Anne and Kent Price, excellent and clear letter of support for marriage equality. Thank you.

The American Psychiatric Association's statement of support for same sex marriage with rationale.

Support of Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Civil Marriage

POSITION STATEMENT

Approved by the Board of Trustees, July 2005

Approved by the Assembly, May 2005

"Policy documents are approved by the APA Assembly and Board of Trustees… These are …position statements that define APA official policy on specific subjects…" -- APA Operations Manual.

As physicians who frequently evaluate the impact of social and family relationships on child development, and the ability of adults and children to cope with stress and mental illness, psychiatrists note the invariably positive influence of a stable, adult partnership on the health of all family members. Sustained and committed marital and family relationships are cornerstones of our social support network as we face life’s challenges, including illness and loss. There is ample evidence that long-term spousal and family support enhances physical and mental health at all stages of development.

This position statement is about the legal recognition of same-sex civil marriage, not religious marriage, and it does not pertain to any organized religion’s view of same-sex marriage.

Heterosexual relationships have a legal framework for their existence through civil marriage, which provides a stabilizing force. In the United States, with the exception of Massachusetts, same-sex couples are currently denied the important legal benefits, rights and responsibilities of civil marriage. Same-sex couples therefore experience several kinds of state-sanctioned discrimination that can adversely affect the stability of their relationships and their mental health.

The children of unmarried gay and lesbian parents do not have the same protection that civil marriage affords the children of heterosexual couples. Adoptive and divorced lesbian and gay parents face additional obstacles. An adoptive parent who is lesbian or gay is often prejudicially presumed as unfit in many U.S. jurisdictions. Furthermore, when unmarried couples do adopt, usually one parent is granted legal rights, while the other parent may have no legal standing. These obstacles occur even though no research has shown that the children raised by lesbians and gay men are less well adjusted than those reared within heterosexual relationships.

As the population ages, the denial of legal recognition of civil marriage has consequences for increasing numbers of older adults in same-sex relationships who face age-related health and financial concerns. Excluding these adults from civil marriage protections of survivorship and inheritance rights, financial benefits, and legal recognition as a couple in health care settings increases the psychological burden associated with aging.

The American Psychiatric Association has historically supported equity, parity, and non-discrimination in matters that have an impact on mental health. APA has also supported same-sex civil unions and the right of same-sex couples to adopt and co-parent children. This is because APA has a longstanding interest in civil rights and legal issues that affect mental health as well as a code of ethics that supports and respects human dignity. Educating the public about lesbian and gay relationships and supporting efforts to establish legal recognition of same-sex civil marriage is consistent with the Association’s advocacy for minority groups.

Civil marriage is associated with a unique set of benefits that provide legal and economic protections to adults in committed relationships and to their children. Equal access to the institution of civil marriage is consistent with the APA’s opposition to discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Therefore be it resolved that:

"In the interest of maintaining and promoting mental health, the American Psychiatric Association supports the legal recognition of same-sex civil marriage with all rights, benefits, and responsibilities conferred by civil marriage, and opposes restrictions to those same rights, benefits, and responsibilities.”

Well, at least BDN had a few Yes letters the other day. But, since it's getting close to voting day, it looks like they're planning on flooding the paper with No letters. That's fair and balanced, right? Funny, but I can still remember when BDN reported the news and didn't take sides. Of course, I really have to think way back to remember those days.

EJParsons maybe they are not getting Yes on 1 letters. Have you written one? Has any of the posters supporting Yes on 1 written one?

7:13 PM, EJParsons, the BDN does not have to answer to you for not printing letters advocating hatred or inflammatory rhetoric. As I have said many times, they will print letters that are in decent taste and not hateful. The fact is, the "opponents" of gay marriage are usually irrational or bigoted, ignorant, or all three. They disregard the teaching of professionals in the behavioral or social sciences presented, seemingly because they don't say what they want to hear.

After the yes vote wins, what will we argue about then.

Do you really think that if (and it is a BIG if) Yes on 1 prevails that will be the end?

Vote NO on 1: protect the rights of ALL Maine citizens and their families.

Vote NO on 1: insure equality and inclusion of ALL Maine citizens and family.

Vote NO on 1: there is no demonstrated reason not to.

Vote NO on 1: it's simply the right thing to do for the people of Maine.

"After the yes vote wins, what will we argue about then"

In court. And the Yes on 1 folks don't have an argument.

Vote YES on 1: protect the rights of ALL Maine citizens and their families.

Vote YES on 1: insure equality and inclusion of ALL Maine citizens and family.

Vote YES on 1: there is no demonstrated reason not to.

Vote YES on 1: it's simply the right thing to do for the people of Maine.

Hum!!! I seem to remember lets just a few posters on here where asking where are the hetrosexuasl and WHAT is there is there opinion.

Well You Ask For It And You Got What You Asked For!!!!

And the debate is just warming up!!!

I hope all freedom loving people of this Great State vote for

True Equality for ALL

One of Twe of a Straight Couple that will both (that is 2) be Voting

Voting No on 1

There is absolutely is anyway this ole boy hasn`t learned his lessons studing History.

Welcome Gays Everwhere to Another Great Day in HIstory.

Thank You ~~~~for Waiting So Long~~~~Thank God You Waited (:~)

The HIstory the Great Teacher

Sorry I accidently hit post comment before I could proof reading

Worth say again for sure

Hum!!! I seem to remember that a few posters on here where asking where are the hetrosexuals in the State and WHAT is where is there opinion.

Well You Asked For It And You Got What You Asked For!!!!

And the debate is just warming up!!!

I hope all freedom loving people of this Great State vote for

True Equality for ALL

I am One of Two of a Straight Couple that will both (that is 2) be

Voting No on 1

There absolutely isn`t anyway this ole boy hasn`t learned his History lessons.

HIstory the Great Teacher

Vote YES on 1: promote bigotry and intolerance by stripping rights from your fellow citizens.

Vote YES on 1: insure children in Maine have inadequate support and care.

Vote YES on 1: make sure inequality and second class citizenry are enforced.

Vote YES on 1: prevent Maine from once again making history for doing the right thing.

Put your fears and intolerance aside and Vote NO on 1

Equal rights and fairness for ALL Maine families

Vote YES on 1: TO PROTECT MAINES FAMILIES

Vote YES on 1: TO PROTECT MAINES CHILDREN

Vote YES on 1: TO PROTECT TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE

Vote YES on 1: WHO CARES ABOUT MAKING HISTORY THE WRONG WAY?

There were publications in 1987 and 1989 by homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen which outlined a strategy to change America's perception of homosexuality and it included the following six strategies:

Talk about homosexuals and homosexuality as loudly and often as possible. (Through sheer perseverance the opposition will be worn down).[287]

Portray homosexuals as victims, not aggressive challengers..[288]

Give homosexual protectors a “just” cause..[289]

Make homosexuals look good..[290]

Make the "victimizers" look bad..[291]

Solicit funds. For example, get corporate America and major foundations to financially support the homosexual cause.[292]

Arguments Against Homosexuality are branded by homosexual activists and liberals as irrational and hateful with the use of terms like "homophobia". However, this term itself can also be a form of intimidation against opposition. Rather than attack their arguments they use a personal attack, labeling the opposer simply afraid. Pastor Darryl L. Foster, a former homosexual, states that homosexual activists are afraid of the testimony of ex-homosexuals to the public at large and that they suffer from "exgayphobia".

VOTE YES ON ONE LETS STOP THIS IMMORALITY

JD2008: Great suggestion at 7:17 PM Yes, why don't they instead of the usual complaining ,etc. Very good suggestion.

This will happen one way or another.

Its unfortunate that there are those who would deny the rights of those they do not even know.

My wife and I are also voting no on question one.

Interesting that "she who has no reflection" has only posted once over the last few days. I think the BDN must have clipped her wings.

Vote NO on ONE and reject hatred.

forHIMtoday......*yawn*

The Marketing of Evil

The book The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian describes how Harvard-educated marketing professionals Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen (who authored the acknowledged public relations Bible of the homosexual-rights movement After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the '90s) were able to change some American's perceptions regarding homosexuality.[293] In addition, the work The Marketing of Evil describes how abortion, promiscuity, and other evils were marketed.[294] Recently, the head librarian of Ohio State University's Mansfield, Ohio, Scott Savage, recommended the book The Marketing of Evil to be part of a freshman class required reading list.[295] Sexual harassment charges were then brought against Mr. Savage because those who brought the charges insisted his suggestion that freshmen read book The Marketing of Evil was an act of "harassment due to sexual orientation." [296] However, once the glare of conservative media were placed on the university, the university dropped the charges.[297]

Still no examples of demonstrable harm from same-sex marriage, 4him? How surprising.

Vote NO on 1: to insure equality and inclusiveness for ALL Maine children.

Vote NO on 1: to promote the security and integrity of ALL Maine families.

Vote NO on 1: because the term “marriage” already includes married same-sex couples.

Vote NO on 1: prove once again that the old adage “As goes Maine, so goes the nation” is true for all the right reasons.

Peter LaBarbera

Peter LaBarbera

As noted earlier, Peter LaBarbera is the founder of Americans For Truth (AFT) which is a national organization in the United states devoted solely to confronting the homosexual agenda.[298]

Peter LaBarbera said the following regarding the need for the organization Americans for Truth:

“ Homosexual, bisexual, and transsexual groups spend tens of millions of dollars every year to market and normalize their aberrant lifestyles, yet after all these years there is not a single, serious national group dedicated specifically to exposing and countering their agendas...

It’s time for Americans to unapologetically resist the demands of this lobby, and to counter the lies upon which it is built-the foremost being that certain people are inherently or ‘born’ homosexual and that this is a civil rights issue.[299]

Some really good letters here that convey well the reasons many are Voting No on 1.

Voted NO on 1.

Mr Parsons: Unlike the majority on here who are against same sex marriage, you articulate your postions clearly and are well written. You might try a letter to the Editor, although it is winding down and read somewhere on here (BDN site) that they will not be able to accept many more letters on the subject.

