We learn via Facebook that Councilwoman Nancy Vaughan has announced that she is opposed to the Marriage Protection Amendment. I suppose we can infer from her statements that she favors gay marriage; and that her husband, Don Vaughan, might vote against the amendment in the North Carolina Senate.
We further learn that she attends Westminster Presbyterian Church. Ironically, this is the same church at which District 4 council candidate Tony Collins serves as an elder.
This particular church is part of the Presbyterian Church USA denomination, which is pro-abortion and which recently implemented the approval of gay clergy. We had previously written about this particular liberal mainline denomination here, here and here.
My, my!
Do we know who Miss Nancy supports in D4?
Posted by: bubba | September 08, 2011 at 02:24 PM
Collins & Vaughan go to the same church, so what? I attend the same church as Myrene Stanley (ran for county commissioner 2010) doesn't mean that I supported her.
Posted by: curious | September 08, 2011 at 02:32 PM
Curious, you are right that the fact they attend the same church is not proof positive that she supports Collins. However, we must note that she has expressed vociferous opposition to the conservative faction on the council during recent months, of which Collins' opponent is part. We therefore must presume she might be pulling for one of Mary Rakestraw's two opponents.
I also learned a couple of nights ago that Mr. Collins is a Republican. I suppose that means there might be some liberal-to-moderate Republicans who might support him.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 08, 2011 at 02:38 PM
Can't wait for tomorrow's "Daily Nancy Vaughan Update". Hope you'll consider giving us an early hint on Friday's obsession.
The rumor mill has it that she wore white after Labor Day. The unmitigated gall of that woman. I have sources trying to confirm. Will let you know. For now, just keep it between us girls.
Posted by: Tony Wilkins | September 08, 2011 at 02:58 PM
There's nothing that the City Council can do about the state's laws on marriage. It does give insight to the person. I'm personally for Gay Marriage because if they are going to hell, they are going to hell after employing a lot of folks in the wedding business; then possibly lawyers and counselors in the divorce business. Their choice.
Posted by: Don Moore | September 08, 2011 at 03:03 PM
Joe:
Actually, given her own life-style choices, it appears that Nancy Vaughan "favors" heterosexual marriage.
She states that she supports equal treatment for "monogamous, committed" couples. There's no favoring there, only an end to discrimination.
Posted by: Dave Ribar | September 08, 2011 at 03:05 PM
Mr. Guarino -- your comments are overly simplistic and do not raise the level of political or community discourse. Westiminster is part of the Presbyterian Church (USA), as is First Presbyterian Church (where a number of other elected officials attend). Westminster is a large and vibrant community of faith. Those who attend one of our five (5) weekly worship services are warmly greeted by people of different ethnicities and political beliefs. While I can't say after a number of years as a member at Westminster whether all that attend ascribe to the pro-abortion or gay clergy positions of the denomination, I feel comfortable concluding that our faith community at Westminster is engaged throughout the world seeking thoughtful solutions to challenges of our time, and seeking faithful ways to feed the hungry, heal the broken and welcome strangers. I am proud that members of my church's faith community are committed to serving Greensboro with their particular gifts and talents.
Posted by: Your Christian Brother | September 08, 2011 at 03:07 PM
Joe- Mary Rakestraw herself has said Tony Collins was recruited to run against her by a former county commissioner. Vaughan's name was never mentioned.
Posted by: curious | September 08, 2011 at 03:24 PM
I am not in District 4 but I support Mary Rakestraw, so don't go lumping me into your "liberal-to-moderate Conservatives" pile.
Posted by: curious | September 08, 2011 at 03:27 PM
"There's no favoring there, only an end to discrimination."
There is no discrimination involved in opposition to same sex marriage. you need to get used to that fact.
You don't get to set the definitions of things like this based on your world view. You don't get to claim some non-existnt moral high ground, whether you like it, or not.
Posted by: bubba | September 08, 2011 at 03:32 PM
"I am not in District 4 but I support Mary Rakestraw, so don't go lumping me into your "liberal-to-moderate Conservatives" pile."
