The Roman Catholic Church, in general, and Bishop Richard Malone, in particular, have been verbally abused, vilified, and denounced during the Question 1 campaign.

What terrible thing have they done? They have asserted that marriage is an institution established and based upon the principle of a union of one man and one woman, and that such an institution is essential to a healthy society and should be defended and maintained.

Is this a new idea? The same-sex marriage advocates and their media allies have managed to recast this campaign as an effort by religious leaders to take away the equal legal rights of persons of the same sex to marry in Maine. But same-sex marriage is not now, and has never been, ever, the law in Maine. After 400 years in which marriage between one man and one woman has been unchallenged, the Maine legislature proposed to change the law in 2009. On Nov. 3, the voters will decide whether the law will be changed to allow, for the first time in Maine, same-sex marriage.

As of the year 2000, there was not a single country, anywhere in the world, and not a single U.S. state, that recognized same-sex marriage. There are now six countries, representing fewer than two percent of the planet's population, that allow same-sex marriage; 98 percent of all people live in countries that do not.

Today, in this country, 45 states, with 95 percent of the population, do not recognize marriages between persons of the same sex. Yet, the Catholic Church and its bishop are attacked mercilessly for defending this universal principle.

What would one expect a Catholic bishop to fight for? Excise taxes? School consolidation?

In 1999 and 2000, the Roman Catholic diocese spent months working with advocates for gay rights and negotiated a mutually acceptable bill prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing, and credit, that was jointly submitted to the legislature, passed, but rejected by the voters. The church has fought against invidious discrimination and worked for ensuring all people are treated with respect and dignity. The church has supported laws guaranteeing health insurance benefits and other rights for "domestic partners." But, the church views marriage as something much greater than a contract or collection of legal rights, and it is obligated to speak up and defend the institution regardless of the consequences.

In 1995 and 2000, during debates on proposed laws to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation in Maine, some opponents (who attacked the Catholic Church and its bishop for supporting gay rights) argued that it would lead to same-sex marriage. Those arguments were dismissed as silly, and the opponents were personally ridiculed by the same advocates and their media allies who now are pushing for same-sex marriage.

If a homosexual person has a right to marry someone of the same sex in order to be happy and equal, what about a bisexual person? It would be unfair to force bisexual persons to choose a spouse of one gender, so the law must be changed to allow them to have two spouses.

But why stop there? Many individuals cannot be truly happy married to only one person, when they love two or three. If we abandon the principles on which societies have based marriage for more than 2000 years, what reason would there be to stop at this or to prohibit polygamy? Is anyone really surprised that the church and its bishop would raise these issues and stand up for marriage?

Michael Poulin, of Lewiston, is a lay member of the Public Policy Committee of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland.