The stars seemed aligned for supporters of gay marriage. They had Maine's governor, legislative leaders and major newspapers on their side, plus a huge edge in campaign funding. So losing a landmark referendum was a devastating blow, for activists in Maine and nationwide.
In an election that had been billed for weeks as too close to call, Maine's often unpredictable voters repealed a state law Tuesday that would have allowed same-sex couples to wed. Gay marriage has now lost in all 31 states in which it has been put to a popular vote - a trend that the gay-rights movement had believed it could end in Maine.
"Today's heartbreaking defeat unfortunately shows that lies and fear can still win at the ballot box," said Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.
With 87 percent of the precincts reporting, gay-marriage foes had 53 percent of the vote. They prevailed in many of Maine's far-flung small towns and lost by a less-than-expected margin in the state's biggest city, Portland.
"The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across the nation," declared Frank Schubert, chief organizer for the winning side.
Attention will now turn to other states, including California - where Schubert was an instrumental strategist a year ago in the successful campaign to overturn cost-ordered same-sex marriage.
Gay-rights activists have been planning to go back to the ballot in California, either in 2010 or 2012, in another attempt to legalize gay marriage. But the Maine result was not the victory they had been hoping for to fire up their troops.
Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative group that steered substantial funds to fight gay marriage in both California and Maine, was elated by Tuesday's result, saying it shows that "that even in a New England state, if the voters have a chance to have their say, they're going to protect and defend the commonsense definition of marriage."
At issue in the referendum was a law passed by Maine's Legislature last spring that would have allowed gays to wed. The law was put on hold after conservatives launched a petition drive to repeal it.
Five other states have legalized gay marriage - starting with Massachusetts in 2004, and followed by Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Iowa - but all did so through legislation or court rulings, not by popular vote. In contrast, constitutional amendments banning gay marriage have been approved in all 30 states where they have been on the ballot.
Brown said "out-of-touch legislators" are a principal reason same-sex marriage has taken hold in New England.
"What we're saying is give us a chance to take our message to the people and let the people decide," he said. He also suggested that the outcome in Maine will give pause to lawmakers in New York and New Jersey, where gay-marriage legislation is pending.
Richard Socarides, who was an adviser on gay-rights issues in the Clinton administration, said the loss in Maine should prompt gay-rights leaders to reconsider their state-by-state strategy on marriage and shift instead to lobbying for changes on the federal level that expand recognition of same-sex couples.
In Maine, gay-marriage supporters conceded early Wednesday.
"We're in this for the long haul," said Jesse Connolly, manager of the pro-gay marriage campaign. "For next week, and next month, and next year - until all Maine families are treated equally. Because in the end, this has always been about love and family and that will always be something worth fighting for.
A similar note was sounded by Democratic Gov. John Baldacci, who signed the bill into law last May and spoke out in defense of the law.
"If we don't get to the top of the mountain tonight, we've made a significant stride. And we're going to get there," he said late Tuesday. "We will get to the top of the mountain."
Both sides in Maine drew volunteers and contributions from out of state, but the money edge went to the campaign in defense of gay marriage, Protect Maine Equality. It raised $4 million, compared with $2.5 million for Stand for Marriage Maine.
Stand for Marriage based many of its campaign ads on claims - disputed by state officials - that the new law would mean "homosexual marriage" would be taught in public schools. That was the same theme used to persuade Californians to reject gay marriage.
Elsewhere on Tuesday, voters in Washington state voted on whether to uphold or overturn a recently expanded domestic partnership law that entitles same-sex couples to the same state-granted rights as heterosexual married couples. With half the precincts reporting, that race was too close to call.
In Kalamazoo, Mich., voters approved a measure that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation.





I wonder where you people
I wonder where you people were educated, so filled with bible misquotes, and I cannot believe you are taking a crack at quoting God for the love of mike about homosexuality. Where in heck do you think gay people come from? Straight parents you misinformed creations. If you believe in God, then you must believe God does not make mistakes, with the exception that he misplaced a piece of your brain that has compassion and is not judgmental, another thing Christ told you not to do either.
Bunch of hypocrites.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.. . Thanks Bruce. We are
. . Thanks Bruce. We are all made in God's image. That does not make us little Gods though :)
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Flowerman says "those who
Flowerman says "those who loathe gay and lesbian people" When are you libs going to get it that it has nothing to do with hate or bigotry? Probably never, which is why you lost. This misguided fool would have you believe that you voted yes becasue you hate gay people, not because you wanted to make your voice heard. He also said "The Yes On One campaign was almost entirely about convincing people that letting gay people marry would lead to teaching gay sex in schools, which is preposterous and outrageous on its face." Sorry Flower dude, the facts aren't on your side. The TV ads worked because they were true:
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/a8a/general/NPR_091304.htm
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/parker/diversity_book.html
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/parker/main.html
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/king_and_king/book.html
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/parker_lawsuit/motion_to_dismiss_2007...
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/articles/franklin_trans_1106.html
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/events07/youthpride07/common.html
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/black_book/black_book_inside.html
The truth can be a bitter pill, eh flower dude?
"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. " Pirate
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.. There are many truths .
. There are many truths . Here's one . ? 7 % of the world is gay , lesbian , bisexual or transexual :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.. There are many truths .
. There are many truths . Here's one . ? 7 % of the world is gay , lesbian , bisexual or transexual :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Lebearun; I watched the
Lebearun; I watched the video and your right except the church cannot rule the government despite how vast they are. They were kicked out a long time ago. If you want, I'll try to make a video of a non religious wedding that's been in practice for thousands of years and was accepted by everyone. It'll show a man clubbing a woman and dragging her home to reproduce. But it'll be in a modern setting of course.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I watched it too... never
I watched it too... never had such a good laugh.. wanna buy some stones? LOL
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.This is to GaryC. I see your
This is to GaryC. I see your comparing yourself to animals that can reproduce asexually. Can you produce asexually? No? Then don't compare yourself to them.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Check out this video for
Check out this video for "traditional" marriage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntC0PNHFRgU
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Lebearun I did watch the
Lebearun
I did watch the video and you have shown me the light I would like to thank you for post that link. I have changed my opinion and I think the law needs to be changed. Once again thank you and sodomy should be illegal again.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Once again the people have
Once again the people have spoken. Twice the gay special rights bill was defeated by the citizenry and the gay agenda had to be passed through the legislature above the reach of the people. Again we were bypassed by the legislature in order to pas a gay marriage bill that they knew would never have been passed in a referendum, because the libs know that given the choice, most people will not vote to give gays special rights, or allow them to redefine marriage. This time it didn't work. As has been the case in over 30 states now, when put to a vote, the people will overwhelmingly deny special rights to homosexuals. It is not a civil rights issue, and the comparison just draws more rancor from the citizenry, especially blacks. It is not a hate issue, nor a bigot issue. It is a populace proclaiming that given it's failures, the institution of marriage still means something. It is a vote to bring the legislature's overbearing, pretentious, better than thou attitude to a screeching halt.
"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. " Pirate
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Gil, You seem to forget that
Gil, You seem to forget that after two victories, those who loathe gay and lesbian people were beaten soundly at the polls in 2006 by a 10 point margin. You know, I wouldn't mind losing this election if it were a matter of conscience by the electorate. It was not, however. The Yes On One campaign was almost entirely about convincing people that letting gay people marry would lead to teaching gay sex in schools, which is preposterous and outrageous on its face. But enough people believed it so that you got by. This time, anyway. This was a campaign of lies, and the Catholic Church, in leading this campaign, has won a victory, to be sure. What it has given up, though, is its moral authority. You cannot lead by lies and keep your moral authority. It has also lost a generation of young people who might have found the church relevant, but who look in disgust at what the church is doing to gay and lesbian people in the name of morality. We will be back, Gil, and the next time, we will figure out how to keep people from believing the ridiculous lies of the church. Remember, you slowed down the process of getting legal protection against discrimination for gay and lesbian people, but in the end, we won. It may take two years, it may take four years, but you are on the losing side of history, and we will win this one, too. .
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Flowerman, its almost as bad
Flowerman, its almost as bad as the pro gay side quoting all the "RIGHTS" that gay couples do not have...I frankly got tired of that argument when they called them rights instead of BENEFITS. The people have spoken on the issue, despite the outside political influences on both sides.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.if I do recall in 2006 the
if I do recall in 2006 the the stand for marriage group was saying that law would lead to gay marriage and the gay activist said that was just a scare tatic and that vote was not about gay marriage. I not saying gay marriage would have been taught in school BUT you should stop and look at who is/was lying
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond."Reasoning with a liberal is
"Reasoning with a liberal is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. "
But keep trying....to pick up the turd that is!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.tsk tsk tsk: such
tsk tsk tsk: such discrimination from both sides! I'm a native Mainer and to be labeled a bigot because I'm a catholic is discriminatory in itself by such open minded people. You take stabs at catholics who get divorces that they are not following their religion. I can name several couples who divorce after their spouse's comes out of the closet to pronounce that they are gay. If your so strong in your beliefs and if this is the way you were when you were born; why did you marry some one from the opposite sex to begin with? And why wait so many years to get there? You can call yourself open minded and nondiscriminatory when you can look at your fellow man and not judge him/her based on anything what-so-ever. Not on religion/sex/color/ideas/beliefs/gender. Yes the catholics supported the yes vote, but they aren't the only religion that's against it. So stop the name calling.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Patriot my man, let's see
Patriot my man, let's see some Scriptures where Jesus taught that it was OK to transgress the Law e.g. Leviticus 18:22, and also in the New Testament: I Corinthians 6:9.
Don't know what Bible you people read from, but you had burn it, otherwise things could get a bit hot for you, if you know what I mean ;)
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.OUCH! Stop thumping that
OUCH! Stop thumping that Bible. I'm getting a headache!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Are we II Petering
Are we II Petering 3:3ing?
Well, at least you're not the only one 'round here! :)
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond."Call us bigots,
"Call us bigots, hydrophobics, or anything that you wish"
Hydrophobic refers to the tendency of a substance to repel water or to be incapable of completely dissolving in water.
Never would have thought to call you hydrophobic.....but whatever floats your boat (pun intended)
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.It is so disappointing to
It is so disappointing to hear people who have privileges, like the privilege of being protected against discrimination, complain that those lacking those protecting them are requesting "special" privileges, that is to say, privileges no different than what they have. It took a while for the electorate to cut through the "special rights" crap, but they did, and whomped your butts in 2006. Similarly, the privilege that all us heterosexuals have to marry is no less special than the privilege sought by gay and lesbian people. And the electorate will see that sooner or later. Get used to it, bud. We are not going away. And you will lose. Again.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.well your president Obama
well your president Obama just signed in to law a few days ago more special rights for homosexuals... do you really want to go there?
It's really too bad that the NO on 1 people can not accept that MAINE VOTERS said yesterday they do NOT want homosexual marriage in their state. It would be more simple if they would just agree to civil unions with the same rights..
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Civil unions do NOT have the
Civil unions do NOT have the same rights...