No need. You've already defined which pile is appropriate for you.
Posted by: bubba | September 08, 2011 at 03:34 PM
“seeking thoughtful solutions to challenges of our time”
Yep, that’s the church today.
Mr. Christian, what about the views God shared about homosexuality?
Is it the Holy, timeless, Word of God
...or just some ramblings from an outdated god that needs to understand the times?
Posted by: Steve | September 08, 2011 at 10:22 PM
There's no discrimination in making a statement that divides one classification of people from others? Nonsense. In fact, discrimination is often a good and necessary thing: As in, having discriminating taste in food (so one doesn't eat out at the worst greasy spoons) or in art (so one doesn't waste money on dogs playing poker) or in choosing which candidate to elect. Discrimination means making decisions after carefully reflecting on one's possible choices. Yes, in more typical slang, it has come to mean "making unjust decisions". But, even the celebrated artist-philosopher Adrian Piper, an African-American woman (she may actually prefer "black" or "Negro", I am not sure), says education, for example, has lost a lot by not emphasizing "good discrimination". http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0268/is_n10_v35/ai_19677901/
I personally have found myself reflecting on potentially voting Republican (for a moderate one) versus for President Obama. Does this mean I am discriminating against the President? Yes. But not because he is African-Caucasian-American. More so, I may be discriminating in favor of Huntsman. And not because he is Mormon.
Posted by: Jim Langer | September 08, 2011 at 10:32 PM
Joe, What did Nancy have for breakfast? We are all dying to know........
Posted by: Craftyboro | September 09, 2011 at 07:36 AM
Jim, the primary definition of discrimination is "treating people differently through prejudice". The secondary definition is " the ability to notice and value quality". Followed by " the awareness of subtile differentiation". It's obvious that you and Your Christian Brother were not talking about the same thing.
Posted by: Grayson | September 09, 2011 at 07:38 AM
Tony and Crafty, as the esteemed Ms. Vaughan lurches further and further to the left politically, she will continue to merit coverage and discussion at this blog.
Brother, the kind of church one attends can speak volumes. It can reflect the worldview one holds; or alternatively, it can help form one's worldview. I agree with you that Westminster Presbyterian has done many good things in the community. Unfortunately, it is part of a denomination that is ethically and morally bankrupt in many respects.
Dave, I believe you are splitting hairs.
And Curious, are you able to rule out with certainty that Ms. Vaughan and Mr. Collins have discussed his candidacy?
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 09, 2011 at 08:43 AM
I believe Mike Barber also attends Westminster.
Posted by: Grayson | September 09, 2011 at 08:52 AM
If so, that doesn't change the nature of the denomination.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 09, 2011 at 09:01 AM
Joe- Yes. I can rule that out. I was told directly who recruited Collins, and Vaughan's name was not brought up. The name given as the person who recruited Collins to run against Rakestraw was that of a county commissioner. Now, could Vaughan offer campaigning advice as a fell church member & friend?, or course. But Nancy Vaughan's name was NOT MENTIONED as the individual who recruited Rakestraws opponent.
Posted by: curious | September 09, 2011 at 09:19 AM
Yes Mike Barber attends Westminister Presbyterian as well. But if your basing the recruitment on membership logs & those who've attended church there then you can add my name as well as my college roommate's name, as we both attended services @ WPC freguently during college.
Posted by: curious | September 09, 2011 at 09:22 AM
Curious, I did not ask who recruited Collins. I suppose it is possible that your past attendance at WPC might help explain some things.
I don't know Barber's positions on such matters as the gay sociopolitical agenda, furthering abortion or the use of government to enact "social justice"-- all PCUSA objectives-- but it is certainly possible for conservative congregants to find themselves in the wrong denomination.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 09, 2011 at 09:36 AM
I am not a member of the Presbyterian Church, I was simply dating a Presbyterian Minister's son & had a roommate who was also Presbyterian. I was raised & am a member of the Church of Christ. Often times I would attend Sunday services w/ them out of convience instead of driving to my family's home church in High Point.
