Perdue opposes marriage amendment

Posted October 7, 2011

Gov. Perdue released a statement today saying she plans to vote against the marriage amendment - but not because she's in favor of same-sex marriage. She says she's concerned about its economic effects.

Here's her statement in its entireity:

“My top priority is creating jobs. Too many people are out of work and I’ve heard from several business leaders who’ve told me that the proposed constitutional amendment will harm our state’s business climate and make it harder to grow jobs here.

"I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman: That’s why I voted for the law in 1996 that defines marriage as between one man and one woman, and that’s why I continue to support that law today.

"But I’m going to vote against the amendment because I cannot in good conscience look an unemployed man or woman in the eye and tell them that this amendment is more important than finding them a job.

"In addition, a number of legal experts have argued that this amendment, if passed, could eliminate legal protections for all unmarried couples in our state, regardless of sexual orientation. Right now, my focus, the General Assembly’s focus, and North Carolina’s focus needs to be on creating jobs.”

Perdue's expected opponent in 2012, Republican hopeful Pat McCrory, has already said he supports the amendment. 


This blog post is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • ashleesboss Oct 11, 2011

    I can't in good conscience support anyone who doesn't know and acknowledge God's Law

  • SpaceRokr Oct 11, 2011

    Sorry to be picky, but the Governor doesn't "Vote" on Bills, she has the power of the VETO, though. Spelling is slightly different, but the result is immense.

    Allowing people who are not likely to reproduce to marry is contrary to creating jobs as well as human life, due to the effect of influencing fence-sitters towards heterosexual behaviors, thus increasing the likelihood of offspring. However, when there are fewer offspring, there is reduced need for jobs to support them. Medical professionals to hair stylists, the jobs all add up.

  • durhamfred23 Oct 10, 2011

    Uhm- what did she say again?

    "But I’m going to vote against the amendment because I cannot in good conscience look an unemployed man or woman in the eye and tell them that this amendment is more important than finding them a job."

  • fireman1963 Oct 7, 2011

    Let me see if I can understand this, because something is not adding up. Boeing is coming to a new plant in Charleston, a new massive tire plant will be built in Sumter by Continental Tire and a huge addition is underway for the bridgestone plant in Aiken. Not to mention all if the other large companies that have relocated or opened new plants in South Carolina. Here's the kicker - South Carolina adopted an amendment to it's state constitution in 2006 that bans same-sex marriage.

    The economic argument is a straw dog. It's a flat-out, in you face LIE. And Perdue is playing politics with it all the way to the governors mansion she hopes for a second term. Let's move her back home.

  • AlbertEinstein Oct 7, 2011

    Just another blonde moment... and some people think that this is news.

  • skeeter II Oct 7, 2011

    What is the legal status of "unmarried couples"? This should not have any effect upon them as they only have rights as individuals not as a couple. If they want the same rights as a married couple, then they should get married.

    I would think businesses would welcome this amendment as it would clarify the "benefits" entitlement of married and unmarried couples -- if married they would have the benefits of a married couple. In the future, other types of couples would only have the benefits as individuals. This should be of importance to present and future employers in North Caroline or new employers moving into North Carolina. Some of the new employers may grant "married benefits" to non-married couples in other states and might want to do the same in North Carolina. I think the amendment would prevent employers from granting "married benefits" to non-married couples.

    I wonder if the Governor is "playing politics" to encourage some to vote for her in the next governor's election?