8:09 PM, forHIMtoday, actually that was the strategy for gay rights long before 87. It was 1979 I think. Being visible and being everywhere meant no hiding and meant everyone should be out of the closet, and being truthful. Gay people ARE good, forHIM. The good to bad ratio is the same for heterosexuals and homosexuals. You just don't focus on the bad heterosexuals.

Vote NO on ONE

Romans 1:26-27 - For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

Scripture does not a good argument make.

Vote NO on 1: extending equal rights to all citizens is the right thing to do: it does no harm and helps thousands of Mainers and their families.

I Corinthians 6:9 (NIV) - Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God

A fiend of mine pointed out to me today that any change that resulted in improving the lives of people has come through creating laws of inclusion or through legislation. This is because of our living constitution in the US. Our brave legislators knew when they passed the gay marriage act that their jobs would be in jeopardy, yet they did it anyway because it was and is the right thing to do. They, knew the courts would see the matter as a constitutional right, which they will.

Vote NO on ONE

I Timothy 1:8-11 (NASB) - "But we know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully, realizing the fact that law is not made for a righteous person, but for those who are lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted."

Anne and Kent Price: I enjoyed reading your letter and wholeheartedly agree. As a woman of color I could not in good conscience vote any other way.

Once again this great country has the oportunity to make history. Unfortunately, I still feel future generations will one day look back in embarassment that it took so long for equal rights and protections under law be granted to every American citizen.

Proud to say I'm voting no

Genetics and Claims of the immutability of homosexuality

For more information please see: Homosexuality and Genetics

A common argument is that an inclination to homosexuality is inborn and immutable. It is widely believed that the public will become more accepting of homosexuality if they are convinced that it is inborn and immutable. For example, neuroscientist and homosexual Simon Levay stated: "...people who think that gays and lesbians are born that way are also more likely to support gay rights."[3]

Research into the issue of the origins of homosexuality suggests that adoptive brothers are more likely to both be homosexuals than the biological brothers, who share half their genes which suggests that homosexuality is not genetically caused. [4][5][6] This data prompted the journal Science to report "this . . . suggests that there is no genetic component, but rather an environmental component shared in families".[7][8][9] However, in regards to psychosocial and biological theories in regards to the origin of homosexuality, Columbia University psychiatry professors Drs. William Byrne and Bruce Parsons stated in 1994: "There is no evidence that at present to substantiate a biological theory. [T]he appeal of current biological explanations for sexual orientation may derive more from dissatisfaction with the present status of psychosocial explanations than from a substantiating body of experimental data".[10]

Dr. Tahir I. Jaz, M.D., Winnipeg, Canada states: "The increasing claims of being "born that way" parallels the rising political activism of homosexual organizations, who politicize the issue of homosexual origins. In the 1970s, approximately ten percent of homosexuals claimed to be "born homosexual" according to a large scale survey....However, in a survey in the 1980s, with the homosexual rights movement increasingly becoming active, thirty-five percent claimed to be born that way.[11]

I thought you were an NIV man....now you are switching between translations - NIV at 8:24 PM and NASB at 8:28 PM

Why would you do that?

Oooooops......here's the truth about Peter LaBarbera. Sorry forHIM, all your heros are really bad guys, Nazis and such.

http://unreasonablefaith.com/2009/04/03/pillars-of-faith-peter-labarbera/

Genetics, Evolutionary Paradigm, and Creation Science

For more information please see: Genetics, Homosexuality, Evolutionary Paradigm, and Creation Science

In 1993, Professor Miron Baron, M.D., the renowned medical researcher and Professor at Columbia University, wrote in BMJ (British Medical Journal) that there is a conflict relative to the theory of evolution and the notion of genetic determinism concerning homosexuality. Dr. Baron wrote "...from an evolutionary perspective, genetically determined homosexuality would have become extinct long ago because of reduced reproduction."[12] In the United States, liberals are more likely to believe in the theory of evolution.[13] Also, in the United States, twice as many liberals as conservatives (46% versus 22%) believe people are born homosexual and liberals generally have more favorable opinions about homosexuality.[14] Given Dr. Miron Baron's commentary about homosexuality, many American liberals are inconsistent on the issues of evolution and homosexuality.

An individual's beliefs regarding creation science/creationism and the theory of evolution appear to influence their views on homosexuality. Creationist scientists and creationist assert that the theory of evolution cannot account for the origin of gender and sexual reproduction.[15][16] Creation Ministries International states: "Homosexual acts go against God’s original design of a man and a woman becoming one flesh — see Genesis 1 and 2, endorsed by Jesus Himself in Matthew 19:3–6."[17] In addition, the vast majority of creation scientists reject the notion of genetic determinism concerning the origin of homosexuality.[18]

Since World War II a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism have been atheists.[19] The Barna Group found regarding atheism and morality that those who hold to the worldviews of atheism or agnosticism in America were more likely, than theists in America, to look upon the following behaviors as morally acceptable: illegal drug use; excessive drinking; sexual relationships outside of marriage; abortion; cohabitating with someone of opposite sex outside of marriage; obscene language; gambling; pornography and obscene sexual behavior; and engaging in homosexuality/bisexuality.[20]

OK, 4him, we get it... you have hang-ups about homosexuals.

What do any of your wasted bytes have to do with same-sex marriage?

Some great letters, thank you all for standing and being heard.

I am seeing a lot of support for marriage equality in Hancock county, and not just on MDI. People in Blue Hill, Deer Isle, Stonington, Sullivan/Sorrento, Gouldsboro. The truth of the matter is that Mainers aren't very vocal about their views, but those views are very pragmatic and tolerant of others as long as respect is given in return.

Many Mainers are seeing the opposition to marriage equality and honestly questioning the rationality of denying these loving families their civil rights. Mainers are confident that no outside forces can break apart the strong family ties that define "the way life should be," and these tactics of fear and uncertainty about equal rights just don't resonate with them.

The silent majority of Mainers don't put "NO on 1" stickers on their cars, nor signs in their yards. Their vote is their business, and your vote is your business. Live and let live is the way to be.

Vote NO on 1, don't let someone else's church tell you how your neighbor should live their life.

Sexual Abuse as a Contributing Factor For Homosexuality

Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, M.D.

In 1999, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, M.D. wrote the following regarding the position of sexual abuse being a contributing factor for homosexuality:

“ Many studies demonstrate a sadly disproportionate extent of sexual abuse in the childhoods of homosexual men, suggesting at the least that both homosexual unhappiness and homosexuality itself derive from common causes...[32] ”

In 2001, the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior published a study entitled Comparative data of childhood and adolescence molestation in heterosexual and homosexual persons. The abstract for this article states the following:

“ In research with 942 nonclinical adult participants, gay men and lesbian women reported a significantly higher rate of childhood molestation than did heterosexual men and women. Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. Twenty-two percent of lesbian women in contrast to 1% of heterosexual women reported homosexual molestation. This research is apparently the first survey that has reported substantial homosexual molestation of girls.[33]

forHIM, you're embarrassing yourself again. This "Dr" is a Muslim fundamentalist. I never met a gay person who said they weren't born gay. Anyway, that's not the issue. The issue is religious bigotry.

Volition as a Causal Factor of Homosexuality - Homosexuality as a Choice

In regards to the issue of homosexuality and choice, given the existence of ex-homosexuals and given the existence of human cultures where homosexuality has apparently not existed, the position that homosexuality is ultimately a choice in individuals or at the very least can be a choice in individuals has strong evidential support. In short, there is a strong argument that one can leave homosexuality. In addition, given that the homosexual population has significantly higher rates of many diseases and the homosexual population also has significantly lower rates of various measures of mental health it can be strongly argued that engaging in homosexual acts is a bad choice for individuals. Another other factor that makes engaging in homosexual acts a bad choice for individuals is the significantly higher rates of domestic violence in homosexual couples. In addition, according to experts homosexual murders are relatively or quite common and often homosexual murders are very brutal. Also, the homosexual population has a greater propensity to engage in illegal drug use.

n 10/8/09 at 8:26 PM, anonon wrote: Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

JoeDoe: I chose homosexuality the same way I chose heterosex. I found a person that I was attracted to,became friends with,and it grew into a relationship where we were there for each other through good times and bad times. What people don't understand is that love is a emotion that can't be controled it just happens. Just as it did when I was heterosexual, I met a girl, became great friends and it became a relationship which i was attracted to her and fell in love and we got married had children. It didn't work out for us because we fell out of love for each other because she wanted a differant life,she wanted to be free from all the responciblities of marrage and of being a mother of 2 children. I ended up consoling and being there for a long time friend in the same situation as mine and we started spending more time together and concentrating on our children being happy and making sure that their lives,feelings and what they went through with their mothers leaving them would not happen to them again. So eventually as I said before we grew attracted to each other,had the same thing in mind for our children and it grew into a great relationship where our children are the happiest now then they have ever been. They now have a family with 2 same sex parents that does not effect them what so ever and our kids love us and have each other. A family is a family wether it is a man and woman , 2 men, or 2 woman with children.

Report abuse

Jeffrey Burke Satinover (Sept 4, 1947) is an American psychiatrist, psychoanalyst, and physicist. He is well-known for books on a number of controversial topics in physics and neuroscience, and on religion, but especially for his writing and public-policy efforts relating to homosexuality, same-sex marriage and the ex-gay movement. Copies of his best-selling 1996 Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth were distributed to all bishops attending the 1998 Lambeth Anglican Communion Conference and his work is widely-used and cited, and equally-widely criticized, as one of the main modern sources supporting the view that homosexuality is a changeable, non-innate condition, though not a matter of choice. He is an adjunct professor of science and mathematics at The King's College, New York City.

A religious bigot. Biased and non-peer reviewed work.

What the American Psychiatric Association says about Burkes work..... over 38,000 members disagree with Burke.

Therapies Focused on Attempts to Change Sexual Orientation (Reparative or Conversion Therapies)

SUPPLEMENT

Background to the POSITION STATEMENT

Recommendations:

1. APA affirms its 1973 position that homosexuality per se is not a diagnosable mental disorder. Recent publicized efforts to repathologize homosexuality by claiming that it can be cured are often guided not by rigorous scientific or psychiatric research, but sometimes by religious and political forces opposed to full civil rights for gay men and lesbians. APA recommends that the APA respond quickly and appropriately as a scientific organization when claims that homosexuality is a curable illness are made by political or religious groups.

2. As a general principle, a therapist should not determine the goal of treatment either coercively or through subtle influence. Psychotherapeutic modalities to convert or "repair" homosexuality are based on developmental theories whose scientific validity is questionable. Furthermore, anecdotal reports of "cures" are counterbalanced by anecdotal claims of psychological harm. In the last four decades, "reparative" therapists have not produced any rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. Until there is such research available, APA recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals' sexual orientation, keeping in mind the medical dictum to First, do no harm.

3. The "reparative" therapy literature uses theories that make it difficult to formulate scientific selection criteria for their treatment modality. This literature not only ignores the impact of social stigma in motivating efforts to cure homosexuality, it is a literature that actively stigmatizes homosexuality as well. "Reparative" therapy literature also tends to overstate the treatment's accomplishments while neglecting any potential risks to patients. APA encourages and supports research in the NIMH and the academic research community to further determine "reparative" therapy's risks versus its benefits.

Sorry forHIM, try again.

Today people still report leaving homosexuality and becoming heterosexual through their Christian faith.[50][51][52][53][54][55] [56][57][58][59]

Ex-Homosexual and ex-"gay rights" leader Michael Glatze speaking to the mother of Matthew Shepard.

Peter LaBarbera is the President of Americans for Truth which is a organization which counters the homosexual agenda. Peter LaBarbera stated the following regarding Christian ex-homosexuals who reported being transformed by the power of God:

“ Another factor from my experience as a close observer of the “ex-gay” phenomenon is that many former homosexuals do not linger in “reparative therapy” programs, or participate in them at all. They attribute their dramatic and (relatively) rapid transformation to the power of God, and likely would not show up in a study of this kind. In fact, these “unstudied” overcomers would appear to be the most successful ex-homosexuals because they’ve moved on with their lives — as “reborn” Christians move on after overcoming any besetting sin.[60]

State and federal law protect deeply personal issues such as religion. Therefore, the choice argument is moot.

It has nothing to do with same-sex marriage.

Try again.

anonon is a bisexual female, forHIM. Try again.

Dr. Whitehead and Briar Whitehead state in their aforementioned book the following regarding ex-homosexuals overcoming homosexuality:

“ The sexology literature reports a huge number of examples of change of all degrees from homosexuality to or toward heterosexuality. These studies have been so numerous that West (a gay man) in 1977 took an entire chapter in his classic book, Homosexuality Re-examined, to review them, and commented: “Although some militant homosexuals find such claims improbable and unpalatable, authenticated accounts have been published of apparently exclusive and long-standing homosexuals unexpectedly changing their orientation.”

West mentions one man who was exclusively homosexual for eight years, then became heterosexual...

Another well known author in the field, Hatterer, who believes in sexual orientation change, said, “I’ve heard of hundreds of ... men who went from a homosexual to a heterosexual adjustment on their own.”[64]

Peter LaBarbera leads a hate group.

Ooooops I posted about Peter LaBarbera before. He's also a white supremacist. You're not keeping good company.

From one of my favorite bible teachers and taken from his commentary

How glorious a change does grace make! It changes the vilest of men into saints and the children of God. Such were some of you, but you are not what you were. You are washed, you are sanctified, you are justified in the name of Christ, and by the Spirit of our God. Note, The wickedness of men before conversion is no bar to their regeneration and reconciliation to God. The blood of Christ, and the washing of regeneration, can purge away all guilt and defilement. Here is a rhetorical change of the natural order: You are sanctified, you are justified. Sanctification is mentioned before justification: and yet the name of Christ, by which we are justified, is placed before the Spirit of God, by whom we are sanctified. Our justification is owing to the merit of Christ; our sanctification to the operation of the Spirit: but both go together.

I do not believe forHIMtoday has an original thought left.

Hate Crime Law Misapplied to Ex-homosexual

Homosexual activists and liberals have become angered in regards to ex-homosexual events and activities.[66][67] In addition, the Center for Reclaiming America cited the following account of how a hate crime statute was egregiously applied to an ex-homosexual:

“ In Madison, Wisconsin, a recovered homosexual who had left the “gay” lifestyle to start a family got into a heated discussion with an open homosexual about homosexuality at a gas station. The ex-“gay” man, David Ott, was holding his child in his arms during the entire incident, and neither man touched the other. The homosexual activist later told police he had felt threatened by Ott, and local prosecutors charged the man with “disorderly conduct” with a “hate crimes” enhancement.

The “hate crime” aspect, stemming from Ott’s belief that homosexuality is morally wrong, raised the potential fine from $1,000 to $10,000, and jail time went up from a possible 90 days to one year. Fearing the possibility of substantial jail time, Ott settled, and received 50 hours of community service plus a mandatory attendance at “tolerance” sessions conducted by lesbians at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. A ground rule for the session was the premise that homosexual behavior is not immoral.

The entire process cost Ott almost $7,000 in legal fees

Are you advocation forcing gay people into these phony therapies, forHIM?

Sorry you don't like homosexuals, 4him.

But what does this have to do with same-sex marriage? Homosexuality is already legal... you're a little behind.

Vote NO on 1 to promote dignity and security for ALL Maine families.

The American Psychiatric Association is the only credible source for information on that subject. You have the website yet you post nothing from them.

2006 Survey Finds Homosexual Men Seek to Become Ex-homosexuals Often Do So to Heal Emotional Pain or For Spiritual Reasons

A 2006 survey finds homosexual men seek to leave homosexual lifestyle to heal emotional pain and for spiritual reasons rather than outside pressure. In addition, there is other data that supports the above 2006 survey findings.

Their goal is to jail gay men, Ted.

I know that he has NO valid argument against same-sex marriage.

He's just raving now.

Biblical City of Sodom, Homosexuality, and Archaeology

The Bible clearly associates the city of Sodom with homosexuality (Genesis 19:4-9), although the Bible associates with Sodom other sins as well. Claims that the primary reason for Sodom's judgment was inhospitality are not supported by sound Bible exegesis.[80][81]

The Bible states regarding Sodom:

...the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven, and He overthrew those cities, and all the valley, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and what grew on the ground. Genesis 19:24-25

I hope those who choose to do that have a good experience with it but all studies say they do not and that it is dangerous. Only religious organizations attempt it and without the approval of the 2 APA's. Not valid therapy nor valid data. Sorry.

Homosexuality and Promiscuity

A recent study showed that 55.1 percent of homosexual males in Shoreland -- known as Chicago's "gay center" -- have at least one sexually transmitted disease.

For related information see: Homosexuality Statistics

A 2004 article by Michael Foust regarding homosexuality and promiscuity states the following:

“ A new study by a group of University of Chicago researchers reveals a high level of promiscuity and unhealthy behavior among that city's homosexual male population.

According to the researchers, 42.9 percent of homosexual men in Chicago's Shoreland area have had more than 60 sexual partners, while an additional 18.4 percent have had between 31 and 60 partners. All total, 61.3 percent of the area's homosexual men have had more than 30 partners, and 87.8 percent have had more than 15, the research found.

As a result, 55.1 percent of homosexual males in Shoreland -- known as Chicago's "gay center" -- have at least one sexually transmitted disease, researchers said.

The three-year study on the sexual habits of Chicago's citizens will appear in the upcoming book, "The Sexual Organization of The City" (University of Chicago Press), due out this spring.[85]

Who care's what the Bible says? Not me.

In September of 2006, the Agape Press reported the following regarding homosexuality and promiscuity:

“ A survey by The Advocate, a homosexual magazine, revealed that promiscuity is a reality among homosexuals. The poll found that 20 percent of homosexuals said they had had 51-300 different sex partners in their lifetime, with an additional 8 percent having had more than 300.

Unprotected homosexual sex is also a concern among health professionals. A survey in Ireland by the Gay Men's Health Project found that almost half of homosexuals said they were having unprotected sex....

The fact that many homosexuals appear to live their lives in sexual overdrive does not seem to concern leaders in the movement. In an editorial from the same issue (August 15) in which the survey results were published, The Advocate said: "[Homosexuals] have been proud leaders in the sexual revolution that started in the 1960s, and we have rejected attempts by conservatives to demonize that part of who we are."[86]

And what does that have to do with gay marriage in Maine or in the US, forHIM?

In November of 2007 the news organization One News Now reported the following regarding Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth remarks about the spead of AIDS via male homosexual promiscuity and a conference on AIDS featuring Pastor Rick Warren and Senator Hillary Clinton:

“ Pro-family activist Peter LaBarbera says he shares Pastor Warren's desire to fight the spread of HIV/AIDS but wonders what solutions a politician who is an ardent supporter of the homosexual agenda has to offer in combating the disease. "He says that he's a co-belligerent with people who he disagrees with on other issues," notes LaBarbera, "[so] I guess the question would be: does he disagree strongly with Hillary Clinton's approach to homosexuality and even the AIDS crisis?"

Although he admits he is skeptical of what solutions a defender of the homosexual lifestyle like Clinton has to offer churches for fighting the HIV/AIDS crisis, the activist is calling on Warren and Clinton to use the upcoming summit to tackle the problem of homosexual promiscuity, which often results in HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases.

"We have homosexual bath houses operating in major cities across this nation," LaBarbera notes. "These are places where men go for anonymous sexual liaisons with other men. They're bringing the HIV virus back to innocent women, because some of these men do not identify as 'gay' and they're even married. So what about that aspect of the AIDS crisis?"[87]

Answer - Nothing !

forHIMtoday doesn't like homosexuals.

