Catholics put cash behind Question 1

Bill Anderson (in this article) states he wants to see separation of church and state and yet it says he contributed money for the repeal. That doesn't even make sense!

I'll be voting YES ON 1.

This was a refreshing article to read.

No on 1. Equality for all.

This is one of the reasons people are streaming out of churches. Modern people like to think for themselves, which is not good for organized religion.

I do not agree with the man in this photo.

Vote No on 1.

Score one for the moral majority. Vote "YES" on Question 1.

I don't want the Catholic church dictating my life. I am not a Catholic and never have been, why should they decide who I can marry in a civil marriage. Vote no on 1.

If the church felt it had an obligation to speak "in great love", it wouldn't be backing an effort to punish and harass an unfashionable minority. What it really feels it has an obligation to do is dictate and control, just as it's tried to do since Roman times. As history marches forward and the church becomes less and less relevant to what's going on in the real world, its automatic response is to tighten its fist further and further, and the inevitable result of doing that is finding one day that you hold nothing but your own clenched fist. The sooner that day comes, the better off all humanity will be.

In order to really have a separation of church and state on the issue of marriage would be to remove all governmental recognition and benefits granted to people who are married. After all, if marriage is only for those who belong to certain churches that wish to dictate who can and cannot get married then the government must stop granting the legal perks to people who are married. That would mean no more entitlement to Social Security when your husband or wife dies, no more medical insurance for your spouse or children, no more hospital access or control over your family's medical treatment if they cannot speak for themselves, etc.

Instead of the government sanctioning and giving special rights to those who have a religious ceremony performed they need to enact domestic registration or civil union licensing and grant the perks currently given to married couples to ALL couples. Take religion OUT of this CIVIL RIGHTS issue once and for all. No more special benefits for marriage! Someone needs to start a petition and raise money to get this idea on the ballot. Maine needs to stop giving heterosexual families special rights that it doesn't give homosexual families. All the children of homosexual parents deserve the same protections and rights as the children of heterosexual parents.

I would really like someone from these churches explain to me exactly WHY they are trying to do something that WILL hurt children. Apparently they didn't learn anything from all those abuse cases at the hands of priests. What would God frown on ,more...not having a religion fueled temper tantrum over allowing homosexuals to refer to their commitment to each other as marriage and get equal rights and protections or harming innocent children by denying them the rights and protections every child should have?

Why on earth does the Catholic Church have a tendency to try to protect everything and everyone BUT the innocent children?

If you want to ensure that EVERY child in Maine is protected and has full access to medical benefits, survivor benefits, access to government programs then you MUST vote to legally recognize their parents' union. If you don't, those children of homosexual parents are NOT legally recognized as the child of said parents. If they aren't legally recognized they can't be added to insurance policies, can't get medical treatment in emergency situations if the birth parent isn't present to sign, etc.

VOTE NO on 1 if you want to protect ALL children in Maine!

Centaurmyst: You raise a troubling point in your intelligent post there. "Apparently they didn't learn anything from all those abuse cases at the hands of priests." Yes, apparently, and sadly, it appears they did not.

Hundreds of thousands of Mainers are going to vote "YES" on this issue. And you're sadly mistaken if you think they are voting on a civil rights issue. That couldn't be farther from the truth. This is a moral issue plain and simple, and millions of people across this great nation of ours feel the same way I do.

1. If the Catholic Church is going to use their tax exempt status for political means they should be taxed.

2. The religious right in this country looks from the outside like the American Taliban. A religious entity that wants to inject it's beliefs on the country and make it's religious rules the Law of the Land

Reports of the demise of the Catholic Church are greatly exaggerated and premature.

As long as the Church stands for something, people will come. Otherwise, they'd be Unitarians.

MaineSurvivor2...I think you are wrong. Everyone knows at least one homosexual person now. A lot of people have at least one homosexual relative. There is a face to homosexuality in this day and age and it won't be easy for people to vote to discriminate against someone they know or who is a relative. You can bet that a lot of the people who donated at church aren't going to vote how you think they will. Sitting in church and feeling pressured to donate will usually make people donate. That doesn't mean they will vote and it doesn't mean that the ones that do vote will vote the way you want them to once they are all alone behind that curtain.

Everyone knows that this fight isn't about protecting marriage. If people gave a rat's patootie about marriage half of all marriages wouldn't end up in divorce. Let's just call a spade a spade, shall we? This is about FEAR and religious people using the bible to thump others over the head with because they think if they point their fingers at someone else people won't notice how rotten they behave. This is why a lot of people steer clear of organized religion and churches. The second mankind puts their hands on something they soil it. To me, God is about love, peace, harmony, beauty, tolerance, understanding and NEVER judging others. God is the ONLY one who is supposed to be judging how a person lives their life. The worst and most blasphemous sin is fancying oneself a God. When religious people and churches judge homosexuals and behave in this way they are trying to act like God. But hey...you go right ahead and vote yes if you really want to...it's your eternal damnation. I'll be voting No and leaving the judging to the dude who wears the sandals!

I guess the RC's haven't spent enough money settling lawsuits, so now instead of helping the poor and needy, they spend money to harm others. My family came to this country to get away from the tyranny of the RC church and now they are back trying to run our country by changing our laws. Wonder when they will start another inquisition against protestants?

I have been married for 32+ years and I cannot understand how giving all couples - traditional and same-gender - wedded rights will "hurt the sanctity of marriage". A marriage is for two people whom love each other and want to take a vow to proclaim that love. It also assures legal benefits, such as health/life insurance, social security, etc. The religions that discriminates based on Biblical text have been the cause of many unnecessary Holy Wars. My God loves all of his children - ALL of them. Most families know of or have a person in their family or a family friend who is gay. Other than sexual orientation they are no different from you or me. I do believe there is only one real "judge" in these matters.

And I agree w/ Centaurmyst!

I agree with you too, cabean. I don't think anyone should assume that this effort by the Catholic Church is going to be successful. As I mentioned in my last comment...if the priest asks the congregation to donate extra for a cause the congregation is going to donate...even if they have no intention of voting yes on 1 and disagree with the priest's position. They're just afraid of what the rest of the congregation will think if they DON'T donate extra. It's just your typical case of fear, guilt and shame being exploited.

Centarumyst: That was my thought too. re 11:29 PM Not saying all, but I'll bet some or a lot of them did it just because their priest told them to and they felt afraid not to in some way. Whether that is what is really in their minds and hearts, is maybe somewhat questionable....maybe with some, but not all.

Yes, many people do leave churches because of all the hypocrisy they see there. Some,though, are able to look beyond that and go to the essence of what their faith is....and so you still see many people going to their chosen churches.....and always will, I should thinkl But you are so right....it is up to God to judge, not mortals. How can one judge for another all the time when they are imperfect themselves?

"The worst and most blasphemous sin is fancying oneself a God." You said it, Centarumyst.

i wonder jsut how many people in the church remember that they are suppose to judge themselfs first if they are perfect they have a right to say something against others but if not they should work on themselfs adn let other people live thier way.

Too bad some people will go hungry who otherwise might have been fed with the money these egomaniacs are spending to promote ignorance and divisiveness. Catholic charities shouldn't be allowed public service time on the airwaves if the church wants to play politics by funneling money into fear mongering.

Let the Catholics continue their hate speech. It will only allow the atheist community to grow.

"if the priest asks the congregation to donate extra for a cause the congregation is going to donate...even if they have no intention of voting yes on 1 and disagree with the priest's position. "

If it comforts you, go ahead and cling to that premise! You have nothing to worry about then, right?

Boy, there is going to be some wailing, moaning and gnashing of teeth in a few weeks.......

Separation of church and state? Not in Maine I guess. Vote NO on one, Vote NO on the bishop, Vote NO on the catholic church!

By laws church is supposed to be seperate from state. There should be a law made that makes it illegal for any religious organization or anyone affiliated with one to be involved in any non church event or act. Politics is a non church event or act. To think the Catholic ministry is one of the ministry's with the most ministers who have sexually molested boys for the past 20 + years. I don't know about any of you, but my God loves ALL.

As someone who was raised Catholic and attended Catholic schools I am ashamed at how my fellow Catholics are acting regarding same sex marriage. First off have they READ the LAW? The law specifically states that NO religious group would be forced to marry same sex couples. Secondly the church is falling right in line with all those other religous nuts by spreading lies about what this law will and wont do. I don't remember my kids having a class on marriage between a man and a women, so why now would they be teaching marriage between same sex couples....THEY WONT! They can't win on the merits of this law, so instead they will try and win on lies. Finally what I fine the most disturbing is the closing of churches all over the state and a school in the Lewiston/Auburn area due to funding and declining enrollment. How about a second collection to save a church or two or maybe keep a school open or here's an idea put that money towards helping bring people back to the church, because if you haven't notice Bishop people are leaving left and right. Like myself they need a place that is open and affirming, not a church that preaches lies. I guess that is why I felt so comfortable at a recent visit to Hammond Street Congregational Church.

I was raised a Roman Catholic. I was abused by a Roman Catholic Priest as a very young boy. The church should stay out of the law and instead of trying to legislate existing laws get rid of those pedophile priests. How hypocritical that an estimated 40% of priests are gay yet that church wants to punish loving couples. VOTE NO on 1

If the churches can put up money for fight against state issues then they can put up the money for taxes and public servicees that they use. Taxes on land that the churches are on. We haven't been involved in church issues then they shouldnt be involved in state issues. I say lets band together and make sure if they can use their money for fighting against over turning rights of equality the we should make it so that they have to pay taxes and not get tax breaks for donations that they give the church.

Maybe they ought to think about all the priests that have molested children,,, and that same sex marriage would alow those priests that have the urges to marry and stop abuseing innocent children.

anonon - Allowing priests to marry either gender won't solve this heinous crime - a pedophile is a pedophile is a pedophile. They aren't interested in a relationship another adult - if that were the case we'd hear more about them breaking their celibacy vows instead of the rape of innocent children.

Jack B.

Bishop Malone truly is an old fashioned bishop. He genuinely believes because he says it, Maine Catholics will do it without question. I hate to state the obvious but look at where that got us in relation to the sexual abuse scandals that will remain with us forever. The second collection is an interesting turn. I look forward to the upcoming collections for heart disease, obesity, substance abuse treatment, and all the other things that are currently hurting Maine Catholics. I have been a Catholic my entire life. I completely disagree with the Bishop's stance on this issue. He is wrong. I remain Catholic because I enjoy the ability to think for myself and make decisions with my heart. The best part in all of this is that my vote on this issue counts as much as his. The Church needs people like me. I'm not leaving.

On the donations envelope it said, "This is not tax deductable". The church is just a middle man. Why should you revoke their tax status because of this issue? Once again, we see a very, very small group of people using the hate monger or racist card because someone disagrees with their views. I guess we'll see in November, won't we?

Hey, does ACORN pay taxes? I was just wondering.........

Christian churches , including catholic churches, that still believe in God , must support his word. His word is the Bible, and it's pretty clear what God say's. I'm voting yes.

The rest of you can and will go to hell !

Yes ACORN does pay taxes that churches are exempt from. Payroll and unemployment taxes are two that I know of.

Poormainiac - I would bet that you, Michael Heath, Captain Andy, the homophobic membership and leadership of the catholic church will see hell first.

How about doing a collection for those who have been abused by the priest of the church ? Have we forgotten so soon ?

Marriage is "Christ-ordained?" Jesus wasn't even married! (Or if he was they hide it for some reason because they think sex is dirty.) There are so many holes in their argument it doesn't pass the straight-face test. There can't really be that many ignoramuses in Maine.

Churches can and do support the bible as they read it. Nothing in this law prevents them from doing so. I remember hugh arguments and discussion around Sunday shopping. Somehow we have all survived and life has gone on. I bet most of those who argued against Sunday shopping even go to Walmart on Sunday. Vote no on 1

jkershaw wrote:

"Yes ACORN does pay taxes that churches are exempt from. Payroll and unemployment taxes are two that I know of."

So do priests, they're not exempt from paying taxes just like the rest of us. I'm saying the organization ACORN not the employees of ACORN. Let's compare apples to apples here.

Priests don't pay income tax. Why would you write that?

So shall we put a ban on divorce now as well? I am pretty sure that divorce destroys the sanctity of marriage as well. Gotta love the double standards.

Poormaniac: Perhaps I will go to Hell, but I am sure the priest that molested me will be there. VOTE NO ON 1

They absolutely do pay taxes. Google it if you don't believe me. The priesthood may be their calling, but they're still citizens of the United States and draw a paycheck. The church is not taxed; the priest, secretary, custodian, etc... all employees pay income tax.

The money is ILLEGAL and voids the church's tax exempt status.

"Sanctity of Marriage" = "holiness of marriage"

How is Civil Marriage "holy"? A clergy member is not required. The new law exempts those perform marriages who refuse to perform a marriage for any particular couple without incurring any penalty. Couples who choose Civil Marriage (secular) are just as married as couples who choose 'holiness of marriage" (non-secular) in eyes of the law. it's surprising the churches and clergy who oppose the change in the Civil Marriage law haven't petitioned the state or federal governments over the word "marriage" before; after-all the government 'stole' the word hundreds of years ago. Huh.....

