Tuesday, March 27, 2012

John Hood on Amendment One: 'Unwise and unfair'

John Hood, president of the conservative John Locke Foundation, wrote a column this week that expanded on last week's departure of Tara Servatius, a freelancer who wrote the foundation's Meck Dec blog.

Servatius left after a firestorm erupted over a blog on the so-called marriage amendment in which she ran a photo-shopped picture of President Obama in bondage gear with a bucket of fried chicken in front of him. Hood wrote that "it would be difficult to imagine a more revolting depiction of the president of the United States."

He went on to explain his opposition to the amendment that would ban same sex marriage and civil unions in the state. He wrote:

"(T)he John Locke Foundation does not take positions on gay rights, abortion, or other social issues. Other organizations, Left and Right, exist to debate those issues. From our founding in 1989, JLF has focused on fiscal and economic matters.

"Since I began writing a column for the organization, I have followed the same editorial policy ... But in this case I'lll suspend the rule for the sake of illustration. ... As it happens, JLF staffers and contributors have a wide range of views on social issues, including the marriage amendment. Some support it, based on heartfelt moral or religious convictions. Others oppose it, including me.

"I think amending North Carolina's constitution to forbid gay and lesbian couples from receiving any future legal recognition, including civil unions, is unwise and unfair. In my opinion the real threat to marriage is not the prospect of gay people getting hitched. It is the reality of straight people too quickly resorting to divorce, or never getting hitched in the first place.

"Should I assume and say that anyone who supports the amendment, including friends and colleagues, must be a bigot? Should they assume and say that anyone who opposes the amendment must be faithless, or hostile to family values? Not if we want to live and work together in a civil society. And not if we actually want to persuade rather than to preen, persecute, or provoke. Most North Carolina voters, it seems, are likely to support the amendment. I disagree with them, but that doesn't mean I should say they all have small minds or evil intent. Once you start down that road, you end up ranting and raving to an ever-shrinking audience characterized by uniform views and smug self-satisfaction."

41 comments:

Wiley Coyote said...

I disagree with them, but that doesn't mean I should say they all have small minds or evil intent. Once you start down that road, you end up ranting and raving to an ever-shrinking audience characterized by uniform views and smug self-satisfaction."

This has been going on for years.

You're way behind the times.

Garth Vader said...

Wiley is correct. As evidence check the May 6 2011 Observer editorial describing the NC Legislature as "beyond indecent", "transparent and hollow", "heavy-handed", "mean-spirited" and "petty".

But Tara is the one who "repeatedly engaged in low-level discouse".

Anonymous said...

Thank you for your post, Mr. Hood. It was well said.

As for those morally opposed,I still do not know why they should support amending the constitution to prevent others from having the same rights and benefits they enjoy. I am morally and religiously opposed to the KKK and I imagine my disgust for them is akin to the feelings those in favor of the amendment may have for their LGBT neighbors. However, despite my moral and religious opposition to the KKK, I would never vote for any amendment or other law that would prevent them from receiving the same rights and benefits as I and the majority of other people have. To do so seems quite Un-American.

Can't you be morally and religiously opposed and still vote against discrimination? Why should the religious views of the majority be imposed on everyone else? Why is this even up for a popular vote?

Anonymous said...

Word to your Mother, John.

Anonymous said...

@anon 1:26. Comparing the KKK to LGBT is such a way off method of fearmongering. This amendment is not preventing the LGBT way of life, nor stopping the love between them to flow freely. This is an amendment that preserves what has been intended for marriage since day one, one man, one woman. Why is it that our traditions and norms are being attacked and disrupted by the left? We too can take a trip down the slippery slope and wonder out loud, what next? Multiple marriages among men/women? What if someone really loves their dog/cat? This may sound silly, but can you imagine our founding fathers reaction to what has happened to our One Nation Under God? And yes, like you said, the religious views of the "majority."

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

On the census form, homosexuality was not an option because it's a behavior not an identity.

Garth Vader said...

Hmmm this is going to end well...

Anonymous said...

@anon 1:45 "Under God" was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954, and the pledge was originally authored in 1892, well after the time of our founding fathers. In an honest and factual historical context, the founding fathers would be appalled at the current assault on the separation of church and state that is currently taking place in this country. If you are looking for "majority" rule when it comes to religious freedom and civil rights, I've got a few countries in mind that our founding fathers would have liked to see you pack up your things and move to.

Anonymous said...

Been married almost thirty-seven years, & I have yet to have "one of those people" threaten my marriage.

Anonymous said...

