Let's keep it civil

Richard, I would like to thank you for reminding me of something that put still more perspective on the church aspect of this question. Yet another reaon really to vote no as this further blows the arguement of churches being forced to perform marriages out of the consideration.

I have a niece who settled in the Portland area near her parents after college. She rather takes after her mother in matters om employment and society. To put it delicately, she is what we refer to as a "social climber." Everything in her life, from her extra curricula activities in high schoo and college, her "friends", the college she attended, her career choice have all been with one goal in mind, climbing the slocial ladder at whatever cost. Her first husband (relationships are disposable even the father of your children and your children are there only to propel you uip the ladder) was a very nice man from a well respected family in the community.He had the right name and sufficiant family money and standing to get her moving ing the right direction and so she latched on to him. She also secured a series of progrssively more prestigious positions in a varoty of Portland area firms. Unless you are familiar with Portland "society" you are not aware of the "religious hiararchy" in that society. I don't know how it is now, but 20 years ago the place to be was Woodfords Corner Congregational Church. This was, probably still is, a massive facility of the most ornate variety that would put many Catholic Cathedrals to shame. now my niece was not the church going type as it was definitely in conflict with her social climbing bent and the young man was otherwise affiliated. My niece, however, viewed her upcoming nuptuals not so much as the joyous union that she should have but as a perfect opportunity to put the spotlight clearly upon herself in all social aspects and at the same time benefit greatly her career, her material possessions and her purse. The best way to achiev this was an extavaganza at Woodfords Corner Congrgatioanl Church, wherein lie her problem. The clergy of that fine institution will not marry you and you can not use the facilities unless you are a member of atleast one year. You do this by formally joining the church and dropping a donation envelop into the collection plate for 52 weeks. Then and only then will there be any consideration to you being wed by the clergy there or in that facility. And that is exactly what she and he did and one year later they were able to get approval to marry in a way that satisfied her "social" needs. My point is that churches and individual religious already decline to marry couples for a variety of reasons, some as base as not having forked over 10% of income for the previous year, allowing the current equity of marriage law to stand will notc change a thing. Thanks again Richard for the memory.

Folks other than Catholics disagree with gay marriage also. And I would also like to hear triumphs list of "lost rights"... you can't lose something you never had to begin with.

Triumph, I have to throw the BS flag on your statement. What rights has the Catholic Church taken away from Maine families?
"Liberals love America like O.J. loved Nicole." Ann Coulter

The Question now, Mr. Matthews: "Is Maine a state with liberty and justice for all or just those the Catholic church approves of?" The CC will close 9 churches and schools in Maine this year due to lack of money. The Maine Diocese has spent over a half million dollars trying to take away the rights of a few thousand families. That is none of my business, and law is none of theirs, but Catholics? There is where your money is going.