Poll Dancing


The latest polling numbers confirm what many of us already knew about Amendment One: it has overwhelming support here in North Carolina (57% strongly support, 6% somewhat support, 5% somewhat oppose and 24% strongly oppose). Civitas recently asked the question:

“Do you support or oppose a constitutional amendment that says: Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State?

Because I have nothing better to do, I made this little graph so folks can see what these numbers actually look like:

Interestingly enough, support for Amendment One has actually increased here in Western North Carolina over the last three months (as opposed to holding at a relatively steady level of 60% plus statewide). For the full results and all the cool crosstabs from Civitas, click here).

And I’ll bet that tonight’s passage of a resolution by City Council in opposition to Amendment One will not only solidify those numbers, but bump them up a few notches. But more on all that shadowy election-year strategery in an upcoming post — let’s just say that the best traps in politics are the ones that your opponents on both sides step willingly into.

Anyhoo, despite the overwhelming likelihood of its passage, several top conservative thinkers in the state have recently weighed in — not only opposing Amendment One, but casting doubt on both its longevity and its constitutionality. If you’re a Republican — not to mention fancy yourself a conservative — you may be surprised to hear what they have to say.

Some excerpts (emphasis mine) from a recent story by The Institute of Southern Studies:

The cracks in the conservative coalition first emerged on March 26, when John Hood, president of the John Locke Foundation — a think tank largely funded by Republican donor Art Pope — described the amendment as “unwise and unfair.”

Hood wrote this:

“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.”

In covering Hood’s statement, reporters turned to another prominent libertarian-leaning conservative, Bob Orr, a former state Supreme Court Justice who used to lead another Pope-backed project, the N.C. Institute for Constitutional Law.

Orr predicts the amendment won’t endure legal scrutiny; as he told reporters:

“Any provision that has to be put into the ‘miscellaneous’ section of the constitution immediately raises questions about whether it should be in the state constitution. It’s probably not a provision that ought to be in.”

Oddly enough, that sentiment was echoed by none other than N.C. Republican House Speaker Thom Tillis, who in 2011 led the effort to bring the Amendment One ballot measure to the house floor and voted in favor of it.

Speaking to a group of students this week, Rep. Tillis predicted Amendment One would pass in May but repealed in 20 years because of changing views about gay marriage, saying:

“It’s a generational issue. If it passes, I think it will be repealed within 20 years.”

It wasn’t a one-time misstatement: Tillis’ spokesman later confirmed it accurately reflected the lawmaker’s views.

Richard Vinroot — Morehead scholar, a UNC basketball player, and a Bronze Star winner and former Republican mayor of Charlotte — has even recorded an ad against the amendment. This from Towleroad:

Says Vinroot: “[Amendment One] is unnecessary and may have serious unintended consequences.”

The mayors also point out the the negative economic impact of Amendment One and the fact that it would write discrimination into the constitution. Never before have the two mayors appeared together to oppose a statewide ballot measure.

Pop on over to the YouTubes to see the powerful video made for www.protectallncfamilies.org.

My friend Dan Gurley, former Field Director of the Republican National Committee, has this to say.

Interesting stuff. As I’ve said before here, I’m utterly ambivalent about Amendment One. I don’t rely on the state for a job, or for benefits, much less some sort of validation for the relationships that I choose to have. I will say that Gay Marriage has been legal and accepted for nearly ten years in Canada — and as far as I know, the place hasn’t gone to hell. In fact, as far as the economy goes, they’re doing much better than we are. All that disposable income spent on gay bridal registries, I’m guessing.


  1. shadmarsh says:

    While I’m certainly no fancy big city lawyer, or even an unfrozen caveman lawyer– heck, to be honest, I’m no lawyer at all. So you’ll have to forgive my primitive mind and understanding of the law. But I’m pretty sure one could, perhaps successfully even,argue that the word “Marriage” here is being used in its theological sense (if it really even has a true secular sense)and would therefore be in violation of the 1st amendment.