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.You are a liar. Name ONE
You are a liar. Name ONE thing that civil unions do not confer that is conferred to married folks? Hint: Tab A - Slot A... You're built to have sex with the opposing gender. If you're mentally ill enough to NOT understand that then you are not fit to vote in the first place and certainly not mentally fit enough to sign a contract which is, essentially, what a marriage is. Me? I say civil unions for all - even the mentally deficient. Then the whiners can stop bleating about how they are equal but not able to have every privilege. Privileges are earned, rights are not. Marriage is not a right without limitations. CFI: Disallowing relatives to wed, disallowing human/beast marriages, disallowing polygamous unions, etc... It is *not* a right without limitations. It is a privilege that is earned. Mentally ill people aren't privy to such nor should they be.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.David, have you been under a
David, have you been under a rock for the last few months? The list of rights that are NOT confered by civil unions is longer than your arm.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.It appears that most of the
It appears that most of the "No" commenters fail to recognize that the majority of "Yes" voters don't care if gays want a committed, loving, LEGAL relationship. Most would support it. What the Yes folks object to is calling it "marriage". They (Yes) would support an expanded civil union/domestic partnership law that provides all of the rights and benefits of hetero marriage. They (Yes) also feel that what the gays really want is acceptance of their lifestyle - something that will be impossible to attain. So, why not learn from this divisive vote and push your elected representatives in Augusta to pass legislation that provides those rights and benefits under a civil union/domestic partnership program. You'll probably find that there will be much less resistance from all of the Yes folks. Please leave "marriage" alone.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.The primary reason we fail
The primary reason we fail to recognize it is because until gay marriage was put on the table, the Yes folks fought tooth and nail against every tiny scrid of equality for gay and lesbian people. There will come a time when the yes folks have clearer vision, and come to understand that gay people getting married has not one thing to do with them.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.clearer vision of what? Yes
clearer vision of what? Yes on 1 knows what the vision and reality is.. Marriage = 1 man & 1 woman
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.i agree what needs to be
i agree what needs to be done is a compromise so that all parties( except that fanatics on both sides wont be happy). But judging from what I have heard from people I have talked to that voted no on 1 its all or nothing. I am not saying every no on1 is like that just the ones that I have spoking to
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.heres 1 big reason for some
heres 1 big reason for some that yes on 1 tok home the votes.... Why was this necessary for inclusion in the draft of the original LAW signed on may 6 2009.. Why do they need to redefine these words in order to give gays equal marriage rights? Cut and pasted from a COPY OF THE LAW AS IT WAS WRITTEN...
§ 650-A. Codification of marriage
Marriage is the legally recognized union of 2 people. Gender-specific terms relating to the marital
relationship or familial relationships, including, but not limited to, "spouse," "family," "marriage,"
"immediate family," "dependent," "next of kin," "bride," "groom," "husband," "wife," "widow" and
"widower," must be construed to be gender-neutral for all purposes throughout the law, whether in the
context of statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other source of civil law.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Does anyone actually care
Does anyone actually care about where his or her soul will end up after we die? Why does the desire for sex, whether legitimate or not, have to rule our lives? Let's focus on pleasing God, because by doing that, we focus on eternity. If we could carry every burden of this earth on our shoulders at once, the suffering involved would be nothing compared to the infinite and unending happiness of heaven, and it would be nothing compared to the infinite and unending suffering of hell. The choices we make in this life determine which of two places where we will spend eternity. A 75-year life, even if "unfair" and full of suffering, is not even a drop in the ocean compared to eternity. Jesus Christ became the means of salvation to all who obey him (Heb. 5:8-9). It's not hard to follow his teachings, which are preserved and upheld for us by the Catholic Church. Let the grace of Jesus work in us, and we can endure any real or perceived suffering. Eternity awaits us, one way or another.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.The Catholic Church?? Great
The Catholic Church?? Great institution. For years it covered up the facts about their child molesters then tried to buy their victims' silence. I looked everywhere in the New Testament but found nothing in the teachings of Jesus allowing such horrible acts against children. It's amazing that religious fanatics like yourself and the folks from out of state always try to shove their doctrines down other peoples throats. You are no different than the taliban. Why doesn't everyone see through your fanaticism and follow both the constitution and the real teachings of jesus. Separate church from the state and love thy neighbor as thyself.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.http://www.bible.ca/s-homo=si
http://www.bible.ca/s-homo=sin.htm
The Bible's condemnation of homosexuality is as clear and plain as the Bible's condemnation of murder, adultery, premarital sex, kidnapping, lying and idolatry. Further, for me to openly condemn homosexuality theologically makes me no more a "gay basher" than I am an "adultery basher", "premarital sex basher", "kidnapper basher" or a "murderer basher". If you disagree, your argument is with God's Bible.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.The link and paragraph I
The link and paragraph I posted is from the link that I posted so people would go read it.
Those are not my words, thank you
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Time for you to accept
Time for you to accept Marriage is 1 man and 1 woman period. '
You also need to know,, I did not have anything to do with writing the bible..
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond."You also need to know,, I
"You also need to know,, I did not have anything to do with writing the bible.. "
Thank God!!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I thank God each and every
I thank God each and every day for everyone in my life.. he is wonderful! You should give him a try.. it might make you a better human being
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.You obviously didn't
You obviously didn't understand the irony in my previous post. But, you are quick to judge........
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I agree on this statement!
I agree on this statement!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.You ust continue to prove my
You ust continue to prove my point someone will see that being OK and laws like this will provide the basis!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Was the photo of Partners
Was the photo of Partners Lisa Brackbill, left, and Lisa Pugh, right, both from Buckfield, Maine suppose to make the YES on 1 supporters feel bad?
Congratulations Frank Schubert and the YES on 1, again I commend you on a well done job.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond."... anyone else wanting
"... anyone else wanting special rights for their sleeping habits.."
Once again you fail to look at the individual as a whole, but instead want to focus on their sexual activity. So typical.
The remainder of your post sounds very bitter. This occurred over 40 years ago and yet you continue to hold onto this resentment today. Because you were denied the privilege to marry the person of your choice you feel others should be made to suffer the same consequences today?? Sounds like sour grapes to me.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Well it sounds like to me
Well it sounds like to me that the No on 1 people are acting like a bunch of two year olds that are having temper tantrums....
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.How so?
How so?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.read there comments.....
read there comments..... bunch of cry babies lol
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.when all else fails....start
when all else fails....start name calling
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Yes, that is what NO on 1
Yes, that is what NO on 1 did when they called the YES on 1 bigots.. thank you for clarifying who's doing the name calling.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I voted No on 1 and you will
I voted No on 1 and you will not find one post where I called another individual names. Please feel free to join me in song..... And they'll know we are Christians by our love, by our love, Yes they'll know we are Christians by our love... Could you sing a little louder? I can't hear you.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.All good points and I
All good points and I respect them, but it does not change the fact that there are those out there that would use this to promote there lifestyle based on the same arguments. I dont belive that protection of one's sexual orientation is something that belongs in legislation ever. Just my opinion!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Same argument Queenbee
Same argument Queenbee someday EVERYONE will want to be protected. School teacher, one form of sexual prefrence is a illness the other is what? This is pandora's box for our generation.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.EveryONE deserves the right
EveryONE deserves the right to be protected. It does not entitle anyone to harass another human being for them breaking the law.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.queen not too far in the
queen not too far in the distant past homosexaul acts were against the law but the changed laws can change.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Nor does it entitle one law
Nor does it entitle one law abiding citizen to harass another law abiding citizen because of a difference of opinion.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.which people seem to be
which people seem to be doing quite a fine job at that...
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.This is a generational issue
This is a generational issue and a temporary victory for opponents of gay marriage. Younger voters overwhelmingly support gay marriage, even in Lewiston. Once the older (and more socially conservative) voters die off, the law will change for good. This might not provide a lot of comfort to our gay friends and family in the near term, but the anti-gay marriage crowd is on the wrong side of history. They just don't know it yet.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.talk about bigots!! Excited
talk about bigots!! Excited for the fact that when enough people in maine die the gay marriage crowd will win. WOW just WOW that is the comment of the day.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Hence the term "greatest
Hence the term "greatest generation". Oh todays youngin's.....I hope I croak before I let those SOB's take care of me in a nursing home. My bed pan would have to wait until they were done texting thier "BFF". People used to hire the young for their fresh prospective...now we have the generation of "Me". I won't ever have to worry about losing my job to some punk who calls in sick so they can stand in line at Best Buy for the next generation of I-Phone. Everybody gets a trophy in "Gen Me" land.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Sounds like someone forgot
Sounds like someone forgot history... While we now recognize the "greatest generation," it's a title that came with time. You were the ones so wild that you swung your hips with Elvis and spent time chopping off your hot rods. And oh ya, people were still gay then too, they were just more afraid of coming out. While the names of the vices have changed, the ideas behind them are still the same. We have more in common than many care to recognize.
BTW (yes, I did that on purpose), "text code" is just a new-age pig latin...
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Oh contraire, mon frere.
Oh contraire, mon frere. You have no idea what a sacrafice is until you talk to some one who lived in the 30's and 40's. These people lived times unfathomable to you or I. Get back on your I-phone and download the "Common Sense" app.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Maine people have spoken and
Maine people have spoken and it is time for the Maine legistlature to act. The people of Maine want the "traditional christian family model" enforced and now it is up to the legislature to make it so. Muddy said, the purpose of marriage is to help men be monogamous but men have proven that the mere ceremony is insufficient. The proof of that can be found in the many SJ articles in which all the children in the family have different last names, not to mention what we see in our neighborhoods and families, so lets pass laws and lock them up when they cheat. Divorce goes against the traditional family and certainly against the bible, so we must do away with that as well. And domestic assault and incest, both of which Maine is at the top of the list nationally for highest incidence must be addressed much more forcefully. If we are serious about preserving the one man, one woman, forever, til death do you part, traditional christian family lets really do it where it counts and stop fooling around.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Hooray for this comment. I
Hooray for this comment. I personally am for gay marraige. I can not understand living in our society where people still think its fair for everyone to not be equal. We've fought it for Black Rights, Women Rights and this is just another version of that. But, your point is so well made and what is very annoying about most peoples argument. They argue that its marraige between a man and a woman, yet most are breaking every single vow that is made and what a marraige should be based on. But that is ok. Likewise, its a religious enforcement yet many people who do not believe in religion get married. Why is that ok? If someone doesn't believe in and/or practice the Bible, why is their government and other people who should care less about the way they live their lives telling them they have a restriction based on the Bible. It baffles me. So kudos to you D Wilson for saying it so well!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Absolutely! After all, fair
Absolutely! After all, fair is fair.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So, now that the election is
So, now that the election is over with, why can't both sides now work toward getting a law passed that ensures that gay couples who are registered as domestic partners have exactly the same legal rights and protections as married heterosexual couples? Heteros can be called "married", and gay couples can be called "unioned", "paired", "partnered", "parried (partner + married)", or something similar. I heard throughout the campaign from the Yes On 1 side that they would be supportive of that, as long as the term "marriage" was kept to the traditional man plus woman. I also heard from the No On 1 side that all they wanted was the same legal rights as married couples enjoy. Seems like they could work together to accomplish this.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Its not the same. Besides,
Its not the same. Besides, why do g/l/t have to go through several different avenues to get those 'same legal rights'... civil unions do not provide the same legal rights. insurance companies or when a spouse dies-its still not recognized-'not good enough'. Whereas with marriage-they are married and its just that. To call it something else-still shows an indifference, a separation, or not the same.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.And what's wrong with that?
And what's wrong with that? Why does everyone have to be considered "the same"? Frankly, there IS a difference between gays and heteros: who shares their bed. There is no harm in recognizing their differences. Please re-read my post; I said that both sides of this issue should work together to ensure that gay couples, regardless of what term is used to define their union, have EXACTLY, in every way, the same rights as married hetero couples have. If in the eyes of the law they are treated EXACTLY the same, why does it matter if a gay union is called a different term than a hetero union? At that point, it's all semantics. As far as "going through several different avenues to get those same legal rights", didn't this just occur with a months and months long campaign? These "avenues" would not be a concern if the legislation I suggest be passed were written properly.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Unfortunately in the states
Unfortunately in the states that approved civil unions-G/L/T reported that they were still 'discriminated' against. Its not the same-no matter what you call it. When I talk about several different avenues I refer to the difference of what a heterosexual couple have to go through to get their piece of paper. With civil unions G/L/T would have to get their piece of paper at city hall, then ride all the way to someone's office to protect their rights/property/children/insurances... (i could go on and on) and that is IF these places want to recognize civil unions. G/L/T want to right to MARRY and that RIGHT they should be able to HAVE.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Then it is the fight with
Then it is the fight with the insurance companies you want. Changing a word here may not change the company policy if that company's base is in a state that does not acknowledge homosexual marriage or if the policy does state it. If there is no last will and testament which states where the inheritance goes, it get tied up and used up. The social definition of marriage doesn't change that.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Good idea. Compromise in
Good idea. Compromise in defeat is an honorable thing.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Lifestyle over civil rights.
Lifestyle over civil rights. Is that what we said to African Americans when they wanted their civil rights?? The issue is the same.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.African Americans wanted a
African Americans wanted a voice and a chance. Homosexuals already have both, including just as much acceptence as anyone else. All "people" are discriminated against, robbed, beaten, insulted, intimidated, and murdered. Ignorance, crime, and disease know no distinctions. Welcome to society.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So does that make it ok? It
So does that make it ok? It should not be acceptable in any circumstance. And based on the vote, they definitely are not as accepted.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.doesn't mean that its
doesn't mean that its welcomed or permitted... it shouldn't be happening period. Inc. not approving/supporting/passing same-sex marriage.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.No on ever said that
No on ever said that everything that happens is welcome or permitted or fair.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Being born a pedophile is
Being born a pedophile is VERY different!! We are talking about honest human beings who want to be allowed to love and marry and hurt no one. Pedophilia is an illness and causes the people who have it to prey on children. The recidivism rate is very low. Gay and lesbian people seek committed, ongoing relationships. There is a HUGE difference. That is the problem with this issue! People have these erroneous ideas that have NO basis in fact-they come out of prejudice toward another person who is a bit different from you and some ways but not in every way. Gay are hardly criminals and should not be considered as such. Your response which has no basis in fact is very upsetting to me because it perpetuates the problem.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I stated that in some
I stated that in some countries (the same ones that kill homosexuals), adults are allowed to merry what we consider to be underaged girls. So, who is it that determines what is acceptable for marriage?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.School teacher your
School teacher your statement in your first paragraph sums up why I voted yes. If we recognize sexual orientation in our laws and agree to protect that as a right of individuals it will only be a matter of time before some child molestor and there lawyer stands up and says hey I can't help it I was "born this way" and I have rights too.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.EveryONE deserves the same
EveryONE deserves the same rights when it comes to the law, one another, and for simply being a human being. EveryONE has deserves the RIGHT to be protected.
Giving an example of a sex offender compared to Same-Sex marriage is pretty lame.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond."Everyone" includes every
"Everyone" includes every one, not everyone except.......
If thats what you mean then that is what you should say.
Example: Everyone adult should be allowed a loving, stable relationship EXCEPT for those adults that want it that with an underaged child, the age to be determined by the society one lives in.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.No-I made myself clear.
No-I made myself clear. EVERYONE INC. PEOPLE WHO BREAK THE lAW... EVERYONE INC. HUMAN BEINGS... NO execptions!!!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So, a 40 year old man having
So, a 40 year old man having sex with a 10 year old should have his rights protected. Makes sense.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Yes, he should-rightfully
Yes, he should-rightfully so. Just because a sex offender offends-doesn't mean they are entitled to years of harassment or abuse from the public. Laws are already in place to take care of situations like that. Its bad enough people who offend have no protection when it comes to the registry posting where they live or where they work.
Again-G/L/T adn Same-sex marriage can not be compared to sex offenders.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I can not believe you just
I can not believe you just said what you did.
Sex offenders SHOULD BE tormented for their whole lives. They know this will happen if they so choose to offend but they still choose to do it. You do the crime, you do the time, PERIOD!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Yup-been there done that
Yup-been there done that with the comments that were in response to the homeless man panhandling in aub. Do I have to clarify yet again that I am a SURVIVOR of sexual abuse many times over.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.your looking for sympathy
your looking for sympathy and I have none.. you choose to not report a business that does not hire women.. you are not for equal rights as you say
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Honey-not looking for
Honey-not looking for sympathy... I'm a SURVIVOR and I forgive my offenders. I am merely stating that offenders have the same rights such as you or I and I feel this way even though I have had this done to me-because someONE had an issue with me saying that offenders have rights, lest we forget. Its too bad that people are quick to judge when they've never walked a foot in another's shoes.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.it still boils down to the
it still boils down to the fact that you sit here and write to all of us you want equal rights for all but you still will not report a business who will not hire women........ you contradict yourself.. practice what you preach
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.maybe if the maine state
maybe if the maine state (un)employment laws were stronger for those employed who SHOULD be and NEED to be protected-it would be a different story. like i said-too quick to judge when people haven't walked a foot in another's shoes... and quite frankly its not anyone's business.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I have to agree with your
I have to agree with your statement, however there is a difference between being born a way where you engage with a consenting adult and a way in which you endager a minor. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine the difference.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Yet, there are many cultures
Yet, there are many cultures that send their daughters into marriage at what we consider to be underage. So, once again, what is the line and who can decide what that line is?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Have you forgotten that once
Have you forgotten that once upon a time WE sent our 11-12 year old daughters to marry 40 year old men to produce babies and cook and clean for them? We have now drawn the line at age 18 so it really isn't necessary to discuss further.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.No one's gonna accuse the
No one's gonna accuse the Yes on 1 side of being rocket scientists.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Name calling and put downs
Name calling and put downs might make good television, but it does little for debate, or discussion threads.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.i do not think this issue is
i do not think this issue is about equal rights.......it's about wanting everyone to accept your lifestyle. i do not accept that lifestyle...so don't cram it down my throat! i don't care if you have that lifestyle...just don't expect me to accept it. you have your rights under domestic partners! it is just not natural. and i wonder where all this hate is coming from now?? so much name calling on the no side. stop the hate!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Since people are so
Since people are so concerned about preserving marriage between one man and one woman we should start prosecuting every cheating spouse out there. How about we make divorce illegal since traditional marriage means devoting the rest of your life to someone until death do you part?
Use logical sense. Prohibiting marriage of homosexuals will not prevent them from loving each other or even having sex with each other. What are we trying to accomplish here? Wouldn't it be better to have monogamous, committed couples? Are we afraid that their divorce rates will be lower than ours and we'd look stupid? Or how about not being able to blame them for the AIDS crisis by accusing them of being promiscuous with multiple partners anymore.
Evaluate what truly bothers you about allowing them to marry. Is it because you don't believe they should be together? Because not allowing marriage isn't going to stop that. Is it because you don't think they should have the right to estates of their partners or rights to make the choices regarding their health and welfare if necessary? Because that's none of your business and doesn't affect you any. Is it because you don't want homosexuality taught in schools? Are you afraid your child might "become" homosexual by learning that it exists? What do you think, that the schools won't talk about this very election and debate in school during history class regardless of whether it passed or not? Why are we not teaching our children love and acceptance for everyone? Are you teaching your child it's bad to have mental retardation or physical disabilities or blue eyes instead of brown? I would hope not so how is this any different? Should the black person and the white person not be allowed to marry? Should the Jew and the Catholic not be allowed to marry? Where does the line get drawn? Consenting adults should be allowed to do what they want to without the nation debating over it. Why is it okay for straight consenting adults to have anal sex but if homosexuals do it, it's horrible? Why is it acceptable and "cool" to watch lesbians in adult films that turn on even straight men and women, yet they shouldn't be allowed to marry? None of this makes sense!!
I just don't understand how there could possibly be one single reason anyone can give me on how allowing same sex marriage DIRECTLY affects anyone who is not homosexual. Seriously, this is what I want here. I want someone to give me one single way that it directly affects your life by allowing same sex marriage. Enough on the stupid debates about being taught in schools and preserving marriage because we all know how many relationships out there have involved cheating and domestic abuse so who are we to blow our horns about preserving traditional marriage considering what people who are currently allowed to marry have done with the privelige.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.This post is the first
This post is the first honest post from the opposition.
All this BS about teaching it in school or not wanting to change the tradional marriage.
When you boil it down, it's all about whether or not you accept homosexuality. But the Yes people hid behind tons and tons of BS. They didn't want to be labeled homophobes.
Hopefully the No people learned that is exactly what is needed. Shine the light of truth on this cowards, and they will run.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I take it you haven't read
I take it you haven't read many posts or spoken to many people in the last month because the Yes on 1 people have been labeled as homophobes. I do agree with you that the No on 1 people should take note. Labeling those opposed to you, name calling, utilizing out of state money and personel, and back room deals don't work with this crowd. Yes, Yes on 1 used most of those those, too, but their not the ones trying to change a social custom.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Outside of taking breaks
Outside of taking breaks from coding, I rarely have time for much political discourse. And I didn't see the NO on one folks labeling people(outside of isolated incidents).
However, the Yes on 1 campaign was dishonest. It focused on wedge issues, instead of core issues of whether or no homosexuality is wrong.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Whether homosexuality is
Whether homosexuality is "wrong" or not isn't the debate. Just because we take away their right to marriage doesn't stop them from being homosexual or marrying, so what did we gain? We certainly didn't accomplish preventing homosexuality. We can still think it's wrong and it will still happen.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.ohh boy you are going to
ohh boy you are going to hear it now. you did the two no no you disagreed with them and you called them haters you are in for it now
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I rarely respond to these
I rarely respond to these things but feel that today I must.
I am a retired school teacher who has many friends who are gay. I do not understand why people continue to say these people choose this lifestyle. For what reason would anyone CHOOSE a lifestyle that would bring them derision from people like some who have written here? Why is it not clear that they are born that way?! For goodness sakes!!
Maybe your Jesus defined this as sin; I do not remember that he did. Paul did-the same apostle who gave us the beginnings of discrimination toward women in the church. Many human beings however inadvertently put "their spin" on issues and they were written down in the Bible. If the whole book is divinely inspired I have often wondered why there are covers on it. Doesn't God keep speaking to us after Revelation??
I am a Christian but the God I serve teaches me to love and not judge and to move forward in all that I do with compassion.
You people pushed the issue that gay marriage would be taught in school. No Child Left Behind has determined every single thing that a teacher will do, leaving no time for creativity or the chance to insert an individual agenda. Trust me, gay marriage will not be taught because there will be no time for anyone to do so!
Perhaps someone did use the word "breeders" in conversation but I always learned that you cannot judge a whole group of people by the comments that one has made. Didn't you folks not learn that,too, or was this comment by one person something you felt you could hang your hat on and "run with"?
Organized religion has in many ways often railed against those things that are different and perhaps threatening. Let us remember the Inquisition, the witch hanging and burning, the KKK. Even German troops marched off to war saying, "God is on our side!" Just about all people who have pressed forward to single out those who were not [to their way of thinking] godly, were worshipers of God. But let me once again state that my God tells me to love and embrace my brother or sister and support them in their journey.
In the sixties the black and white people involved in the Civil Rights moment sang "We Shall Overcome" as they protested nonviolently against the same antiquated reasoning which many said was supported by the Bible.
May I say to you that the Gay Community-my friends-are singing "We Shall Overcome" today as they move forward in nonviolence to achieve their civil rights. That is what our God demands. Gandhi set that example for us.
"I seem to remember something about "Judge not, lest ye be judged." Perhaps that is something for YOU folks to think on.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.While teachers might not
While teachers might not have time to teach an individual agenda, they can always slip in a comment, roll their eyes, change a voice pitch, or ask a pointed question. You are trained that there are verbal and non-verbal ways to communicate....and intimidate.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Hey Centarie, are you trying
Hey Centarie, are you trying to tell me that if a teacher is going to do what you've just described, they won't do it just because it's not legal for them to marry? Use your common sense.