Posted by: curious | September 09, 2011 at 09:43 AM
Perhaps she's just making sure she gets the endorsement from Replacements Ltd's PAC.
Posted by: Great | September 09, 2011 at 10:09 AM
The plot thickens.
Possibly witchcraft involved.
Neighbors report the brazen hussy turned a bag into a BOWL!
SHE TURNED A BAG INTO A BOWL!
Posted by: Tony Wilkins | September 09, 2011 at 10:14 AM
Newsflash!
Nancy had a toasted English Muffin for breakfast. Rumour has it she advocates the wearing of white wigs by men and women washing their sheets in copper kettles over an open fire.
The real question. Homemade strawberry preserves or imported orange marmelade? These types of decisions speak volumes about people.......
Stay tuned and watch Dr. Joe revel in the increasing number of hits to this blog.
Posted by: Craftyboro | September 09, 2011 at 10:21 AM
Here is a hint, Crafty and Tony. This is a conservative political blog. Nancy is not even remotely a conservative, and has worked to undermine conservative objectives. The voters need to know what she is all about, and they need to understand her record.
Thanks for the clarification, Curious. Of which Church of Christ denomination are you part? There are at least a couple. BTW, it would be great if you could discontinue using your pseudonym, and use your real name, so that we can all know who you are.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 09, 2011 at 10:29 AM
Joe,
You take this blog and yourself much too seriously. Innuendo and guilt by association are tactics used by the lowest on the ladder of life.
I am glad Nancy goes to Church. Where is up to her. Westminster is a great congregation. I have many friends there and they engage many in ways to walk with God.
I am checking out for a while. There is so little to read here.....
Posted by: Craftyboro | September 09, 2011 at 11:25 AM
Crafty, I hope you enjoy your respite. I am also glad if Nancy goes to Church. I just wish she would make better choices on quite a number of things.
You are another pseudonymous commenter who probably would do well to reveal your true identity instead of taking personal shots from behind a veil.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 09, 2011 at 11:33 AM
I wish Joe would quit disparaging our names
Posted by: stormyboro | September 09, 2011 at 11:37 AM
"You are another pseudonymous commenter who probably would do well to reveal your true identity instead of taking personal shots from behind a veil."
Seriously? While you regurgitate, day after day, "It has been said," "I have heard," "A couple of sources tell me"? Your criteria for seeing people on the record seems to be rather situational.
Posted by: Roch101 | September 09, 2011 at 01:02 PM
Roch, it is fairly convenient for commenters to take personal shots at the blog host from behind a pseudonym. Yep, that's real courage. And I do reserve the right to confront this type of situation when personally attacked.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 09, 2011 at 01:08 PM
@ TW - *NEWSFLASH* I ate mint chocolate chip ice cream for breakfast from the bowl Nancy made from a bag WHILE driving to work... but....oh yeah, no one cares. Duh!
Posted by: curious | September 09, 2011 at 02:05 PM
Joe- I am a member of the Church of Christ, NOT the United Church of Christ. I was raised @ the largest Church of Christ in Greensboro on Friendly Avenue. However, my family left this congregation in the early 2000's after a large split and helped form a Church of Christ congregation in High Point.
Posted by: curious | September 09, 2011 at 04:09 PM
Nancy is not a bad person and she has a good heart. I am running against her in the at-large race but I can not trash her on her beliefs. This is America and we all have the right to think anyway we want.
SAL
leoneforcouncil.com
Posted by: sal leone | September 10, 2011 at 05:50 AM
Yes, we do, Sal. And in the case of city council members and candidates for public office, voters have a right to know how they think.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | September 10, 2011 at 07:08 AM
"You are another pseudonymous commenter who probably would do well to reveal your true identity instead of taking personal shots from behind a veil."
Differant guidelines for differant folks... nice. You are really starting to suck at this Joe.
Good work, Sal.
Posted by: Mick | September 10, 2011 at 07:12 AM
Tony Wilkins said: "Can't wait for tomorrow's "Daily Nancy Vaughan Update". Hope you'll consider giving us an early hint on Friday's obsession.