  2. The poll of 600 registered 2012 general election voters in North Carolina was conducted March 22-25, 2012 by National Research, Inc. of New Jersey. All respondents were part of a fully representative sample of registered 2012 general election voters in North Carolina. For purposes of this study, voters interviewed had to have voted in at least one of the past three general elections (2006, 2008, 2010) or be newly registered to vote since November 2, 2010.

  3. A. Chandler says:

    The Resolution will, as Michael points out, only solidify the pro-amendment folks and do nothing for the LGBT community. I oppose Amendment One, as many of you could guess, but I also oppose politicians politicizing the issue. Why should city councils across the state be voting on this one way or another? It will rile the masses, bring out the worst in many folks, and only create tension for no good cause.

    Real activism is no more. Instead, we have faux activism and resolutions and candle lighting and hand holding. When are the gays going to be ready to shake things up? If not over Amendment One, then I dare say…never.

    Mind your manners you dykes and queens and bears or you will not be allowed to partake in the Gay American Dream: gay marriage, 1.5 adopted children, a home in West Asheville, and debt up to your eyeballs. Now isn’t that better than taking a stand for something you believe in? You bet it is!

    Now, gays, sit down and shut up unless you are going to oh so elequently get up in front of council and bestow upon us the virtue of your gayness and righteousness and wisdom and instruction that this is how we win.

    But it is not how we win, it is how we assimilate and how we inch towards inclusiveness in a society that would be better off taking the lead from us rather than the other way around.

  4. designation says:

    Angel, you ignorant fool.

    You are one of the 3 three reasons we’re facing this amendment.

    You, Mary Beth and pitifully failed US Senate candidate Jim Neal are THE reason the amendment was dusted off by the theocrats in the NC House.

    Were it not for you three and your “activism” nonsense of busting onto the NC House floor on June 2, the amendment would still be rotting dead in a legislative committee as are the rest of the constitutional amendments considered by the General Assembly this session.

    Consider these facts: On June 1, the marriage amendment is sitting dead in a legislative committee. On June 2, Angel & friends burst onto the NC House floor. On June 3, the now-famous “hot-mic” NC GOP House caucus catches representatives urging their leadership to bring the marriage amendment forward soon so they can “get their ground game working.”

    Your actions directly led to the legislature bringing up the amendment.

    I suggest you keep your wildly ignorant view of politics to yourself so the rest of us can have the slightest chance at defeating the amendment — which this state did year in and year out until your foolish actions gave the enemies of equality focus and attention.

    There’s a lot of blame to go around for this amendment advancing to the ballot, but make no mistake, it starts with you and your actions on June 2, 2011.

    So just shut up for four more weeks and give the rest of us a chance to fix the mess you made.

  5. So, if the law will not pass constitutional muster, but is enthusiastically embraced by the Conservative “base”, it obviously can be used to not only get good voter turnout and an energized election cycle this round, but they can then blame the Democrats and those “activist judges” when the thing is found unconstitutional later.
    Then, they get to use it again some other time, when they need it, because once it gets slapped down it can be re-written as a more serious piece of legislation. The over-stepping is intentional and calculated to fail.
    Great example of a law that was never intended to actually function as anything more than a political tool.
    And all the Dems get out of it is the same moral high-ground they already carry. Brilliant.

  6. mat catastrophe says:

    “Angel, you ignorant fool.”

    Attention, Messrs Peck, Cates, et al:

    *that* is a personal attack.

  7. Jessica Britton says:

    Angel, showing our anger by acting out plays right into the extreme right’s hands, allowing them to use it as an example of what they’ve claimed we are all along. You don’t bring someone over to your side by slapping them in the face. You do it by showing them what you have in common and why your idea is beneficial to them as well. We can’t and won’t change the minds of the extreme right on this, their belief is set in stone. We can and will bring the average person over to our side by putting a human face on the issue and showing them how this amendment can have far reaching consequences that negatively affect them as well. Activism is often more about WHAT you say, rather than how loud you say it.

  8. Davyne Dial says:

    Just a wild guess, but would Civitas be doing a cross section of likely voters or registered voters, or would the high approval number be due to them only polling a certain partisan segment?????

    Tom Tillis did state that they expected this to be shot down in the future…much along the lines mentioned in previous comments.

    Dog and pony show.

  9. When I was a little girl in Poland, we all had ponies. My sister had pony, my cousin had pony. So, what’s wrong with that?

  10. Diogenes says:

    Cat fight?

  11. shadmarsh says:

    I’m so confused.

  12. mat catastrophe says:

    Buddy Pumps.

  13. A. Chandler says:


    Ha! Are you kidding? We are responsible for this amendment passing? I wish I had that much power. But, alas, I do not. You really shouldn’t listen to Ian Palmquist, he had that all wrong.

    Are you really saying that the Republicans would not have passed it if not for us three going on the floor that day? I find that very, very hard to believe. I think people want a scapegoat and instead of looking at who pushed the bill and who voted for it you look no further than three gay people who protested against it. That is a joke.

    I am not worried about middle-school silly name-calling. I am used to personal attacks. They come often. Not from conservatives or Republicans; rather, from lesbians, gays, Democrats, “progressives”. Designation just proved my point that we gays are supposed to sit down and shut up and write a check and sign a petition and if we do more then we will pay. Mary and I have paid and Jim has too. And it was worth it.

    What people like designation has taught us is that “open-minded”, “liberal” “progressives” are no more progressive or liberal or open-minded when it comes to gays and lesbians making unapproved, unstamped action. Sadly, these people are just as close-minded as they accuse Republicans of being.

    Maybe all you know about me and Mary is our bust into the General Assembly. Let me tell you something else about us. We were subjected to a conservative family court judge’s idea of family which meant she was put out of the house for three years. The ACLU represented us and our case set precedence in Tennessee law. http://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights/chandler-v-barker Three years of psychological examinations (we were both deemed sane and,I might add, well above average intelligence), family studies, court dates, questions about our sex lives, three years of living apart (after being together for nine years when the court stuff began), etc. It was horrible. So, we decided that we would stand up for our rights when and where and how we saw fit, no matter how mad that makes the gay Democratic status quo.

    Besides, the gays have never been better off in North Carolina since Amendment One passed. Millions poured into groups, new groups forming, organizing like we’ve never seen here, closets opening all over the state, marriage counters busy with requests and denials, etc.

    Opposition can be a good thing, a healthy thing, and it can be a catalyst for change. So, I will take credit for all that good news since it is all our fault.

    Tonight I am taking Mary out on the town to celebrate all our success! lol

  14. I rode a white pony once, then it turned into a dragon and tried to eat me.
    But the experience did teach me that there are some hungers that no food will satisfy, some thirsts that no drink will cure, and for some there are no hearts open enough to truly meet the demand for an acceptance beyond reason.

  15. trifecta says:

    I rode in the desert on a horse with no name. Well, he might have been an undocumented immigrant I made give me pony rides for a glass of water. It gets confusing. I was very drunk.

  16. Michael Muller says:

    So three Polls walk into a strip bar — one’s gay, one’s straight, and the other is a Trappist monk. The bartender brings them all a beer and says “So fellas…nice tits on that broad, huh? One third of the Polls strongly agrees with the bartender, one third strongly disagrees, and the other third doesn’t know/refuses to answer.


  17. Michael Muller says:

    P.S. I just made that up.

  18. A penguin goes to a mechanic to have his car looked at…

  19. mat catastrophe says:

    No soap! Radio!

  20. TJ says:

    You guys are just weird.

    Go Asheville! 😉

  21. RHS says:

    Q: How many surrealists does it take to change a light bulb?

    A: The fish.

  22. Jason Bugg says:

    Why did the dinosaur’s die off?

    Because the males had reptile dysfunction.

  23. TJ says:

    Q: How many therapists does it take to change the lightbulb?

    A: One, but it really has to want to change.

  24. James Dye says:

    Angel, Mary, and Jim’s action at the State House last June was heroic. It did NOT pull the dread Amendment One out of mothballs: Amendment One was destined to come to a vote from the time the Tea Party delivered a Republican majority to both houses of the NC legislature. A kudos to Equality NC for keeping the Amendment out of our Constitution for so many years. But those were years when we had Democratic majorities in both houses. Equality NC plays nice, which is fine when others play nice with you. But this Republican majority, quite frankly, isn’t nice: they’re all about bullying and heterosexual wealthy married Christian privilege. They have the forces of ALEC (the “Stand Your Ground” and “Papers Please” people) behind them and the financial backing of the Koch brothers. They play dirty and are not concerned with the consequences of their actions. They don’t care what new tragedies will arise in the areas of child custody, domestic violence, health insurance protections, and the economy in general when their unholy Amendment is ratified.

    Jim, Mary, and Angel did the right thing in standing up to these bullies. LGBT North Carolinians and heterosexual North Carolinians in domestic partnerships, wake up. We’re being bullied, pure and simple. We have to be loud. We have to be visible. Think Stonewall, which accomplished in two nights what a decade of silent protests by the Mattachines (of whom you’ve likely never heard) and the Daughters of Bilitis (ditto) failed to do. While I prefer civil disobedience over the more, shall we say, impolite kind of disobedience, the important thing is that we make a public stand, with every Who down in Whoville not going gentle into that good night.

    I fear many LGBT folks and our straight unmarried friends, who will now find themselves similarly situated, believe that, by being quiet, we’ll be left alone. This brings to mind a certain bumper sticker: “Take my civil liberties: I wasn’t using them anyway.” The people who crafted this Amendment, beyond an appalling lack of empathy, have no understanding of constitutional law. They should NOT be in politics. How will they respond, I wonder, when someone tries to curtail THEIR civil liberties, when, as Gandhi opined, someone labels their marriages meretricious relationships and their children illegitimate.

  25. Thunder Pig says:

    I fully support the idea of governing bodies (local, state or federal) passing resolutions that are symbolic in nature.

    This means they’ve consumed time and effort doing something that has no real effect as opposed to have been doing something that may actually harm me or my fellow man.


  26. TJ says:

    “I fear many LGBT folks and our straight unmarried friends, who will now find themselves similarly situated, believe that, by being quiet, we’ll be left alone. This brings to mind a certain bumper sticker: “Take my civil liberties: I wasn’t using them anyway.”

    Reminds me of another one:

    “Well-behaved women (add ‘men’)rarely make history.”

    Of course, ‘misbehaving’ looks different to different people.

  27. TJ says:

    Still my all-time favorite, so far:

    “Critical Thinking: The Other National Deficit”

  28. designation says:

    @JD: Your characterization of constitutional amendment politics in the year 2011 in NC is false.

    As of June 1 2011, the NC House had passed 3 constitutional amendments that were sitting dead in Senate committees — House Bill 8 (eminent domain), House Bill 61 (Chamber Leader Term Limits), House Bill 823 (Superintendent Powers). The marriage amendment hadn’t moved an inch.

    In particular, the House and Senate leaders were fighting publicly about the term limits amendment. Google some news articles from state government beat reporters around that time to confirm this.

    To ThunderPig’s point above, when someone is distracted by other matters, it lessens the chance they’ll focus on a matter that concerns you.

    But of course, something happened after June 1 that gave focus to an entirely different constitutional amendment than the ones they already brought up for a vote.

    It is not heroic to endanger your fellow citizens. And that’s exactly what the antics on June 2, 2011 have done.

    Take such “heroics” back to Tennessee or some other place. We were doing better here without them.

  29. A. Chandler says:

    You called it “heroics” not me. I didn’t think it heroic, I thought it necessary.

    And, I don’t think you get it. Your anger and accusations do not dissuade me. It only proves my point. Do it like the staus quo want it or be attacked by the status quo. There is no room in the LGBT movement for anything other than what is approved, stamped, nice, quiet, and easily digested by the masses.

    You should be focused on the ones who didn’t protect us in the first place, your near and dear Democratic friends who controlled our government here in NC for, like, over a hundred years, but didn’t pass any laws to protect us. But, THAT would require heroics, something most Democratic politicos and their enablers do not have.

    Keep coloring in the lines, designation, they were created for people like you.

  30. arrington13 says:

    Nothing like fresh chest thumping in the morning.

    Designation – for someone well versed in timelines, I’m surprised you didn’t pick up the articles posted pre-June 2011 that discussed not only rallies by the extreme right happening at the GA greens in favor of this Amendment, but that on February 22, 2011 Sen. Forrester filed the proposed amendment in the Senate. (Source here – http://bit.ly/hxf9LX)There were polls and even an ENC video on the fact that in March of 2011 the NC Legislature were already discussing this very amendment. Whether it was in formal hearings or not, both sides of the argument were acknowledging that it was, in fact, being discussed. I think it’s unreasonable to put the decision making of the NC Leg on any one or multitude of people and their actions in June, when clearly this ball was already in motion.

    What you also may not have known was that during the month of March, there was an educational seminar held here in Asheville to discuss the recent (at that time) ruling about second parent adoptions and the discriminatory effects on the LGBTQ community as well as the proposed language to the Amendment proposed in Feb 2011. Angel was one of the organizers for that event. What should also be noted is that when the ruling came from the judge, it leveraged an opportunity for proponents of Amendment 1 – which again, was already being discussed in February 2011.

    All that being said, I didn’t agree with Angel’s actions the day of the rally in June. She and I have had those conversations and we respectfully agree to disagree. In fact, Angel and I don’t agree quite frequently, but we can have civil discussions about it. From time to time we even find a platform or topic that we do agree on and we work together to figure out a way to bring it to the LGBTQ community.

    What we do know is that it takes a multitude of voices and ways to get a message out to a multitude of types of people. At the end of the day, fighting over who “got it right” distracts away from the issue itself and plays right into the hands of the opponent.

  31. designation says:


    Once again, you can’t see what is plainly in front of you.

    JD called it “heroic” in the first sentence of the post I was responding to.

    Again, you lie by stating that Democrats in NC passed no laws protecting LGBT people. Of course they did. The anti-bullying bill is a shining example of that.

    All that said, you know nothing of whether I enable Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, unaffiliated office holders or none at all. Clearly, it is you who make baseless accusations, some of which are plain lies as I’ve shown above.

    Enjoy your perceived martyrdom while the people in real legal danger wait to see how badly your foolish actions have harmed them.

  32. Davyne Dial says:

    Oh please anonymous “designation.” Any hard won civil rights is painted in blood. That’s a fact. This is par for the course.

  33. Aaron Sarver says:

    Interesting to see the increasing number of public figures in N.C., across the political spectrum, voicing their opposition to Amendment 1.


    The Times-News of Burlington (hardly a promoter of the liberal agenda) ran this nice editorial piece yesterday:


    I wish the N.C. GOP would focus on jobs and education instead of pushing wedge issues for their own gain, but this is going to be a very interesting vote on May 8th as more and more folks realize this ballot measure has a wide-range of negative impacts for all residents of our great state.


    “The Amendment threatens domestic violence protections for all unmarried couples. The Amendment will harm victims of domestic violence, calling into question NC’s domestic violence laws. This happened in states like Ohio, where the passage of a less restrictive amendment meant dozens of batterers were released from prison—before courts could intervene—simply because they were not married to their victims, further endangering the victims and their children. As Ohio’s Cleveland Plain Dealer put it, “Ohio voters who approved a constitutional amendment that denied legal recognition of unmarried and gay couples probably didn’t envision the measure being successfully used as a defense in domestic violence cases.”

  34. Michael Muller says:

    Angel Chandler, Ashley Arrington and Davyne Dial are absolutely correct — as usual.

  35. Tim Peck says:

    Mark Meadows:

    “I’m driven by a moral obligation to stop Barack Obama’s assault on our values. That assault includes same-sex marriage, which Meadows is against… “Above all I am guided by my Christian faith, and that will never change.”

    [submitted 4/11/2012 1:14 PM (don’t forget to change the posting timestamp to match the submission timestamp)]

  36. Diogenes says:

    I strenuously object and find outrageously offensive Jason Bugg’s gratuitous use of apostrophes. “Dinosaur’s ” indeed!

  37. Diogenes says:

    I strenuously object and find offensive Jason Bugg’s gratuitous use of superfluous apostrophes. He should stick to crude and rude comments about penises, sandy vaginas and Gordon Smith. Leave dinosaurs alone, you bastard person.

  38. Ascend of Asheville says:

    On a slightly different but related topic, who thinks the now settled Republican Presidential primary will make a difference in NC turnout as it relates to the Amendment?
    I think it could help, but marginally. Important though, if it gets close by primary day.

  39. arrington13 says:

    Most people in NC are used to not being a factor in the primary Presedential race. We tend to cling to our local folks running for local, state, and federal offices.

    The Amendment is two-fold in voter turnout. 1) It gets those who could care less about actual races, but feel strongly about their social beliefs out to vote in a primary; or 2) those who feel strongly about a person running in a race will more than likely go ahead and vote one way or the other on the Amendment.

  40. Doug Gibson says:

    PPP tweets:

    No hotly contested GOP primary in NC should chop ~3 pts off the marriage amendment’s current poll lead…helpful but not a huge game changer

  41. Ascend of Asheville says:

    Three points is more than I would have expected. Every little bit helps.

    @MM: Them Damned Gay Fee-Aunt-Says!

  42. Tim Peck says:

    Timestamps are a bitch.

  43. Gordon Smith says:

    Thanks for choosing to visit this site, Tim! No coercion!

  44. Tim Peck says:

    “Thanks for choosing to visit this site, Tim!”

    You’re welcome. Even when the posting timestamps are altered.

  45. Gordon Smith says:

    I have no idea how to alter timestamps, Tim. I really don’t think anyone here cares to do that sort of thing anyway. It must be a broader conspiracy than you’d imagined. The puppeteers at WordPress, perhaps? Or maybe the Internet has it in for you.

  46. Tom Sullivan says:

    Me neither. No idea. Don’t know why some comments lag.

  47. Ascend of Asheville says:

    I didn’t do it.

  48. shadmarsh says:

    I don’t even know what the heck he’s talking about. Is there some discrepancy somewhere (other than in the Peck brain)?

  49. Michael Muller says:

    I can vouch for the technical ineptitude of us Hooligans. Getting anything done around here that doesn’t involve drinking beer is like watching an old Stooges episode. It’s a wonder the the whole place just doesn’t come crashing down on our heads! Cuz it’s all held together by duct tape, ya see.

    Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk

  50. trifecta says:

    I confess. I went back in time and changed Tim’s timestamp. Then I went back further in time, and drew a Hitler mustache on Dagny Taggart in the original edition of Atlas Shrugged.

    I am sorry.

  51. Michael Muller says:

    Social radical and Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers comes out against Amendment One:

    “I believe that when you pass an amendment like that, you are sending a message to the world about what kind of community this is — not inclusive,” he told a crowd of nearly 400 at the Hood Hargett Breakfast at Carmel Country Club. “We don’t have equal standards for people with a different point of view.”

    Rogers emphasized he was expressing a personal opinion, not a corporate one. But he did not dodge the question and he was emphatic.

    “I’m old fashioned. I believe we’re all the children of God, and we shouldn’t have special rules for some and not for others,” he said.

    “I will go a step further. If this amendment passes, we’re going to look back 20 years from now or 10 years from now, and we’re going to think about that amendment the same way we think about the Jim Crow laws that were passed in his state many, many years ago.”

    Read the entire story in the Charlotte Business Journal.

