NC group files U.S. Supreme Court brief in gay marriage case

By Matthew Burns

Posted: January 31

Raleigh, N.C. — The North Carolina Values Coalition has filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court to defend North Carolina's definition of marriage as the high court takes up two cases related to same-sex marriage.

California's marriage amendment and the federal Defense of Marriage Act will go before the Supreme Court this spring, and experts speculate these cases could be the deciding opinion on marriage and the ability of government to define it.

North Carolina approved a constitutional amendment last May stating that a marriage between a man and a woman was the only legally recognized union in the state.

“The court should not dismantle liberties of conscience and religious freedom by redefining marriage to include same-sex marriage," Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the Values Coalition, said in a statement. “This would have a catastrophic impact on those who cannot conscientiously embrace it.

"Since Attorney General Roy Cooper has not filed a brief in defense of our marriage amendment, we have filed this amicus brief to ensure the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court hear the voice of the 61 percent of North Carolina voters who supported marriage as the union of one man and one woman," Fitzgerald said.

The Liberty, Life, and Law Foundation joined the Values Coalition in filing the brief.

8 Comments

WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.

This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.

page 1

sort order: oldest first | newest first

"This would have a catastrophic impact on those who cannot conscientiously embrace it."

I can imagine the anti-gay marriage supporters sitting by as they must painfully watch couples get married. They start to cry and weep. Suddenly, volcanoes begin erupting in their homes. Their spouses begin to divorce them. "I just can't be with you if Joe and Ted get married." The shingles on their homes begin to fall off as a married gay couple walk their dog down the street. They lose sleep. They toss and turn and slowly die off due to sickness and sleep depravation.

Gay marriage has destroyed society.

albertiam
February 1, 2013 2:04 p.m.

Report abuse

So if the amendment is repealed everyone will have to get gay-married thereby betraying their conscience?! Well now I can understand why everyone is so afraid.

lisapage
February 1, 2013 12:52 p.m.

Report abuse

How is it catastrophic to people who can't embrace it? So....let me try to understand this....if something makes you uncomfortable, there should be a constitutional amendment to ban it? Last time I checked, that's not what this country is about.

Things like this make me ashamed of the state I live in. The fact that people are so warped as to think that christianity should be favored over everything else makes me absolutely sick. This is especially true when it is used as an excuse to restrict other's freedoms and to make bigotry and hate acceptable. If something makes you uncomfortable, then just don't do it. No one is asking you to get married to someone of the same sex, and contrary to what a lot of people believe, it won't "turn your kids gay." That's not even posiible so it shouldn't be an argument against anything.

Things like this are why people just view us as uneducated and sheltered in NC. Grow up, North Carolina.

darkzabbath
February 1, 2013 12:43 p.m.

Report abuse

Since gays cannot get married, then they should withdraw from the military because why would they fight for freedoms that don't exist for you? That's the equivalent of being black and serving in the military during segregated times.

ritablueboys1
February 1, 2013 12:27 p.m.

Report abuse

How is it that "religious freedom" means others are free to practice our religion?

How is it that "liberties of conscience" means we can use our consciences to limit others' liberties?

jackflash123
February 1, 2013 12:24 p.m.

Report abuse

It was confusing to read 'The court should not dismantle liberties of conscience and religious freedom by redefining marriage to include same-sex marriage'. I would think you would not want to control people's lives by altering our constitution or say what they should believe religiously.

One thing I remember from history classes is not that all Americans are guaranteed everything the need and want but the fact that we all should have 'the right of freedom, liberty, justice and the pursuit of happiness'.

61% voted for this but look how quick it was rushed to primary voting instead of waiting until November national elections. This was purposedly done. Some young voters that voted for offices could not vote on this particular amendment at this time. If it had been on the November ballot they could have voted on the amendment. From pulpits accross communities, ministers admonished their parishioners to vote for this. The other side of the issue had limited time to get informatio

indrdw
February 1, 2013 8:44 a.m.

Report abuse

It is great that this group files an Amicus Brief t=other than the ProtectMarriage.com. Their Lawyer a Mr. Cooper is incompetent and been using almost the same Argument from 10 years ago. He has no insight or new Arguments, except his losing Procreation. They pay him millions for him to use his carbon copy of losing Argument, (in the singular) I am NOT a Lawyer but I have 10 Arguments better than his. His Argument appears like it is designed purposely to lose. Pity.

caseyjac425
February 1, 2013 1:01 a.m.

Report abuse

“The court should not dismantle liberties of conscience and religious freedom by redefining marriage to include same-sex marriage,"

AMEN!

Dnut
January 31, 2013 8:13 p.m.

Report abuse

page 1

sort order: oldest first | newest first