Jack B. (vote No on 1)

As a Catholic, I will be well pleased when this election is over and we can go to mass without having to have the bishop's political opinions crammed down our throats every Sunday. How stupid does he think we are- not to have understood his views yet?

Yes on 1,

God, I love it when "Loons" come here spewing nonsense! Why, may I ask is the money, "ILLEGAL" Coolfusion? Did the people not give it by their own free will? Did the church steal it from them? Like I said earlier it said on the envelope at the end of the pews in mass, "This is not tax deductable" what part of that don't you understand. Push your agenda hard because in a little more than a month the people of Maine are going to speak and all you progressive talking heads on the left will be silenced for another year.

Yes on 1. Equality for all.

Wow....If the Catholic Community wants that badly to take a second collection to support a question on the November ballot then they should cough up the money to pay taxes as well, as there is and for years has been a seperation between the church and the state. By Voting No on 1 the state of Maine will allow for equality of all, which can be used to promote the "Maine, the way life shoudl be" motto. Besides, there is nothing wrong with two men or two women raising children, I know many gay/lesbian couples with children and their children behave no differently than those with heterosexual parents. Also, for the Catholic community to come out and say that homosexual education will be taught in Maine Schools, the idea of that is a crock of bull, the laws of marriage in the state of Maine will not change what is going to be taught in Maine schools. Finally people should stop and wonder, by voting yes on 1 who they may be changing the lives of, because you never know, it may be your next door neighbor, your best friend, your boss or even a member of your family that you would be denying the one right that you have that everyone else would like to have, just think about it......

"It’s so sad to see such a division.”

What is sad is that people will pony up to fund this. What is sadder is that a church will actually encourage its members to fund this. What is saddest is that a large amount of money such as this could go a long way to help the poor.

Jesus said several times how he felt about the poor, and it was always the same.....give to them. I never once read his words denouncing gay marriage.

I agree with an earlier commenter - let's have a second collection to help those who have been abused by catholic priests.

Couples are coming to CT tp wed this summer rom all across the country, and they are bringing their families and friends along to celebrate with them. Congrats to all.

Joe Mustich, Justice of the Peace,

Washington, Connecticut, USA

To the marriage police, please find something else to do with your time, because life's just too short. Find love.

And please remember that marriage is firstly a civil matter as marriage licenses are issued by and recorded in town halls not church halls, or mosques or temples in America.

YOU CAN COUNT ON MY VOTE THIS NOVEMBER - I'M VOTING " YES " - It's bad enough we have live amoung these BIGOTS - I pray we find a cure for these sick people -

"Send me money, send me green, heaven you will meet

make a contribution and you'll get a better seat...

BOW TO LEPER MESSIAH!"

-Metallica

workingpoor, I don't know abut the secretary and the custodian, but the priest doesn't pay income tax. Neither do ministers.

I will repeat this over and over again. These men were gay when they joined the priesthood. They knew their lifestlye was totally against the teachings of the church. That was the first mistake. The second was the shuffling of the priests from one parish to the next. It was all about deception on the part of these men who were gay and who joined the priesthood to put a cover on their lifestyle. These comments I read from always the same people are very predictable. But it should be a lesson to us all. If these men did this to the the church, do you not think others will use this type of deception to do the same thing to other organizations? Such as school systems and boy scouts. You should not be attacking the church, you are blaming the wrong people. Blame the men who did this to the church.

Many men are now joining the priesthood and these are good and holy men. I know many priests and they are extremely holy men.The Catholic church will not be destroyed. It is going through a purification...it will survive.

working poor, I stand corrected. Priests and ministers do pay some, but not all taxes. From http://www.dmdiocese.org/files/documents/2751_microsoft%20word%20-%20compensation%20for%20priests-may%2012th-ref.pdf

"Social Security Taxes: Priests are considered self-employed for Social Security tax purposes and therefore do not have Social Security taxes (also known as FICA and Medicare) deducted from their salaries. Priests will pay the Social Security taxes of a self-employed person when they file their personal tax returns. These taxes cannot be withheld from their salaries and matched by their employers as is done with lay employees.

• Federal and State Payroll Tax Withholding: Priests are exempt from payroll tax withholding (Federal and State), but they are not exempt from paying quarterly estimates, if necessary, because priests are generally considered employees for income tax purposes..."

It is interesting, and disheartening, that those who claim to hold diversity and equality dear, only do so for their point of view. Just because we disagree does not mean we hate. Please try to open your mind.

Watching a episode of the Sopranos yesterday and they were at church meeting with the Father and one of the guys made sure they knew old Paulie was an Alter Boy at one time.....I said Paulie not Perley..LOL>>...

Can someone explain to me how this church can deliberately solicit funds to support their political position, yet still remain tax exempt? Why is this not being addressed or at least brought into question by our elected officials?

So much for separation of church and state…..

VOTE NO ON 1

Gay marriage should not be allowed, Its immoral & inhuman. How many Gays have lost their lives with HIV.

My wife and I have been married for nearly forty years. No marriage of any other couple, whatever genders on either side, threatens that.

If *you* feel threatened, look inside yourself. That's where the threat lies.

The Catholic Church is attempting to force its beliefs upon non-Catholics.

RE: I doubt they will be silenced but...perhaps the BDN

could contact the correct sources to do a story pertaining

to how the church raises funds, for what, and how

they disperse those funds. And also what laws they are

bound by. Maybe that would at least put to rest part of

this issue that they keep harping on.

Thinkaboutit: Three fingers point back at your bigotry. As I recollect, the coporeal works of mercy don't include "harrass the minority" or "persecute homosexuals." Vote NO on one and let Mainers -- not outsiders (who are funding much of the campaign) and religious bigots (who mentally live in the age of the Inquisition)--decide who can and cannot marry under CIVIL law.

A number of churches currently marry same sex couples as part of their religion. The RC church is attempting through civil law to prevent other churches from the free practice of their religion. They won't stop with this, so if you aren't RC then get ready to find out what else your church won't be allowed to do in the future. The RC church knows that they won't be forced to marry anyone they don't want to just like they don't have to marry divorced people now. This is about the control of NON - RC's, what they can believe and what they can do in their own churches. This is a blatant attempt to force one religion over others by use of civil law and that is just un-American.

Dear Kelly Maltz:

To protect the sanctity of marriage, the Catholic Church needs to outlaw divorce among its congregants. This would be the only way to protect the sanctity of marriage. Marriage fails almost 50% of the time and leads to divorce, which has the effect of destroying marriage as you know it.

From my perspective, marriage is currently the union of one man and one woman, until one of the two decides to jump ship and marry one more woman or one more man.

If you really want marriage to be defined as the union of one man and one woman, then make it stick and make it forever! NO DIVORCE!!!!!!!

My husband and I have been together longer than my sister's marriage lasted....and now she has two kids who have to shuttle between two houses.

Stop the insanity...vote NO ON 1

Part of being a Christian is having tolerance and compassion for people that don't think or worship the same way you do. I don't understand why people feel so threatened by same sex marriage. Why not have equal rights for all? Who should have the right to say that their discription of marriage is the correct one? How would these so-called Christians feel if they were told they couldn't marry the person they loved? This is the 21st century,people! As long as same sex marriage isn't allowed, there isn't equal rights for all. OldJim, you said it the best. I agree with you 100%.

josealters, more than 75% of all HIV in the world today was spread through heterosexual sex according to the World Health Organization. Maybe you better think before you post nonsense.

Somebody said above that theywere voting no on # 1 becasue they don't want the Catholic Church dictating to them.

However, I don't want Politically Correct liberals dictating to me how to live either. They, the liberas in Augusta are the ones that want to PUSH THIS ISSUE DOWN OUR THROATS! As such, I am voting YES ON # 1!!!!

“I’d just like to see this settled because I don’t like the idea of the politics and religion,” said the retired Brewer teacher. LOL....I hope he didn't teach history...As Gandhi said, "I can say without the slightest hesitation and yet in all humility that those who say reiligion has nothing to do with politics do know what religion means."

1 John 4:16 makes it pretty clear..."God is love" and that means love for everyone.

workingpoor :

Who to hell are you trying to fool?,,, I used to go to church faithfully and you do get a tax break for donations,,,don't say they don't

The catholic church like many other churches raises money for charities around the world and in local communities. They feed the poor, they give clothing, they house unwed mothers and help them with adoptions. They do prison ministeries and they educate. They live in foreign countries under extreme conditions to help their fellow man. They teach how to farm and they dig wells. When you give to a christian charity you get alot more for your money. Unlike other agencies who end up giving only a fraction of what they receive in donations to the actual need. Many christians do charity work on their own without the aid of government. They give their time and their money without recognition for the work they do. I know people who are constantly doing charity work. That is their life. Some of you people have the gall to attack christians. Those true christians, those that do it out of love and compassion do not deserve the bigotry they receive. Any spare moment they have they are helping others. They do not have time to sit by the computer all day making post after post.

VOTING NO ON QUESTION #1

Will the Catholic Church back a movement to prevent a sterile person or a person past childbearing age to marry next? According to the Church, marriage's sole purpose is to procreate....well if barren women and people over the age of 60 cannot bear children, then they shouldn't be allowed to marry because their ideas of marriage do not conform to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. Who will it be next? Will couples be required to marry in the church next? No more civil marriages because they do not conform to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church?

Can you all see where this is leading? Stop the Roman Catholic Church from dictating how we can live our lives.

Vote NO ON 1

Centaurmyst wrote so eloquently. I cannot improve upon it. I am in complete agreement with Centaurmyst. I think people often use religion to support their own prejudice and fear. In Nazi Germany, Hitler used organized religion to promote his prejudice and hatred.

I just finished watching a FREE Netflix video, available on your computer if you are a subscriber to the DVD program, and it's called

BONHOEFFER (2003) "This poignant documentary traces the life of German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who was one of the first to speak up against Adolph Hitler throughout Hitler's rise to power. Bonhoeffer organized the Confessing Church, the only structured revolt against Hitler, and turned to his roots as a devout Christian for the strength to take a political stand for Jews everywhere."

I am praying to the Deity that organized religion will stop sticking it's nose into peoples' business. Go ahead and believe that Christ has something to do with marriage despite the fact that it predates Him by, likely, millennia, but don't force society to act according to your beliefs. That's what is known as "establishing a religion" and the government is prohibited to do so, according to our Constitution.

If you want to live in a country where religion dictates government, please feel free to move to Iran.

rogernamvet, for you to agree with centaurmyst on the one hand and then give praise to such a brave Christian such as Bonhoeffer is further evidence that "vote no" people are thoroughly confused.

vote yes on one

joesalters:

Don't know if your uneducated or just not up on statistics. It is heterosexuals that are the most populated infected in the US

ELLEss, you too are confused. Marriage doesn't predate Christ, He has always existed, He is God incarnate, the beginning and the end, the Alpha and the Omega.

Anybody ever get the impression that this forHIMtoday freak is actually living so far in the closet he's getting freaky with the lion from Narnai?

Just sayin'... why else would anybody get this bent out of shape about something that is so silly.

forHIMtoday = closeted homosexual.

Centaurmyst, F.Y.I.

"All states allow parental consent for treatment of a minor to be waived in the event of a medical emergency. The circumstances that should be present in order for such an emergency include the patient being incapacitated to the point of being unable to give an informed choice, the circumstances are life-threatening or serious enough that immediate treatment is required, and it would be impossible or imprudent to try to get consent from someone regarding the patient. In these cases, consent of the parent is presumed, since otherwise the minor would suffer avoidable injury."

I work in a hospital and know that medical providers can operate, perform procedure etc. without consent if they feel the victim's life is in danger, this happens to both minors and people who are not their own legal guardians.

MikeNYC, here's some advice GO BACK. If you are unhappy in OUR country, follow your directions back to your homeland.

The Catholic Church should be busy taking second collections for the victims of their years of child rape? Imagine a corrupt organization like that lecturing us on morality. Laughable.

Hey ziggy, though I disagree with forHIM on a few things, your comments regarding him do NOT help. People are just looking for the name calling and innuendo and personal attacks.

Jack B. (Vote No on 1 - marriage equality and freedom of religion)

So people who are not married in the church are not really married in the eyes of some Catholics but they are in the eyes of the state and both marriages are treated equally, both marriages require a license from the state and are bound by the laws defining marriage. That status conveys about 300 rights and responsibilities to a legally married couple, and benefits that are intended to make their staying together easier and their separating fair.

The legislature passed the marriage equality act to improve the lives of a minority that is hated by some voters.

9:38 AM, berettastorm, so you'll be gay if gay people can marry? Interesting...

9:11 AM, joesalters, sickness is a reason to not allow someone to marry?

8:47 AM, firefly, this is the reason gay people need to be visible and not forced into hiding and marginalized by hatred and misinformation like yours.

8:30 AM, Thinkaboutit, good morning Doctor, I see you either didn't read the column by the 3 sociologists a few days ago. "ologist" at the end of a word means Doctor. In this case 3 PHDs.

8:01 AM, outdoorman, you got that wrong, Equality for all is a NO vote.

7:58 AM, workingpoor, not for very long because soon the supreme court will determine that this is a crime against taxpaying citizens. Running a referendum against a 2.5% minority is a shame. The church is using it's status as a venue to finance a campaign against a legislation that was intended to improve the lives of some taxpaying Maine citizens.

