Unintended ConsequencesMay 08, 2012
The more things change, the more things stay the same. Those of us who lived through the 2006 marriage amendment campaign well remember the ridiculous claims of "unintended consequences," things like contracts not being valid and domestic violence laws no longer being enforcable. Many were repeated by the media and editorial pages. Virginans saw through such nonsense of course, and passed the amendment with 57 percent support.
Since its passage there have been no reports of "unintended consequences." In fact, the amendment has done simply what it was intended to do, protect the definition of marriage. (We haven't, however, seen any editorals admitting that they were wrong about the amendment's impact.)
But such realities aren't stopping opponents of North Carolina's marriage amendment from making exactly the same claims. You could really just plug "Virginia" in every place articles say "North Carolina" and you too can relive 2006. Despite the fact that none of the wild claims have come true in the past six years, same-sex marriage advocates continue to use the same talking points.
But facts have never been a big part of the same-sex marriage movement.
As in Virginia, expectations are that North Carolinians will pass the amendment, making marriage amendments the most popular ballot initiatives perhaps in history (with NC, they will be 31-0).
Despite this overwhelming number, same-sex marriage advocates and their media apologists continue to claim that they are, in fact winning. A spokesman for the so-called "Human Rights Campaign" said, "No matter the outcome [of NC], support for these divisive amendments is nowhere near where it once was."
A claim made with as much validity as "unintended conseqences."