Intimidate the kids into what, turning gay? lol...
If it being taught in schools is really your only problem, why not pass a law stating it isn't allowed to be taught in schools but same sex marriages are legal. Great compromise, I think.
But of course we all know it's just an excuse to discriminate and we'll come up with a new one if a law passes not allowing it to be taught in schools, right?
Haha yet we're allowed to teach our children about how Hitler lined up Jews and shot them into holes and that's better for them. It was as early as the 5th grade when I did a book report about it.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Teachers convey a number of
Teachers convey a number of things. They are human with an opinion. My niece's teacher worked in a No on 1 lecture during class time for her students to bring home. I have also heard of teachers inappropriate reactions concerning the president and soldiers going to war. I was trying to point out that, while No Child Left Behind "ties teachers down" as was mentioned in the blog I was responding too, there are many ways that teachers can still intentially or unintentially communicate personal political opinions on children who may or may not understand, but are still underprepared for adult debates.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.And I agree with you that
And I agree with you that teachers can choose to influence children in whatever way they see fit. However, my point was that they are not going to suddenly change and start doing it if gay marriage passes nor are they going to not do it now that it hasn't. As with anyone else children will come in contact with through the internet, at home, at school, at a friend's house, on TV, etc. etc. Your child could be reading all of these posts!!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.And I agree with you that
And I agree with you that teachers can choose to influence children in whatever way they see fit. However, my point was that they are not going to suddenly change and start doing it if gay marriage passes nor are they going to not do it now that it hasn't. As with anyone else children will come in contact with through the internet, at home, at school, at a friend's house, on TV, etc. etc. Your child could be reading all of these posts!!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.You know what would be 5
You know what would be 5 shades of awsome? If they brought it up for a vote again today.
And as for moving on, no. This thread is about question 1. If you want to talk about other issues, find the story about them and go at it.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I just wanted to remind
I just wanted to remind everyone that while we are divided on this issue, that there are still things that don't acknowledge race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation that we as a people must deal with.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.The people of Maine voted
The people of Maine voted YES on 1 and I don't think any one that voted this way will change their minds. What would be the purpose of bring the vote up again today?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Well: One: to put same sex
Well:
One: to put same sex marriage back on the books.
Two: make you have to do another citizen's veto.
Three: To tell you what you can do with your citizen's veto.
Again, they wouldn't do it, but to quote my favorite homosexual(Neil Patrick Harris), it would be...wait for it....
Leg...
en...
dary.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So we vote on it again
So we vote on it again today. And again tomorrow. And again. And again. Are you hoping to wear people down? If, after months of tv, radio, mail, door to door visits, home phone calls, and newspaper stories hasn't changed people's minds, would asking people to vote everyday on this until you get what you want really work? Also, just because you change the definition of a word doesn't mean that anyone would accept it. And, in this state, forcing such things have often had the opposite effect.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.The voters have spoken.
The voters have spoken. Good for Maine!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Now back to other
Now back to other issues:
There is still a war going on, which affects gay and straight and black and white and christian and non-christian soldiers and their families.
We are in a recession, and gay and straight and christian and islamic and jews and black and white alike are all losing homes and jobs or are otherwise affected.
There is a pandemic flu going around which also acknowledges no sexual orientation, skin color, or religion.
Lets keep in mind: there are still things that we are still all in together.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Finally, this is what I've
Finally, this is what I've been waiting for. Somebody finally f'ing gets it.....however, we still have the battle of commu-care to fight.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Jesus said to hate the sin
Jesus said to hate the sin and love the sinner. Many of you disparage the Bible out of ignorance or hate. Jesus is painted as some hippy who allowed sin. Here is a lesson to remember. Jesus ministered to a prositute at "the woman at the well." He spoke and had compassion. He concluded with, "GO AND SIN NO MORE." You too have that choice. You are not born that way if you happen to be female with extra testerone or male with extra estrogen. You have been fed the BIG LIE - a license to do as you please with no moral implications whatsoever! You have a genetic predisposition to be more masculine or to be more feminine . . . but you DO have a choice. Choose to be straight and avoid the problems of a lifestyle that only 3% of the population live.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.And exactly When was this
And exactly When was this Jesus charactor elected to office? I don't remember that one? I certainly never voted for him
As mounting scientific evidence shows that homosexuality is not a chioce I have to ask you something even if it was why shouldn't our choice be less protected then yours I mean you Chose to be straight Right?
Hell for that matter you chose your religion and that chioce has numerous protections wedged into protect it.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.not legit to preach about
not legit to preach about your god-his wants and needs-what he allows and doesn't...
its important to be educated about the real facts before painting a perception of how ignorant people make themselves out to be.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Not surprising, my home town
Not surprising, my home town of Lewiston voted 7 to 5 to discriminate. That's a tradition I had hoped would have vanished by now. Very medieval! Very shameful.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Our local rep and REpublican
Our local rep and REpublican who went against us:
Rep. Michael Beaulieu; District 68
Representative Michael Beaulieu is serving his second term in the Maine House of Representatives representing part of Auburn.
Michael Beaulieu is a graduate of the University of Maine at Farmington and holds a Master’s in Education. He is a retired history and government teacher, but remains active as a supervisor in the Lewiston Adult Education Program. He is also an active participant in local political organizations.
Rep. Beaulieu and his wife, Paula, have two children and enjoy spending time with their grandchildren.
COMMITTEES
Judiciary
Legal and Veterans Affairs
CONTACT
27 Sherman Avenue
Auburn, ME 04210
Tel. (207) 784-0036
mike@mikeformaine.org
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Rollcall Details for Senate
Rollcall Details for Senate Roll-call #64
LD 1020 (SP 384)
Copy and paste BOTH lines in to your browser:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/LawMakerWeb/rollcall.asp?ID=
280031932&chamber=Senate&serialnumber=64
ALFOND of Cumberland D Y
BARTLETT of Cumberland D Y
BLISS of Cumberland D Y
BOWMAN of York D Y
BRANNIGAN of Cumberland D Y
BRYANT of Oxford D Y
CRAVEN of Androscoggin D Y
DAMON of Hancock D Y
DIAMOND of Cumberland D Y
GERZOFSKY of Cumberland D Y
GOODALL of Sagadahoc D Y
HOBBINS of York D Y
MARRACHÉ of Kennebec D Y
MILLS of Somerset R Y
MITCHELL of Kennebec D Y
NUTTING of Androscoggin D Y
PERRY of Penobscot D Y
RECTOR of Knox R Y
SCHNEIDER of Penobscot D Y
SIMPSON of Androscoggin D Y
SULLIVAN of York D Y
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Enough with the smearing and
Enough with the smearing and name calling. It is counterproductive in a debate.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.There is no name calling or
There is no name calling or smearing done here. These are elected officials and we ALL have the right to know who they are and who to contact.
IF these elected officials do not want to be contacted, they need to give up their seats.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I meant in general. Anytime
I meant in general. Anytime anyone wants to have a conversation about a topic, the opposing party often times falls back onto name calling and smear tactics. That stuff might make the talking heads on tv more interesting, but it rarely leaves a positive lasting impression and any good points that follow are lost in a personal defensive shouting match. This seems to be the new debating method. One which leads to polarization with limited information or education exchanged, especially for emotionally charged topics which require both.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Churches are closing. Church
Churches are closing. Church leaders say that it is because of declining membership. So, how is it that an institution with declining numbers has such a power over people that are not a part of it?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.wanna-bes
wanna-bes
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.alas! it was a pretty close
alas! it was a pretty close call... i'd think yes on 1 supporters would have more to brag out if it happened to be 90-10% or even 60-30%. this is something that all NO on 1 supporters should be proud about! we can make an impact/difference/change!!! =]
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Question 1 Same Sex
Question 1 Same Sex Marriage
97% OF PRECINCTS REPORTING
> Yes 297,937 53%
No 266,528 47%
I do not think that 31409 is close... it's far from close. 31409 is A LOT of people!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Its so sad to see the sore
Its so sad to see the sore loser attitudes being posted here.... No on 1 supporters need realize that not all the people who voted yes are against gays being joined in marriage.. the big turn off to a lot of people I have spoken to about this is everything else included in the bill that was passed in the late hours of the evening in the state house without the peoples voice being heard.. Many of the yes votes were a no vote to the state house, basically saying that it is wrong for the legislature to approve a bill and pass it to law without hearing the voice of the people. now it is time for the no on 1 supporters to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new way to get what they want WITHOUT requesting special rights above and beyond that of the heterosexual citizen and without stomping on the rights and beliefs of the christians/catholics then maybe they could get 53% of the vote.. They're unwillingness to compromise and display of outright reverse bigotry towards us so called "breeders" is repulsive and one of the huge reasons they lost the election. Equating this to the civil rights movements of the disabled and the black or latino communities is twisting reality to suit your agenda. A civil union or civil marriage in my oppinion is ok however dont start asking for special treatment and special rights and especially DONT try to rewrite the definition of the word marriage to suit you while spitting on me and the traditionally married couples(man and woman)in this state. This is why you didnt get 53%. If fairness is what you want then start with fair requests of the citizens to be compassionate to your plight, dont ask for the whole farm to be handed over, And for GODS SAKE stop being bigots towards those who dont empathise with you, all it does is solidify they're resolve against your cause. Other than that if your still not happy move to New Hampshire.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Really so We're
Really so We're discriminating against straight people? how and what are these so called special rights that we've got that you don't? And again the term breeder is dragged out I don't like it myself but it's so tame. But it's also the heart of so many of your arguments. You claim marriage is your right alone because you can breed. Hell the term breeder isn't that bad then, and it's a lot nicer by half then some of the things I've been called
I've never understood that the claim of special rights. Exactly what special rights are you talking about? is it the anti discrimination law that was passed a while back? Because as far as I know that's not special rights... unless you think at any minute you could be fired if your boss found out your straight. was it some where in the marriage law that the legislature passed? I don't see any special rights there just a leveling of the playing feild. to get the rights privilege and responsibilities you take fore granted. but no some how our wanting to be treated the same is discriminating against you.
Oh and all this bull about "It was passed in the late hours, people weren't allowed to vote." bull should just stop. So many laws and rules and bills are assed by the legislature with out the "People" voting on them. that's why we have a representative democracy. Other wise we'd be at the polls every other week voting on this bit or that, Also the Representative form of government is designed to try and prevent what happened yesterday. Part of the system of government is to protect the unpopular minority from the tyranny of the majority. With out those checks in play it's all down to mob rule.
As for redefining marriage, why do so many people treat the definition of marriage like it's something that's immutable? It's changed hugely over the centuries but so many people glaze over that saying... No no it's always been like this never been different. Marriage has been many things over the centuries, a way to cement alliances, a purely business transaction, women have been regarded as little more then property at times. The idea people get married for romantic love is relatively new. So the stance that marriage is some how untouched by time is ludicrous.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.1. The special rights are,
1. The special rights are, for example, after you lose your job, claiming you were targeted because of your sexual preference, not because of poor job performance or cut backs, and getting your day in court for it with all the expense, lost business time, negative publicity, and scrutiny for the former employer. Not everyone gets this right.
2. You are correct that many laws are passed without people voting on them, and many have come under scrutiny and recalled after a people's veto because people are tired of elected officials not hearing them.
3. Everyone is a member of an unpopular minority at one time or another, and yes it stinks. That is why we have elections where the majority rules, and yes that can stink, too.
4. Yes, marriage has been redefined many times throughout history, but always with the acknowledgement and acceptance of the people.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Thank you "iangol" for
Thank you "iangol" for posting the names of legislators who went AGAINST THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE. For you in the Auburn/Lewiston vicinity please contact these legislators and courteously inform them that you did not appreciate their surrendering to the "Political Correct" pressure as they did and remember them when election time comes:
AUBURN - LEWISTON and VICINITY
BEAULIEU of Auburn R Y
BOLDUC of Auburn D Y
CAREY of Lewiston D Y
DOSTIE of Sabattus D Y
GILBERT of Jay D Y
HAYES of Buckfield D Y
ROTUNDO of Lewiston D Y
SIROIS of Turner D Y
WAGNER of Lewiston D Y
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Conservative Concedes in
Conservative Concedes in Upstate Congressional Race
A staunch conservative conceded defeat to a moderate Democrat early Wednesday morning in a hard-fought contest for New York State's northernmost Congressional seat, a race that exposed divisions among Republicans over how far outside the party's base they should reach as they look to rebuild.
With 88 percent of precincts reporting, the Democrat, Bill Owens, was leading with 49 percent of the vote, while the Conservative Party candidate, Douglas L. Hoffman, had 45.5 percent.
As for "the country changing," a few boutique issues and races for governor doesn't mean the Republicans who nearly drove America into the next Great Depression are doing anything but hunting around for their next subject to smear.
That's all they can do, they're devoid of anything but serving the most ignorant with meaningless divisions. Elect enough Republicans and eventually the demage to America won't be repairable.
Oh, and in Maine ... how to the wingnuts claim "victory" when TABOR lost, among others the wingnuts favored.
Such small minded people, these wingnuts.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I just have this to say no
I just have this to say no matter which biblical scripture you read they all state or imply that the high power (God, Lord, Allah, etc) he/she provides you paths to take in life, you then choose to take the path and deal with the outcome. My question is if he/she only provides you a path of love to the same sex as you how is that wrong? How is that against what he/she believes?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.http://www.thebricktestament.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Ummm? well you obviously
Ummm? well you obviously havent read any of these "higher powers" scripts but if this is your train of thought then I'll just say this. The devil offers paths through life too. It is up to the individual to choose the path they walk. However, when they meet the maker then they will be judged and if they are judged to be a sinner then with the devil they will be because that is the path they chose. In short CHOOSE CAREFULLY.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Maybe you have some
Maybe you have some translation of the Bille that is not availible to the general public? Could you please forward the translation in which you are reading this?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.What you said isn't written
What you said isn't written in my Bible (KJV).
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Please!
Please!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Please!
Please!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond."Please!" Great response.
"Please!" Great response. Really hit home with that one.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.The point was not to hit
The point was not to hit home. The point is the arguments for gay marriage are getting more foolish by the minute.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.You know what I think, I
You know what I think, I think everyone that voted yes on 1 is prejudice against gays. I say if they wanna get married that is their business and noone elses. You people don't have any morals or a heart. I am straight and have been with my man for almost 19 yrs and we both think this vote yes on 1 was bs. People should be free to make their own choices and noone else should be able to stop them making the choices they make. To each their own is what I was always told growing up. They are not going to teach stuff like that in school. If people think stuff like this is going to be taught in school you got it all wrong. They don't teach you on relationships or marriage straight or gay for that matter. People are people and everyone makes choices not everyone agrees with. It should be up to them who they marry and if they are 2 guys or 2 girls so be it.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Heres a big reason for many
Heres a big reason for many that they voted yes.. Why did this need to be part of the LAW that baldacci signed on may 6, 2009? Why is the need for these words to be redefined or legally viewed as non gender specific required to give gays the same rights as hetero couples? These words have deep seeded meaning to a lot of individuals and to claim that they need to be legally redefined in order to be fair to gays is rediculous. This is cut and pasted from a copy of the law as it was written by the legislature. If you have a problem with the vote , go bark up Baldacci's tree and chew him out. Without this in there maybe the no's would have gotten the 4% they needed.
§ 650-A. Codification of marriage
Marriage is the legally recognized union of 2 people. Gender-specific terms relating to the marital
relationship or familial relationships, including, but not limited to, "spouse," "family," "marriage,"
"immediate family," "dependent," "next of kin," "bride," "groom," "husband," "wife," "widow" and
"widower," must be construed to be gender-neutral for all purposes throughout the law, whether in the
context of statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other source of civil law.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.No, not Everyone. I voted to
No, not Everyone. I voted to repeal the law because the government doesn't have the authority to redifine marriage. I also think the law was a bad law in that id only would have allowed same sex couples to have the bennefits and priviledges of married couples.
The bill should be re-submitted, re-written, and renamed "The equality for Families" law, and extend the bennefits and privileges afforded to marriage to same sex partners, heterosexual partners who are not married, and single parrent households. That would leave the definition of marriage alone, and I don't think anyone who voted "yes" would be opposed to equal bennefits for all.
John A. Chick
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Colonel Charles Yancey (January 6, 1816)
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.>The bill should be
>The bill should be re-submitted, re-written, and renamed "The equality for Families" law, and extend the bennefits and privileges afforded to marriage to same sex partners, heterosexual partners who are not married, and single parrent households. That would leave the definition of marriage alone, and I don't think anyone who voted "yes" would be opposed to equal bennefits for all.<
I would be so thrilled to find out that you are right. Unfortunately, I think most who voted for the repeal were voting from a knee jerk reaction of fear and bigotry. When I see and hear that heterosexual couples fear that their marriage will means less, or is somehow invalidated by including anything else under the term marriage, I can only contend that there is more happening than just a wish for marriage to remain "traditional". (Which tradition do we want to save here, anyway? I guess it must be the latest one. I did not get the impression that anyone wanted to preserve polygamy, a traditional form of marriage, or "open" marriage along with same sex marriage. These are all traditional marriages , too. Some have a long tradition easily predating the current one-man, one woman version even in this country.)
I really do hope that you are right.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.You are right in that people
You are right in that people do have a right to choose who they want to be with. We don't kill homosexuals like they do in many countries. The question was not if homosexuals have the right to exist, work, live, be educated, or be in a committed relationship. It was a question put to the public if they wanted to redefine a custom that has its roots in religion. If 2 guys or 2 girls are in a committed relationship, they can legally have a civil union with all the tax benefits that are included in a religious marriage, and most people will acknowledge their husband or wife.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.If this is truly a religious
If this is truly a religious issue would you be willing to give up the 1000 rights and privileges the government grants this religious issue? If it's the word marriage you are so hung up on then petition the state to remove marriage from it's purview entirely. marriage if it is strictly a religious domain should have no place in the law and you along with your gay and lesbian comrades should have to get your civil unions for government recognition. The marraige ceremony should be just that then a ceremony with no legal standing what so ever.
but we both know that will never happen will it but then again if it is a religious issue what of the religions that allow same sex unions shouldn't those be granted the same stature as marriage since it is from a religious ceremony just like yours...Ohh wait you only mean the "Right" religions
and while no homosexuals aren't killed as you said, it was only recently that the act of being gay was decriminalized in a number of states so hey don't pat yourself on the back to hard there bub.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I wasn't married in a
I wasn't married in a church, but by a justice of the peace in the living room surrounded by friends and family. According to many christians, we are not married. Yet, most of society acknowledges our union. The only ones who said it didn't matter, besides the church, was the No on 1 people.
As for the "Right" religion, everyone has a right to their own personal religious beliefs. If someone doesn't agree with someone else, that is also their right.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Very well written and I
Very well written and I believe a lot of people would agree with you too.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Here are the names of Maine
Here are the names of Maine Legislators who voted for homosexual marriage.
Rollcall Details for House Roll-call #52
LD 1020 (SP 384)
Main page:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/LawMakerWeb/rollcalls.asp?ID=280031932
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.POINT TO PONDER: Did
POINT TO PONDER: Did everyone actually read the law that was passed? If you voted yes on 1; then you don't want gay/lesbian marriage to be legal and not be discriminated against and you do want the church to be held accountable for not recognizing nor marrying a gay/lesbian couple. If you voted no on 1: then you want gay/lesbian couples to be legal wed and not be discriminated against but you'll let the church not recognize your marriage nor marry you. Go figure? So.....
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.well the whole church thing
well the whole church thing was just a short term thing anyways. If no would have won the first church that said no to a gay couple would have been sued for discrimination and thing churches would have had to perform gay marriages too.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.that is why is is soooo
that is why is is soooo important (can't emphasize enough) for people to become fully educated about the law. its already stated in the maine state constitution (and the us constitution) that protects churches... it was stated in the law LD1020 AGAIN to clearly state and 'protect' what is already protected. as marc mutty tried to downplay.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Queen I do understand the
Queen I do understand the law but if no would have won making gay marrage legal then if a church denied a couple the right to marry based solely on the fact that they are gay it would be discrimination. If it was taken to court it would be a pretty good argument. last note on that is even if the church would win in court. it still would take up time and efforts.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Queen is right on this one.
Queen is right on this one. The law would have protected those who did not want to marry same sex couples under the "for religious reasons" category.
John A. Chick
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Colonel Charles Yancey (January 6, 1816)
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.IF, IF, WOULD... shy of
IF, IF, WOULD... shy of being misunderstanding and having lack of knowledge. i'm sorry but i have to say that this was used as a scare tactic and nothing less. why would g/l/t want to get married at a church where they weren't accepted. why would they want to practice their religion there? i would avoid it at all costs if it was me...
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.queen be the reason I used
queen be the reason I used the word if and would is because question 1 passed. I dont care if people misunderstand me
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Teachers, teachers,
Teachers, teachers, teachers...Wow!
I did not realize that 53% of the state were Catholic's. Seems to me, that if you attack the Catholic's this way...while screaming "Bigotry", what the heck does that say about you? How many Christian children do you have in your classrooms that are not allowed to express their Christian believes? What message are you sending?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Not everyone that voted YES
Not everyone that voted YES on 1 is Catholic. In fact many are not.. remember Maine has several different religions and they do not accept homosexuality.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.They have made this an
They have made this an attack on Catholics. Who will they attack next? The people said, "No". Thirty other states said, "No". Are they all Catholics too? Leave the Catholic's alone. They have a voice, as everyone else does.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.My entire family is Catholic
My entire family is Catholic and they still had the brains and the heart to vote no on one. This isn't about Catholics, it's about being a bigot.. regardless of your religion (or lack thereof).
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I am so happy yes passed.
I am so happy yes passed. On the other hand i am so glad that this vote has brought out the true colors of the no voice. They are on here promoting death panels for our elderly, and calling us Yesers names like bigots and breeders. Discrtiminating against us because we believe as much as you do. This is a free country where issues like this can be put to vote. But when you lose you should lose with dignity. The fact is that the legislature voted for something their constiuants have overwhelmingly said no to time and time again. Not only should we repeal this law, we should send a message to the represenatives who voted for themselves not for the voice of the people that they represent. An to the Noers out there, not just gun toting rednecks voted yes. There were lawyers, teacher, firefighters, judges, represenatives, Moms, dads, brothers, sisters, your close friends, family, and co-workers. We in maine have sent a Loud YES marriage is 1man 1 woman. Now please leave us along and let Maine continue to be the way life should be.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I am truly heavyhearted that
I am truly heavyhearted that people can be "so happy yes passed". Why feel happiness at the loss of others? Even if not Christian, this seems like a very sad and mean-spirited point-of-view. You state that No-on-1-ers are "handing out names like bigots and breeders" and yet you spew out phrases like "Here they are promoting death panels!" An ignorant and untrue statement like that is very much the same as calling someone a "bigot or breeder." I understand that educated people voted yes on 1. However, even people with an education can be homophobic. People that still are very racist can also be educated people - that doesn't mean our State should also agree with their ideals. Unfortunately hatred and/or misunderstanding lives in all types of people.
Oh well, goodness will prevail and all people will have equal rights someday.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I'm pretty sure that the
I'm pretty sure that the "death panel" comment followed one by someone who wrote to the effect that once the greatest generation people die off, that homosexual marriage will be made legal by the following generations.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Hey Yes Voters --- The fact
Hey Yes Voters --- The fact is: Gay People Exist. I am a teacher, and "teaching" homosexuality at schools is not an item of agenda. Our curriculum is controlled by the State and by the community school board, not individual teachers. Also, you cannot "teach" someone to be homosexual. This is ridiculous. Homosexuality, also, is not contagious.
Eventually the Federal Government will pass a law to make the United States have full equality for everyone. It is ultimate, because when a group of people is segregated from the normalsies of life, it is WRONG. That fact will remain despite which percentage is afraid for change or not. The fact that the federal government hasn't already taken action sickens me. People need to start asking themselves what they are so afraid of? There isn't going to mass chaos if marriage was equal - look at the other states who are doing it already. There are much bigger (and more moral) things to worry about. Why not put this many people together that you have gathered to "fight homosexuality" and use them to fight homelessness, famine, and war?
Oh, and if you voted due to your Christianity, I'm sure Christ truly appreciates the stone casting. Good job, Catholics. There really seems to be a lot of hate in your "all-encompassing" love. Excellent.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Laurag, I was very disturbed
Laurag,
I was very disturbed to read your post on several levels. First, as a teacher it is part of your job to be able to explain to our children how democracy works. Democracy is a messy business in which people decide how to be governed, one side wins and one side loses. The venom in your response suggests that you have a very poor understanding of this concept. This was not a vote on gay people (you make it clear that they exists), this was a vote about how the citizens of Maine wish to be governed. The people of Maine chose to say no to a law with which they disagreed.
Second, the yes on 1 campaign never even implied that Homosexuality was contagious, this is a red hering you have created to mask the deeper problems in your argument. The Yes on 1 campaign said that if we legalize gay marrige then this lifestyle will be taught in our schools. While you claim that this in not on the agenda, your comments ignore several developements in the field of education. There is pressure being brought on textbook manufacturers to become more gay friendly, and there is pressure being brought nationally to teach our children that hetrosexual coupling is not the only possibility. Additionally, in states where gay marriage has been legalized situations have arrisen or been created where very young children have been taught about alternate lifestyles. As such, on this issue, you are either uninformed or purposefully not telling the whole tale.
Finally, your final statement suggests your lack of understanding concerning Christianity, and your hatred for the same. Jesus, as you point out suggested that the best way to win souls was not by stoning, but by loving correction. He did not however, teach us to ratify sin, and simply look the other way. The No on 1 campaigh said it understood and respected Christian objections, you clearly do not, and it is people like you that the church rightly fears would eventually try to force them to ratify these unions.
When we see the world in dichotomies, with me or against me, we tend to see hate around every corner. However, one should understand the dichotomous reasoning is false reasoning. The fact that one chooses to disagree does not make thme an enemy, it make them a person with a different view, that, at least, is the theory of our democracy.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I have every right to be
I have every right to be passionately angry about an issue that provides rights for some of the population and not for others. The message from Yes voters reads, to me, that: homosexuals are less deserving for marriage than others. This implies that they are less than a person. That they are unequipped to be a husband or wife. That they are unfit to raise a child. That their nature is fundamentally repugnant to God. If this is the message that Yes-voters have secured, then it is one I will shout proudly against.
A teacher should provide a supportive environment for all people, regardless of differences. A classroom is to provide a safe and accepting environment for all people - it is not to push a specific agenda, but to provide a sense of tolerance for all agendas.
You say the phrase "gay friendly" as though it leaves a bad taste in your mouth, but I highlight the word FRIENDLY here. Being friendly is something I think all of us should value, and spread through our example to our children. It will be a sad state when unacceptance is taught over friendllness.
A relief to me is that a law cannot hold universal discrimination against humanity forever, because that is wrong, and unjust. The fact is: goodness will prevail. All will be equal, at least in the eyes of the law, someday.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Why would the textbooks need
Why would the textbooks need to change at all? I guess I'm missing something since I don't recall being taught about opposite-sex marriages in school so why would children be being taught about same-sex marriages? Kids don't go to school to learn about marriage they go to school to learn English and Math and Science.. duh. Even Sex Ed teaches to have protected sex or to abstain but still doesn't specify that it has to be with the opposite sex.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.laurag, you have said it
laurag, you have said it well. This should not have been made into a "marriage is between a man and a woman" or any of the other assorted things that this stood on, this was about equality for all. I find it odd that an individual, or group of individuals, with a religious or moral agenda, have the right to decide what goes on in someone's private life. This essentially has NO affect on each of us as a person, it does not affect our lives. This is not on the agenda to be taught in schools, and even if it was, as a parent you have the right to say what your child is taught, if you don't like it take them out of the classroom for that session. You are correct in saying there are much bigger and more moral things to worry about. Every day children are beaten, starved, neglected, homeless, and schools are not equal in the amount of funding they receive and that affects our children's education and future, yet, I hear no one making a loud objection to any of this. I am a Christian and I do not believe it is up to us to judge another, none of us are perfect. I fear that by denying equal rights to others just because they are different opens the pathway for other rights to be taken away just because some "religious" group doesn't like the way someone else lives. All too soon people forget the lessons that history has taught us, namely how Hitler ran amok. The voting public was not well informed on the FACTS of this question, instead choosing to listen to the misleading television adds by political factors that felt they needed to lie in order to win their way. Hate was the theme, not the love of fellow man, or even simple respect. It doesn't mean you have to like it or agree with it, this was about being made equal in the eyes of the law, someplace religion has absolutely NO business.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Just out of curiosity, when
Just out of curiosity, when the Federal Government passes a law to make sure everyone has full equality, will that also include pediphiles? They are, unfortunatly, included in "everybody". A 40 year old man concludes that he and his 10 year old concubine have a commited relationship and deserve marriage rights. As does his friends and their child brides. Who are you to say otherwise? Where is the line in "everybody" and who is it that has the right to decide?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.A ten year old is not a
A ten year old is not a legally consenting adult. It is illegal to have sex with a minor, it is not illegal to have sex with an adult homosexual. Come on people, if a pedophile was truly in love they would wait until the child turned 18 to have sex with them, which would make them not a pedophile. Then they could legally get married and be given their equal rights, the equal right to marry a consenting adult regardless of their gender.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.First off this is a rather
First off this is a rather repulsive statement that seems on it's face an attempt to stir up the old gays=pedophiles nonsens.
second It Would Never Happen, Minors can't enter into legal contracts, there brain and thought processes aren't fully formed yet and thus they don't have all the cognitive processes to fully understand the ramifications of such. Which is why Minors can't consent, can't enter into legal binding contracts, and so on and so forth. That's why it will never happen the laws are designed to protect the vulnerable from being levered into something against there will.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Where are the Christians
Where are the Christians "stone casting"?
Homosexuality is against God's law plain and simple........No matter how hard people try to change Him, God never changes......even for the "enlightened" progressives.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Divorce is against god's
Divorce is against god's law. Don't see you working on making that illegal.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.If you want to go to the
If you want to go to the "against God's law" road then how about the priest touching little boys. Is that part of God's law? Priest are suppose to be religious figures that are moral people and yet they can control themselves. This whole moral defense is not appropiate when we have figures in the house of God committing sin.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.This is frightenly bad
This is frightenly bad reasoning. Are you suggesting that since there is sin, that we should abandon morality? Are you suggesting that since there have been bad priests, that all priests are bad, or are you suggesting that since there have been bad priests that all Christians are bad? The Bible says "for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." This means that we are all sinners, but we are called to rise above our sinful condition, and live our lives, not for ourselves, but for God.
If I use your reasoning then I can rightly say that if even one homosexual is a pedophile, then we can paint all with that brush, and rightly make laws against them. I think that we can all agree that this is both silly and insulting. So too is your argument attempting to indict the morality of Christianity by using the sins of a few. I pray for them as I pray for you.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.As a matter of fact it most
As a matter of fact it most certainly is NOT. In fact God ordered individuals who committed such sins to be dealt with quite uh, firmly.
Don't worry, so called "Men of God" WILL answer for their sins before The Lord when the time comes....same as everyone else.
No need for red herrings.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So, let's just humor you and
So, let's just humor you and say you are right. Let's say that Homosexuality is wrong in the eyes of God. So, let GOD deal with it. God never asked for an army of haters to do his biding for him. (More people die on this earth due to the excuse that they are "fighting for God" than for any other reason.) If God wants to deal with "sinners" in the afterlife, that is HIS job. You are not God (have you not realized?) and your job is to lead a good life YOURSELF and leave the rest alone. Love your neighbor. Do not treat others any way you do not wish to be treated. The "let he who is without sin, cast the first stone" incident is one of the most well-known lessons of the Bible, or have you forgotten? WWJD, pal.
The Bible also rails against greediness. I bet, though, you don't gather up thousands of Christians to go and fight the greed of large corporations together, in the name of the Lord, do you? Hm. And the Bible also has many, many rules about things - have you not read Deuteronomy or Leviticus? The Bible states that dwarfs and those with "crooked backs" are not allowed into Church (Deuteronomy 21:20). Should you start voting against the disabled, as well? Oh, and for the record - homosexuality is not a word used in the bible, neither is the word gay. If you are referring to references from the Old Testament, this requires one to follow every rule from the Old Testament. I guess that means if you had bacon for breakfast, you're going to Hell.
Therefore, I think the real issue here isn't a Christian's "noble dedication to God." It's a fear of something you do not understand.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Let God deal with it? You
Let God deal with it? You mean like he did with Sodom and Gommorah?
John A. Chick
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Colonel Charles Yancey (January 6, 1816)
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Good grief, you need to
Good grief, you need to round file the "modern" "Christian" dogma, and just stick to what's written and not be duped by traditions of men.
I have to get ready for work...but....
Know the difference between Laws, Statues and Ordinances......blood ordinances for sins were nailed to the Cross. Food laws on the other hand still stand, so yes, eating bacon is a sin against the flesh body i..e it's not good for you (same as say cigarette smoking), it's not one of a Salvation issue however.
God's laws still stand, regardless to what Godless legislatures write up in D.C. Jesus said "I have not come to change one jot or tittle of the Law". Christians are not to "kick and against the pricks" concerning the laws of the land, but indeed it's getting more and more difficult for a TRUE Christian to do so in these "end times".
And your right, "homosexuality" isn't written in the Bible but you do know what sodomy is right? Red herrings, red herrings, red herrings.
www.theseason.org
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.There is a separation of
There is a separation of church and state, this is not about God, this is about equality under the law. Leave the judging to God, He is the only one qualified to do so.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Actually do your children
Actually do your children ask the teacher about what sex between a man and a woman is???? I do not believe any teacher tells a child what that is any more than what gay sex is...it should be taught by the parents !!! BUT because this was said over and OVER in the ad the question will come up. Actually the question here was not about sex it was about love and equality. Just my opinion. This ad riled me more than anything !!! I think it was ignorant.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.actually teachers do teach
actually teachers do teach kids about sex between a man and a woman every year it called sex ed.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.As I posted somewhere else,
As I posted somewhere else, sex ed teaches kids about going through puberty and to abstain from sex. Sometimes to use protection, but never with whom they should or shouldn't have sex. Parents have to consent to this and have the choice to keep their children from participating.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.no one talks about what goes
no one talks about what goes where. for females they discuss the terms for the ladies thang. for males they talk about their parts too. they touch basis on STD's. sex ed is more like health ed. where a sex ed teacher when we need one???
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I dont know what school you
I dont know what school you went to but at mine we did learn about both sex body parts and how sex could produce babys if not protected. teachers did not put on a move about sex but we did learn how everything worked and where everything went.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Right, so since gay marriage
Right, so since gay marriage is being taught suddenly a man doesn't have a penis and a woman doesn't have a vagina? The body parts are taught, yes. The kids even have to label the names of them. Yes, sperm and eggs make babies, does that change because of being gay? Most certainly not. "How everything works" doesn't change if you're gay. Unprotected sex CAN produce babies and STDs. Did your teacher tell you that you must have sex with the opposite gender? Did you teacher tell you it wasn't okay to have sex with the same gender? Again, no changes need to be made to cirriculum. No, homosexuals can't have a baby if they have sex with each other. Do we need to specify that to children if we teach them who has an eggs, who has sperm, and the only way to make a baby is to combine the two?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Ditto! maybe she went to a
Ditto!
maybe she went to a all homosexual school where they can't tell you where each part goes because ++ and 00 does not fit?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.They teach about what the
They teach about what the human body is and how to pro create but at an older age when their bodies start to mature.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.the yes supporter need to
the yes supporter need to push for a constitutional amendment to be passed stating marriage is between one man and one woman to end this debate and allow maine to focus on fixing other problems and not have to deal with this every year. To the No on 1 people I would like to say it was a good race and I am sorry if any of you think the is about hate. My vote was not about hate.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.A Constitutional amendment
A Constitutional amendment is not something that should be taken lightly, this why a lot of them do not pass. The Constitution should not be altered just to make certain groups happy. We have laws and bills that are for that. Leave the Constitution alone.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedDisagree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I think that the choice to
I think that the choice to expose children to gay and lesbians should be a parents choice! NOT THE SCHOOLS!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So, onceagain, you think
So, onceagain, you think your child won't encounter a gay or lesbian at some point simply because they're not allowed to get married? Last I checked this law wasn't to decide on whether or not to teach homosexuality.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.all the more reason why i
all the more reason why i ask for people to educate themselves. there was/is a misunderstanding about LD1020. marriage is not taught in schools. why would any teacher/school want a lawsuit? when i was in sexed all they talked about was parts of the body.
so girls i met up with said it best. why aren't parents more concerned with their kids doing drugs, smoking, or having sex.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Oh, it's not hate
Oh, it's not hate dear...it's just irritation for having to vote on this issue yet again!
We've turned this issue down NUMEROUS times, but nobody seems to hear us! We're simply annoyed at having been ignored, and it was simply a slap in the face when Maine legislators decided to put the bill through regardless.
We've spoken, and if need be, I have no doubt that when the next time comes, we'll speak again!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Yes, I am sure your
Yes, I am sure your irritation is much greater than those who are segregated by the government and do not have the same rights as yourself. You must be really heavyhearted, not being able to have your excluding opinions heard, until now, and not having sooner had others to have seen your finger pointing towards what you BELIEVE is "wrong." Oh, I can totally sympathize with your irritation.
What you are experiencing must be so much harder than not being able to express your love in public, due to fears of hate crimes. And it must have been much more painful than having to keep a part of yourself hidden from your family, in the fears of non-acceptance. AND you must really feel more irritated than someone who, after finally finding the person that they love more than any other, cannot celebrate this love with their friends and family present, and have this love recognized by the state.
Yeah, you poor thing.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Now see...now you've gone
Now see...now you've gone and turned me into a hater, truely I'm not. I have gay friends and gay co-workers and I treat them with the same respect that I would any other person. They are intelligent people and I enjoy working with them. I don't have anything against gay people or their beliefs, tell your family, tell your friends, just don't try to push it on me!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Push it on you? How does it
Push it on you? How does it affect you if they get married? They're not trying to convince you to accept them, they just want to get married.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.This is true and we will
This is true and we will AGAIN vote to keep the law as is, 1 man & 1 woman is marriage
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I have not read all of the
I have not read all of the comments..but I do want to say/ask something...how many children now want to know what gay sex is now that the Vote Yes people played the ad over and OVER and OVER??? If the parents of the Vote Yes are asked, are you going to say go ask your teacher?? because you seem to think it is the teachers that are telling children what they should be taught at home. I am sure many will ask that had never given it a thought before.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Wasn't about gay sex, was
Wasn't about gay sex, was about gay marriage. The ads didn't run on the children's channels so I guess that's the parent's fault for allowing them to see ads if they did. If a child relates marriage to sex its because they learned to associate sex and marriage prior to this debate, and who's fault do you think that is?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Vote No ran just as many
Vote No ran just as many ads. My niece told me that her teacher "had a soapbox moment" and lectured the class about why their parents should vote No on 1. Inappropriate use of class time? Yes.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Very inappropriate! That
Very inappropriate! That teacher should be repromanded!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Yes, wrong use of class
Yes, wrong use of class time. Teachers need to keep their personal lives to themselves. Children are in school to learn things other then a personal sexual preferences.
There was also an article in the news paper about a teacher from Auburn that tried to get the students to help the NO on 1 campaign. The school district said NO.
School Supt. Says No To No On 1 Phone Bank. Kennebunkport Fire Chief In Court ... No On 1 Responds To Attacks Against House Speaker Pingree ...
www.wgme.com/newsroom/top_stories/videos/wgme_vid_1058.shtml
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.queenhoneybee I read just
queenhoneybee I read just about every comment here and I found more negative comments coming from the no on 1 voters than from everyone else.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Now to the Supreme Court
Now to the Supreme Court where queston 1 will be overturned and the Constitution re-affirmed. Each year more bigots die and more supporters of human rights are born so even without the Suprme Court of Maine its only a matter of time.
Jon Albrecht Dixfield
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.It's funny to see some of
It's funny to see some of the things written because each negative word from yes voters shows just how much HATE they have. I don't think I've read one pleasant comment... they STILL want to bash people and direct their comments towards SJ Users.
NO on 1 Supporters-Keep your heads up! This is a trying day in all of our lives, because it effects each and everyone of us. No matter if it is us that are gay or that we are family members of gays or that we are friends of gays or just plain will not tolerate discrimination in our state-we have the choice and the right to prevail.
Its really too bad that Same-Sex marriage has to be up to people's vote. Maine's Constitution and the Constitution of the United States protection wasn't in place for NO on 1 supporters.
I think the end results (%) only show just how important it is to vote to make a difference. No excuses. Registering to vote is so easy-its ridiculous. Get involved. Become educated.
Coalition Partners for NO on 1 from Protect Maine Equality
Americans for Democratic Action
AFL/CIO
American Academy of Pediatrics- Maine Chapter
American Association of University Women (AAUW)
American Civil Liberties Union
Center for the Prevention of Hate Violence
Children of Lesbians and Gays Everywhere
Community Counseling Center
Downeast Pride Alliance
Engage Maine
Equality Federation
Equality Maine
Family Equality Council
Family Planning Assoc of Maine
Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders
Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation
Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund
GLSEN
Holocaust Human Rights Center of Maine
Human Rights Campaign
Kids First Center
Lambda Legal
League of Women Voters of Maine
Log Cabin Republicans
Mabel Wadsworth Health Center
Maine Association of Psychiatric Physicians
Maine Bar Association Elder Law Section
Maine Bar Association Family Law Section
Maine Bar Association Women's Law Section
Maine Children's Alliance
Maine Civil Liberties Union
Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence
Maine People's Alliance
Maine Psychological Association
Maine Women's Lobby
Marriage Equality U.S.A.
NAACP- Portland Chapter
NAACP-Bangor Chapter
National Assoc Social Workers-Maine
National Association of LGBT Community Centers
National Black Justice Coalition
National Center for Lesbian Rights
National Council of Jewish Women of Southern Maine
National Gay & Lesbian Task Force
National Organization for Women
National Stonewall Democrats
New Hope for Women
Parents, Families & Friends of Lesbians & Gays
Peace Action Maine
Peace Through Interamerican Community Action
People for the American Way
Planned Parenthood of Northern New England
Preble Street
Rainbow Business & Professional Association
Religious Coalition for the Freedom to Marry
Soulforce
The League of Young Voters
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Chu
Women Work and Community
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Haven't read very many of
Haven't read very many of the No on 1 comments have you? Or do you just agree with those hateful comments and only take issue with those hateful Yes on 1 comments that you don't agree with?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Civil Unions = ok Marriage =
Civil Unions = ok
Marriage = NO / Marriage is 1 MAN & 1 WOMAN
Congratulations YES on 1
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Listen to all this
Listen to all this whining.The NO people are starting to show their true colors callin people names biggots all Christians.It sound to me like all the No people are very hatefull people. It went out to a vote they lossed and now they start pointing fingers and crying and name calling
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond."biggots"? "lossed"?
"biggots"? "lossed"? You're also showing your true colors.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Yes many people that are
Yes many people that are catholics are divorcing. If you were to take every couple that were/are gay you would find a lot of them are breaking up or have found new partners as well. And if you really want to dig deeper you will find that some couples are sharing their partners with others just like some heterosexuals do too.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Don't worry folks, you'll
Don't worry folks, you'll get it some day. When the remainder of the greatest generation dies off and the complacent, lazy, entitlement lovin' gen Y'ers and gen ME'ers get to voting age, you'll get anything you want.......
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Sweet, good thing we're
Sweet, good thing we're taking away their medicare and giving it to illegal Mexican immigrants.
DEATH PANELS 4TW!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.1. People who are
1. People who are complaining about the Catholic Church seem to forget that Islam also forbids homosexuality, and even calls for killing them. Yet, to say that you want to see an Islamic mosques close is considered bigoted.
2. If people wanted others to stay out of their business, then they shouldn't have gotten their friends in Augusta to pass and sign a bill behind the backs of the same people whose beliefs they want to change.
3. Stop the name calling. This is a democracy, the people have spoken. If you're going to put this on the ballot again, name calling and attacking religion is going to alienate more voters.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.It was a very sad day for
It was a very sad day for Maine. I thought that people were more opened minded and wanted everyone treated equally. Many of the Catholics are hypocrates. They go to church and turn around and start gossiping before they are out the door. Supposedly attending church makes them a better person. Some should take a gool luck in the mirror and judge themselves instead of other people.
Marriage is described as a union between two people who love each other, promise to honor each other in sickness and in health, richer or poorer. This union is sacred, yet how many of these couples are divorced today. Maybe would should outlaw divorce since it is against the vows that were taken by this married couple.
Everyone should be treated equally . I hope that they continue to fight for their rights, and hopefully someday they will be able to marry if they so choose.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I totally agree wit you, you
I totally agree wit you, you took the words right out of my mouth. I truly feel this was voted down mostly because of the scare tactic used by the Yes on 1 campaign and how it turned it all around to be about if this passes, your children will taught in school about gay sex....Let's face it, IF "marriage" was such a sacred union.....WHY is the divorce rate SOOOO high??? Perhaps the next time this comes to vote, we as the public will be more educated and open minded to what it means to sincerely accept one another without judgement...."judge not, les ye be judged".........
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.scare tactic? Humm well
scare tactic? Humm well this did not scare me. I voted for what I felt was right... nothing to be scared about here lol
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I'm all for gays to be in a
I'm all for gays to be in a civil union. But just the word marriage is a religious one. And last time I checked most don't approve of it. It's funny; yet hard to see groups that can raise millions of dollars to spend on a campaign; but little Johnny/Jane has to have a bean supper to raise money for an operation. Help your community your in not your beliefs. The moral majority have spoken. This is how we do things in this country. It sucks; not everyone wins. Try again? More power to you. I was shocked to learn that gay lifestyle information, support groups and other media are being plastered all over schools just like L.H.S. is now. I was surprised to see that in California (of all places) the courts went against gay marriage as well as several other states. Tell me; if catholic Mainers are such bigots and everyone in the gay community have so much love for their fellow humans; would you so kindly accept say what they find socially acceptable in the middle east? Where an older man can marry a teenage girl? If this came to our country would you accept it with open arms or would you dismiss this with distaste. Everyone is different.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.If marriage is a religious
If marriage is a religious word then why isn't it taken seriously. The divorce rate is through the roof. There are more affairs now then there ever has been. Churches are closing because they are losing members. Marriage is a word the act of marriage is the important part not the label.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.You're kidding, right? If
You're kidding, right?
If religion is religious why isn't it taken seriously? The moral collapse we are seeing in society is the reason the vote was as close as it was, and why churches are closing their doors. Religion is not taken seriously, never mind marriage. Just keep on teaching the secular humanism religion and evolution as fact and pretty soon you won't have to worry about religion.... at least until Jesus comes back.
John A. Chick
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Colonel Charles Yancey (January 6, 1816)
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Very intelligent comment,
Very intelligent comment, 2sides
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Publik, you can call
Publik, you can call yourself a breeder all you want, as for me, I am a mother. Breeder sounds like something out of a science fiction novel. Seriously, if my husband called me a breeder, there would be hell to pay.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.This wasn’t “Round 1”
This wasn’t “Round 1” – Same Sex Marriage has been one the Maine ballots multiple times, and has been rejected each time by THE PEOPLE.
And just to throw in a wild-card here; I am a 28 year-old SECULAR, and I voted YES. My choice had NOTHING to do with the Church or Conservatism. In my opinion this was no different than a Girl trying to join the Boy Scouts. One big cry for attention.
And to the homosexuals, be happy you are given MORE rights than ANY Heterosexual White Man in this country.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Yes, homosexual marriage is
Yes, homosexual marriage is like a girl trying to join the boy scouts. You nailed it right on the head with you astute observation. And yes, it is so hard being a hertosexual white male. Remember that time when a heterosexual white male was dragged behind a truck?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Nope, but I remember reading
Nope, but I remember reading about a few hundred thousand of em' dying in a fight to end slavery.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.In this day-in-age, it is
In this day-in-age, it is EASIER dude to affirmative action, for a Homosexual or a person of color to get ANY job or ANY apartment. I can’t recall ANY instance where a White Man has been able TO SUE because he didn’t get a job.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.They can sue for being
They can sue for being discriminated against whether they are allowed to marry or not. Doesn't change a thing.. if a white man doesn't get a job because he's a white man, by all means sue. Homosexuals can't sue simply because they don't get a job, they can only sue if they were discriminated against. Just like a woman could sue if she was discriminated against, but not if she simply wasn't qualified for the job.
I guess it's better to be able to sue if you dump hot coffee from McD's in your lap?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.They can sue for being
They can sue for being discriminated against whether they are allowed to marry or not. Doesn't change a thing.. if a white man doesn't get a job because he's a white man, by all means sue. Homosexuals can't sue simply because they don't get a job, they can only sue if they were discriminated against. Just like a woman could sue if she was discriminated against, but not if she simply wasn't qualified for the job.
I guess it's better to be able to sue if you dump hot coffee from McD's in your lap?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I Agree 100%
I Agree 100%
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.As a school teacher the YES
As a school teacher the YES on 1 campaign really ticked me off. I am a strong supporter of No on 1. As part of our demanding curriculum there is no room or need to talk about homosexual marriage in my classroom. I am too busy with the unrealistic demands of meeting the standards left by President Bush. I teach my students tolerance and treating everyone equally no matter the skin color, belief, physical appearance or sex. As a state we just set the example for these children that it is ok to treat a certain group of people differently. It is ok to make sure that people don't get fair treatment. When I teach my students about slavery, woman's rights and the Holocaust my students feel compassion and I always hear from them that its not fair and it doesn't matter about their skin color, if they are a woman or what their belief is because we are all human beings. It makes me sick to know that this state is helping to create a new group to treat unfairly and we are continuing to cancel out that diversity is a good thing. What is the huge problem with being with the one you love? How does a homosexual marriage effect you if you are not gay? Are you afraid you are going to catch it like a disease? When are we finally going to understand that love is love and marriage is a word out of a dictionary. Marriage IS a union of two souls who love each other and want to make the promise to devote themselves to each other for as long as they live. I didn't know that put a limit on who to love and make those promises to. I hope someday we will understand the error of our ways.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.To all gay couples who
To all gay couples who desire the same benefits and protections afforded to all civil marriages: I suggest having a lawyer draw up all the papers required to ensure that you have every advantage of a civil marriage. Then send your legal bills to the Catholic Church, Stand For Marriage Maine, and any other group that financially supported the defeat of marriage equality. In addition, start a legal fund and solicit contributions from those who staunchly argue that gays HAVE equal rights.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.LOL Ohh I Like that, I realy
LOL
Ohh I Like that, I realy do
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.1) what makes anyone think
1) what makes anyone think that only Christians voted YES on one? I know non-Christians who did as well...
2) as for the comment comparing slavery...have you read of William Wilberforce? In the 1700's (before Abe Lincoln) he was a leader in the slave trade..he had a "conversion to Christianity" ...and THEN he became one of the leaders in the movement to abolish slave trade in England... imagine that.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.John Mitchell The Roman
John Mitchell
The Roman Catholic church has been behind the curve throughout its history (ask Galileo and Copernicus, among millions of others that the church has tried to restrain). The bishop of Maine, in response to the reactionary pope (redundant, I know) made sure that all the "good" catholics voted with the church's teaching of hatred, bigotry, and abject ignorance of Christian theology. So far, at least, the RC church has not reverted to burning the heretics, but it's probably only a matter of time.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Maybe next year!!!
Maybe next year!!!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Well, now it is time to tax
Well, now it is time to tax every bigoted church in Maine, and it is not only the Catholics, it is every church that purports to preach the WORD of JESUS. Lets tax them all into infinity.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.RENDER UNTO CAESAR!!!
RENDER UNTO CAESAR!!!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Hey Blue Eyes, Where are you
Hey Blue Eyes, Where are you now!!!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.This vote was closer than I
This vote was closer than I expected. Like I've said before this is only round one. If we can have a dozen referendums on TABOR and its' spawns, then expect more to fight discrimination.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Right on. As I said to my
Right on. As I said to my father this morning "Congrats, you won round 1"
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.What I find humorous is what
What I find humorous is what will you do when this is brought to Maine Supreme Court and overturns the "peoples" veto because it's unconstitutional? Fact is much like Mass. and a few other states it WILL go to the courts and WILL be found as unconstitutional, in turn making this whole process null and void.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.That is why the Yes
That is why the Yes supporters need to push to have the Maine constitution made to say one man and one woman
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Finally, the people have
Finally, the people have spoken! And don't give me this crap about how out-of-state money and people influenced this outcome. As if the NO people didn't have out-of-state help. Now I ask the Sun-Journal to publish the names of every state legislator that voted for homosexual marriage in the first place so that we can 'remember' them come next November!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Here are the names of Maine
Here are the names of Maine Legislators who voted for homosexual marriage.
Rollcall Details for House Roll-call #52
LD 1020 (SP 384)
Main page:
http://www.mainelegislature.org/LawMakerWeb/rollcalls.asp?ID=280031932
The letters after the person's name means Democrat or Republican and the Y means they voted yes to pass LD1020
ADAMS of Portland D Y
BEAUDOIN of Biddeford D Y
BEAULIEU of Auburn R Y
BECK of Waterville D Y
BERRY of Bowdoinham D Y
BLODGETT of Augusta D Y
BOLAND of Sanford D Y
BOLDUC of Auburn D Y
BRYANT of Windham D Y
BUTTERFIELD of Bangor D Y
CAIN of Orono D Y
CAMPBELL of Newfield R Y
CAREY of Lewiston D Y
CASAVANT of Biddeford D Y
CLEARY of Houlton D Y
COHEN of Portland D Y
CONNOR of Kennebunk D Y
CORNELL du HOUX of Brunswick D Y
CROCKETT of Augusta D Y
DILL of Cape Elizabeth D Y
DOSTIE of Sabattus D Y
DRISCOLL of Westbrook D Y
DUCHESNE of Hudson D Y
EATON of Sullivan D Y
EBERLE of South Portland D Y
EVES of North Berwick D Y
FLAHERTY of Scarborough D Y
FLEMINGS of Bar Harbor D Y
FLOOD of Winthrop R Y
GILBERT of Jay D Y
GILES of Belfast R Y
GOODE of Bangor D Y
HARLOW of Portland D Y
HASKELL of Portland D Y
HAYES of Buckfield D Y
HILL of York D Y
HINCK of Portland D Y
HOGAN of Old Orchard Beach D Y
HUNT of Buxton D Y
JONES of Mount Vernon D Y
KAENRATH of South Portland D Y
KENT of Woolwich D Y
KRUGER of Thomaston D Y
LEGG of Kennebunk D Y
LOVEJOY of Portland D Y
MacDONALD of Boothbay D Y
MAGNAN of Stockton Springs D Y
MARTIN of Orono D Y
MAZUREK of Rockland D Y
McCABE of Skowhegan D Y
MILLER of Somerville D Y
MORRISON of South Portland D Y
NELSON of Falmouth D Y
O'BRIEN of Lincolnville D Y
PENDLETON of Scarborough D Y
PEOPLES of Westbrook D Y
PERCY of Phippsburg D Y
PERRY of Calais D Y
PETERSON of Rumford D Y
PIEH of Bremen D Y
PILON of Saco D Y
PINGREE of North Haven D Y
PIOTTI of Unity D Y
PRESCOTT of Topsham R Y
PRIEST of Brunswick D Y
RANKIN of Hiram D Y
RICHARDSON of Carmel R Y
ROTUNDO of Lewiston D Y
RUSSELL of Portland D Y
SANBORN of Gorham D Y
SCHATZ of Blue Hill D Y
SIROIS of Turner D Y
SMITH of Monmouth D Y
STEVENS of Bangor D Y
STRANG BURGESS of Cumberland R Y
STUCKEY of Portland D Y
SUTHERLAND of Chapman D Y
TREAT of Hallowell D Y
TRINWARD of Waterville D Y
VALENTINO of Saco D Y
VAN WIE of New Gloucester D Y
WAGNER of Lyman D Y
WAGNER of Lewiston D Y
WALSH INNES of Yarmouth D Y
WATSON of Bath D Y
WEBSTER of Freeport D Y
WELSH of Rockport D Y
WHEELER of Kittery D Y
WRIGHT of Berwick D Y
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.dwstick SJ did publish the
dwstick
SJ did publish the name of the legislators how they voted and what area they cover. You can find them in the article about them passing the know ex-law. we do need to remember their name for next november.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.YES thats a very Good
YES thats a very Good idear. I would like to know who the people are that tried to sneek this same sex marriage law into effect with out the people having any say and that Gov signed it. Very sneeky bunch. Also the no side spent almost twice the amount of money as the yes side did and still failed to brain wash the most of us. People wanting same sex marriage is proof of MOREAL DECAY in this country Thank You to everyone that voted YES
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Just a note: Even though I
Just a note: Even though I was pretty firm in the thought I would vote Yes, you know what was the clincher?? A No on 1 activist referred to a heterosexual woman with children as a "Breeder"--how absolutely disgusting--take your signs and money and leave. Lead us to our own lives, morals and "narrow point of view".
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.and where exactly would you
and where exactly would you like us to go,
wa are maniers too you know.
and good god you're upset about being called a breeder? have you heard some of the things we're called?
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.So because you feel you have
So because you feel you have been called degrading names it is ok for you to spew vomitrotious words towards non gay individuals. sounds like point one in the lack of morals arguement to me.....2 wrongs dont make it right.... its no different than a black person walking the streets calling every white person they see cracker... Its just wrong.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I'm going to second that
I'm going to second that concered KD. There seems to be some sort of double standard here.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.