Is it ethical for a state representative to use BDN to air her views? How much did she pay for the space? Or was she paid by BDN to push their agenda? Either way, it is an abuse of her office and she should be reprimanded for her actions.

And it may be perfectly legal, no matter how she got her opinon into print. But, it is still an ethical violation, in my opinion. Will BDN print the view of a rep that's opposed to gay marriage?

Oops! I'd better retract my first two comments. I overlooked that she was rebutting an article by Rep. Emrich. My bad. They both violated ethics rules, in my book. There, now I feel better.

Mr Parsons: This is not a criticism, but when you wrote "my bad" it sounded funny coming from you. I know it's you...don't get me wrong....oh well...guess that is some latest slang. Yes, I have heard it before......sounds weird to me every time I hear it, but get your meaning.

Just a few responses to a few points from Rep Emily Cain.

Most people do not want any children to suffer because they are being raised by parents who are being denied certain benefits and protections that married heterosexual parents have.

Yes, it is instructive that what some predicted in Massachusetts has not come to pass. But then , a lot of the dire predictions don't occur.

And finally, and maybe most importantly: It is so true that it is the quality of parenting and nurturing a child receives that has such an impact on the rest of their lives. Most of us are aware that children raised in homes where the parents are heterosexual many times, and too often, do not have the benefit of a good upbringing. The environments they are raised in feature some degree of dysfunction, too much dissension,etc. There is just no generalization about what environment is guaranteed to produce healthy , well-adjusted children with a sense of caring for others. There are no guarantees....but a child raised in a loving and nurturing home with same sex parents has just as much of a chance of growing up with a good and healthy sense of self and living a productive and accomplished life as one raised in a household with a heterosexual couple.

cher - I've got 4 kids ranging from 19 to 27. And I work with youth at church. My bad is just the tip of the iceberg.

Mr Parsons: I hear you. My oldest child happens to be just one year older than your oldest one. Yes, it gets pretty "interesting"....the different generations and differences in speech,etc.

EJParsons, what makes you think Legislators give up their right to free speech when they take the oath of office? There is nothing at all unethical about any public official writing an op-ed piece in a newspaper.

Very good points made. I think we all have a view of what we think the perfect stting for raising children is. As I get older my perceptions of what is ideal are changing. Some of the most dysfuntional people I know have come from the 'perfect' setting.

ryan - I'm for all elected officials using PBS and NPR while they're running for office and while they're in office. I'm not for any of them pushing their agendas through newspapers, television, or over the Internet, with the exception of their own .gov sites. It's just a quirk of mine. If all elected officials were allowed to use the government run broadcast and Internet systems, we would all have a chance to get into politics, not just the rich or popular.

EJParsons -

I just love that an elected official with an actual opinion about fairness and equality is described by you as "pushing an agenda." Yes, in fact, fairness, equality, and freedom from religion are the American "agenda." Last time I checked, it's what the entire country was founded on. So...BRAVO to Rep. Cain for taking an actual stand on a real American issue. I wish more elected officials would do the same. As for your assertion that Rep. Cain used her money and influence to get her piece in the paper, remember that It doesn't cost anything to write a letter to the editor. Knock yourself out.

Well said, Rep. Cain. No on 1!

EJ, of course it is ethical. You are objecting because she makes her points intelligently, without hyperbole and rhetoric or provocative predictions of doom.

Vote NO on ONE

Interesting analysis of the first "Yes on 1" campaign advertisement.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/9/16/9552/36940

" One glaring inaccuracy Sudbday finds is that the Associated Press headline used in the ad is completely fictional. The Associated Press never actually ran anything with the headline "Homosexual Advocacy Group Accuses Maine Diocese of Violating Tax Law," and it never would. Why? Because the AP does not use the word "homosexual" in any story or headline. Not only is it inflammatory and outdated, but the AP’s own style guide restricts the use of "homosexual." "

Way to go guys! Your doing the "No on 1" side a great service!

Ms Cain, You are right on! Please keep up the good work, ever thought about a run for Governor?

Clearing up Distortions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Gm7HvaCW2k

William - Do you think it is ethical for the President to neglect his presidential duties in order to run all over the country leading pep rallies for his left wing agendas? Do you think he, or anyone else in politics, should go on the Letterman show or other TV shows, news shows excluded, to spread his message? And do you believe that those running for office should be allowed to spend billions during the election season all for the purpose of going to DC to pay back those that gave them the money that got them there? Let them broadcast through their .gov Internet sites, PBS and NPR. And they can use the 2 CSPAN channels for national debates and campaigning. Television news, newspapers, and Internet sites that deal with reporting politics should remain neutral and should not favor one opinion over another. Of course, that will never happen as long as there's money and greed involved.

This is excellent. Thank you so much for this! It means a lot to have someone in the state legislature (which passed this bill in the first place) speak out in favor of equality for ALL citizens.