The rumor mill has it that she wore white after Labor Day. The unmitigated gall of that woman. I have sources trying to confirm. Will let you know. For now, just keep it between us girls."
Tony,your remarks show your blind allegiance to a morally bankrupt liberal. Why not simply defend Nancy's position in a civil manner instead of showing yourself to be inferior intellectually? You claim to be a Conservative Republican, its time you came out of the closet.
Posted by: conservativewatcher | September 10, 2011 at 10:17 AM
Good one Jodi... OOPS! I mean "conservativewatcher'
Posted by: curious | September 10, 2011 at 11:43 AM
Only an intellectually inferior individual would argue that liberty is a "position" that needs to be "defended" by proponents.
Here's a hint: It is the duty of the opponents of equal rights for gays to put forth a convincing argument for inequality.
Posted by: Brandon Burgess | September 10, 2011 at 12:11 PM
I'm not a member of any church, but I think I'm pretty conservative.
Posted by: Spag | September 10, 2011 at 12:38 PM
Good one Jodi... OOPS! I mean "conservativewatcher'
Your welcome Theresa, I mean "Curious"......
Posted by: conservativewatcher | September 10, 2011 at 01:09 PM
cat-fight!!!!
Posted by: cheripickr | September 10, 2011 at 01:11 PM
Here's a hint: It is the duty of the opponents of equal rights for gays to put forth a convincing argument for inequality.
Here's another hint: You don't get to pick and chose what is a right and what is equality. Sinply read the Constitution.
Posted by: conservativewatcher | September 10, 2011 at 01:14 PM
Nancy is not a bad person and she has a good heart. I am running against her in the at-large race but I can not trash her on her beliefs. This is America and we all have the right to think anyway we want.
SAL
leoneforcouncil.com
Sal, I am sure to this day you will find people that thought Hitler had a good heart and had a right to believe the way he wanted. The key for an elected official would be to decide what is best for society as a whole, not what serves thier personal beliefs or agenda. You might want to read up on this sort of thing if you have any hopes of being a leader in the community.
Posted by: conservativewatcher | September 10, 2011 at 01:19 PM
"It is the duty of the opponents of equal rights for gays to put forth a convincing argument for inequality."
Here's a hint: No it's not. Get an alternate hint.
Posted by: bubba | September 10, 2011 at 01:32 PM
I'm taking a break from sorting things out at the StreetWatch storage unit. Winter is coming and we have to be ready to help homeless people survive the cold. Nancy was here helping me yesterday for hours. Hitler, really? I'm bet Jesus loved that one. You may comment anonymously, but God knows your name. That's some ugly, ugly stuff.
Posted by: michele | September 10, 2011 at 01:42 PM
"sinply read the constitution"? or did you mean "SIMPLY read the constitution"? Jodi- there is a thing called spell check. Maybe one of your kids can show you how to use it since they are obviously much smarter than you. Are they adopted?
Posted by: curious | September 10, 2011 at 02:23 PM
Michele- are you shocked that "conservativewatcher" compared Nancy to Hitler? This is someone who has SOOOO MUCH common sense that she knowingly married a convicted sex offender...
Posted by: curious | September 10, 2011 at 02:26 PM
For those of you who have a tea party streak in their political views but find C4GC distasteful and would like to support a REAL TEA PARTY candidate look into Jean Brown. Man, I really wish Guilford County could start a real tea party. Maybe then these yahoo's would go away
Posted by: curious | September 10, 2011 at 02:29 PM
Curious, that was unkind. I don't know if conservativewatcher is Jodi, but I know that Jodi married the man she loves and is his staunchest defender. That's an excellent quality in a wife. Her beautiful children are not adopted. My daughter used to babysit them, and she loves them. They are good, sweet kids. The negative rhetoric on this blog hurts my heart and I know that it hurts God's heart, too. It never profits anyone to be unkind, love conquers all. I highly recommend it.
Posted by: michele | September 10, 2011 at 02:42 PM