Another study involving male homosexuality examined the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexual men and was published in the Journal of Sex Research in 1997.[88] This study of male homosexuality found that 2.7 percent of these men claimed to have had sex with one partner only. [89]

The David P. McWhirter, M.D., and Andrew M. Mattison, M.S.W., Ph.D. study reported in their 1984 work The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop stated that in regards to relationships involving male homosexuality that "all couples with a relationship lasting more than 5 years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships

We've already established that LaBarbera is a Nazi. And what does AIDS have to do with gay marriage? I might decrease the incidents of it, I would think.

Homosexual Male Promiscuity in the United States in the 1970s

Dr. Hewitt wrote the following regarding homosexual male promiscuity in United States in the 1970's in the Journal of Sex Research:

“ Gay liberation in the 1970s was accompanied by an explosion of gay sexuality, especially in tolerant cities such as New York City and San Francisco, where gays concentrated. The director of the New York City Department of Health describes the situation as follows: "By their own reports, many men had large numbers of sexual partners annually, often numbering in the hundreds and even in the thousands. Frenetic casual and anonymous sex was widespread among homosexual and bisexual men. Bathhouses, back rooms of bars and clubs, and other public settings such as erotic bookstores and movie "heaters were, in effect, wide open...these practices and more were accompanied by extremely high rates of sexually transmitted diseases and set the scene for the rapid transmission of HIV once it appeared in the late 1970s. Rates of rectal and oral gonorrhea in males soared.

forHIMtoday what does your brother-in-law think about your position?

forHIM is obviously pathologically obsessed with this issue.

Vote NO on ONE

In June of 2004, the journal Nursing Clinics of North America reported the following regarding homosexuality and domestic violence:

“ Domestic abuse is under-reported in the gay community...

Male-on-male same-sex domestic violence also has been reported in couples where one or both persons are HIV-positive. Intimate partner abuse and violence include humilation, threatening to disclose HIV status, withholding HIV therapy, and harming family members or pets.[95]

williamsds...quit posting the same old story, I have seen that same position quote numerous times in the last week or so....trysomething else!

BDN printed severa Yes on One leters on the same day...looks like that will be about it, huh? they are so one sided, it is sickening...not a newspaper, but a big free add for things they back (no pun intended) Since they only let you write one letter every 60 days, makes it kinda tough to speak your mind and sign your name..the no on one people are meaner and louder.

paleshadows, my experience is the no on one side is the intolerant side! all maine families have equal rights and fairness, just dont call it marriage if its between a same sex couples

I read recently, cant remember where, that the natl gay groups want to have all of New England for gay marriage by 2012...

Methinks those No On One vocalizing arent "Mainers" to begin with.....lots of out of state voices and money coming in for them.

In 2000, the pro-homosexual agenda newspaper the New York Times in an article entitled Silence Ending About Abuse in Gay Relationships cites some information which may indicate that domestic abuse may be under-reported in relation to couples who engage in homosexuality.[96] The New York Times article states the following:

“ But the issue of gay domestic abuse has been shrouded by silence until recently...

For years, gay people have tried to keep quiet about the problem, said Dave Shannon, coordinator of the violence recovery program at Fenway Community Health, a gay and lesbian clinic in Boston.

Mr. Shannon said: People feel, 'Why should we air our dirty laundry? People feel so negatively about us already, the last thing we should do is contribute to negative stereotypes of us.' [97]

”

The Journal of the Family Research Institute using data from the U.S. Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics and the Center for Disease Control concluded that "married men who are not separated are at least 25 times less apt to be domestically attacked than a homosexual male in an 'on-going relationship.' Even if we include all married and separated husbands, the risk of domestic violence in a male-male homosexual relationship is still at least 18 times greater." [98] A study published in The Journal of Family Violence reported in respect to homosexuality and domestic violence that among its participants "Emotional abuse was reported by 83%" of its participants.[99] The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Domestic Abuse Fact Sheet states that "11% of women in homosexual relationships and 23% of men in homosexual relationships report being raped, physically assaulted, and/or stalked by an intimate partner".[100]

Actually forHIM, everyone was promiscuous in the 70s. Heterosexuals were even more promiscuous than gay people. Get a clue.

Commonness of Homosexual Murder

Vernon J. Geberth, M.S., M.P.S. who is a former commander of Bronx homicide for the New York City Police Department stated in 1995 concerning homosexuality and murders that homosexual murders are relatively common and these murders may involve male victims murdered by other males or may involve female victims who are in some type of lesbian relationship and they are murdered by another female.[101] In 2005, Dr. Harnam Singh, Dr. Luv Sharma, and Dr. Dhattarwal reported in the Journal of Indian Academy of Forensic Medicine in respect to homosexuality and murders that homosexual murders are quite common and that these murders may involve both sexes either as victims or as assailants.

LOL the VA is a great source for facts on homosexuality! LOL

Homosexual Murders and Brutality

Forensic Journal Articles on Homosexual Murders and Overkill

The eminent pathologist Dr. William Eckert wrote concerning homosexual homicides: "Equally high is the number of homicides, many probably related to transient attachments, which often lead to suspicion, jealousy, and murder. When murder does occur it is exceptionally brutal with an overkill appearance... Overkill, as it is seen in homosexual and lesbian murders, is certainly a form of sadistic crime."

There have been a number of forensic journal articles on the issue of homosexual homicides and overkill.[103][104][105][106][107] In 1996, the forensic journal The American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology published an article entitled Homicide in homosexual victims: a study of 67 cases from the Broward County, Florida, Medical Examiner's office (1982-1992), with special emphasis on "overkill". The abstract for the journal article states:

“ Forensic pathologists often state that homosexual homicides are more violent than those with heterosexual victims. Overkill or wounding far beyond that required to cause death is a frequently used descriptor of these deaths. We quantified the number and extent of injuries between homosexual and heterosexual homicide victims to determine whether one group suffered more violence than the other...Homosexual homicides are more violent than heterosexual homicides when one compares the mean number of injuries (fatal sharp, blunt, and total)/case and the extent of injuries on the body.[108]

williams ds, you must be a atheist.

The American Sociological Association is the ONLY source that is credible, forHIM

Lesbianism

Yvette Cantu Schneider and family

Women who engage in homosexuality are called lesbians (after the ancient Greek island of Lesbos). Recently, the former lesbian activist Charlen Cothran left homosexuality and converted her pro-homosexuality magazine to one that helps homosexuals find freedom and deliverance through faith in Jesus Christ.[124][125] Lesbian activist Yvette Cantu Schneider also became a Christian and left homosexuality.[126] [127]

In 2007, WorldNetDaily published the following regarding a lesbian woman:

“ A 53-year-old university professor and campaigner for legalized same-sex marriage in the UK said she was once a married "happy heterosexual" who had no doubts about her sexual orientation, but political activity and involvement in feminist causes "changed" her into a lesbian.[128]

Anybody else find this hysterically sad?

On 10/22/09 at 8:24 PM, forHIMtoday wrote: Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden

I Corinthians 6:9 (NIV) - Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God

We covered this the other day. MY KJV does not say "homosexual offenders" this is a TRANSLATION that one sect chooses to use over another i.e. effeminate, to promote its agenda.

Health Effects of Homosexual Lifestyle

For more information please see: Homosexuality and Health

AIDS

Human Immunodeficiency Virus attacking T4 lymphocytes

A review of the history of homosexuality and AIDS, indicates the original spread of AIDS is generally attributed to the aforementioned promiscuity of homosexual men. Originally the syndrome was called the "gay disease" because the overwhelming majority of patients were homosexual men.[129]

In June of 2004, the journal Nursing Clinics of North America reported that homosexual men and men who have sex with men "are nine times more likely to become infected with HIV than their heterosexual counterparts".[130] Of newly diagnosed HIV infections in the United States during the year 2003, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that about 63% were among men who were infected through sexual contact with other men.[131] As of 1998, fifty-four percent of all AIDS cases in the United States were homosexual men, and the CDC stated that nearly ninety percent of these men acquired HIV through sexual activity with other men

the only 3 credible sources

http://www.psych.org/

http://www.apa.org/

http://www.asanet.org/

In relation to HIV infections in the developed world, in 2007 the German medical journal Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz published an article entitled Prevention strategies to control the HIV epidemic. Successes, problems, and perspectives. The abstract for that German medical journal stated the following: "...for several years now, in the western developed countries sexual risk behaviour, newly diagnosed HIV infections, and the incidence of various other sexually transmitted infections seem to re-increase, especially among men who have sex with men (MSM)."[133] In 2007, the medical journal Sexually Transmitted Diseases reported the following: "In Western Europe, HIV prevalence among community surveys of MSM [men who have sex with men] conducted between 2000 and 2004 ranged from 5% to 18%.[

It's obvious he is not going to stay on topic.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) from 1994 to 1997 the proportion of homosexual men stating they had anal sex increased from 57.6 percent to 61.2 percent.[135] Although homosexual men may practice various sexual practices which may put them at risk, studies report that anal sex may be an important risk factor for the relay of many diseases.[136][137][138][139][140] For example in 2004, Jeffrey D. Klausner, Robert Kohn, and Charlotte Kent reported in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases the following: "Proctitis, or inflammation of the rectum, is a condition that is not uncommon among men who have sex with men (MSM), and, in HIV-negative men, greatly increases the risk of acquiring HIV infection. With the recent increases in bacterial sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) among MSM in the United States and Europe, there has been a concomitant increase in the number of cases of clinical proctitis."[141] On March 15, 2004 Medscape published an article by John G. Bartlett, M.D. entitled New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome" in which they commented on the aforementioned 2004 journal article Etiology of clinical proctitis among men who have sex with men published by JD Klausner and C. Kent in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases. The article in Medscape stated the following:

“ There were multiple studies of the newly recognized "gay bowel syndrome" in the late 1970s and early 1980s. However, subsequent attention and study has been sparse, in part attributed to reduced frequency thought to reflect changing practices by gay men in response to the HIV epidemic. This study clearly indicates that it is still an issue, since the cases were studied in 2001-2002. Also, the etiology is about the same as previously, although HSV is newly recognized as an important component. This finding not only affects management but also has HIV prevention implications. The authors note that two thirds of the participants were HIV negative and that proctitis increases the risk of HIV by up to 9-fold.[142]

doofus...No on 1 is not refusing to release list on donation made, Yes on 1 is. Yes on 1 has had a greater percentage of money coming from out of state sources than No on 1.

"I read recently, cant remember where, that the natl gay groups want to have all of New England for gay marriage by 2012..." Ah...if you cannot remember then why post it? Could it be that you just want to add another piece of "fear"?

Oh, by the way the chief Yes on 1 cheerleader is not a "Mainer", he is a flatlander.

Johns Hopkins HIV Guide website has a duplicate of the aforementioned article by John G. Bartlett, M.D. at Medscape which was entitled New Look at "Gay Bowel Syndrome".[143]

In 2004, the prominent medical website, WebMD, stated the following: "Men who have sex with men and women are a "significant bridge for HIV to women," the CDC's new data suggest."[144]

On 10/22/09 at 9:07 PM, tedlick wrote:

Anybody else find this hysterically sad?

I do.(raises hand)

omosexuality and MRSA

In 2008, the Annals of Internal Medicine reported that infection with multidrug-resistant USA300 MRSA is common among men who have sex with men, and multidrug-resistant MRSA infection might be sexually transmitted in this population.

In regards to homosexuality and MRSA, on January 15, 2008 the newspaper San Francisco Chronicle had a news article entitled San Francisco gay community an epicenter for new strain of virulent staph.[145] The San Francisco Chronicle news article stated the following in regards to homosexuality and MRSA:

“ A new variety of staph bacteria, highly resistant to antibiotics and possibly transmitted by sexual contact, is spreading among gay men in San Francisco, Boston, New York and Los Angeles, researchers reported Monday.[146] ”

On February 19, 2008 the Annals of Internal Medicine published a study regarding antiobiotic resistant staph infection in relation to men who have sex with men and the abstract for the article states the following in relation to homosexuality and MRSA:

“ Infection with multidrug-resistant USA300 MRSA is common among men who have sex with men, and multidrug-resistant MRSA infection might be sexually transmitted in this population

From the APA

What can people do to diminish prejudice and discrimination against lesbian, gay, and bisexual people?

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual people who want to help reduce prejudice and discrimination can be open about their sexual orientation, even as they take necessary precautions to be as safe as possible. They can examine their own belief systems for the presence of antigay stereotypes. They can make use of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community—as well as supportive heterosexual people—for support.

Heterosexual people who wish to help reduce prejudice and discrimination can examine their own response to antigay stereotypes and prejudice. They can make a point of coming to know lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, and they can work with lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals and communities to combat prejudice and discrimination. Heterosexual individuals are often in a good position to ask other heterosexual people to consider the prejudicial or discriminatory nature of their beliefs and actions. Heterosexual allies can encourage nondiscrimination policies that include sexual orientation. They can work to make coming out safe. When lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people feel free to make public their sexual orientation, heterosexuals are given an opportunity to have personal contact with openly gay people and to perceive them as individuals.

Studies of prejudice, including prejudice against gay people, consistently show that prejudice declines when members of the majority group interact with members of a minority group. In keeping with this general pattern, one of the most powerful influences on heterosexuals’ acceptance of gay people is having personal contact with an openly gay person. Antigay attitudes are far less common among members of the population who have a close friend or family member who is lesbian or gay, especially if the gay person has directly come out to the heterosexual person.

The February 19, 2008 Annals of Internal Medicine stated the following regarding homosexuality and MRSA:

“ Data from this study suggest that multidrug-resistant USA300 has spread rapidly among men who have sex with men in San Francisco and Boston, and that having male–male sex seems to be a risk factor for multidrug-resistant USA300 infection independent of HIV infection....

As in the SFGH HIV clinic population, having male–male sex was a risk factor for multidrug-resistant USA300 infection among patients in the Fenway Community Health sample. All patients in this sample who had multidrug-resistant USA300 infection were men who had sex with men, and none of the more than 3000 men seen at this health center annually who did not have male–male sex had multidrug-resistant USA300 infection, suggesting the exclusive spread of the multidrug-resistant USA300 clone among men who have sex with men....

In summary, we show that multidrug-resistant USA300 has emerged as an important source of disease among men who have sex with men in 2 geographically distinct communities. The high proportion of infection involving the buttocks, genitals, and perineum suggests that community-associated MRSA may be transmitted in the setting of sexual contact among men who have sex with men. The link among USA300, multidrug-resistant USA300, and unsafe sexual risk behaviors should be evaluated further in prospective studies

In the January 15, 2008 newspaper San Francisco Chronicle entitled San Francisco gay community an epicenter for new strain of virulent staph, Binh An Diep, a researcher at San Francisco General Hospital and lead author of the aforementioned medical journal article in the February 2008 Annals of Internal Medicine stated the following regarding MRSA:

“ "We are nowhere near the peak," Diep said. "The peak will occur when it spreads into the general population."

Diep said there is reason to believe that the more drug-resistant strain will make that leap because it is just a slight variant of USA300, which became one of the most common strains of MRSA in the United States only a few years after it was first detected.

WilliamDS and tedlick...I do believe forHIMtoday is attempting to get a board shut down through his use of long cut and paste "articles". Another observation, where is his friend Mainer?

forHIMtoday- ok. so you have found information that says homosexuals have are capable of domestic violence, spreading AIDS, murder..and whatever else all those posts were about, (no one is reading all that stuff) Heterosexuals do all those things too.

See why they should all be equal under the law? Inside, we're all the same.

In the previously cited January 15, 2008 newspaper article in the San Francisco Chronicle regarding MRSA the medical reseacher Binh An Diep stated regarding the MRSA and the city of San Francisco: "We probably had it here first, and now it is spreading elsewhere." The January 2008 San Francisco Chronicle article also stated regarding San Francisco and MRSA: "The risk of contracting this difficult-to-treat bug is 13 times greater for gay men than for the rest of the city's population, researchers found."[151]

American conservative commentators and conservative news organizations have published a number of articles on the internet in relation to the homosexuality and MRSA issue

Last minute desperate flooding of posts, it seems....doubt it will make any difference....most have made up their minds.

JD: What is a flatlander again? Think I know, but want to confirm it. And did you know that you are not a "real man" because you do not find gay people

"repulsive" and because you support the rights of others to marry? Did you know that makes you not a "real man." ......Please!

Cleveland Health Official and the Opening of a Homosexual bathhouse

The Beacon Journal of Akron reported the following on July 16, 2006 regarding the opening of a homosexual bathhouse:

“ City leaders say the club could help spark the economic revival of a desolate commercial block, but they also worry that the bathhouse could fuel a growth of HIV/AIDS and other diseases.

"I think it's going to be a big mess in the not-too-distant future," said William Tiedemann, AIDS director for the Cleveland Department of Public Health.

JD, I think you're correct. He knows he has no rational argument, so getting the forum shut down is is best tactic.

That, in and of itself, is sad... but somewhat satisfying at the same time.

Homosexuality and Mental Health

Studies have long indicated that homosexuals have a substantially greater risk of suffering from psychiatric problems (suicide, depression, bulimia, antisocial personality disorder, and substance abuse).[195]

In respect to homosexuality and mental health, studies have long indicated that homosexuals have a substantially greater risk of suffering from psychiatric problems (suicide, depression, bulimia, antisocial personality disorder, and substance abuse).[196]

For example, a national survey of female homosexuals was published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology which found that 75 percent of the approximate 2,000 respondents had pursued psychological counseling of some type, many for treatment of long-term depression or sadness.[197]

In contrast to claims by gay rights activists blaming this heightened incidence of mental issues on discrimination, John R. Diggs, M.D. states the following regarding homosexuality and mental health:

“ An extensive study in the Netherlands undermines the assumption that homophobia is the cause of increased psychiatric illness among gays and lesbians. The Dutch have been considerably more accepting of same-sex relationships than other Western countries — in fact, same-sex couples now have the legal right to marry in the Netherlands. So a high rate of psychiatric disease associated with homosexual behavior in the Netherlands means that the psychiatric disease cannot so easily be attributed to social rejection and homophobia.[198]

9:08 PM, concernsme, yes I called him on the "effeminate" part a few weeks ago so he changed it so as not to look like the misogynist he is.

Bible Prohibition Against Homosexuality and Sound Health Practices

Given the many diseases associated with homosexuality, the Bible prohibition against homosexuality is arguably one of the many examples where the Bible exhibited knowledge that was ahead of its time.

JD: Maybe mainer is too busy flooding the threads with last minute posts....who knows...or maybe he is keeping Sincity company!

Anyway folks....however this turns out very soon (Nov 3rd), it will not be over. Sooner, rather than later, this will be turned over to the Supreme Court. It will become uniform in this country, rather than legal in just some states.

9:23 PM, chersully2000, yes about problems gay marriage could help solve.

forHIMtoday wrote: "Genetics and Claims of the immutability of homosexuality

For more information please see: Homosexuality and Genetics

..pointless post snipped... "

You don't get it. It doesn't make a hair of difference if homosexuality is genetic or learned. There is nothing about it that should exclude two homosexuals from legal civil marriage. It's irrelevant.

Are you ever going to actually answer any of my questions by the way? I've ask you many over the last several days and you've ignored them.

You might start by providing an objective reason, not based on religious opinion, why there should not be legal civil gay marriage.

tedlick: Getting the thread shut down, though, is counterproductive if someone is trying to convert some last minute deciders!

I think SinCity has either had her wings clipped or has had a personal revelation.

Flatlander (as I am myself) is someone from away.

forHIMtosay is just spamming the board. He can't come up with his own rational arguments for now allowing civil gay marriage so he spams the board with right-wing and religiously motivated pseudoscience.

Yes, EJParsons is not in Maine.

crazyfingers: Good luck with that. Several or more have asked questions, politely, of that poster and that poster chooses not to answer. "His call", he claims.

williamds: What are you saying there in response to mine at 9:23 ....not sure...

