Longtime gay marriage opponents form PAC in Maine

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Two longtime opponents of gay rights and same-sex marriage initiatives are forming a political action committee to oppose Maine's same-sex marriage referendum.

Michael Heath and Paul Madore said Tuesday they've formed the No Special Rights PAC to oppose November's ballot measure asking voters if same-sex marriage should be legalized.

Heath and Madore have held leadership roles going back to the early 1990s opposing gay rights and gay marriage initiatives in Maine. Heath was executive director of the Christian Civic League for 15 years until his resignation in 2009, and Madore once headed a group called Maine Grassroots Coalition that opposed sexual orientation laws.

Madore said he's ready to "take off the gloves" in the campaign leading up to November's election.

"It's going to be a fight," he said.

Heath and Madore's entry into the campaign isn't surprising given their active roles opposing past gay rights initiatives, said David Farmer, spokesman for the Dirigo Family PAC in support of the referendum.

Although Heath and Madore have been known to use sharp rhetoric in the past, Farmer said gay marriage supporters want to keep the debate "reasonable" this time around.

"Our goal throughout the campaign is to be respectful of people with differing views and to make our argument that same-sex couples should be able to enter into the same type of committed and responsible relationship as other couples."

The Legislature three years ago approved a law legalizing same-sex marriage in Maine, but opponents forced the question to voters, who then overturned the law 53 to 47 percent.

Gay marriage supporters this year turned in enough signatures from registered voters to again force the matter to a vote. If Mainers approve gay marriage this time around, the state would be the first to do so by a popular vote.

As the name implies, the goal of the No Special Rights PAC is to convince voters that allowing members of the same sex to get married amounts to "special rights," Heath said.

"There's no basis in nature for a right to sodomy or a right to call two men or two women who are choosing to relate to one another sexually as a marriage," he said. "There's no intrinsic or natural right to that. So we believe that these are special rights."

Heath and Madore's PAC has yet to raise any money, and the amount of funds raised will determine what it does during the campaign, Heath said.

But it's too early to speculate what kind of impact the PAC might have, Farmer said.

"At this point, we're not aware of their strategy or the tactics they'll use, or whether Mr. Heath will be a successful fundraiser or a spokesman," Farmer said. "We just don't know how he'll fit in with the opposition."

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.

Advertisement

Comments

JOANNE MOORE's picture

Heath & Madore......

...have been spending way too much time together. And way too much time thinking about sex - other people's, not their own.

Hey, guys, there are magazines out there if you are that interested.

Geeze, it's Spring! Don't you have some chores to do around the house? Like, cleaning out the closet? Hmmmmmm?

gay marriage in Maine

It appears to me that both Mr. Madore & Mr. Heath really need to find something more to do with their time. If 2 people really love one another it is nobodys business but theirs and God. Leave them alone, and it certainly isn't the senates business, nor the legislators business either. Politics have no right trying to interfere with peoples rights under the law. They definately need to leave religion out of it as well.

Audrey Alcala's picture

Just who does it hurt if two

Just who does it hurt if two people of the same sex want to unite, legally??? It harms NO ONE! It has nothing to do with religion, though
good ole Michael Heath...who claims to be a good Christian, but teaches
hate.....is out there preaching that this union is against all religions!! Anyone, heterosexual, homosexuals,blacks, whites..we should all be able to marry whomever we want to share our life with. Our goal is all the same...LOVE!! If marriage is such a sacred thing...why are so many allowed to marry 7,8,9 times??? Look at all the married famous folks,several marriages, affairs,government people as well! And people are so fearful that allowing gay people to marry will destroy the sacrament of marriage??? Pleaseeeeeeee....

Joseph Keelan's picture

!

Here! Here!

Joseph Keelan's picture

What are trying to say?

The story says in part: "There's no basis in nature for a right to sodomy or a right to call two men or two women who are choosing to relate to one another sexually as a marriage," he said. "There's no intrinsic or natural right to that. So we believe that these are special rights."

What do they mean by employing the word 'sodomy'?

Maine repealed its sodomy law long ago. The 1970's, in fact. Also, in 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all sodomy laws, making clear that private, adult sexual conduct cannot be criminalized, so why are Madore and Heath using this as part of their argument?

It's hardly a rational (or accurate) but more to the point — they're using tactics to incite people's irrational hate as they clearly display their revulsion for homosexuality.

Mike Lachance's picture

NEWSFLASH: GAY SEX IS SODOMY (Among other things)

This according to the Bible (Old Testament)

from Latin: peccatum Sodomiticum, or "sin of Sodom."
Genesis 18-20

You can check all this out on your own:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy

Mike Lachance's picture

FACTS: This nation is

FACTS:
This nation is governed by the people, for the people and of the people. Not by the lawyers, of the courts and for the politicians.

Therefore if the people continually vote DOWN gay marriage, and the politicians keep pandering to their special interest group by passing laws that the people repeatedly vote down, there is a problem.

Just because you feel being gay is "normal" is irrelevant. If society says it is NOT, then you cannot legislate otherwise. Especially if the PEOPLE keep telling you otherwise.