EJ, I think the president is an ethical man. His goal of a transparent administration is why you see him on TV. The man who broke the world, GWB, did it quietly and secretively. His failures in life were obscured by his family so as not to make him look like the fool he was. We elected this man to make the necessary changes and I would trust this president to make life and death choices for me before I would trust an guy whose family fortune comes from oil. This president is a constitutional scholar.

And that's not the subject of this Op Ed, EJ!

Vote No on One!

The arguments opposing gay marriage are irrational or based on religious dogma which is irrational by default. The real issue is that the heterosexual majority holds the high ground and can vote to repeal the same sex marriage law. Note that I didn’t say “moral high ground” although they believe they do have that too. The real moral high ground was taken by the legislature in passing this bill, knowing that a majority of their constituents would disagree. It was an act of bravery and fairness.

William - Don't hurt your knees during your Obama worship time. I'm sorry, but there is nothing ethical about Obama or transparent about his administration and their underhanded dealings. He's got you duped. I wouldn't trust this man with anything in my personal life, because he would try his best to take it over and us it to his own advantage. As for being a constitutional scholar, he's also studied under avowed Socialists and Marxists, sat in a church for 20 years while his Rev preached hatred, sat on a board and raised funds in the house of a domestic terrorist, and is in bed with ACORN, SEIU and some pretty powerful union thugs. And you do realize, I'm sure, that all the intelligence in the world is worthless if there is no wisdom involved. I just wonder what he's going to do when he loses in 2012? I'm sure the new ACORN (under a new name) will hire him as their CEO.

One word for you, EJ.... "Hallliburton." ACORN had a few bad employees earning 25 grand and fired them. Halliburton is THE bad employee earning billions.

Amazing that you have one word against the Bush administration, and there are many, many that cloud Obama's halo.

Take this to the appropriate comment section. I have many many words for the Bush administration.

EJParsons wrote:

"Is it ethical for a state representative to use BDN to air her views? How much did she pay for the space? Or was she paid by BDN to push their agenda? Either way, it is an abuse of her office and she should be reprimanded for her actions."

What about YOUR agenda, based on hate, dogma, lies, and fraud ?

So she is supposed to remain silent while cowardly little toadies like you get to pollute every forum, daily, with your hypocrisy, dogma and BS ?

Lets talk about YOUR agenda. Your agenda to keep people oppressed, based on your facile interpretation of the Bible, your perpetuation of hate, your fear-mongering, your incessant lies and distractions.

You hate the idea of equality, you hate the idea that you won't be able to use your dogma and church to judge people you don't know, have never met, have repeatedly shown that you know absolutely NOTHING about.

You represent a status quo that a lot of people are ashamed of, and a hypocrisy that is insurmountable and supportable only by an inflexible and aggressive assertion of a dogma that has kept people miserable, caused children to commit suicide, and done unmitigated and almost incomprehensible harm.

Shame on you, you hypocrite. We know Emily's "agenda", at least she's HONEST about it !

EJParsons...this was not reported as a "news" piece but as a "Guest Column" and most likely was printed on the editorial page of the BDN which is where it should have been published. Both sides of this debate have the right (and yes, the duty) to put there side of the argument in front of the voters. While you may disagree with the publishing of the "Guest Column", it's the right of the BDN to publish it. It was identified as a "Guest Column" and properly identified the author who wrote it.

The media has been involved in politics since the day of Ben Franklin. Both sides have used it to there advantage and continue to do so today.

JD2008:Great explanation from you at 3PM. Thanks for the accurate clarification.

WilliamDS:re 10:16 AM Yes,it came across.No insults....no inflammatory language....just a commentary on her position.Very noticeable and her right to do so.

AionCA - Sorry, but I can't respond to your rant. As soon as you linked hate with my name, I quit reading. I have no hate for anyone.

JD - You're right. But I would still like to have all the politics limited to PBS, NPR and the politician's .gov sites. If the news outlets are going to participate, they need to be unbiased in their reporting and fair in presenting both sides. Also, they should not be able to pay a cent to any politician they quote or print. Just my opionion.

Awful busy, that thumbs down group. How childish.

And the news outlets have been biased, EJ?

They are and but they have only thumbs downed on my posts, EJ. That makes you suspect... :-)

Actually, posts from both sides have been thumbed down. I don't play that game. And, yes, the news outlets are biased. You were joking, right?

Not joking at all. Biased because they don't support your view? I don't play that game either but this is not the appropriate comment section for this debate. You need to go to the "Letters" section. This is the Op Ed.

Biased because they only promote their own view, left, right or center. News agencies and newspapers are supposed to report the news. Sadly, they quit doing that decades ago. Everything has to have an agenda nowadays. Personally, I'm agendad out.

What do you think their motives are? New agencies hire educated people, EJ. Is that your point?

news...*

"Personally, I'm agendad out."

Said with eyes firmly closed. Hilariously self deluded.

Everyone should immediately change their user profiles and use an email address with gmail, yahoo, etc. Don't use your home email address, there's a hacker on the loose. (Don't worry, he'll never get mine!)

William - It all depends on what the meaning of "educated" is. I think "indoctrinated" better suits.