9:35 PM, crazyfingers, there you go. That's the word. "Pseudoscience" Not to mention some of his researchers are Nazis.

9:36 PM, chersully2000, I was agreeing that it's last minute spamming by forHIM.

Either he is reloading his cache or he has been suspended. I bet he is reloading.

LOL we can only hope...

JD: That is what I thought....but did not realize you were referring to EJ Parsons. He grew up in Maine though, so guess he is not "from away." unlike those of us not born here!!! Anyway, we are residents and citizens of Maine and he is not.

cher...forHIMtoday is also from away. I do know that forHIMtoday lives in Maine as do I. I didn't know EJParsons was though.

.....And to the person who criticized my posting the APA's statement of support for same sex marriage, I do it because it is rational and true. That organization is comprised of over 38,000 psychiatrists in the US and worldwide, both researchers and practitioners. There is no better source of unbiased information. I will continue to post it because people need to read it. Especially YOU.

EJ was born in Maine but does not live here nor vote here.

The "No on 1" campaign has some wonderful testimonial videos from everyday people. They're very moving and well worth watching. I see links to them on this page, although that may not be the case with everyone.

Please vote "no" on 1.

JD: I believe Mr Parsons said he grew up in Aroostook county...he now lives in Fla or Alabama....I forget which.

You know more about the poster 4him than I do. If he ever said where he is from I never picked up on it. I guess I really am just not that interested.

As for me , I have lived in Maine now for as long as I lived in another New England state.

JD: What do you mean at 9:40 PM?.....let's hope sincity had his wings clipped....for good. mainer72 also does all he can to try and shut down the pages. See how it has not happened tonight? The BDN moderators should pick up on this sooner or later.

OK I can't take it any more, for him has oficially turned me, I'm voting NO on ONE! No I'm just messing with ya, but dude, you are getting really annoying. Don't you understand that this isn't a forum for evangelism, NObody is going to turn due to what is said. Rather this is a forum to express your thought in intellectual banter. The NO's feel like theri ace is "what harm does homosexual marriage pose to heterosexual married couples"? My personal fav. is a question NObody has really addressed yet "If this is really about Equality, and this law is inequitable in it's allowance of JOP & NP's to refuse to marry soley on the basis of sexual orientation, then why vote for it"? Patial Equality is not Equality.

9:52 PM, chersully2000, SinCity was advocating violence against gay men the other day.

William, I'm glad to hear you believe in the APA, I was beginning to fear you didn't have a faith! I'm just playing! Seriously though, with some of the articles and positions they have taken, I think it would take more blind faith to trust them then trust For Him!

9:52 PM, TurkeyTalker but it allows religious people to have their beliefs and to discriminate like they have always done. The issue is the state recognizing gay couples as legal spouses. That's the issue. Catholics refuse to marry people who are not Catholic unless they agree to become Catholic. That's not questioned, it's freedom of religion.

William: Yes, I realize that. And if the BDN had not strengthened its posting guidelines a while back, that poster would have said even worse things (if he could have gotten away with it.) have no doubt. I would not have wanted to see it!! Good riddance....

9:58 PM, TurkeyTalker, because they say something different from what you want to hear? And yes, if I were to take a faith, it would be either of the APA's. There only agenda is the wellbeing of people.

Ooooops Their only agenda *

Peter LaBarbera, Stand for Marriage and For him have one thing in common. They are obsessed with gay sexual activity.

William: Stick with APA !!!!

0:03 PM, robin56, yes I was about to point out his traveling porn show. lol

And his membership in a white supremacist group.

William, I didn't mention religious people or churches. This law as it currently stands allows JOP & NP to refuse to perform homosexual marriages based soley on discriminatory personal views. That isn't equality is it? As for the APA they are kind of like WalMart. You might find a thing or two you like, but most of what you find there is crap!

10:04 PM, chersully2000, I do, they have the only trusted research in behavioral health.

10:05 PM, TurkeyTalker, it states religious organizations and individuals. That is done now. Cut out the semantics. We see through them.

I'm too old to be nice when I don't want to be nice.

cher what I meant at 9:40 was either forHIMtoday was cutting and pasting additional articles or he has been suspended by the BDN for cutting and pasting over and over and over.

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

Wow is all I can say. The names bigots, uncompassionate, and intolerant are thrown at those who disagree with someone else's opinion. They are the bigots but what shall those name callers be called? Fair and Tolerant. I think not. They must look themselves in the mirror and call themselves the same words. The battle is over morality. A Harvard professor, did a study on 88 cultures and stated that all those that tried to define marriage differently than it has been defined in the last 5000 yrs has failed, They're are 10,000 studies that have been done that will prove that a child growiing uo in a homosexual home has a less chance of succeeding. Those are all good reasons, but there is a better 1. God throughout the Bible tells us it is wrong. Have an honest debate with Him and then see where you stand. Taking verses out of context can be done by a 3 yr old. Do honest study, Not just to seee if you can prove your point but also live it and defend it by the Word of God, Like it or not we are founded on the Judeo Christian ethic. Based on the Word of God, Lets return to our roots. Love thy neighbor as thyself. Stand for something rather than falling for foolishness.

Marcus Eaton

I think he's psychotic anyway. He totally misinterpreted something someone posted as a personal threat, and responded with a threat of violence toward the poster. A very paranoid response. People who have paranoid delusions can be dangerous when they feel compelled to act on them.

10:16 PM, pastormarc, you are mistaken.

Following are states that have legalized gay marriage.

Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire

Following are the nations allowing gay marriage:

Canada

Sweden

Norway

Netherlands (Holland)

Belgium

Spain

South Africa

Countries who have a civil unions provide most of the rights and responsibilities of marriage:

Finland

France

Iceland

Norway

Portugal

Denmark

Sweden

Germany

United Kingdom

Switzerland

Elsewhere

Israel

New Zealand

Here's the start of a press release based on 83 peer-reviewed scientific studies since 1960. It speaks for itself but you can Google the rest or read the meta-study at http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/therapeutic-response.pdf

APA PRESS RELEASE August 5, 2009

INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT SEXUAL ORIENTATION CHANGE EFFORTS WORK, SAYS APA

Practitioners Should Avoid Telling Clients They Can Change from Gay to Straight

TORONTO—The American Psychological Association adopted a resolution Wednesday stating that mental health professionals should avoid telling clients that they can change their sexual orientation through therapy or other treatments.

The "Resolution on Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation Distress and Change Efforts" also advises that parents, guardians, young people and their families avoid sexual orientation treatments that portray homosexuality as a mental illness or developmental disorder and instead seek psychotherapy, social support and educational services "that provide accurate information on sexual orientation and sexuality, increase family and school support and reduce rejection of sexual minority youth."

William, no semantics here just the facts max! My opinion has always been that this really has more to do with legislated acceptance than it ever had to do with equality, and I guess since the Law itself is written to support inequality and that is acceptable to NO, then my point is made. The APA does empirical studies of behaviour and then generalizes their opinions based upon their own bias. It is all experiment and opportunity for the psych drug market. You must like them because their findings support your standings.

TurkeyTalker wrote: "OK I can't take it any more, for him has oficially turned me, I'm voting NO on ONE! No I'm just messing with ya, but dude, you are getting really annoying. Don't you understand that this isn't a forum for evangelism, NObody is going to turn due to what is said. Rather this is a forum to express your thought in intellectual banter. The NO's feel like theri ace is "what harm does homosexual marriage pose to heterosexual married couples"? My personal fav. is a question NObody has really addressed yet "If this is really about Equality, and this law is inequitable in it's allowance of JOP & NP's to refuse to marry soley on the basis of sexual orientation, then why vote for it"? Patial Equality is not Equality."

Turkey, that's a wonderful post.

"The names bigots, uncompassionate, and intolerant are thrown at those who disagree with someone else's opinion"

Stripping rights from people is more than opinion.

Let’s take a look at this whole issue and the bigotry involved.

Two teams: Team A and Team B.

Team A has been given equal protections and guarantees under the government as Team B. They are fighting to hold onto those protections and guarantees: argument for their side: the government extending the protections and guarantees to Team A poses no threat to anyone and can benefit the lives of thousands of citizens and their families.

Team B wants to strip Team A of the protections and guarantees the government has determined should be granted to Team A: argument for their side: nothing: they have no demonstrable proof that the protections and guarantees extended to Team A will harm culture or society in any way.

Which team sounds like bigots to you?

Vote NO on 1: extend equality and inclusion to ALL Maine families.

Why is the fact that there are ex-homosexuals such a point of contention? Isn't there ex-heterosexuals? Does that threaten the theory of "born gay"? Would an ex-homosexual be considered a bigot for leaving the flock?

Same-sex couples are families, too

By Steven Barkan, Stephen Marks and Robert Milardo

Peer reviewed research. Not research paid for by religious organizations with the purpose of finding certain results. "You find our desired results or we cut your funding?" You know?

http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/121751.html

Hey Ted, welcome aboard sailor! Have there actually been any marriages yet in the State of Maine? If this Law hasn't been enacted yet, what rights are being stripped away exactly? I don't understand the passion for such a flawed law.

10:16 PM, pastormarc, also, you are in the fear industry. It behooves you to keep people concerned about their afterlife. You are hardly and unbiased researcher.

JD: I think if that was going to happen, it would have happened by now!

10:26 PM, TurkeyTalker, it was passed by the legislature and a flaw in Maine's law lets the majority veto a law that was intended to improve the lives of a minority.

And at great expense, I might add.

robin56: There seems to be a commonality there.....that obsession they have with the sexual activity, especially of gays....remind you of a frequent poster on here?!

We deserve equality! But we'll accept a law that allows Government Officials the right to refuse us that Equality based on our sexual orientation. But this is all about defeating those Hateful Stupid Red-Neck Bigots! Just a little story here, I was watching a show called Mercy last week, not a great show, one of the story lines was a gay coupe who were fighting. This gay nurse lectures them, and tells them to set a good example for the...wait for it..."BREEDERS"! The 99 percentile of the population has been given a slur name by the homosexual community and it's "BREEDERS"?!?

