UPDATE: NC elections official resigns rather than facilitate the marriage discrimination amendment

[xchrom]

http://pamshouseblend.firedoglake.com/2012/01/10/nc-elections-official-resigns-rather-than-facilitate-the-marriage-discrimination-amendment/

This thunderous letter of support for equality was sent to PHB and BlueNC by Sherre Toler, who, until last week was the director of elections for Harnett County in my state. Toler would rather leave her job than be a party to facilitating a ballot initiative this May that would allow discrimination under the North Carolina Constitution. Notably, she observes that “the Majority” would have voted to keep interracial marriage illegal. The cultural — and shifting — norm should not guide which human beings have civil rights and which should not. My emphasis below.

On January 3, 2012 I resigned my position as Director of Elections for Harnett County, NC. I am extremely proud of the progress and accomplishments made to the voting procedures and polling places in Harnett County over the last eleven and a half years. I am especially proud that the Board of Election’s Office has always been operated in a fair, efficient and non-partisan manner during my tenure.

Unfortunately, recent actions of the North Carolina General Assembly made it impossible for me to continue as Director of Elections as speaking publicly about candidates or issues appearing on the ballot is prohibited. In September, the legislature passed a bill requiring a referendum be placed on the May, 2012 primary ballot defining marriage as a “union between a man and a woman”. I cannot and will not be a party to such actions.

If “marriage” were simply a religious institution, this would not be an issue. Different faiths are free to impose whatever moral restrictions they choose on their congregations and they in turn are free to accept or reject those restrictions. From a psychological and emotional perspective, marriage provides the individuals an opportunity to demonstrate their love for each other by committing themselves to this “special” relationship. In addition, marriage provides the participants in the relationship with a myriad of legal rights and special status, including inheritance and property rights as well as insurance and tax benefits. Marriage provides over 1000 legal rights and protections. The so-called “Defense of Marriage” Act seeks to ensure that anyone wishing to marry their partner of the same gender will be DENIED those legal rights. The broad language of the referendum could also impact private contracts between individuals, powers of attorney, and domestic partnerships, including heterosexual ones.'


*** more at link

[HillWilliam]

1. HBB and I keep reminding why it's important for people to get out and vote

this spring. If we encounter "it doesn't affect me", we quickly point out "oh, yes it does and here's why". The broad wording will snatch up all sorts of "seeyun", like elderfolk who live together rather than get married. (Often elders will live together without being wedded so one or both partners don't lose benefits.)

I can only hope that Harnett Co won't gain a nutter whose goal is to make sure Amendment One goes into effect.

[joeybee12]

2. Good for her...knr

[obamanut2012]

3. It's been rigged so it will pass

I don't think there's anyway it CAN be defeated. The question is: how long will it take to overturn it? Many large companies who are HQed in Charlotte and RTP are PISSED about this.

I read the Freeper state rep who got this introduced died soon after he did so.

Good for the election official. Wiking shows her county is pretty poor.

The giving of civil rights should NEVER be left to the tyranny of the majority. It is, literally, unamerican.