That's a paranoid term, EJ. Sorry.....it's nebulous and meaningless. "Educated" really has meaning.

And don't use your real name. It's too easy for this sick stalker to google it.

Calm down Anna, there must be a logical explanation. I'm sure the BDN crew would know if they had a hacker on the loose.

I've heard of the mad hatter but not the mad hacker.

Anne and everyone: It is outrageous that he posted the personal info of a poster who has not posted here for a long time. People have a right to their privacy. I doubt the BDN people will allow that kind of thing to continue. If a poster wishes to give out personal info that is their decision....but no one else should be divulging another's private information.

I like PBS and NPR but do not think politics should be limited to certain sites, or media. Is one implying FOX also be shut out re politics???

Everyone needs to relax. I post here often and I have not received emails or phone calls from a hacker. What could he do with the information anyway? Anne,have you had emails that are suspect?

I'm here for you gals....:) Nothing can harm you now....

lol oh Tele, you're so easy to love... but I got here first.

I guess my post earlier was misconstrued. I am not at all concerned about myself posting here.....my point was that someone today (a "new" poster) apparently posted the address and phone# of a previous poster. I was saying that was inappropriate....that's all.....geez.....

Step aside pal :)

What time was that, cher, and on what thread?

WilliamDS: Re 7:06 PM I have never had any problem whatsoever that way, either.....

He was just spooling Anna up.. If she would of ignored him he would of gone away.. He has no info on her.

And as far as the address he came up with, yahoo people search...

WilliamDS: Let's see if I can answer that. I am not online a lot during the day...so when I do get on for 10 mins or so, I have missed tons of stuff (well, don't think I have really missed much....smile). I think it was around, I don't know.....sometime this afternoon (but it was removed), that a "new" poster wilson_oglethorpe (or something like that) posted some info about a poster who has not posted here for mos (maybe about 4 mos or so) Not sure if you were posting then or not. (4 mos. ago.) That's about it.

Hornets nest!!!!!!!!!!

Nor'easter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

6:22 pm, it is outrageous and I know this person has harassed and threatened people in other ways. It is common sense to take precautions. A word to the wise should be sufficient.

"Everyone should immediately change their user profiles and use an email address with gmail, yahoo, etc. Don't use your home email address, there's a hacker on the loose. (Don't worry, he'll never get mine!) "

LOL!

Amazing how far off track this forum got. I think it was a great column, entirely appropriate, and in the right sort of venue. Critics like EJ should worry more about politicians soap boxing as part of the election process. And, as you pointed out, Ms. Cain was responding to another (soap boxing?) member of the Legislature who happens to be of the opposing (and minority) party.

I'm from Boston and I think you folks in Maine are very tolerant and thoughtful regarding this issue. We've had same-sex marriage in Massachusetts for a while and it is a no-brainer. We wouldn't want to go backwards at this point. We just include everyone and it works like a charm. It looks like you Mainers are poised to do the right thing and vote to maintain Equality in Maine. Three cheers from Boston!

Payson3: Thanks so much for your thoughtful commentary. Maine is a great state....but so is Massachusetts. Not sure what will happen in Maine in Nov. Time will tell. I am not sure if you are aware how much certain churches (including the Catholic church) are working to repeal this.....pouring time, money and effort to repeal it. So, and I speak as a supporter of marriage for same sex couples, I am not so sure. It may be close...it may not be. As you do not live here, you might not be aware of the great efforts being put into repealing it here in Maine.

For all the fear and thinly veiled hate, it's funny that no one can point to social disasters of the sort threatened by the opponents in the states that have permitted same-sex couples to marry. Oh they've TRIED to make lists and post them in other comment sections of the BDN, only to have them summarily dismantled and shown to be baseless and irrelevant. If letting people who are in love marry is so very destructive to the social fabric, why is it they can't prove it in any substantial manner ?

But one can see what the results are in states that repeal or prevent them. Yes, I'm talking about kids that kill themselves again, a subject that I know is such a downer that the opponents of same-sex marriage refuse to even acknowledge, much less address it.

Who could blame them, since their agenda is one that has always perpetuated despair, confusion, prejudice, mockery, subjugation, and even murder ?

THEIR message is loud and clear - RESERVED for those who are NOT "lesser" people - you will never, no matter how committed to the one you eventually find who will actually love you back, for who and what you are, be seen in the eyes of the law, the state, and society, be less than an abomination - much less be simply equal !

But hey, the opponents have the world of God and the Love of Christ on their side !

Or DO they ?

It's time that the opponents of same-sex marriage butt-out of the business of other churches and stop using the state to further their agenda of hate and oppression, for them to have some integrity and some honesty for a change, and to live and let live.

Please choose kindness instead of hate, equality instead of hypocrisy, to live and let live - instead of to judge ( least ye be ? ) and condemn to death.

Please vote "No".

AionCA: You express, so well, what you feel and believe.

Vote NO on 1.

9/18/09 at 6:27 PM, AionCA, yes, thank you very much.

Vote NO on ONE