People miss that this amendment affect straight, unmarried couples in a domestic partnership and their children. And contrary to what @anon 10:45 pointed out, you'll be hard pressed to find something that supports "one man, one woman" or any other sacred implication of marriage in the Bible. Obviously there were plenty of people discussed in the bible with multiple wives, but what about a man's slaves? He could force then to pair however e wanted. A woman who lost her husband could be forced to marry her brother in law. Women from pillaged nations were taken as spoils of war, and all in God's name of course. Drop the sanctimonious argument because it will get you nowhere.

Anonymous said...

You can always discern the real racist bigots since their small empty brains always pull the race card or 3K BS and 9 out 10 times are liberals. Libs are the biggest racists on the planet.

Anonymous said...

"As for those morally opposed,I still do not know why they should support amending the constitution to prevent others from having the same rights and benefits they enjoy."
-->There is no distinction between "us and them". Everyone over a min age has the same right to marry one other person over the min age. Every person can marry one other person thatis not their immediate relative and is of the opposite sex.

"I am morally and religiously opposed to the KKK and I imagine my disgust for them is akin to the feelings those in favor of the amendment may have for their LGBT neighbors.
--> There is no logical reason to compare the existence of a hate group to this amendement. The amendment is not specific to LGBT anyway. i.e. Plenty of LGBT people are married to people of the opposite sex in NC. Regardless just because you feel disgust for people you disagree with does not mean that every person who agrees with something (Like the amendment) feels disgust in every case (i.e. for LGBT people or same sex marriage)

However, despite my moral and religious opposition to the KKK, I would never vote for any amendment or other law that would prevent them from receiving the same rights and benefits as I and the majority of other people have. To do so seems quite Un-American.
Can't you be morally and religiously opposed and still vote against discrimination? Why should the religious views of the majority be imposed on everyone else? Why is this even up for a popular vote?
--> There is no discrimination. Everyone over a min age has the same right to marry one other person over the min age. Every person can marry one other person thatis not their immediate relative and is of the opposite sex.

Anonymous said...

You can always discern the real racist bigots since their small empty brains always pull the race card or 3K BS and 9 out 10 times are liberals. Libs are the biggest racists on the planet.
--> Apparently you didn't get the point of the commentary you responded to...

Anonymous said...

"you'll be hard pressed to find something that supports "one man, one woman" or any other sacred implication of marriage in the Bible."
Who cares. The boundaries of marriage in NC stand on their own merits

Anonymous said...

History will not be kind to those that vote in support of this amendment. They will bring shame to us all. Too bad there is no way to make them see the light anymore than there was to make racists see the light when they were a majority.

Anonymous said...

How one feels about homosexuality/gay marriage is irrelevant to the issue on the ballot.

The issue is that it's NONE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S BUSINESS.

A government that can prohibit gay people from marrying today can prohibit straight people from marrying tomorrow.

Anonymous said...

I love the "traditional marriage” argument that presents as its evidence the way marriage has been for “thousands of years”. Really? Well if we’re going to allow the history of human marriage to dictate what we should be doing today, then let’s consider all of that history, not just the part we like to use to make a point. If we get to apply “how marriage has always been”, then what about allowing a man to sell his 12-year-old daughter to his cousin to become his 3rd wife against her will? Clearly, the “institution’ of marriage has been tampered with throughout history to fit the times. The definition of marriage bends to fit us, not the opposite. If that were the case, we’d be overturning laws against polygamy, incest, child rape, and prostitution because they don’t fit the traditional/historical view of marriage either.

Anonymous said...

John its too bad you had to give Tara the shaft. I like the Carolina Journal but I don't like the way you sold her down the river. Gay marriage is something we need to look at after the rest of our monumental problems are solved. Say 2075? That's about how long it will take to undo this liberal nightmare we are living. I expected better from you.

Anonymous said...

History will not be kind to those that vote in support of this amendment.

--> History wont be unkind either. History won't affect dead people nor will their vote's be made public. People who don't reproduce will not pass their genes into future generations in either case

They will bring shame to us all.
--> How is that?

Too bad there is no way to make them see the light anymore than there was to make racists see the light when they were a majority.
--> This makes no sense. No one is stopping people who are attracted to people of the same sex from marrying. they just can't marry. Several mixonceptions is that voting against stame sex marrriage is hatred for or being against homosexuality or people who consider themselves as homosexual. someone of the same sex. there are many married people who fit that description and they are married to people to the opposite sex and often are genetic parents.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
How one feels about homosexuality/gay marriage is irrelevant to the issue on the ballot.
--> homosexuality and "gay" marrige are irrelevent to how one feels and aren't on the ballot in the first place. same sex marriage is.