12:49 AM, captainandy, no there is going to be sadness and oppression. Voting against a 2.5% minority is really something to be proud of I suppose.

11:00 PM, Centaurmyst, you rock! lol Thanks for your support of gay Maine taxpayers.

I absolutely agree with free2bee. There is know reason

to resort to these types of posts. It's not doing either side

any good. And you couldn't ask for a more honest person

than 4him. He's always been very up front. You may not

agree but you need to respect his opinion if you want yours

respected.

Questions:

Why does Kelly Maltz say "It’s about marriage. It’s hard because people feel divided. It’s so sad to see such a division” and then promote that very same sad divisivness and discount marriage? Why does she insist that her definition of marriage should be the only one? Would or did the Bishop argue against inter-racial marriage as "non-traditional" as it once was by law and catholic dogma? Is the Bishop calling for additional donations to pay reparations to the victims and families of pedophilia or is that already included in his budget? Does the Bishop consider pedophilia traditional or non-traditional? What credible scientific knowledge does the Bishop posses that we do not proving that "family with one man and one woman is historically the most nurturing environment for children"? Why does the Bishop expound non-marriage and celibacy for himself and then try to define marriage and family for others? What are his insights into marriage and raising children other than papal dogma? Why can't more catholics understand the wisdom of Anne Underwood and other like minded catholics? Why has the papacy constantly throughout it's history changed it's dogma on so many issues primarily based upon the current thinking of any given Pope at any given time and then insist that the rest of the world cannot have a change of mind or heart?

My overall point is to promote any catholics' right to their own beliefs and values as well as my own and others. It is to say that the papacy historically has been so wrong on so many profound issues with absolute tragic and unalterable consequences worldwide for so many civilizations that one must seriously question any dogma that they promote as gospel and critical to the well being of civilization. My sincere opinion is that this position taken by the leadership and some adherants of catholicism is just another pocket book one for the papacy once again thinly disguised as moral dogma.

Marriage is a sacred union between man and woman for child-bearing. Society, God and individuals do not want it to be done improperly. Children need to be brought up in a wholesome and loving family of father and mother who fear God. Something else is not marriage. Homosexuality is referred to as wicked and an abomination in the Bible. Sodom and Gomorrah was overthrown by God himself because this sin had become normal. No law will stand the test of time and experience that breaks God's law. But, just as judgment fell on all in Sodom and Gomorrah's day, so shall it fall on us if we make "normal" something that is wicked to God. Jim Sawyer

Why does the catholic church or anyone else care what consenting adults, that are in love, do behind closed doors. Doesn't this country and state have bigger issues than this to worry about. What about war, homelessness, crime, healthcare? I'm not gay, but I'm also not homophobic. If 2 people in love want to take their marriage vows they should be able to.

Jim Sawyer, You logic is very flawed if you believe that marriage is only for those that can procreate. What about infertile heterosexual couples? According to your way of thinking they shouldn’t be allowed to marry either.

I have a friend who was raised in a "God fearing home" with her mother and step-father. Her father was an abusive alcoholic who physically and sexually abused her since she was three while her mother looked the other way in a benzo induced coma. Both attended church faithfully every week, and were consider upstanding citizens by everyone in the community.

The only safety and peace she knew as a child was when her best friend's family took her in at age 14. Incidentally her best friend’s mother was also in a loving lesbian relationship. Had it not been for the love and support of this family, she would not have gone on to college and later married having three children of her own.

It makes me sick when people believe that only heterosexual couples can love and raise a child. From my experience...this couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Should be "your" logic

I believe that the Gay Marriage Bill will be controlled by the 30 second informercials!! What a disgrace!! To late to change that now!! I think if the Yes Vote is the majority in this election then the next time I would hope that we would be voting on a Civil Union with all the rights of a Married Couple. I think then you would flat out win. The religious issue is a hard one for alot of people. Alot of people are religious I would dare say a very high %. I hope you compromise if you lose. As far as dealing with this on the Federal Level, don`t you think that the same feelings will surface there.

ElectraGlide,

If you do the research, people were against abolishing Jim Crow and against school integration and interracial marriage for what they saw as religious reasons. Regardless of how we view it today, that was their argument at the time. It's pretty easy to find the religious rhetoric they used, and the passages they quoted. It's all a part of public record.

As for "As far as dealing with this on the Federal Level, don`t you think that the same feelings will surface there", our federal government has time and time again shown that rights trump religion. And there is no federal referendum vote. The difference is vast. Watching recent coverage of the goings-on on Capitol Hill, the federal opinion is beginning to sway: and the number of federal court challenges are mounting daily. The feds will clear all this up once and for all, just as they've done in the past.

And it will all be so much wasted time, energy, and money that could have been used for far saner purposes.

I'm off... this has all gotten so tiresome. Fear, bigotry, and ignorance: there are no other reasons to vote yes on one.

I was on the fence with respect to how I felt about gay marriage until i sat down and thought long and hard about the arguments on both sides. A few key points in my opinion:

1. Marriage, whether, heterosexual or homosexual creates families which is good for children

2. The idea that only hetero married people can provide loving nuturing homes to children is ludicrous and alienates single parent families

3. We all know some married hetero families that provide ghastly homes for children

4. the marriage of gay or lesbian couples has absolutely zero impact on anyone else

5. The only people getting rich off of gay marriage are the divorce lawyers

6. Allowing a partner to legally care for another and/or their children is a human right not a gay right.

7. Gay marriage in school curriculum is a school planning issues not a gay marriage issue

I for one will voting to keep gay marriage legal in Maine.

berettastorm...this isn't a liberal vs conservative issue. It's about doing the right thing. On 9/11 there was a group of men who prevented that final plane from hitting the white house by taking a stand. One of those men were gay. He had been with the same partner for years. If gay marriage were legal back then, that American hero's spouse would have been entitled to survivor benefits. Most homosexual people attempt to live a straight life and many have children during that time. Some homosexual couples use sperm donors to have children that they raise with their same sex partner. Without this law in place those children are not protected, have no rights and cannot access government programs. That is NOT right. Our children are the hope and future of this country we live in. They are the most vulnerable population. They NEED people like you and I to make sure that their needs are met and rights are protected. A yes vote on Question 1 is a vote AGAINST innocent children. This has nothing to do with religion, how anyone feels about homosexuality or any of that stuff. This is about ensuring rights, protections AND responsibilities to ALL Maine families...and especially looking out for the thousands of Maine children who are being raised by one birth parent and their same sex partner.

MaineSurvivor2: You don't have to be Catholic to have morals. You don't have to be religious to have morals. Thousands of priests, ministers, and child molestation victims can attest to that. Morals and ethics are issues, and for me, the issue is, is it fair to discriminate? For me, it's a simple fairness, moral, ethical choice. I'm voting No on Question 1. All Maine citizens should have the legal right to marry the person they love, and who loves them. Hard to imagine religion disagrees with that. One more reason to walk away from the church.

One more atheist voting No on Question 1.

11:06 AM, ElectraGlide, on the federal level, it will be the judicial branch dealing with it rather than the legislative branch. Legislators, by default will oppose marriage equality because the majority of the population will vote them out of office if they don't, making the issue a human rights issue. The court is not subordinate to the whim of the voter.

This nation's future rests on inclusiveness and NOT exclusiveness. It must be a nation of all for all or it becomes what failed nations suffered.

People are free to go to church. Churces are not welcome to invade the Public domain protecting equality of services.

Voting NO on #1.

The Catholic Church as well as many other sects, are way far out of the loop. These churches live in the dark of fear and ignorance. Like the Taliban, they are trying to install a Theocracy instead of a Democracy. Protecting marriage indeed! As if any religion has created marriage. No more special rights to relious groups I say.

becwith wrote: Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I was on the fence with respect to how I felt about gay marriage until i sat down and thought long and hard about the arguments on both sides.

Bullsh!t. If you were "on the fence", as you claim, you would have presented at least one opposing argument. You don't even have the strength or honesty to play it straight. All you did was regurgitate the standard, weak arguments. You didn't touch on the arguments that have substance supporting gay marriage.

are you confused captainandy or is that a typo.....becwith IS supporting gay marriage?

11:56 AM, Eugene, very frankly and well stated. An inclusive society makes a strong nation. All people need to be free form disparity and their lives respected by the government. Taking a look at those countries that do not have inclusive societies clearly evidences that fact.

Vote No on One.

oooops..... free FROM*

The most recent post by becwith seems to point that way.

"An inclusive society makes a strong nation. "

Following the Constitution makes for a strong nation. Legislators pushing a politically correct agenda against the will of the people causes division.

Your turn......

jimsawyer: "Marriage is a sacred union between man and woman for child-bearing."

Did you know: in 2006 per 1000, 14.6% of married females ages 40-44 were childless http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/fertility.html#hist

So by your narrow definition, either these married couples' union is not sacred and it should not be called marriage, am I understanding you correctly?

Sodom and Gomorrah, all the men, all the people came to Lot's house demanding the men (angels) be brought out so "we may know them", think about that a minute, literally ALL the people from every quarter, they were all asking to have sex with the men (angels). ALL the people were homosexual men? And Lot chose to live knowing that in was inhabited only by homosexual men? That is the reason God told Abraham that He intended to destroy the city, even before the angels visited Lot? You have to wonder how that city became populated to begin with.

Jack B. (1/2 Straight Couple For Marriage Equality)

In my book, any religion lead by a "former" Nazi and has, en mass, raped countless young boys, has little leeway when it comes to condemning others.

Can't wait for the diocese to lose their tax exempt status and be reduced to a political organization, which they are!

captainandy...if you really sit down and think about this issue in a logical and rational manner there really is only one way to go. The basic civil rights of all citizens and the protection of children trumps religion, fear and any church. It does every time. Ultimately, that is what this is about. You don't have to like or approve of homosexuality to support same sex marriage. There are A LOT of reasons to support same sex marriage. The biggest reason is to protect the rights of all those innocent kids being raised by same sex couples. I honestly don't know how anyone could vote AGAINST the rights of those kids and still bear looking at themselves in the mirror. I know that I couldn't. That's why I'm voting No on 1...

This country is much more about inclusivity than exclusivity (which is something to be proud of.)

People can attend the church, mosque, synagogue,etc. of their choice. Once again, no church will be forced to marry any couple they do not want to.

Vote NO on 1.

PaleShadows: re 11:03 AM You show why people should not make generalizations. Glad that child got out of that horrible home environment she previously was in. And as we know, many church going people are good and moral; there are plenty who are not. I know of someone who never missed church, but his wife and kids had to go to the bars to drag him home; always swearing,etc and putting people down. But he felt since he went to church and prayed and whatever else, that he was all set.

ElectraGlide: Many many ads are on TV from the Vote YES on 1. folks , so don't worry about it! They also are raising money and getting signatures in certain churches so I would not get all worried about it. The NO on 1. people have every right to rebut or dispute what they know as distortions and lies in some of the ads from the other side, concerning what will be taught in schools,etc.

RevTrue: That was a good suggestion.

firefly: Many Catholics and other people would disagree with you. Many of those priests were not able to handle celibacy; most were pedophiles in what they did to innocent young lives. Most all Catholics I have talked with recognized it as a matter of pedophilia. Those priests also molested young girls, although it is true it was young boys in much greater nos.

End their exemption...today.

free2bee, Sodom and Gomorrah were absolutely about gross sexual immorality. No where does it say they were all homosexuals but rather they were no different than what going on here recieving the support of most everyone. It is also confirmed later in the new testament book of jude. Jud 1:7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire. To think Sodom and Gomorrah was about the people being inhospitable is nothing more than a spin put on it by the homosexuals and their supporters. Its ludicrous.

I just wanted to point out that the California Supreme Court upheld the gay marriage ban earlier this year, well they said that a constitutional revision to say marriage is just between a man and a woman was valid. Therefore, gay marriage is not allowed in CA and so schools are not teaching about same sex marriage because there are laws on the books about it in CA as Malone says.

11:47 WilliamDS.... Agreed and then time will have changed for the good again. Do you have a possible ETA on that happening.

This is exactly why we quit St. Matthew's. In fact, we soured on Catholicism when they re-connected the church with the state. Guilty conscience, Bishop?

On 9/28/09 at 10:07 AM, ziggyz wrote:

******

I may disagree with 4Him on several things. I may get a bit tired of his cut and paste from the bible style of "debate" believing it has any relevance to those of us who do not choose to base our opinions on that anthology, BUT your comment was totally out of line and really does nothing to promote the topic. Comments like that only give the opponets of SSM more amunition and validates their argument that the left is hateful.

For you Mr. forHIMtoday...

You really should learn how to read earlier translations of the texts. I've read how you disagree with the idea that these words are translated differently in different languages and I've always thought that humorously naive of you.

Yes, you can find support for your argument, but not by anyone who actually reads the tongues in which these passages were written.

http://www.libchrist.com/other/homosexual/sodom.html

http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/sodomg.html

http://www.mccchurch.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Resources&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=4784

You're a very vain and proud man, Mr. forHIMtoday. I continue to pray for you.

Vote NO on 1 and do the right thing before your fellow man and God.

I wish we were hearing more from Catholics For Marriage Equality...

Hey look, I can quote the bible too:

"A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed." -Dueteronomy 22:13-21

What now, bible thumpers?

forHIM, I was addressing jimsawyer from 10:45 "Homosexuality is referred to as wicked and an abomination in the Bible. Sodom and Gomorrah was overthrown by God himself because this sin had become normal." He said nothing about "sexual immorality", only homosexuality. I didn't say a thing about being inhospitable. I asked him if he thought every person there was gay, as in all the people from every quarter. How would you read what he stated?

Jack B.

On 9/28/09 at 12:53 PM, forHIMtoday wrote:

Sodom and Gomorrah were absolutely about gross sexual immorality.

****

Actually, I believe it was about xenophobia and violence. To rape a heterosexual man is one of the worst things you can do to his psyche, ego and emotional state. The "townspeople" wished to do this as the "angels" were strangers, unknown to them. The lesson was based more upon treating strangers with respect and hospitatlity than the sexual aspects.

It is disgusting that they are trying to make this a "save marriage" campaign. Guess what, if gay marriage is legal then straight people can still get married too. Traditional marriage isn't going to go away. Their campaign is about stopping gay marriage, not about saving traditional marriage. They just market it that way because they think it will help them get more votes.

For once, do what people in small-town Maine can never seem to do...live and let live, and mostly importantly...get a hobby and mind your own damn business.

oldgrump, agreement here but you'll never convince forHIM.

Jack B. (Vote No on 1)

oldgrump: Can you really separate the two issues you bring

forth. Rape is violence and it is also sexually immoral. I agree

with 4Him. Even if you were to take from this the lesson that

you do, it is still gross sexual immorality...

I am also not catholic but I do believe in the bible and not just parts of it. I does say that homosexuality is an abomination and if you can show me where God created Adam and Steve I will vote NO. Since you can't I am going with yes... God made marriage between one mane and one woman period and I can not see how you can sit there and try to debate that. Yes God does love everyone but it is the sin He hates. You may not call it sin but it is... You can not take the bible out of context you have to keep it as a whole. There is just to many people out there trying to justify thier sin. I could quote scripture all day about this but I wont because you will jsut call me prejudiced. Please stop trying to cram you sinfull lifestyle down everyone elses throat...

Good post jmc149

Proponents of gay marriage have to make a case for state recognition of their union. Simply stating same-sex couples deserve equal rights and should not be discriminated against is an insufficient argument. Marriage as an institution is not a right granted by the state, for it existed prior to the state and in fact prior to the church, just as the right to life, liberty, and justice did. Civil marriage therefore is a privilege, a legal recognition by a state or a political division of a life-long commitment by two people of the opposite sex to promote the well-being of the traditional family arising from that commitment. The fact the traditional family is in disarray only indicates that more should be done to encourage family unity for the sake of children. We all benefit from the existence of strong families, but few of us will benefit from state sanctioned unions (or marriages) of same-sex couples. The current attempt to include unions of same-sex couples in the definition of marriage appears to be an effort to force recognition of homosexuality. Certainly it is not about unjust discrimination any more than an insurance company's refusal of coverage of crutches to applicants who do not need them.

oldgrump , very similar to the story of Gibeah where men from the city demanded to "know" the male stranger (a Levite), they were offered the stranger's concubine or the virgin daughter of the farmer. They took the concubine, serially raped her and she died on the farmer's door step. The men were not punished by God but killed by the Levite - actually the whole tribe was killed. Very similar story but 500 years or so later.

HRH how is the rape and death of a woman not worthy of the same punishment, by God Himself, as the attempted rape of males?

Jack B.

Here is how I debate that, jmc.

God ain't real.

Win.

captandy...regarding your 12:17 PM, you'd do well to not regard what our legislators did as something against "the will of the people". It is against the will of SOME of the people, maybe even a majority, but not ALL. Many of us "people" feel that trying to take away this right is very wrong.

The "Vote Yes" crowd is being pandered to by those who enjoy preying on religious weakness. Some people can't see reality beyond what their religion tells them is real. It's sad, but it's the world we live in.

Our legislature wasn't trying to be politically correct. They were trying to level the playing field for a deserving minority. They did the right thing.

JMC, "if you believe the bible and not just parts of it" then how can you condone all the other things the bible states are abominations?

No one is trying to cram anything down your throat...I really fail to see your logic in this. Gays and lesbians just want the same protections and rights for their families that heterosexuals enjoy and take for granted every day.

It is the opponents cramming their political agenda and principles down everyone's throat by opposing SSM. In this country we are suppose to be free to practice whatever religion we choose.

I'm a very happily married straight female and I'm very confident that allowing SSM will not affect my marriage, my children, or my faith.

Anyone that claims it will affect their marriage already has issues they should be working on instead of sticking their nose in other people's lives.

Vote NO on 1

Nothing beats watching the "inclusionists" descend from their lofty perches to do some good old Catholic bashing!

seacoast,

I'm referring to carbon taxes, government takeover of health care, expansion of the gov't sector, "stimulus", bailouts, illegal immigration and homosexual marriage. The Legislature (State & Federal) has ignored the people they represent and pursued their agenda. It's shows in their approval ratings, in protests and in the ever widening divide among the citizens.

I should have been more clear.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform

AS I SEE IT, by Mainer Mike Brown

The church isn't against gays because of what God believes. The church is just against gays because they are a bunch of homophobics.

some deep thinking there mikebrown.....

this issue is about right and wrong. about principle. not about how comfortable a person is around gay people. most all of us

know gay people and we live peacefully with them. embracing sexual perversion under the guise of "fairness" and "equality" will be a setting a damaging precedent in our society. thats why i'm voting yes on one.

What is damaging about it? It damages your feeling of control over society as a homophobe, that's it. Otherwise, harmless.

"God made marriage between one mane and one woman period" - hmmm - let's see . . . . . Matthew 5:32

"But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery". Isn't adultery a sin as well?

Some shallow thinking there JoeDoe. This is not about right and wrong. Stop throwing around pejoratives like "perversion" and remember that we gay people want the right to marry because the so-called "traditional" marriage isn't a natural option for us.

I'm glad to hear you know gay people and live peacefully among them. Now try talking to them about this. You don't have to embrace our lifestyle...just understand us a little better.

I want to correct something I just posted: this IS about right and wrong. Discrimination based on sexual orientation is wrong. Very wrong.

On 9/28/09 at 2:35 PM, free2bee wrote:

****

Interesting comparison.

I will not ever profess to being a bible scholar. I've read enough of it to know it's not "my cup of tea". However, when anybody quotes from the bible and I am not familiar with the passage, I do the same thing I do when anybody talks about anything I'm not familiar with. I research it, look for credible sources (neither far right or far left) preferable from someone/something that has an actual understanding of the situation, look for comparisons and then draw my opinion. Then, again, that's just me. Silly, I know, to try and understand things I don't, but still.....

Does the church still use wine for communion or is it grape juice?

They were allowed to use wine during Prohibition as sacramental wine was exempted.

If they do I hope they don't serve it to kids or tea-toddlers or anyone who is an alcoholic - yes I know it is watered down but still.

Thanks

Jack B.

Well put seacoast. If the Yes on 1 side expects to maintain a civil and respectful debate, then they need to use more respectful language rather than referring to gay and lesbian people as sexual perversions.

Too bad the Catholic Church didn't put this much energy into dealing with the priests in their church that abused children. Always easier to look externally than internally I guess.

Thanks anyway oldgrump, maybe someone else figure it out. Maybe it was because Sodom was a Canaanite city and Gibeah a Hebrew city?

anyone?

Jack B.

On 9/28/09 at 4:16 PM, free2bee wrote:

******

I understood the comparison and the underlying theme you brought out. I also agree with what conclusions your are attempting to get across. As you and I both understand, this one story does not play into the "rightous" hand book so it tends to be pushed to the side.

Just trying to suggest, without being strident, that others may want to consider another way of making a decision as opposed to accepting info that is spoon fed by persons with a specific agenda, and chose this particular venue as a springboard.

( I know, a bit pendantic. I guess it's the repressed teacher in me)

oldgrump I personally think it has more to do with justifying in ones own mind their own sinful desire and conforming the bible to meet that need rather than read what the bible reaaly has to say and allowing it to convict, teach and reprove (2tim3/16)

4. (12-17) Benjamin's help sought and not given.

Then the tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying, "What is this wickedness that has occurred among you? Now therefore, deliver up the men, the perverted men who are in Gibeah, that we may put them to death and remove the evil from Israel!" But the children of Benjamin would not listen to the voice of their brethren, the children of Israel. Instead, the children of Benjamin gathered together from their cities to Gibeah, to go to battle against the children of Israel. And from their cities at that time the children of Benjamin numbered twenty-six thousand men who drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gibeah, who numbered seven hundred select men. Among all this people were seven hundred select men who were left-handed; every one could sling a stone at a hair's breadth and not miss. Now besides Benjamin, the men of Israel numbered four hundred thousand men who drew the sword; all of these were men of war.

a. But the children of Benjamin would not listen to the voice of their brethren: The other tribes of Israel did the right thing in asking the tribe of Benjamin to deliver up the men who committed this crime. They sought to justly resolve the crisis without full war. But the tribe of Benjamin committed a great sin by putting their loyalty to the tribe before obedience to God's Law.

i. Modern followers of God can make the same mistake today when they put the interests of their own nation before the interests of the Kingdom of God. It is important for Christians to remember that they are citizens of the Kingdom of God first (Philippians 3:20).

The above post commentary taken from the "enduring word"

Someone earlier said something such as: "...I believe in the Bible and that's it..." I am fairly certain it is the King James version and you know the record of publication of that particular rendering. Unless the Gnostics are included you are a little like the man who liked the menu so much he ate it.

There is far more to any record than that which has survived through (or not) the ages.

Unlearning is not easy for any of us. Change is Exchange. It begins for each of us when each allows himself to give over a little, give in sometimes, and finally, when the time comes to "meet your maker", give up with a little grace...and, of course, permission from your government.

On 9/28/09 at 4:29 PM, forHIMtoday wrote:

*****

If you are trying to responed to me or my comments, perhaps you should lay off the cut paste bible. I feel it only fair to inform you that once I see chapter/verse from your little black book I skip whatever you have to say. Though the book may mean quite a bit for you, it has no meaning to me or my life. If you wish to actuallly discuss, condense, opine on a reference, I may read it and do any research (on my own, thank you) for any rebut I wish to make.

I have commented, on another thread, about "stop words", words one hears/reads and immediatly tunes out making the comment moot. Quoting from your book has much the same effect on me.

RE: oldgrump ......

You are not an "old grump" afterall.

Your Cool or "Kool". You treat the word as a symbol and not "the thing". I like that.

You might be a retired teacher but you are clearly a life long teacher and learner. Keep up the struggle.

oldgrump, with all due respect to your outstanding post on how you study the bible, I'm sure that people out there see the perversion of scripture here on a daily basis and I will refute it with all I have from any sources which I deem to be reliable. thank you for your suggestion and feel free to just skim over any of my post or all of my posts.

Quoting bible passages really is totally irrelevant. There are passages in the bible that sanctions murder, rape, pillage, plunder, slavery, and child abuse. All of those things are illegal and every person in their right mind would agree that there are a lot of things in the bible that has no place in modern, civilized society. If American citizens based their votes on what the bible sanctions this country would make the Taliban look like liberals.

People voting against equal rights for homosexuals know deep down that the only reason they are voting that way is out of fear. Just be honest for crying out loud. Stop hiding behind religion and just tell it like it is. Those who want to vote Yes on 1 are afraid of how same sex marriage would impact them, their kids and their way of life. They are afraid to admit that because they don't want to be called bigots or gay haters,etc.

I used to have those same feelings when I lived in Vermont when Civil Unions were signed into law. Vermont was put in a position where they had to find out if their fears were justified or not. Guess what...they weren't justified. You don't hear people complaining about it anymore. When same sex marriage passes in Maine (and I really believe it will) then the people of Maine will learn the same thing I learned in Vermont...it won't impact you at all.

On 9/28/09 at 4:53 PM, Eugene wrote:

You might be a retired teacher

****

repressed, not retired. I never taught in an academic setting. Not that fond of children (though I will protect them with all my heart and soul), high schoolers are a bunch of caged hormones and college have to much attitude (lol)

And let's not even go into symbol/word. I'm dealing with someone who has returned to college and keeps trying to discuss sociology with me. I'm to old for that kind of conversation.

I was referred to an interesting article on another thread. After reading it I felt like sandpaper had been rubbed in my eyes. Not that it was biased, or against my way of thinking, just that it was a dry read. However, There were two quotes in it that I adored. Just to be a "cut & paste" poster (hey, why should I miss out on the fun?):

http://online.logcabin.org/assets/pdf/1-20-06-LEF-White-Paper-Booklet-2nd-Printing-FINAL.pdf

"In this world, there are many who cling to mistaken ideas and old notions that

comfort them, bring order to the chaos of life, and reassure them, and when

these ideas are proven wrong, these people flounder helplessly."

"Years ago, an English

politician, faced with new information,

changed his position on an important policy.

When an opponent rose to criticize

him, he looked at him and said, "When the facts change, I change my opinion.

What do you do?"

oldgrump...you are NEVER too old for any kind of conversation. Stimulating those dendrites and firing them up is an important key to longevity! :)

oldgrump: You continue to amaze me with your posts.......they are really good and full of wisdom , IMHO. And in my opinion, wisdom really does not have all that much to do with age (although one would hope that a person would gain more the longer they live....but as we know, such is not always the case!) I am continually brought up short by the wisdom of my 6 yr old graddaughter.

Loved those quotes at 5:07 PM Right on!

oldgrump: Sometimes, though, I get confused with your posts. For example at 1:36 PM I do not know where you are quoting the poster ziggyz and where you are making your own comments. Which part is your words? This has happened before. Maybe you should separate them (2 paragraphs or something) Could you please clarify your post at 1:36?

On 9/28/09 at 5:08 PM, Centaurmyst wrote:

Stimulating those dendrites...

****

Oh great, now we're getting into biology. Well, considering the topic, I guess it fits. (lol)

Actually, re: the sociology discussion, I was having trouble with it the first night as I was approaching the topic from a psych point of view, and the person I was discussing it with was trying to get me to see the socio point of view. Symbology was the topic. Took me a few hours but I finally got the point. May be old and slow but I do catch up eventually.

Cher, As I found Ziggyz's comments to be rather insulting and uncalled for, I didn't feel comfortable with reposting them. Thus the ****** to seperate my comment from his name. The majority of the posting, other than Ziggyz name and time, were my feelings regarding his original post. And I realized I used the "but". In this instance it is not true that "everything before the 'but' is a lie"

I am a firm believer that in a debate, one should stay with attacking the debate, not the person. As a rule, I attempt to keep my responses to the topic, not the person directly. To try and denigrate the person instead of rebutting their comment is a sign of loosing control. I will attack a comment, the way it was presented or the person's debating skill, yet still try and respect the person themselves. However, I have to admit, I have fallen off that wagon on occasion.

3:28 PM, JoeDoe, then you do not live peacefully with gay people and you are not their friends, Joe. You live peacefully with them as long as you are sure they are not your equal. That's not peace.

medstudent: You said well-put to seacoast. And now I am going to say it back to you, "Well- put" concerning your comments at 4:08.

oldgrump: Re 4:01 PM.....You paste, free2bee wrote ...I guess that is just a lead-in to show what post you are responding to....and then the remarks under it are your's.

But the post at 1:36 does not seem to follow that, and not sure which part are your words only??

whawell: So what you won't benefit from it!! That is rather a selfish view. Others will benefit (other families with children). It does have economic benefits anyway. (more marriages)

The majority does not have some automatic, built-in right to overrule a minority.

oldgrump: I get it now...thanks.

I can not fathom some of the comments that this story has generated. One of the comments stated that voting yes would allow priests to marry and prohibit pedophilism. Priest don't marry. Someone stated that 40% of priests are gay. Does that mean that all homosexuals are pedophiles? I don't even know how to respond to most of the comments posted here. I can say that I am voting yes. Not because Bishop Malone has asked me to. I believe him. We see the educational issues happening now in California and Massachusetts. Unfortunately, we won't see the real effects of same sex marriage for a couple of generations. We have so many forces at work trying to destroy the family can people not see that a child needs a man and a woman to give them the balance they need to develop. I'm not intolerant of homosexuality no more than I am intolerant of bestiality. But if a man, or woman, loves an animal should they be given the right to marry? Right wing nuts, Religious right. What I have read in these commments are a lot of people who just don't want to be told what to do. Bishop Malone was not telling anybody to do anything. He wsa asking people to look beyond the politics and see the family. I see al ot of people that are so wrapped up in self they can't see beyond themselves. This "if it feels good, do it" philisophy is going to cause some big problems down the road. We see it everyday in this country on the news. Greed of one man allows him to destroy the financial abilities of countless others. Most families have both parents working so they can chase the dollar and buy another four wheeler. Kids are being raised in daycares where they used to be raised at home.

Cher, when I'm responding to a point in someone's post, I will include the original for clarification. When I'm responding to an entire post, I refer to the person and time without creating the onus of having to read the primary comments. I have what we refer to in my home FAS, Ferret Attention Syndrome. If a post gets to long I end up just skimming it to try and garner the gist of it. I assume other's do the same (don't start lecturing me on the term "assume" lol). Thus, I try to keep it short and sweet (or, bitter, depending on my mood)

1:02 PM, ElectraGlide, I don't know when that will happen but I do know it's in the works. Not in my lifetime, I'm sure.

This is a MUST read for anyone who isn't sure what the moral way to vote is...

http://aapnews.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/e2006217v1

If you want to make sure every child in Maine has all the rights children are supposed to have and that you think they have then you need to vote No on Question 1.

If you think denying same sex couples the legal benefits for their families that marriage allows is more important than protecting children then go ahead and vote Yes on Question 1.

In my opinion there is only one ethical choice...protect the innocent children.

Though some Catholics have donated money, unfortunately, others will ocntinue to leave in droves and the long term losses to the church will be great. The number of catholics and their leaders has declined, and still keeps declining, and Portland can't figure out why. The bishop's message at masses this weekend was clear- either you believe and support this, or you are breaking catholic doctrine-I personally took that as either you do this or you are not welcome in our catholic churches. I know that some people will leave the church because of this- many already have. They were already on edge following the preist pedophilia scandlas and campaign to raise millions of dollars and the non-stop requests for money. Sadly, as a long time devoted catholic, I fear this is the beginning of the end for me and many others like me who believe in equality for all. Choose to completely ignore my beliefs that all should be treated equally or choose to to leave the church that I have loved for 4 decades?

Perhaps I should remind the bishop that he can refuse to do marriages, just ike he does now, for people who are not catholic or do not meet the curch requirements. Secondly, if a business refused to provide a service to a gay person, they should be sued- Sad.....if you look at the arguements being made today, they are identical to those made of African American years ago- If you refuse a black on the bus (or in a flower shop as used ths weekend) they can sue- don't let this happen...except now, the action is being led by a BISHOP? People don't choose to be gay just as they don't choose to be black... One thing is certain, I definately will never donate another penny to the diocese so they can use my money to make such a policy.

We now know how new sects of churches begin....

On 9/28/09 at 6:04 PM, namehelp wrote:

*******************************

Personally, I took leave of the RCC back in the early 70's when they change mass from being held in Latin to being held in English. Little did I know that a good 45 minutes of those "mass" were actually begging for money, just spoken in Latin.

All I know is I will be glad when the vote is over as I'm sick and tired of all the commercials. I will be voting No on 2.

b-toads....please stay with the subject at hand, which is not bestiality. This is about two consenting adults of the same gender wishing to have the legal right to marry each other. Gay people are not attracted to the opposite sex. It's simply the way we are.

Traditional marriage (man/woman) doesn't work for us. I don't understand why the "Vote Yes" people keep missing that very obvious fact.

On 9/28/09 at 6:41 PM, irishgirl wrote:

All I know is I will be glad when the vote is over as I'm sick and tired of all the commercials. I will be voting No on 2.

**********

Ahhh..the joys of satilite tv. I rarely pay attention to the "network" stations so the only time I see the ads are online when brought to my attention. I feel the same way for the last two months before a vote.

To all you "catholics" who are uncomfortable or unwilling to live the teachings when it becomes difficult, the Unitarian/Universalist services might be for you. It's a 60 minute coffee hour, under a rainbow flag with NO judgement.

All are welcome.

5:41 PM , WilliamDS, Sorry to hear that!! I think not just because of the Vote on 1, but because of alot of other issues that are going on in this country that has fired up the populace. There is going to be a much higher % of citizens voting this time around. Really do not know if that will help the No or Yes people. In fact when it comes down to it I have no idea how this is going to turn out. But if you lose by a close count I standby my statement that I hope to see you try again with just a slight tweak that I mentioned!! If you win congratulations!!! I am looking forward to working with you on all the issues of the day come National Election time as well as other State Issues.

The commercials will have the opposite effect that the Catholic Church intends. I saw this all play out in Vermont. Religious zealots were even harassing school children, trying to make them take pamphlets, scaring them. The commercials offended parents who now had to explain things to young children due to the commercials being on during family viewing hours. Ultimately...it makes people mad and turns them off...and they vote against those commercials.

For those who still might be confused on this question, remember this: If you want the law to remain as is, that gay marriage is legal, vote "no" on question 1. If you want to change that law so it reads marriage is only between a man and a women, then vote "yes" on question 1. I think some are still confused on how it is written.

It remains to be seen, but the Catholic population getting behind this does not bode well for the NO voters. i would say that there are probably more catholics in the state of maine than there are gay people, not a promising statistic for the homosexuals and their marriage dream.

i'll be voting YES ON 1, to keep our families safe and happy.

baaaa...pass the plate....baaaa....pass the plate

LOL @ seacoast 6:54pm. Who the hell are you? The moderator?

I'm pretty sure my family is already safe, and that fact won't change oafter the vote, either way. Or at least it won't change either way as a result of the vote. My children are already aware of gay lifestyles, and have friends who have a gay parent. It is really no big deal to them. I'm quite sure that my sons are safe, despite that fact.

That having been said, I'll be voting for equality, freedom, and fairness. "No On 1".

Many catholics have felt alienated by the church, and many have left. I have one thing to say--don't let the church take your faith away from you. Many catholics do not back the bishop when it comes to political matters. I have seen a drop in attendance at church, and I want other catholics to be aware that not everybody at church backs the bishop. Just because the congregation sits and listens does not mean they all agree. God is love. Love thy neighbor, love thyself.

Personally I'm voting no on Question 1, I do not need a Catholic Church or any other religous community telling me how to think or vote. I saw the latest tv ad on this subject and it made me angry that they would use such dirty tactics to get what they want. Gays and Lesbians should have as much equal rights in a marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Centaurmyst made some very valid points and I agree the Catholic Church hasn't learned anything from what those priests did to those boys, heck they didn't even acknowledge it they swept it under the rug and relocated the priest. Its a shame all that money going to this cause when it could be put to better use.

JoMarch: Bravo.

namehelp: Hear you. And the amazing thing is that church does not have to marry anyone it does not want to anyway. They often will not marry a couple where one is a Protestant,etc....unless that person undergoes education and classes or converts! So, no need for them to deny human beings some rights and protections. If they want to ostracize these same sex couples in some way, then they will anyway. There are churches and people who would not turn them away, including the children in these families. A lot of children in these families would benefit as well if same sex marriage was legal....why deny them as well! There are many children who are part of these families.....do not forget that.....many being raised in as good, or much better, home environments than those in other families.

No, Mainesurvivor, I'm not trying to moderate. It just really bugs me when someone decides to take the road to Crazytown by bringing bestiality into a conversation about marriage equality for gays. Sadly, there are other people who would read that and follow him down that road straight to the voting booth. It's both misleading and ignorant, in my opinion.

Seacoast continues to miss the point that this is not about his/her "right" to marry, it's about family and the effects this will have on the family years from now. I don't understand why he/she doesn't understand this.

4:57 PM, forHIMtoday, and you will be summarily disregarded as a nonthinker by those who do not care what the Bible says.

9:59 PM, seacoast, exactly, thank you.

b-toads...I agree with you, this is about family. Gays and lesbians are members of families. They are brothers, sisters, sons, daughters and yes, dads and moms. And those who are parents have kids that must see and hear the vicious lies spewed out by those who won't take the time to understand homosexuality.

I can grasp the effects all of this is having and will continue to have on the families of gays. But what does it possibly have to do with you? Absolutely nothing. Your life will go on the same the day after gays are allowed to marry as it did before.

I don't know very many children of gay friends, but those who I have met are the nicest, brightest, most well-adjusted kids a parent could hope for. And probably emotionally stronger than most as a result of putting up with the kind of bs people like you dish out.

Regarding your other comment, I must disagree. The right to marry is exactly what's at the heart of this discussion.

seacoast: I agree and had said basically the same thing at 8:31 PM so will not repeat it. Any homosexual people I have known or know are really great people. To me, they are just human beings like me (a heterosexual) and I do not understand this desire to ostracize people in any way, to think of them differently, or to deny them the same rights and protections of heterosexual married couples. It would not affect the marriages of those heterosexual couples, but would improve the lives of same sex couples and their families. I think it is horrible how some would deny them that.

Seacoast,

Once again this isn't about you and what you want. It is about family. You write that you don't know many children of gay friends and go on to assume a lot about the emotional and mental well being of these children. I know that there are a lot of great single parents out there but how many kids do you think don't wish that the missing parent were there at home? How many kids do you think are going to wish that they had their biological mother and father caring for them. I'm not doubting your capacity to love. Your sexual orientation dictates you toward your own sex which means that you are unable to procreate in your monogamous relationship. I'll say it over and over this is about family, not even my family, but the future of families in our society. Please try to look beyond yourself and consider that.

Thanks for throwing in a "you people" line. Maybe you haven't noticed but I haven't gotten snippy with you even once.

toad, if you read my reference to the kids of gay parents that I know, you'll see (I hope) that I know them well. I just don't know very many.

Have you looked at other societal models where gay marriage has been allowed? Are there examples you can point to where the families in those societies are crumbling in any way? I don't mean isolated instances where someone happened at a school or the like. Nor do consider bible stories a fair answer. I mean the wholesale falling apart of norms in today's world that you seem to fear.

You're tilting at windmills, methinks.

And by the way, I don't consider this about me. I'm not involved with anyone and doubt very much that I'll ever get married. This is about those who are being denied by those who won't open their eyes.

i'll be voting yes on 1 to cancel out seacoast's vote.

children should always be raised in a traditional home with a mother and a father

VOTE YES ON 1!

Seacoast,

Methinks you're wrong. This will not be settled here but on 11/03. Have a good night!

bloodytoads, you say this is about family. You're right, it is about families, families headed by same sex parents in this state raising children. And with so many children in need of a loving stable home in our world, the inability to biologically procreate does not mean an inability to form a family. Maybe you should look beyond yourself and a rather narrow view of family and consider that.

where do i send my donation? and i,m not catholic. if this helps get a yes vote in nov, i,m all for it.

bloodytoad....regardless of the vote on 11/3, this question will ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Company under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

good post bloodytoads...it's all about common sense...

Artificial insemination.

Single parent adoption by homosexuals.

Homosexual people who try to live as a straight person and have their own children.

There are a lot of innocent children in families in Maine who are being discriminated against, who do NOT have the same protection as other children just because their parents are not considered a legal family. You know what they say...if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck and acts like a duck it is a duck. If people look like a family, live like a family, act like a family, and sound like a family.

Anyone who would deny ANY child equal rights and protections are pretty morally vacant, in my opinion.

Protect Maine's Children...Vote NO on 1

I am an Iowan now, formerly of Brunswick, Maine, trained in psychiatry at Maine Medical Center. In many ways our hearts never left.

I wish the opponents of gay marriage could have attended my marriage to my partner of 23 years on Saturday in Maine. We were married at Plymouth Church, United Church of Christ. Our minister spoke of the evolution of theology and interpretation of scripture: Slavery and Women's equality. Now the issue of gay marriage. Critics will say we're "not REAL Chrisitans."

My daughter left our wedding sobbing, "Dad, I have been so wrong. Your marriage to Doug is about two men loving each other. This has changed my life in ways I cannot predict." There is no hidden "gay agenda."

Some do not believe that gay men and women are capable of long term, committed, moogamous relationships. They are wrong.

300 Iowans came to our reception to celebrate our marriage. Iowans have always been on the leading edge of issues of social justice and human equality. Although I miss Maine a great deal, I am thankful that life has taken me to Iowa.

Loren A. Olson, MD

My marriage was in Iowa, not Maine, as I posted in previous comment. Plymouth Church, Des Moines Iowa

RE: 09/28/09 @ 10:38 William, Was it not you, a few days ago,

who wanted 4hims interpretation of a particular scripture? So

do you want his opinion or not? Are you confused, lost, searching?

Kelly Maltz believes that marriage is Christ ordained. Does that mean she doesn't believe in marriage between non-Christians? It's only a matter of time before the immoral minority takes away those rights too.

HRH419...the problem a lot of people (myself included) have with 4HIMToday's comments is that all he or she does is copy and paste bible passages as if that alone should sway opinions. The bible has a lot of really messed up things in it and basing your argument on it is pretty weak. The second I see the copy and paste lines of bible passages I scroll on by and don't take anything said in that comment seriously.

Society doesn't tell churches who can and can't go to their church or be members of their congregation. Likewise, the church has NO right to tell society or the government who can and can't have a legally recognized marriage. Also, marriage existed LONG before any church existed. People married to protect land, wealth, and for survival. Religion didn't have anything at all to do with it. Religions incorporated marriage into their teachings, but marriage existed LONG before any church or organized religion did.

Here's an interesting Bible passage that made me laugh out loud...

1 Timothy 4

"1The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. 4For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer."

bloodytoads & SinCity:

Following this thread (which turned into a chat room) it occured to me that the two of you chose your names (above) as reflective of your anima vs animus (maybe without knowing) and brought it here into discussions of equal rights in a somewhat free society...when it's really only about you. There are others on the thread (in the chat room) but too many for me to list.

I could be wrong. It is a very deep place to go...and not much light there.

Centaurmyst: The point is, whether you agree or not,

4Him has an opinion. And he can voice it as he wishes.

If you don't care for scripture, don't read it. But don't

tell him not to post it and then turn around and ask for

his take on one, as William did. I would much rather he

back his view than just babble on as some do with no

reasoning behind it. What he has to say IS important

to some on here. Maybe not you, but it's not all about

you or me

If forHIMtoday would just come out of the closet, we'd all be happier.

HRH419...my issue with what ForHim writes is that they aren't actually discussing the issue at all or giving real opinions and thoughts on the subject. The Bible passages can be interpreted so many ways...and that's why it's pointless to try to base any argument on the Bible. People that don't approve of same sex marriage don't have to have one, go to one, give their blessing or the like. There ARE churches and religions that find same sex marriages to be acceptable and those churches DO sanction them. Why does the Catholic Church and others that don't sanction such marriages think they should be able to control and dictate who another church marries? What if another religion's churches organized to raise money to take political action against the Catholic church? Let's say they wanted to ban communion for anyone under 21 years old because they oppose giving wine to minors. Would that be just or fair? Nope. What the Catholic Church is trying to do is the exact same thing.

SinCity @ 11:51 PM: If children are born or adopted into a so-called traditional home, then they will indeed be raised by a mother and father...assuming that the parents stay together during the time the child grows to adulthood. If not, the child winds up in a different set of circumstances beyond his or her control. Hopefully, it will still be a loving, nurturing environment. So what's your point?

BTW...I tend to vote very near closing time, so chances are I'll be cancelling yours :)

workingpoor..... WHY should we revoke their tax status? Because once again the catholic church is sticking it's nose into an issue it has no business being in. Separation of church and state means just that and to have these people collecting funds for a politcal campaign just further proves how disconnected from reality they are. You don't get to go around picking and choosing which side of the law you are on. Look how that worked out in the abuse scandals. And bringing up ACORN is just another tactic of the religious right. Deflecting from the real topic at hand. Oh, and the real hatemongering is when you try to stop people from being who they are just because you disagree with their lifestyle. None of us are perfect and we should stop trying to force our so-called MORALS on others. That I believe is one of the fundemental foundations of religion.

I can't blame Jesus for trying. He asked me to love everyone and love has a definition for each of us. I have to call it quits when it comes to corn holing some mooneyed large mouth. I want to stick with my wife thank you very much. Now that analogy makes sense to some and none to others. I didn't create the human race I am stuck with it. We are not perfect no matter what you call yourself. Please don't make every one rotton that takes a side. There are many facets to each organization because they are unfortunately just human.When your brand becomes the without blemish send it to the Bangor Daily News.

Centarumyst: Re 1 Timothy 4

Yes....wow.

edofouru, some may skip over or miss your inappropriate language, many others do not.

Lyn

free2bee/Lyn: Luckily I do not even know what that poster is talking about and would rather not. Also, his/her post makes absolutely no sense, and is very poorly and inappropriately stated.

Lyn: Hope all is well.

edokfouru - please find some "class" before you post in here.

chersully, it is the same term used a few days ago that was deleted. I reported that one and this one also.

Lyn

Yep, I flagged it as well.

Hope everyone is having a good day:)

Vote NO on 1

edoforu...you miss the point by a mile. You're making assumptions about what happens in the bedroom and this issue has nothing to do with that. The "ick" factor gets pretty high with straight couples, too.

Try asking the hero of your bible stories to appear at a meeting and straighten all of this out. I'm sure he'll get a big crowd...probably world coverage. He could lay to rest a ton of questions. Bring that up the next time he's asking you to do something.

11:28 AM, thecbread, and to add to that... They are providing a venue for financing the repeal of a legislation that does not have an effect on their congregations. They oppose it for theological reasons. They do claim sociological reasons as well but noted sociologists have explained their support for gay marriage in the BDN. The church is funding a campaign to removed a civil right that was legislated to improve the lives of a minority. They need to be taxed on all their properties until they stop campaigning to legally mistreat people.

11:28 AM, edokfouru, how would you like to be defined as a sex act in which someone "thinks" you participate. Gay people are not dirty jokes as you learned in your adolescence.

Lyn: Guess I missed it (hopefully) I cannot keep up with all that garbage. Maybe it was a post that was deleted or probably you are referring to 11:28. Pathetic and worse. (those people, such as 11:28 AM, have some kind of sexual hang up themselves it seems, just for starters)

WilliamDS: I would suggest, though, that if you are interested in someone's interpretation of the Bible here and keep asking questions of that person (s), you not then say, don't post about the Bible. Unless you are just interested in certain people's interpretations....some of us are not. That does not mean the person(s) is not free to put it on here, of course. You can look at your own Bible, or get one, if you want to know more about what it says in the Bible anyway.

cher, I didn't ask him to not post about the Bible, I said I don't read those posts. I rarely ask his interpretation of the Bible. Interpretation is not cutting and pasting, but interpretation of scripture. I have a Bible and do not need its text pasted here. Maybe some do.

“It’s my belief that marriage is Christ-ordained”

This is all well and good, but it goes against everything this country is about; This is a nation of many religions, and we do have a separation of church and state here, which ostensibly exists to protect churches from the government forcing upon them the will of other churches.

And Catholics are far from the only Christians. The Catholic Church does not have the right to tell other Christians churches that they can not wed same-sex couples. And it doesn't have the right to decree the families of same-sex couples as being any lesser than those of heterosexual couples, which is essentially what it seeks to accomplish. It is dishonest for the Catholic Church to claim that their "traditional marriage" is in any way impacted, nobody is making them marry anyone their dogma and interpretations of The Bible preclude them from marrying. They are meddling with the internal choices made by other churches, and using the state to force their will upon other churches.

That aside, none of these churches cared when the State preformed it's own marriages. None of them petitioned the State to stop it from issuing marriage licenses on the grounds that marriage was within their own dominion and control. None of them sought to preclude Jews from being married, for instance. One could hardly argue that people of faiths different from Christianity are bound in any way by any concept of "Christ-ordained” marriage.

This is why all arguments for a "Yes" on 1 vote are based on overt lies and fraud.

This is why we should all be voting "No" on 1.

Don't let any church tell your church what to do - it sets a legal precedent that could conceivably come-around to bite you in the arse.

That is, if the state supreme court doesn't just dismiss the right of the public to vote on other church's right to marry what ever people it chooses to marry. Either way, this is a massive waste of good will, time, effort, and money to simply express hatred of homosexuals.

But then again, people in Maine no longer get away with simply getting their kids to throw them off bridges.

Anyone have time to volunteer today? I'm sure someone in your area needs your help....

Centaurmyst, Its ironic that during my morning devotional study, the very verse that "wowed" you and cher was the scripture used in the study. For the Christian there is no such thing as "luck". Could it have been Gods timing? While you are certainly correct in saying there may be many interpretations, you are wrong in your assessment that its pointless to use in an argument. While you may have 10 different takes on a particular verse, its entirely possible that nine are wrong and one has it right. Is mine the right one? No, not always. The bible says its not a matter of ones interpretation, the bible means exactly what it says, and how God intended it is exactly right. The bible has to be taken and understood as a whole and not taken out of context to suit us but rather we need to change our lives to suit the bible. That being said, I use the bible quite often in my posts because as a Christian I know and believe it to be the word of God. Why would I rather post my own opinion over Gods written word? Gods written word is powerful. It has the power to change lives. It has literally changed mine. It can change yours too. Don't believe the lies out there, find out for yourself.

ForHIMtoday...it's pointless to use bible passages when debating with people who don't view the bible the same way you do. It honestly has no impact at all, and if anything, it causes people to tune you out. If you genuinely feel that you have a message you wish to get across to the people reading these comments you aren't going to succeed using scripture. As for interpretation...the radical muslims who go on suicide missions killing innocent people are a perfect example of this. They are looking for support for their unholy thinking and opinions in their holy book. When you look hard enough you can find support and justification for just about anything you want to. That sure doesn't make it right, though. This is the problem with organized religion...instead of people using the holy books of their religion as a guide to live THEIR OWN lives they tend to use them as an excuse to persecute and judge others. That is NOT what the bible was intended for. The potential beauty of the holy books are always spoiled by someone else's need of forcing their personal interpretations down the throats of others.

You should just tell people why you oppose same sex marriage minus all the bible passages. If it's fear then explain exactly what it is that you fear or think should be feared. Let people "get" where you are coming from.

Almost forgot...I don't need my life changed. I am quite blessed. I am able to look in the mirror and be completely confident and secure in who I am and what I stand for and believe. I leave God's job as the judge of how other people live their lives in HIS hands. I know that God loves ALL of His children, even the ones He might not approve of all the time. I also know that it is His will for me to love His children as I love Him. How can I honestly do that if I knowingly do something that stands to harm others by voting Yes on 1? To Honor God I have no choice but to vote No on 1. To vote Yes would be in direct violation of God's word. Sorry, but I can't do that and neither should you.

well that sounds all warm and fuzzy but the reality is God has already made His judgement very clear in his written word to us. You a free to not believe it or not. If you are confident in what you believe tell me your source of that belief. Give me a glimpse of what it is that guides you other than your opinion. You never do say what your faith you follow. Any Christian knows the power of Gods word as written in the bible and would never hesitate to use it.