OP ED:
As far as harm to others and society, I could argue ad nauseum that your ad hominem attacks are wholly unrealistic. Society suffers when it embraces lifestyles that are unnatural, immoral and perverted. Yes, that includes many heterosexual pastimes also.

You've got your opinions, I've got mine. This is America.

I don't "hate" anyone, but when someone throws their disgusting lifestyle in my face and demands I accept it I'm not going to have anything nice to say about said person/people.

Joseph Keelan's picture

REBUTTAL:

My pastime is gardening, not being homosexual and although you may think that's simply parsing words, I'd like to encourage you to be as specific as possible when you castigate fellow citizens.

And if "lifestyle" was a word I'd use to describe my life, I'd certainly be spending my days sunning on a sandy beach. But, sadly, no. We do the same things that, perhaps, you do: Breakfast; walk the dog; work; lunch; work some more; commute home; dinner; a movie maybe or how about a book instead? Bedtime and do all over again tomorrow.

I don't demand you accept anything about me personally. I do, however, expect that you look upon me as a citizens of this country, just like you — not as some unnatural pervert that garners your disgust.

Mike Lachance's picture

You cannot legislate

You cannot legislate "normal"... in as much as unnatural goes, it is what it is. The laws of both nature and God dictate this. If you deny Christ, thats your choice, but denying nature is the ultimate fraud. Denying both Christ *and* nature is simply insane. Legislating it is even more outlandish.

While i DO respect you as a fellow sinner (we all our), I do not accept that sin be legislated into the "norm". The laws of nature are against the Gay Lobby on this, and the laws of God are above all. As Christians we must rebuke, not judge. I do not judge homosexuals, but I do rebuke them for their lifestyle. Only God can judge.

To accept what is 100% against the Christian faith and is an abomination to God is not gonna happen.
However, my hand is open to anyone who needs it. Gay, straight, or other. I do not accept living a homosexual lifestyle, but I will tolerate the fact that we all choose to live our personal lives personally. I will not accept that personal lifestyle be publicly, politically or institutionally elevated to "normal", nor will I accept a mandated "normal" for something so unnatural.

Do what you will in your own privacy. The choices you make (and/or continue to make) without true repentance will be judged by God at His judgement seat, (and no one else). In the meantime I will express my opposition to living the gay lifestyle and legislating "normalcy" to homosexuality as clearly and fairly as I can.

Jonathan Albrecht's picture

There isn't?

"There's no basis in nature for a right to sodomy or a right to call two men or two women who are choosing to relate to one another sexually as a marriage,".... There is no basis in nature for marriage at all. Marriage is an institution of government and religion not nature. To deny marriage to homosexuals is irrational as every court which has looked at the issue has found.

Joseph Keelan's picture

Well, then. . .

Do you believe, then, that homosexuals are unnatural? What, then do you suggest for those citizens who are denied the right to marry? All because they're "unnatural"? That's hardly fair — or accurate.

Jonathan Albrecht's picture

I must have written this badly

All forms of human sexual expression are natural i.e. human sexuality is a continum of orientations, actions, preferences which are the natural expected results of human psychosexual development. Since marriage is a purely social arrangement any socially acceptable arrangement is perfectly OK. No rational reason exists to deny marriage to anyone except where real identifiable social harm will be done i.e. marriage among close relatives for example. Marriage Equality is the last great civil rights struggle of the 20t century.

Joseph Keelan's picture

Thank you.

Nicely put.

Mike Lachance's picture

Ah yes, anyone opposed gay

Ah yes, anyone opposed gay marriage is a bigot?
Logic? Using logic results in the answer that gay marriage is wrong. It's when you throw logic out the window that it suddenly becomes viable.

"Bigots and homophobes! Bigots and homophobes! Bigots and homophobes! Bigots and homophobes!"

If those opposed to same sex marriage were to apply the same tactics used by those supporting it, the cry would be "rapists and child molestors!rapists and child molestors!rapists and child molestors!"

 's picture

The problem with your analogy

The problem with your analogy is that the overwhelming majority of rapists and child molesters are heterosexuals. You really should get your facts straight before making a homophobic slur.

Mike Lachance's picture

Yes Dan, and the majority of

Yes Dan, and the majority of those opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage are niether bigots nor homophobes. You've just backed up my point precisely.

 's picture

By definition they ARE.

By definition they ARE. Can't you guys go and buy a dictionary?

Mike Lachance's picture

No Dan, they arent. Perhaps

No Dan, they arent. Perhaps *you* need the dictionary.

DEFINITION
Bigot : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

(No hatred, and we all tolerate homosexuals in society every day)

DEFINITION
Homophobe : a person who fears or hates homosexuals and homosexuality.

(No fear and no hatred at all here, Dan)

 's picture

I'm amazed you can

I'm amazed you can rationalize your hatred and bigotry and deny it. So be it, on to November.

Mike Lachance's picture

Seriously Dan, you missed

Seriously Dan, you missed that target by a mile.
Perhaps you should stop using boomerangs.

 's picture

when bigots and homophobes

when bigots and homophobes combine, this is going to get very dirty, and the newspapers and TV stations are going to be complicit in it. This referendum would be so simple if people only used logic instead of fear and hate.

Advertisement

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...