"The issue is that it's NONE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S BUSINESS."
--> Obviously it is not the issue on the ballot. the isue on the baloot is same sex marriage

A government that can prohibit gay people from marrying today can prohibit straight people from marrying tomorrow.
--> the government can't prevent "gay" people from marrying today. They can't determine who is "gay" in the first place. There are plenty of "gay" people who are married to people of the opposite sex

Anonymous said...

I can't stand LIBERALS!!! They all need to go back up north to where they belong! They make me sick with their policies. I think we need to cast all of them out here from Purdue to Anthony Foxx. I strongly support the Marriage Amendment!!!!

Anonymous said...

Liberalism is a disease. Liberalism will get you killed.

Anonymous said...

Why dont Tara Servatious just run for Mayor of Charlotte and get it over with?

Ahole Foxx just got the commie lib annexation bill back after H845 had only passed last year using Wake County lib Superior Court judge Shannon Joseph who will be removed from office.

Foxx has proven to be a socialist piece of crap and needs to GO !!!!!!!

The NC Supreme Court will reject Foxx and his bandit municipalities who annex and steal hundreds of millions of tax dollars from property owners at will and have been since 1959 as there were only 3 states in America with such terrible commie liberal annexation laws.

H845 will be back in business very soon.

Get FOXX OUT OF OFFICE.

Servatious needs to be running for MAYOR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Hood the RINO liberal who may be another mens restroom type...

Anonymous said...

Thanks for publishing this. It shows that Hood, a smart guy, has not thought about what is happening at all with this amendment. It is only about ensuring that the people of NC decide this issue and not the courts. And it flushes the supercilious civil unions, good, let them be gone. Sadly, Hood does not realize that this amendment is the best possible way to handle this issue right now. Later, we can do better but the homosexual community has brought us to this place now because of their lawsuits in other states. Courts are not the way to resolve this issue-- debate, discussion, legislation, voting is the way to go. It can be readdressed later after the homosexual community realizes it has to do the hard work of convincing people, not having a court ram it down our throats.

Anonymous said...

WE THE PEOPLE? You kidding right? Dont the US Constitution ratified in 1788 say WE THE GOVERNMENT?

The will of the peoples vote is final say? Since when? Heck thats Constitution is just a little piece of silly paper. The peoples vote only counts if its the right vote in the new revised politically correct lib Amerikwa.

In California and other lib states the people voted and passed pro hetro marriage only bills and amendments for yrs but some San Francisco homosexual US Federal District Judge always overturns them (but thats not a conflict of interest). Oh no.

Historically they also passed all pro-hetro bills and amendments in the grande cities of Sodom and Gomorrah way back but they were all overturned too ...

Anonymous said...

Yea its been rumored a long time Hood hangs out at his home base in Raleigh Durham airport male restroom stalls (plus any airport he travels too including Charlotte Douglas) for years sending tapping Morse Code signals with his wingtip shoes.

ps They call it the Larry Craig Code but it may be changed to the John Hood Code soon.

Anonymous said...

Closeted airport bath stall Republican taps what????

Anonymous said...

All RINOs against the amendment need to be arrested charged jailed convicted and given a quick lethal injection with all the rest of the nasty filthy faggots.
Islamic Sharia Law require fags to be beheaded in the public square.

Bring back public executions to cure learned bad unhealthy behavior. Traitors like Hood need to be first in line.

Anonymous said...

Dear Editor. There are facts everyone should know about Richard Hudson before voting for him. Richard Hudson is running a campaign of mailouts? The represention of him portrayed in the mailouts is not 100% accurate.

One mailout pictures him hunting with Robin Hayes in an attempt to make him the establishment candidate. I don't know if that will help him in Richmond county because we have had enough of Robin Hayes. The flyer tries to connect him to the local community by calling him the owner of a small marketing group in cabarrus county.

What they obviously don't want you to know is this time last year he was in Washington DC where he has been for several years. He and his wife were Chief of staffs for Republican Congressmen. The RNC and Robin Hayes picked him to leave his job as a Congressional Chief of staff and move to the US 8th Congressional district in hopes of getting him elected. His cronies and lobbyists donated heavily to his campaign.

The RNC is doing that all over the nation. They are riding the Tea Party wave and slipping in their own candidates. His mailout campaign makes him look very impressive. But it's good ole boy politics as usual. The RNC is part of the problem. And in this election of throw the bums out do you really want to install a Washington Insider?

The progress we made last election were the Tea Party freshmen. They wouldn't vote the way John Boehner wanted them to. So the RNC are trying to elect candidates that will be loyal to them, not us. Is that what you want in your next congressman? A Republican loyalist?
Rev Russ Fincham, Rockingham Tea Party

Anonymous said...

Jihadist Muslims beheading Americans under the many Islamic Sharia Law crimes. There are 1.5 billion Muslims and 2.3 billion Christians on earth. Be glad Bush fought back after 911 or millions of spoiled rotten ungrateful Americans could have been beheaded right now or speaking Arabic and praying 5 times daily. The Quran also calls for perverts, non-Muslims and atheists to be put to death.

http://jblog.jackcjohnson.com/Videos/muslim-videos/172.aspx

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?p=muslim%20beheading&tnr=21&vid=4959137259258008&l=32&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts1.mm.bing.net%2Fvideos%2Fthumbnail.aspx%3Fq%3D4959137259258008%26id%3D76930a6114c695e743a52c9bbd424782%26bid%3DnFUHr5sIHlwYyg%26bn%3DThumb%26url%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252fwww.stupidvideos.com%252fvideo%252fanimals%252fBeheading_of_Paul_Johnson%252f&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stupidvideos.com%2Fvideo%2Fanimals%2FBeheading_of_Paul_Johnson%2F&sigr=1241n5bu2&newfp=1&tit=Beheading+of+Paul+Johnson

Anonymous said...

http://www.bestgore.com/beheading/eugene-armstrong-beheading-death-video/

Very cool raghead stuff here for budding muslims or wantabes. Raghead crazies cut off the heads screaming allah. Very gory and a must watch. Grab some popcorn.


http://www.nomullas.net/beheadings.html

Anonymous said...

So are you Republican bigots going to be boycotting your own convention this year? Pro-gay rights Donald Trump is headlining the NCGOP.

Anonymous said...

http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2011/03/donald-trump-on-gay-marriage-lgbt-rights-no-and-no/

fuk off predator fag pedophile who lurks with young minority teens for yrs. the community knows about it now. some pos is dead meat.

Anonymous said...

Reality (TV) Check: The Celebrity Apprentice 5, Episode 6...

Trump asks Aubrey if she’s always this emotional, and Aubrey says no, but she’s here fighting for something she really believes in. Her charity is called GLSEN (pronounced “glisten”), and it’s the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. Trump caves in and gives GLSEN a personal donation of $10,000.

So Trump's money (and vicariously the NCGOP) supports teaching high school students how to safely "fist" each other with graphic handouts.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2009/12/fistgate-ii-high-school-students-given-fisting-kits-at-kevin-jennings-glsen-conference/

BTW, want to know how much Romney gave GLSEN over the years as Governor of Massachewdics?

LOL, silly Republicans. Can't even be a bigot right.

Anonymous said...

http://www.wnd.com/2002/04/13722/

Report: Pedophilia is common among 'gays'
Research reveals 'dark side' of criminal homosexual culture

Anonymous said...

Hey, it's no "World Nut Daily," but Psychological Science Quarterly does have some gravitas.

Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes
Lower Cognitive Ability Predicts Greater Prejudice Through Right-Wing Ideology and Low Intergroup Contact


http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/04/0956797611421206.abstract

Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/intelligence-study-links-prejudice_n_1237796.html

Evolve already Cro-Mag.

Anonymous said...

Civil discourse is needed more than ever. Name calling will get us nowhere. As an independent voter, the best of religion is when it is inclusive and the worst is when it is exclusive. From my reading, Jesus tended to hang out with the disenfranchised more than he did church leaders. Setting this aside, there is a reason for a separation in church and state. It is discriminatory to treat people differently, so I am against Amendment One and believe in equal rights for all groups. I respect people's rights to disagree, but am less tolerant of uncivil discourse. Our country and state need more civility and collaboration.

Anonymous said...

Get ready for Romney, Palin, Bush, Santorum, Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity etc.

Once the high gas price and homo protector in the WH is purged in Nov all his pro homo laws will be reversed.

Make homos unlawful again. Get them back in the closet and STFU if you know whats good for you.

Muslims and real Xians both agree on this issue. Oddly the Muslim conversion rate of homo to hetro is 99% due to beheading. America will consider cutting off heads also as penalty for refusal to stop their learned perv behavior .

Let them have civil discourse with their executioner before he slices off their heads.

VOTE FOR AMENDMENT ONE.

.

Anonymous said...

Methinks anonymous bigot Republican doth protest too much.