  52. A. Chandler says:


    We can disagree on facts all day. But you are simply ranting. You are very angry, and you sound like you have a personal agenda besides wanting to defeat Amendment One and all. The more you write, the more I feel I know you. Too bad you choose to make personal attacks without stating your identity.

    I have volunteered against Amendment One by phone banking and helping facilitate educational events regarding Amendment One. I also protested on 6/2/12, something you seem focused on in a quite unhealthy way. I believe in a varied approach, part of which is direct, loud, and purposeful action.

    Your problem, along with most other gays and liberals, is you don’t like direct, loud action. You only want to do the stuff that will be the least offensive and what offers the least amount of risk. You would rather we be as nice as possible so maybe your aunt Tilly will still love you and your grandma don’t think you’re one of them radical queers. You want it as digestible as possible, as easy as possible.

    But, risk is absolutely necessary. And that’s where the LGBT community has fallen short.

    I think it stems from 2 things: internalized homophobia and playing it safe politically. We gays are used to hiding from the time we are children who we are. We don’t want to be exposed. We play it safe to protect ourselves. Then, we come to a place like Asheville and think we are all radical and out in force because we walk in a four block area of downtown holding our partner’s hand. We also tend to vote lesser of two evils rather than taking the risk of saying no more, we won’t vote for anyone of any Party unless they take a stand for equality. Again, there we go with that lack of risk thing.

    Hell, even most of the gay groups here in Asheville and WNC didn’t want to create a pledge to ask Democrats to sign stating that they are FOR full equality for LGBT citizens. That kinda made em nervous, they said they didn’t need it, or that the whole thing might run into problems for other larger Equality groups. Does that even make sense? Do we not want to know who our friends are and who our enemies are or who won’t stand for equality to save their own political asses?

    Southern queers and designation, whoever you are, your flavor of homophobic, self-loathing kool aid has turned you and the gay community yellow. Have a beer, grow some hair on your chest, (wo)man up for equality’s sake!

    P.S. Tell your Aunt Tilly hello for me.

  53. Angel Chandler is turning me on again.

    And I really like Davyne’s comment: “Any hard won civil rights is painted in blood. That’s a fact.”

    The lesson here, designation? Don’t mess with a woman with a gun or in a fancy hat.

  54. Jess Carter says:

    To all of you who think Angel, Mary and Jim were wrong in their actions, get the f**k over it. They are 3 individuals who were looking at the big picture with *your* future and well being in mind. Nothing gets accomplished by sitting on your pansy asses (no offense, fancy pants) and waiting. Nothing gets changed by being idle. Do we need even more martyrs for our cause to prove that? You have no right to criticize the people who are actually willing to get off their asses if you choose to sit by and wait for the world to change around you.

  55. Connie French says:

    I think Angel and Mary have done a lot for NC lgbt community. I was a sign waving dyke a while back and was happy to be one, even tho at a rally supposedly protected by police presence, shots were fired from a car and hmmm and the people never caught. If you don’t like the way Angel and Mary do things for lgbt’s then go find a way to be heard that’s better. My partner and I understand what Angel and Mary have been through to be lovingly together in Tenn. And I am proud to call them leaders and friends in the state of N.C.

  56. beth brooker says:

    Wow, talk about damaging! Shame on you. If more people would stand up like Angel and Mary and fight for OUR rights we could have full federal equality. But no, you have to hide behind some alias name and blast people who stand up and make a difference. It is YOU that are harming the “cause”.

  57. beth brooker says:

    Angel, no need to continue this debate with this idiot. You cannot change his/her mind and he/she is the very reason why the “gay movement” will take decades to get equal rights. Stay the course, keep fighting and know that your work is valued and appreciated by many. It is easier for people like this to sit behind their computer and act all big and all knowing, but it takes the brave few to stand up and make a true difference. Thanks!

  58. TJ says:

    “Oh my.”

    Now, Michael, see what you’ve gone and started?!

    I hope you’re proud of yourself. 😉