account northern Va that is too low for the time and compared to what the surrounding southern states passed theirs by around the same time. The language seemed to imply that all contracts between folks not married were banned, like wills and medical contracts. The AG had to issue a statement the state allow those contracts. It is propably the strictest amendment passed, but I think it would have passed by much more if it was not as broad.

Freegards


10 posted on 05/08/2012 9:31:23 AM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Ransomed; kabar

Opponents of the amendment here in NC have been pursuing similar arguments against it.

They’ve argued that it would invalidate all contracts between non-married people, as well as any benefits given by private companies - even though the text of the amendment clearly says otherwise.

They’ve also tried to argue that the terminology “only domestic partnership” would remove protections against domestic violence - even though the current laws against domestic violence don’t even require a “domestic partnership” to exist for them to go into action. A man and a woman who are merely dating and not living together fall under the current NC DV statutes.

Sounds like our marriage-haters have been copying from the ones in VA, even when it doesn’t really apply.


12 posted on 05/08/2012 9:47:17 AM PDT by Yashcheritsiy (Anybody but Obama and Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson