31 For 31: NC Marriage Amendment Approved In Landslide; Orwellian Name For OpponentsMay 08, 2012
North Carolina voters came out in the largest number in decades for a primary earlier today, spurred mostly by the opportunity to approve a state constitutional amendment to define marriage as between one man and one woman, which they did overwhelmingly (see UPI). Early returns were so convincing that the Associated Press called the referendum with only 29 percent of counties reporting. At the time, the proposed amendment was leading by about 61 to 39 percent, despite an opposition that outspent proponents by a 2-1 margin (just as they've outspent proponents in every other state). Oh, yes, the opposition. My colleague Chris Freund commented on its tactics earlier today: it used the same worn out and unapologetic lies they used in Virginia in 2006 and in the 29 other states in recent years that have approved constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage. You remember the routine: all the unintended consequences which would preclude people from entering into contracts (hasn't happened anywhere), visitation rights in hospitals would be denied (hasn't happened anywhere), domestic battery charges would become difficult to prove (hasn't happened anywhere), and the litany went on.
Something hasn't happened anywhere: The self-styled libertarians and deep thinkers at certain editorial pages across the commonwealth and other states have never admitted that they were wrong about all these imaginary figments. Marriage Amendments now have been approved by voters 31 times in the 31 states in which there has been a referendum.
But the North Carolina opponents took the Orwellian-twisting-of-the-language a step beyond. They dubbed their campaign organization satisfied The Coalition to Protect North Carolina Families. That is not a typo. The ironic tune to this scene isn't The World Turned Upside Down, though it certainly is with a name like that. It's that they are admitting they are on the losing and inherently wrong side of the issue if it must take the theme of traditional marriage and appropriate it for themselves to try to confuse the issue and the voters. After all, how could a coalition that "protects families" be wrong about what protects families?
It's like diving in soccer or flopping in basketball. It's the natural progression of leftist tactics. It not only redefines issues to accommodate its agenda (such as redefining 2,000 years of culture to mean marriage suddenly is anything trendy judges want it to mean), but it also attempts to define its opponents (usually conservatives) by assigning to them vicious motives, no matter how well grounded the underlying philosophy is. That's how we get the incongruous and non-sequitur claims that supporters of traditional values are haters trying to deny rights to everyone — and how those stereotypes become rote in mainstream media.
The bright side is that 31-69 means 31 for 31. In other words, the Truth does get to the voters when people unafraid to spread the Truth and confront the left's machinations to obfuscate, confuse, distort and impugn. When people shrivel in fear, the opponents stand gains confidence. When they stand tall, it doesn't matter how much money they spend.