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith.”

You make the claim that people just skim over my bible posts, I'm sure many do but to make the claim that it impacts no one is presumptuous on your part. Gods word never comes back void. You ask me to give you reasons apart from the bible as to why I oppose it. Why would I need any further reason than that? Then it would only be my opinion.

Centaumyst, your last two posts are spot on. (2:23 and 2:35)

Having attended the same church since birth, this is always how I've interpreted the Bible and God's teachings. They are to be used as a guide to live ones life to the fullest, to remain humble and grateful for all the gifts I've been given, and to always hold tight to my faith in trying times.

It is not my place to judge how others live their life, nor is it my place to prevent anyone from the same equal rights and treatments I enjoy.

I believe you have articulated the feelings of countless Christians across the state.

The only rational and correct vote is NO

paleshadows I have no doubt that you would instantly change that position once someone tries to steal your car.

ForHimtoday...I think I've made it pretty clear that I don't follow any organized religion. You see, mankind has the tendency to soil whatever it touches, and faith in God is no exception. I believe that my faith and relationship with God is something very pure, sacred and private. It's between myself and Him. The source is my faith. I hold myself to a very high standard of behavior and can honestly say that I treat others in a way that I can be proud of. Yes, most people seem to feel closer to God when they go to church and listen to someone preach to them. That's not my style. I don't feel closer to God in something man made. I feel closer to Him when I'm near the water, trees, open air...out in nature. That's what He created.

God's Design for Marriage

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he crated the (Genesis 1:27).

"The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him" (Genesis 2:18).

"Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh" (Genesis 2:24).

"The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame" (Genesis 2:25).

"But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband...(1 Corinthians 7:2).

Janylee McGlinchy

And centaurmyst, I knew that was going to be your answer before You even posted it.

I'm not surprised you knew because I stated it earlier in the comments of this article.

Once upon a time, there was woman who was travelling down the wrong road, and someone that cared about her soul, gave her a Bible, and told her to begin with the book of John. She got on the right road, but after she had suffered much heartache. You see, she was going her own way. And she wishes now that someone would have taken the time to show her the right way and teach her about the sacrifice that was paid for her sin, (Jesus dying on the cross) so she would have been on the right road. I would encourage you to read the Bible. And God will speak to your heart. And he will change your life, and you will be glad he did. The Bible is a living book. "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God, and the word was God. There is power in the word. What have you got to lose, except your soul.

Janylee McGlinchy

Vote Yes. The majority will over-rule.

Protecting children is ALWAYS the right road...and I'm on it...and it leads to voting No on 1!

JMTnovember17: Maybe your side will win in November....and then you can celebrate and be all gleeful. But I would point out one thing; in this country the majority does not automatically have some right or advantage in overriding a minority. Civil rights and the rights of women to vote , among other examples, were not put to a majority vote. Just because a majority thinks a certain way, does not translate automatically to they are right and they won. Yes, your side may very well win in November , and that a minority is denied some rights and protections and benefits that married couples currently enjoy, is of course no concern of your's.

ForHim, can you elaborate on your 4:03 post?

You'd think I'd change my position if someone tried to steal my car?

These statements are cruel and untrue. People against Marriage Equality do not base their public statements on facts either from science or the bible. It is a repeat of the time the Vatican was condemning Galileo, because they insisted that Galileo was going against the bible that it is the sun that revolves around the earth.

Children need people who are honest and truthful, not people who do not study the facts and speak out of ignorance and fear, which indiscriminately hurts innocent human beings.

Children are not safe around people who publicly speak out against Marriage Equality, because in truth these people have had no formal study in human sexuality or the bible and yet they without any intellectual thought speak out and harm innocent people. This is irresponsible adult behavior, which is harmful for children to witness. This has been proven to have “negative consequences” for children, consult developmental psychology.

With all due respect, it is without a question that Bishop Malone would not be able to pass graduate course exams on human sexuality, sexual orientation, and gender identity or biblical studies. Prove me wrong!!!

And if Bishop Malone cannot pass these exams today, than before God he needs to publically retract what he said against Marriage Equality. If not, then Bishop Malone needs to study moral theology. This is what children need the truth, not people’s ignorance, fears and blind hatred.

It would be the best for well-being and safety of all children if people against Marriage Equality spent their money to academically study human sexuality, sexual orientation, gender identity and the bible. People speaking out on such life and death issues should not speak out of ignorance and fear, thus spreading hatred and violence that indiscriminately is severely harmful to all children. The truth will set you free - not ignorance and fear. http://fathermartykurylowicz.blogspot.com/2009/09/maine-bishop-fights-marriage-equality.html

paleshadows, you stated its not your place to judge how others live their life. I would venture to guess you would object to anyone violating what you would consider to be wrong in your eyes even though they might not hold your view.

Centaurmyst, no I never read where you stated that. Its the standard answer given by those that can't answer the simple question of "what do you base your beliefs on". All of a sudden its personal and thats usually the end of it. They don't know! It based solely on "feelings" which are highly unreliable.

Read the bible folks. We need more atheists in the world.

I will vote to allow gays to marry. They don't bite; they are very clean and most are very well educated unlike most of the bible thumpers.

A bible thumper does nothing but quote passages but that is about it. When it comes to a real debate they lack the ability to think on their own. They can only retort with a passage from their bible and that is it.

I find that sad because their mind is so closed they lack the simple ability to think for their self.

Religion is nothing but a fairy tale and I stopped believing in fairy tales a long time ago.

forHIMtoday...it's not that I can't answer the question...it's that I chose not to. I don't base my beliefs on any one thing. It might help to know that I pretty much live my life according to the Serenity Prayer..."God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference." My ex husband was an alcoholic, so I spent a considerable amount of time in AlAnon...which is an amazing program, by the way.

Perhaps some people don't know what they base their beliefs on and perhaps some were raised in a certain religion and found that they didn't like the church even though they still believe in God. That happens a lot and it's not easy for people to talk about some things. Me, well, I'm an open book and have nothing I feel compelled to hide or be uncomfortable speaking of.

My family was not religious. I did my own exploring of different religions and churches and did a great deal of observing. I've been to almost every kind of church representing the major religions aside from muslim and hinduism. Heck, my ex's aunt is a nun and his family are very devout catholics. I even welcomed an elderly Jehovah's Witness lady to come by once a week to sit and discuss religion. I was open to hearing her talk about her beliefs. As I mentioned before...organized religion leaves a really sour taste in my mouth. In all honesty, of all the religious people that I have encountered, the Jehovah's Witnesses were the best behaved group.

You should never assume that someone can't possibly have faith and a firm belief in God just because they don't care to share details with you. Honestly, that is a very personal question to a lot of people. I gave you that answer mostly because this discussion isn't about me and my relationship with God and didn't feel it was relevant. It is about the rights of same sex couples and many innocent children. God's will is for all of us to love ALL of His children as we love Him. It is His job to judge how those children live. It's NOT for you or I to judge anyone. No one has provided even one solid reason to vote Yes on 1. I see many reasons to vote No on 1. Those reasons are to protect children, provide equal rights, responsibilities and protections to ALL people, to take a stand against misguided Christians who ARE trying to act like God and judge others and to send a clear message that politics and religion need to be two distinctly separate things.

Perhaps you will now tell me what YOUR thoughts on this subject really are...

Centaurmyst I just wanted to tell you how much respect I have for you. Just as I am an atheist you have the right to believe in a god but with that said. You have smacked ForHimToday so hard upside the head it has no clue how to respond to you.

I have read all of your comments and I wish everyone was as open minded as you are regardless of their stance in believing in a god or following any sort of religion. Everyone should read your comments because a lot of those that post here could learn a lot from you.

FrMartyKuryowicz: Good post. It is so true about children; they deserve and need honesty. Some parents may want to teach their kids that some people are undeserving of certain rights and benefits; but these children will go out into the world, meet a lot of different people and make up their own minds about what is true and what is not. And that is the truth. Many will meet real people and wonder what all the "fuss" was about. You can count on that. Kids see through dishonesty and hypocrisy... and can figure things out on their own, more and more as they get older.

Centaurmyst: Sometimes it is the ones who do not talk all the time about their religion but live it and feel it deeply, that have the strongest faith. Just because someone screams something from the rooftops, does not prove they have a stronger faith. Still waters run deep sometimes, right? To many people, their faith and religion is very close and personal to them; they may be private people to begin with and do not feel the need to get in a long detailed discussion with a stranger about it. People are different in that way too. That seems like a simple thing to understand.

Quote: "How about doing a collection for those who have been abused by the priest of the church ? Have we forgotten so soon ?" Quote

Well of course "we" have dearie!! Bible-thumping busybodies see no irony in quoting Leviticus 18:22 on one hand, and Matthew 7.1 on the other.

It's all subject to interpretation, and completely no one else's business who does what in the privacy of their own homes. This is also why our founding fathers crafted the separation of church and state - so we could be a "free" country. One of the greatest reasons that people flocked to this country was to escape religious persecution, yet here we are "persecuting" the way some people choose to live. Frankly, I find it's none of my business who does what in the privacy of their own home. I wouldn't want anyone telling me that I couldn't marry my husband - why would I feel that I had the right to tell someone else who to marry? As far as marriage and children: Don't even go there. There are far more children murdered or abused by their mother's boyfriend than I even want to think about. Why don't we hear of single mothers (or fathers) being called out for not being in a "loving, committed, marriage"? Hmmmmm?

I'm hoping at some point in time (although it's highly doubtful that it will ever occur) people will leave the judging to God and be done with it.

I have one question for you Father....are you living the vows of the priesthood? Celibacy, obedience, and poverty...

are you living the sacramental character of the priesthood?

centaurmyst, Let me start by saying that the reason I knew what your answer would be is that its precisely the answer I would have given 20 or so years ago, practically word for word. Forgive me for my bluntness, but it was precisely because I didn't know what I was talking about, although looking back I had convinced myself that hey, it sounds good, it makes some sort of sense, and does anyone really know what is or isn't true. Its nothing more than "new age" philosophy. I too bought into it. It was sort of like being at a buffet, walking by all these enticing foods and taking what I wanted. A little of this, some of that, not stopping till I had enough to satisfy my appetite. Like you organized religion left a bad taste in my mouth. You might be surprised to know it still leaves that taste in my mouth. Religion is mans attempt at pleasing God. You might even say in the case of an atheist its is also a way of denying Gods existence. Atheism is as much a faith as anything else. Gods existence is evident all around us. It takes more faith than I have to deny Him as the atheist does, than takes to believe in Him. I have seen it from your side, had your point of view. Looking back now I'm so grateful for the way God had His hand on my like and for revealing Himself to me through the person of Jesus Christ. It is so real, so profound. It is a supernatural thing, and once you truly experience it, there is no way you can keep it to yourself. When I hear people say their christian yet say its personal I have to truly question whether they have ever experienced what it truly means to be born again. Jesus says you must be born again to see the kingdom of God. There is no other way!

forHimtoday.....you're right. To be born in the spirit. There is a difference. A big difference....

Everything is true but in different degrees....so this 3 day chatroom would suggest.

It appears it is time to grab a cup of Clorox and go shock the baptismal tank.

So now 4him has somewhat answered the two questions put to him on numerous occasions by other posters. I think I can confidently say that 4him is a NON-denominational christian ( a popular NEWer group of the more than 3000 christian denominations in existence) and it would appear he does not have a pastor and is trying to figure this out all on his own---and of course reading written works by other religious folks he agrees with. He seems to accept it all on face value DESPITE all the glaring inconsistencies, errors, omissions, etc. that exist within the Englsih text alone---not even counting the grave errors, omissions, etc. when compared to the original Hebrew text.

forHimtoday good post @ 8:49 and very troubling indeed is the platform that people "claim" Christianity and call Jesus their "friend" but have never met and dealt with Jesus as being their Savior (Heb. 9:22)....the meaning of Christ's cross and shedding of His blood for the sins of the world is the most powerful realization one can come to....the only way to live a transformed life as a child of God is through the power of the blood of Christ....a quote read "If your goal in life is to not offend anyone, you will be a crummy witness. You may make the world happy, but you won't make your Savior happy."- Mike Redmond.

Even Jesu got around to finally saying "...it is finished." So, please?

PabMainer,

Hebrews 9:22 is completely contradictory to GOD's ORIGINAL laws. In FACT, ALL of Hebrews contradicts the Law it purports to explain. The author of the letter to the Hebrews quite often misquotes entire portions of Deuteronomy, thus giving a false impression of GOD's laws and more specifically, the COVENANT between GOD and the people. As a Christian, you are unaware of the covenant you are truly under because of nearly a couple millenia of mistranslation, misapplication and misunderstanding of the original text. I'd love to take the time to explain all this to you, but I have the distinct feeling that you would either just ignore it or perhaps browse through it, not really reading to understand but to have your own comeback already planned while reading. You are set in your ways, and anything that may upset the beliefs you have held for so long will be met with scorn and adversity. That's ok, it is a normal psychological response of a normal person. I'm not up for a "debate" or a "discussion" or an arguement about "who is right and who is wrong", but if you really want to know for your own future, then I'll send you the information. That holds for ANYONE here, not just PabMainer.

