Cullie Tarleton (NC) supports keeping discrimination from our

state Constitution:

Scott- Thanks for your email. I agree with you and will vote
accordingly. Cullie

-----Original Message-----
From: xxx
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:58 AM
To: Rep. Cullie M. Tarleton
Subject: So called "marriage protection" is fraudulent

Representative Cullie Tarleton
1109 Legislative Building
Raleigh, NC 27601

Dear Representative Tarleton,

As a constituent, I'm asking you to oppose the attempt to force the anti-gay, anti-marriage state constitutional amendment to the House floor on Tuesday.

If the legislature really meant to "protect marriage" they would enact laws or propose amendments that banned all divorces. Perhaps then people wouldn't be so quick to rush in or so heedless of their vows - neither of which will happen if my partner and I are called out as "less than others" as NC citizens, small business owners and taxpayers.

If the proposal was so right and needed, then it would be called by a proper name - something like "Amendment to Consider some NC Citizens Second Class because We don't Approve of Them" instead of hiding it in a name that is a bald faced lie.

If any NC citizen's marriage is truly threatened by the ability to offer legal protections to the person I've chosen to spend my life with - then there are problems with their relationship that neither you nor I could do anything to fix it. Statistically, one of those within that relationship is probably involved with adultery - which you and the rest of the Legislature passed laws against decades ago. Apparently those laws weren't very effective either, but at least
they never declared some NC citizens are worth more than others and set it into our Constitution. All of you were elected to protect our Constitution, not to pander to one group or another.

House Bill 493 would write discrimination into our constitution and do real harm to families across our state.

Our constitution should be there to protect our citizens--even unpopular minorities. The constitution should never be used to deny rights.

Thank you for considering this issue.

Sincerely,

Scott