Stifling the Creative Class

I know, I know. Richard Florida's work on the so-called "creative class" has been one of the most over-used studies of the year. But he does have some good points. And one of the facts he most likes to put out there is that diverse regions with tolerant attitudes towards minorities. Our area became that much more appealing to gays last year when it became harder for the state to enforce laws that restricted what citizens could do in the privacy of our homes (Lawrence v. Texas). However, that could all change when/if the state legislature and voters pass a bill to further encode the discrimination by the state of gay people? That might just happen. There are 67 co-sponsors on a proposed amendment in the house that would not only ban gay marriage, but might also restrict the rights of municipalities and even private companies from offering benefits to unmarried partners. I wonder what the economic impact of such a move would have on some of our major cities? Do people realize that there are LOTS of gay people in this area that contribute a great deal to the community, many of whom will consider moving to a different state or country where folks are more accepting? Even if you don't approve of homosexuality on moral grounds, can't you at least make an economic argument for continuing to promote diversity in our region?

issue: 

Total votes: 0

3 Comments

When asked why he thought

When asked why he thought marriage between two committed adults was so heinous, I heard one of the House proponents say that it was just 'wrong' and that it was an 'article of his faith' to oppose such blasphemy. I wish I'd caught his name so that he could get the kind of publicity he so rightfully deserves.

For him, here's a couple of articles of my faith:

Article I

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...."

Article XIV

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

North Carolina shall make no law endorsing the views and biases of a religious minority, especially to abridge those rights and liberties that should be afforded to us all.

In a world with too little love, compassion and cooperation, why go out of your way to drub those that wish to celebrate their legal commitment to those ideals?

Shameful.

Today, so many Orange County

Today, so many Orange County residents think this issue is over.

They think they have and always have had a General Assembly delegation that would never support a statute (DOMA) that explicitly discriminates against same-sex couples let alone support a Constitutional Amendment to do the same. Hell, we recognize the benefits of a welcomed GLBT community that Rickie references.

Press comments made by some members of the Orange County delegation (Kinnaird and Insko) during the recent DOMA repeal discussions appear to endorse this general feeling...

but such complacently could be dangerous.

Orange County residents sat back silently when their General Assembly delegation, along with some "progressive" Durham democrats like Wib Gulley, voted in favor of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

Passing of this Amendment would be akin to slapping a giant "Closed" sign across the state. The corporations that have fueled the triangle's economic explosion over the last 20 years -- the medical research and technology companies -- have demostrated their committment to identifying communities where their employees can experience a high standard of living, rich with cultural amenities -- the kind of communties Florida tells us that LGBT people are an integral part of.

Mass Gov Romney is wasting a great economic opportunity by opposing rather than embracing equal marriage rights. Too bad for them. I hope it's not too bad for us. I hope Orange County's entire delegation will be on board this time.

Constitutional amendments

Constitutional amendments that restrict rights have a nasty tendency of failing utterly (prohibition). Our Constitution is a mere shell of its former self, why even bother with something this stupid? We can't get the 2nd, 4th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 13th, 15th, etc amendments enforced, what is the point in adding another and going through a meaningless exercise that will certainly create more discord and more anger?

And we still have a great deal of the "spirit" of the 18th amendment alive in state laws. Ask any UNC student who has had the bad luck of running into the ALE agents at the start of every fall semester at Carolina.

I notice that the 27th amendment is not really followed, either--Congress votes for its own pay increases all the time and they take effect immediately.

I don't think I'm a fan of constitutional government anymore. It doesn't work.