I believe that we will all stand before GOD one day to answer

for what we have or have not done in our lives. I believe that

as a christian you are required to stand for what the Bible

teaches. If that means upsetting or offending someone with

a scripture than so be it. At least I've put it out there for

consideration. Anyone is free to accept or reject.

I beleive that the Word of God is a Living Word

That it is not dead, not static

not a dessicated lizard found

under the refidgerator

I beleive that we will all be held accountable

for what we did not do

when we let families be exploited by our prejudices

by dogmas based on literal intrepretations

as dead as the empty conciences of those pretending

that they know God when their every act, their every word

reeks of the very judgment they were stearnly implored

to leave to the only one with the capacity to do so

what days of the week do you choose to ignore

what parts in your Bible Jesus said ?

ForHimtoday...even though I don't subscribe to any organized religion, I have gotten to know people from many different ones. My ex father-in-law is a very devout Catholic...his sister is a nun and his entire family has always been very deeply involved with the church. He and I used to talk about religion on occasion. He made a comment that has stayed with me for a very long time. He said that he didn't think any one religion was right or wrong, or better than any other and that it was the faith and what was in their hearts that was what is important. I tend to agree with him. Not all religions are as outward and vocal as some others. There is nothing wrong with that. For you, as a born again Christian, being loud and proud is important. That's not the case with everyone or all religions. Many people are quite put off with people who come across like they are pushing their religion and beliefs. Temperance is a very important trait to master. There are times when shouting it from the rafters is appropriate and there are times when it's not and is even harmful to your cause.

My position won't change on this subject of religion, faith or which choice I believe is the right one in regards to this vote. I've lived my life in such a way that I can be very, very proud. I love my fellow man and my purpose in life is to help others. I don't need a church to remind me of my responsibility to my fellow man or to remind me to be thankful and recognize all the beauty and blessings around me. I don't need a church to tell me how to live because the standards I hold myself to are actually higher than those of most people I know who belong to a church and go faithfully.

I'm really glad that you are sharing your own words now rather than the biblical quotes because it does make a tremendous difference in how you come across as well as how receptive others will be to what you have to say.

I read today on internet that there were 2,700,000 new cases of Aids in the year of 2007, probably a great % were gays, we do not need to promote homosexual relationships for health & moral reasons.

Kevin_of_Bangor...thanks. It wasn't my goal to smack forHimtoday. I just wanted to help him find a better way to communicate with people here. Everyone's opinion on something is equally important because if it didn't matter to him he wouldn't be making comments. While I may not agree with his opinion and do think he's making a mistake, I still welcome his input. The only way to get beyond fear and misunderstanding is for people to be able to talk to one another in a civil manner...even when they disagree so strongly.

ForHim, I just wanted to respond to your post @ 4:03 and 7:20

*snip from 7:20* “you stated its not your place to judge how others live their life. I would venture to guess you would object to anyone violating what you would consider to be wrong in your eyes even though they might not hold your view”

Quite honestly, I do not see the connection between voting down equal rights and someone wrongfully entering my property to steal from me. It is not my job to judge or condone two consenting adults who wish form a legal union. Actually, it’s not my job to judge the person who would steal my car either. I may be angry that they have taken something from me that I have worked for (btw, I have had my truck stolen as well as several other things I don’t have time to list) but is it “really” my place to lay judgment on them? And it doesn’t matter that “I” consider it wrong…it’s against the law and it would be for a judge or jury to decide a person guilt and punishment. Not everything in life is black and white.

I mean no disrespect when I say this, but I feel this comparison you’ve put forth is a quite a reach to say the least.

A person has a right to their beliefs and opinions regarding homosexuality, but I do not believe they have the right to push those beliefs on others…especially when it has such a profound impact on the quality of life those families “should be” entitled to under law.

joesalters...wouldn't you agree that promiscuity compounds the spreading of sexually transmitted diseases? Wouldn't you also agree that marriage reduces promiscuity? It only stands to reason that making gay marriage legal would reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS. Thank you so much for providing me with yet another reason to vote NO on 1!

I doubt anyone is "offended" by a Scripture, especially if they read the whole Bible themselves. I doubt very much that they would be offended. Being humans though, they see different things in some of the parables,etc. We are human; no one sees everything the same, even when they look at a painting,etc. And not comparing a painting to the Bible in that sense. But people are not going to think the exact same. We were not made that way.

Centaurmyst: Well put....and took special interest in your relating what your ex father-in-law said. He made quite a point. You yourself are so civil and fair in your posts. I think many pick up on that....not all, but many.

Thanks chers...the ex father-in-law was always an amazing human being...and so patient, well, except for when he got lost in bad traffic...then he got a little cranky, lol.

Centaurmyst: The poster writes, "Probably the majority of new AIDS cases are gay people". PROBABLY! That is real compelling!! Actually, the rise in AIDS cases has not been attributed to mostly gay people....but he/she is going to want to think that, so go figure.

They want to deny the rights and benefits of marriage to same sex couples. Yet they also complain and criticize high rates of AIDS, promoscuity, etc etc. Do you get the picture? Perhaps the agenda is to marginalize as they find them "repulsive."

PaleShadows. You are dealing with some people here who do think everything is black or white, don't you get that? It is that simple, in a way. Two entirely different ways of thinking and seeing the world.

Vote NO on 1.

Unfortunately I think you're right Cher.

Vote NO one 1 :-)

chers...it's more fear, really. People really are afraid of how same-sex marriage might impact them, their lives, their communities and their children. That's normal to have those fears. It would just be a lot healthier if people would be honest about those feelings. I once felt that way too back when I lived in Vermont and the same type of situation happened there that is happening here now. It turned out that it didn't impact anything in a negative way at all. In fact, the only overt changes turned out to be positive in a way that no one really expected. It increased tourism and opened up a new business opportunity. Since most churches did not want anything to do with performing Civil Union ceremonies there were a lot of new businesses that started up catering to people seeking Civil Unions. They would organize everything for the couple for a fee utilizing businesses that wanted to serve same sex couples as a package deal. It was a very positive boost to the economy and provided more tax revenue to the state. It prevented a raise in other taxes as well. There is a big picture that you have to look at when deciding your position on something. Allowing same sex marriage WOULD provide a boost to the state's economy and businesses and that is something that people do need to consider as well...especially with Maine's "tax happy" government, lol.

Ahh...off to class...again. I'll check back in later!

PaleShadows: Can just about predict what will come next.

Have a good day. Your posts are really good and interesting to read.

Thank you to those who write your wonderful, loving posts. You convey a hopeful message to our friends who read them.

FrMartyKuryowicz, Thank you for the great informative post you wrote on 9/29/09 at 7:07 PM. What you wrote is important, it sheds 'light' on relevant issues; equal rights, safety of our children, love and acceptance, science and the bible, and education on sexuality etc..

I think the URL bears repeating:

http://fathermartykurylowicz.blogspot.com/2009/09/maine-bishop-fights-marriage-equality.html

The following is an excerpt from the url and is only a small part of the well written blog;

"World Leaders Support LGBT 2009"...

1. "President Obama – April 24, 2009 - Condemns Homophobia at Holocaust Remembrance."

2. House of Representatives (Washington DC) – April 29, 2009 - passed legislation - add sexual orientation and gender identity covered under federal...

3. Nancy Pelosi: - April 29, 2009 - ‘Hate Crimes Have No Place in America’ Speaker of the House...

4. President Barack Obama – June 1, 2009 - BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA A PROCLAMATION - LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENDER PRIDE MONTH, 2009..

5. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State USA – June 1, 2009 - In Recognition of Gay and Lesbian Pride Month 2009 - Washington, DC

6. Groundbreaking professorship in LGBT studies – June 3, 2009 - Harvard University Gazette Online...

7. French President Nicolas Sarkozy – June 24, 2009 – Appoints Openly Gay Frederic Mitterrand as Minister Of Culture, a nephew of former Socialist President Francois Mitterrand...

8. President Obama – June 23, 2009 - New Protections for Transgender Federal Workers by Jim Rutenberg - The New York Times/ International Herald Tribune..

9. THE WHITE HOUSE – June 29, 2009 - PRESIDENT OBAMA WITH FIRST LADY MICHELLE OBAMA AT LGBT PRIDE MONTH RECEPTION...

The list goes on. It's wonderful to know that our government leaders are intelligent and forward thinking enough to speak out for what is right.

Vote 'No' on one for marriage equality, make life better for Maine's children and families everywhere.

karenlite: And you are so right; they are our friends; and people's sisters and brothers, and children, and neighbors; they are our doctors and nurses, and shopkeepers, and postal workers.....and on and on and on....

I know and have heard of friends that betray friends, brothers and sisters who squabble over inheritances, neighbors who sell drugs from their home, doctors who steal from insurance companies, nurses who have illegally taken prescription drugs, shopkeepers with unjust scales, postal workers that shoot co-workers. Whats your point cher?

forHIMtoday --- take a little time off tonight and relax...take in a movie...I suggest "Milk" with Sean Penn in his oscar winning performance. A moving true story that even you would see the personal sacrifice of someone (Harvey Milk) who believed just as deeply in something as you do...and died for it as well. Sort of "christ like" don't you think?

Eugene, if I were any more relaxed I'd be asleep. You are welcome to Penn, Pelosi, Hillary, Obama et al. I'll stick with common sense thank you very much.

Men don't marry men.

"Men don't marry men."

Yet....

forhimtoday -- Excuse me, Sir. I was talking about Harvey Milk, a human being who was murdered by a man who spoke as you do today and Harvey Milk (the REAL human being) kept showing up and was shot five times. "Christ like", isn't it?

Eugene, if I were any more relaxed I'd be asleep (you said) --- You are already asleep with your own self-acclaimed holiness wrapped around you.

My apologies Eugene. am not familiar with the movie.

3:22 PM, ziggyz, interesting that you don't mention women... Not on your radar? Misogyny..? I'd say so... Look it up. All the more reason to vote No on One.

forHIM, won't you be surprised that come "judgment Day," you are excluded from paradise for your sanctimony here on Earth.

Vote No on One

I posted this on the letters page but just incase some missed it there...

PENTAGON'S TOP JOURNAL CALLS FOR REPEAL OF MILITARY GAY BAN

Colonel Om Prakash, who now works in the office of Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, writes in a new article in the Pentagon's top scholarly journal: "After a careful examination, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that unit cohesion will be negatively affected if homosexuals serve openly. Based on this research, it is not time for the administration to reexamine the issue; rather it is time for the administration to examine how to implement the repeal of the ban."

http://www.towleroad.com/2009/09/pentagons-top-journal-calls-for-repeal-of-military-gay-ban.html

Vote No on One

The film is titled: M I L K. You can find it on DVD. You can google it and watch a trailer.

You can google HARVEY MILK and read tons on the man - the real human being who lived and breathed and died a brief time ago.. You can move a little out of your own shadow temporarily and investigate someone who is honored today as a champion of Inclusiveness -- not Gaydom...merely equity across all barriers.

hey, don't get snarky at me Willie, I was just quoting and answering the closeted forHIMtoday...

joeslaters, according to the World Health Organization more than 75% of all HIV in the world has been spread through heterosexual sex. Each year the number grows and the biggest group are heterosexuals. Are you saying that because heterosexuals are allowed to marry, HIV is spreading? Do you think that if heterosexual were not allowed to marry that HIV would decrease? Why not try logic?

realist38, my family has been in this country since the 1600's. I suggest YOU leave if you don't think everyone should have liberty and justice. This country was founded on those principals and if you want to hate a group, do it somewhere else.

Never claimed to hate anybody. You must be a no voter, always trying to put words in other people's mouths to justify your cause. You were ranting about Maine, and I suggested if you don't like it move. And I'll say it again, IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT HERE, MOVE! Quick comeback by the way.

Eugene, you are kidding right. You insult my faith comparing a gay activist as being Christ like when he stands for what Jesus opposes. I should have known better.

MikeNYC, do you suggest I move to one of the 47 states where it's not legal, so I can join ALL the others that don't think everyone should have liberty and justice?LOL.

forHIMtoday: You said: "They don't know! It based solely on "feelings" which are highly unreliable." I trust my feelings and my own beliefs a lot more than I trust ones thrown-out there by someone who doesn't know me, doesn't care about me, and woreships an imaginary Lord.

Still wrapped in your own shadow. "...what Jesus opposes..." -- and from your Shadow comes those words?

You really should know better.

You have a great deal of work to do.

So long.

Right on.

Vote NO on 1

david go visit a prison sometime. It will give you a glimpse of what happens to people that act on their feelings. Ask the man that cheated on his wife because of his feelings at the time and has now lost his family. Ask the teenager that stuck that needle in her arm the first time because her friends were doing it and it felt right. I think you get the point I was trying to make. Temptations have a way of overpowering logic at times.

I find it strange that murderers, pedophiles, and all sorts of convicted criminals are allowed to marry, provided they are marrying a consenting member of the opposite sex. So I gather this Gay Marriage ban isn't really about "Sin" after all.