10:32 PM, chersully2000, yes the obsession seems to be with gay men.

William: Who are you referring to at 10:16 PM Not sincity, right?

When my husband and I visit his sisters and brother in Maine, our legal marriage should not disappear.

It's a long enough drive from Boston to Blue Hill, without worrying about that sort of legal limbo. What if one of us was injured in a car crash? Would the hospital treat the other as a stranger? It's happened form time to time all over the country that hospitals keep gay and lesbian partners separated, or refuse to honor the partner's health care proxy.

10:33 PM, TurkeyTalker, one shouldn't wear ill-fitting shoes.

WilliamDS: There is one poster, in particular, who I have always found to be really really paranoid.

10:35 PM, chersully2000, no... forHIM.

So if I understand this correctly, all this fuss over the Bigots taking away the rights of the poor and oppressed, and there has NEVER been a LEGAL homosexual marriage in Maine! You would think this has been happening for years and the Bigots were stripping away a grand ol' traditional value. So a flawed Law, that hasn't even been enacted upon yet, is the basis of NO's discrimination howls! I'm going to bed. Settle this and let me know how it turns out in the morning!

SC said Charlie Howard deserved to die because he blew a kiss to the carful of teens.

William: Yes, we had enough with ill fitting shoes with bigfoot, aka sincity, et al.

SteveK: I hope the day is coming, very soon, when you and your husband will not have to worry and have those concerns. You should not have to!

Voted NO on 1.

Turkey, it took years of work to draft that law so that the legislature would pass it. You dismiss the dedication of the people who worked so hard for it. Gay people are fighting for their lives.

TurkeyTalker...I have been following this question longer then I have been posting. At one point some of the posters were using the term you quoted in your 10:33 PM post as well as other terms to describe the far right. That was sometime ago and I have not read those terms on these pages for some time now.

I cannot say the same thing for the posters on the far right. Just today a post was taken down for an inappropriate word used to describe someone who is gay.

One may or may not agree with the No on 1 group, but they have been far more civil with their post than the Yes on 1 crowd.

And get your dead azz to bed, you're begging to piss me off, Turkey.

I fail to see how preventing people from having a right they should have had all along is and better than taking away a right people have already had. In our case it's moot.

My husband and I are legally married, and in our opinion we are married wherever we go.

JD, I'm not civil and I have no intention of being civil. I'm to old to start being nice now.

Vote NO on ONE

I don't live in Maine most of the year. I mostly live in Massachusetts. We spend all of my vacation time in Maine though. My dad grew up in Winthrop, ME and my wife's parents are from Hancock and Waldo county. All four of our parents went to UMaine Orono. My wife has about 20 relatives within 15 miles of Ellsworth. My grandmother lived in Winthop most all her 96 years. My sister in law works at UMaine Orono and lives in Bangor.

We (my wife and sister and my mother in law) have a 150 year old shack in Hancock county, not MDI, that we have been trying to fix up for 10 years. Me (I'm a he) and my wife, and kids love Maine and the people we know all around there. Maine is our second home. We spend all of my 4 weeks of vacation time at our shack because we love it there so much. I so much hope that the good people of Maine vote for justice and equality for all.

I wish I could vote in Maine to Vote No on 1

LOL WilliamDS OK, I will give you that one. But give me this one. You have been more civil that many posters on here and I think other would agree.

Thank you, Crazy! lol Thank you very much...

WilliamDS: re 10:39 That is what I thought. I picked up on that a long time ago. (paranoia.) Maybe some people never really change in their lives.

But, if people really work on the right things to change in their lives and try to be better people, it shows in what they say and do. And that should include not denying other human beings dignities and rights. People who are accepting of others and don't try and dictate how others live their lives. People respecting others. Those would be positive changes. These divisive kind of people do not come across as very contented, well-integrated people, have you noticed? (maybe that is where some of the paranoia comes in, and the insults.)

You all are sad people on the no side, real sad your calling people names

Well good night all. Keep up the good fight!

10:53 PM, JD2008, perhaps, it's hard to get a point across when you are not being civil. ...Besides my swear words get turned into funny symbols? Ever notice that?

10:56 PM, Coronadrinker, as I said before, don't wear ill-fitting shoes.

Actually, I just scrolled through the posts, Corona, and we didn't call people names. We used their screen names. TurkeyTalker is a guy's name. I called him Turkey for short. Wake up.

William: And most of us have seen how sad many are on the YES side.....insults over and over......think maybe they wear their shoes too tight??!

Have a good night.

WIllaim you were calling people bigots, by which is name calling and not allowed on the Bdn site. I dont care what you all think bigots are by me its name calling. Have a great night.

Please Vote Yes on #1

Y'all, I see you miss me when I'm gone......or, as some put it, reloading. I actually have a life outside of the BDN threads. Anyway, JD, I was born in Mars Hill in 1954, moved to Cary Plantation in 1960, then Hodgdon in 1963. After graduating with a class of 33 from HHS in 73, I went into the military and have lived all over the world. In 1994 I retired from Hawaii, lived in Rapid City for a year and moved to Florida where I've lived every since. I've always loved the state of Maine, but could not move back because of the liberal government, high taxes, low wages and lack of decent work. I keep in touch with infrequent visits, relatives, and the Internet. Lately, I've kept up with the goings on a lot through the BDN and have actually enjoyed the comment section, even though I'm not on the popular side of many issues. But, I'd rather be right than popular.

Just a note on the 33 I graduated with, and this should shed some light on one of the biggest problems in Maine: nearly two thirds of them moved out of the state and stayed. Some came back, but did not return to the place they were raised. Some that stayed in the state moved south to find better work. And a few are still there, and will never leave. Each time I go back, there's more stories of those that had to move out because the economy in Northern Maine is so bad that they just couldn't remain there and live a decent life. It's really sad. Maine is one of the most beautiful states there is, and I've seen 48 of them, and there's virtually nothing there to make anyone want to stay, short of retirement or tourism. Northern Maine is especially hurting, especially since Loring Air Force Base was politically closed in the mid 80s. There's just nothing to attract people to live up there anymore.

And who's fault is that? I blame it primarily on the government and their lack of caring about the people. They tax and tax and tax while keeping industries out because they tax and tax and tax. The government has broken the people's pride by allowing the family farms to go under and driving out small businesses by removing incentives and tax breaks for both, at the same time allowing big farmers and chain stores to move in and push the little people out. Of course, when there's a bunch of liberal progressives in charge of things they know nothing about, this always happens. Just look at DC.

Anyway, I'll get off of my soapbox now. Just wanted to answer a couple of questions you seemed to have about me. Cher got most everything about me correct.

let the gays have their marriage

let them "breed" by trying to have children of their own

oops...

Peter LaBarbera? You mean the guy who defended a straight kid on his website for attacking and putting a gay kid in the hospital, the guy that has aligned himself with David Duke (former Grand Wizard of the KKK), that guy? What a joke.

The whole "ex-gay" thing? If a straight guy chooses to be celibate does that make him "ex-straight"? When an alcoholic stops drinking does that make them an "ex-alcoholic"? The celibate straight guy is still heterosexual. The alcoholic is still an alcoholic.

Coronadrinker - you must have skipped over all of forHIM's posts. Or perhaps you agree with everything he posted. Let's see what words has he used today and in the past - sick, disgusting, perverted............ Back in the 1900s there was a law that took away your right to drink that Corona but the law was repealed eventually giving you the right to partake of any alcoholic beverage you choose. It was in fact a law that took away rights. In May a law was passed to give same-sex couples the right to marry and now we have a referendum to take that right away. I choose not to drink alcoholic beverages but I wouldn't vote to that right away today. And I didn't vote to take away the right for same-sex couples to marry even though I'm not part of a same-sex couple.

EJParsons - what do you think of the hazing that is/was taking place in the military? Do you think soldiers of any orientation should be forced to imitate sex acts with same-sex soldiers? Should they be forced to prove their orientation by engaging with prostitutes? Should gay/lesbian soldiers be forced to "tell" in the "Don't ask, Don't Tell" policy now held by the military because they report such activities and booted out?

Give all the thumb downs, I would say someone must be upset the forHIMtoday is gone (at least for the moment).

Someone here stated that gays/lesbians were equal as in they could marry someone of the opposite sex but when posed a hypothetical question it he wa very clear that he would not accept a gay son-in-law he was quite clear through a direct threat against the life of the one who asked the HYPOTHETICAL question. And then he goes about spamming the board with anti-gay rhetoric and cites a man (Peter LaBarbera) who allies himself with a former Grand Wizard of the KKK. And he professes day in and day out to be a Christian man.

I told you then and I'll tell you again, you stooped to your lowest level even bringing my underage daughter into the picture. I see the bdn removed my response to you, I have no doubts now that you did have the chance to read it. I have no stomach for cowards like you.

It was a HYPOTHETICAL question - what part of "an of age daughter" don't you comprehend? Good to know they removed your threat of death. So you stand by your Peter LaBarbera who is aligned with David Duke, the former Grand Wizard of the KKK? You are a sick man.

Have to go to work.

forHIMtoday when exactly did you add a daughter to your family?

4him i commend you for quoiting the bible verses. These No campaigners jut dont realize gays dont need rights. But that is all im saying. Ive read comments from some of these No campaigners calling people bigots and other names. Its pretty sad, they have to resort to name calling. I hope Bdn catches it and takes care of it soon

"Law hasn't been enacted yet, what rights are being stripped away exactly"

The state has granted the rights of marriage to same-sex couples. The Yes on 1 crowd has brought forth a referendum to remove that right. The fact that there has not yet been a same-sex marriage in Maine does not diminish the fact that the state granted that right.

If you are born in America to American citizens, you are an American.

If you follow the teachings of Christ, you are a christian.

If you are exclusively attracted to members of the same sex, you are a homosexual.

If you are attempting to strip rights from a group of citizens based solely on personal reasons, you are a bigot.

Seems pretty simple to me.

I'm not sure that the town council election in Belfast interests enough readers to warrant a spot in the letters to the editor section.

Hey 4him...

Ever come up with any evidence that same-sex marriage has done harm in the states and nations it's been granted in?

We're still waiting!

Coronadrinker, thank you for sharing your viewpoint, I think we all need to see attitudes such as yours here for what they are.

"gays don't need rights" you say? Gays are Americans. Gays are our fellow Maine citizens. Gays are in our community. Gays absolutely deserve equal protection under the law, for they are people just like you.

Vote NO on 1, and take a stand for fairness and equal protection under the law.

Boy doesn`t a good nap feel good!

While I was napping it seems that there were somemore really good comments and some really opened with there personal history.

How refreshing to be able to talk like we are mostly all concerned about trying to figure out what is the right thing to do.

I agree that the word Bigot inflames all people and when enflamed it takes away from being able to decide what is right from what is wrong

I would like anyone on here to explain to anyone how HATE (which I will try to use instead of Bigotry)

Has worked for us all throughout mans HISTORY

Another ?, do we want World Peace or NOT

Another ?, how can anyone that has the conviction to be, or have serviced in The Armed Forces of this the Greatest Freedom Loving Country in the World. That actually puts its Troops on the line with there Lives, Not be on the NO side of this Gay Marriage Issue??????

History Lesson ( I HAVE A DREAM) who said it and what did it mean????

The glass half full attitude for me is we keep trying threw out our not puuurfect American System to continue to struggle AND to

Fight for Equality for ALL

I ALSO HAVE A DREAM

That the people of Maine wake up Nov 4th and Vote for our never ending quest for World Peace as we ALWAYS have eventuallly as

History has shown you how to VOTE all through out our History

A STAIGHT CRACKER Voting NO and oh so PROUD

Just look at all the wonderful words: Inclusion, equality, peace, bigotry, hate, rights, minority, and more.

Please excuse me while I go vomit.

.............there! I feel better. YES on #1

TurkeyTalker, I'm confused. Didn't you change your mind or was that all sarcasm? I sometimes have a hard time spotting sarcasm in posts without emoticons.

I don't see what all the issue is whether or not the law has been in practice or not. The fact remains that the law will very largely equalize marriage rights for gays. That the law allows government workers to abstain from performing same sex marriage doesn't strike me as a reason to pass on the opportunity to correct the huge wrong that currently gays are not able to participate in civil marriage, the legal rights and responsibilities that help to create stable families as all the evidence points out.

Well Convi, you dont understand some of these comments i have read. Why you calling the Yes side Bigots. Its name calling. Well at least in my book it is. Your No side is getting away with alot of comments on here and nothing is being done. Im ss to say this but you guys dont need rights. You chose to be gay. Your not born gay. You dont like what is happening then turn ungay. Lets protect Maine and our children Folks

Vote Yes #1

Coronadrinker, the evidence suggests that being gay is not a choice. Can you choose to be gay? I doubt it. However, whether it's a choice or not is irrelevant. Gays are currently unable to have civil marriages with the consenting adults that they wish to have civil marriages with.

Common morality and ethics, namely the Golden Rule and empathy for others demands that people who may find homosexuallity personally objectionable not stand in the way of them still being able to have civil marriage.

It is wrong for you to stand in the way of that and thus perpetuate harm to a segment of the population. Vote No on 1

forHIMtoday please tell me where the kingdom of god is so I can avoid it. I sure don't want to be anywhere near where you are, especially for all eternity.

religious fanatics make me ill!

Het EJ-This is the OPINION page. Not the NEWS page.

corona...another poster child for the "vote yes" side. You might want to lay off the Corona for a while. Your 9:10 offering was one of the more arrogant and presumptuous posts I've seen here in a while.

You get upset when someone calls you a bigot, then proceed to show precisely why you fit the description.

Keep posting...you're an interesting study.

Please vote "no" on 1.

And seacoast what is ignorant about it. I said you guys dont deserve rights because you chose to be gay. Guess maybe you do but i dont think so. And the name calling needs to stop you all, its just nasty and mean of you all. I see it coming from both sides, Not just our side but the No side. Seen several comments removed that the no side said. Keep the good work up seacoast.

Vote Yes #1

Is "ungay" even a word? Remember that movie: "The Good, The Bad and the Ungay"?

Coronadrinker, it's morally wrong to vote yes on 1. Don't you understand that? It's morally wrong to harm people who cause no harm. Yes on 1 will cause harm to others. Consider the Golden Rule and empathy for others.

corona...you're being ignorant by not listening when we tell you we didn't choose to be gay. It's not a put-down, it's a fact. You're ignoring what we tell you.

I'll say it again: I did not choose to be gay. I've had same-sex attractions for as long as I can remember, going back to my childhood. These attractions are part of my nature, I couldn't have chosen them even if I'd wanted to.

Ok? It wasn't a choice, so stop telling me it was.

Please vote "no" on 1. Coronadrinker is giving you plenty of good reasons to do so.

I have considered the golden rule and that golden rule is to Vote Yes on #1. I think its wrong Baldacci signed this law. We are figthing this to the end and we will continue to fight it to the end. Have a good day

US 14th Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Coronadrinker, it makes zero sense to say that the golden rule would suggest that it's good to intentionally cause harm to others who are not causing harm. Your stand is nonsense. I have to think that other motivations guide your stand. What are those other motivations?

seacoast wrote: " I couldn't have chosen them even if I'd wanted to. "

And the odd thing is that coronadrinker could not choose to be gay and yet he thinks that others can.

Me thinks Mainer72 is back using a new screen name. Certain abrevations that I have never seen before Mainer72 are back. And the "no side" are the ones "name calling". Hmmm....t

I have no other motivations except that i Have already Voted Yes on #1. My whole family has. We believe in marriage between one man one woman. Your No side has been name calling, been rude, been nasty. Lets see what else have they done. Oh yea, they stole Yes signs. Not once, but not twice. Five times i have had heard so far. Just get with it, the supreme court wont do anything like a couple posters in here think they will. If you lose you lose. If you win you win. We will have to deal with gays running around holding each others hands kissing in front of kids, making parents upset. Im ss but i am a yes vote and nothing will ever change my mind. Unless i turned gay, and i doubt that will ever happen

"Its name calling."

But it's true.

To call me a homosexual is not an insult: I am a homosexual.

If you are a bigot, you should not be insulted by being called a bigot.

If someone calls you a bigot, and you don't like being called a bigot, don't be a bigot.

I understand it's not a word people want to be called: but calling for the removal of state granted rights from a group of people based only on personal, emotional, reasons has only one definition: bigotry. Those who practice bigotry are bigots.

Uncomfortable or not, it simply is what it is.

And by the way... IF sexuality was a choice, it would be no different than the choice to follow a religion: which is a protected choice. The choice argument is moot.

"You dont like what is happening then turn ungay" -- YOU are the one that doesn't like what's happening (exemplified by your vote to remove it). Perhaps, if you don't like what is happening and you feel homosexuality is a choice, you should become gay rather than try to strip state granted rights from your fellow citizens.

Vote NO on 1: it's simply the right thing to do.

No Jd, your wrong. But good try

"Just get with it, the supreme court wont do anything like a couple posters in here think they will."

Now THERE is a statement made in complete and utter ignorance of the world around us.

Good... grief...

"We will have to deal with gays running around holding each others hands kissing in front of kids, making parents upset."

Yes... just as you do today. It will be no different whether the bigots strip away the rights of marriage or not.

Nothing will change for you either way.

And your "five times" comment is worthless without credible sources.

BeaverFood>>>>>thank you for oh so elequantly showing your distain for those words THAT AMERICANS HOLD DEARLY

Please, Please continueing to show people what is just so RIGHT.

Oh BTW I forgot to say

A CONVERTED STRAIGHT CRACKER AND WIFE VOTING

NO ON ONE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY

Coronadrinker wrote: "I have no other motivations except that i Have already Voted Yes on #1. My whole family has. We believe in marriage between one man one woman. "

Coronadrinker, It's distressing that you'd choose to cause harm to others who have caused no harm. I'd describe that as terribly immoral.

"Just get with it, the supreme court wont do anything like a couple posters in here think they will. If you lose you lose. "

It will not go to the SCOTUS but to the Maine Supreme Court.

"If you win you win. We will have to deal with gays running around holding each others hands kissing in front of kids, making parents upset. Im ss but i am a yes vote and nothing will ever change my mind. Unless i turned gay, and i doubt that will ever happen"

Intolerance like that is a shame. It's a shame that your personal distaste for homosexuality has motivated you to choose to cause them harm and to denuy them equal protection of the law.

Whatever happened to "don't feed the trolls"? OMG this is so funny, and so appropriate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ig_2k9aDhpE

free2bee - 6:22 AM - Never been hazed and I've never had to prove my orientation. I support "Don't Ask, Dont Tell".

JetMech - 9:26 AM - Your point?

As for the Golden Rule: If I were involved in a lifestyle that was sure to send me straight to hell for eternity, I would want someone to intervene and, excuse the expression, set me straight. Are you going to hand your 10 year old a loaded pistol and tell him to figure out how to use it? Are you going to send your teenage daughter to the red light district by herself and tell her to get to know the neighborhood? Do you let your kids roam the Internet without filters or supervision? Do you meet your kids dates at the door and get to know them before they take your son or daughter out or your sight? Unfortunately, many people do these things or worse with their children. So many have forgotten that the Golden Rule isn't a blanket excuse to let others do whatever they want. The Golden Rule also includes protecting others from doing harm to themselves. The Golden Rule, to Christians, means letting the homosexual community know that what they are doing is wrong, it's a sin, and it means an eternity separated from God if they don't repent and turn away from their lifestyle.

Coronadrinker, I've never called anyone here that name.

It matters not a bit whether being gay is a choice or not. The fact of the matter is that gay people live amongst us, and have committed relationships every bit as meaningful and fulfilling as any heterosexual coupling.

It's simply wrong to say that because you don't like how we live our lives that you will stand in the way of us receiving fair and equal protection under the law. In fact, it's not just wrong, it's unconstitutional.

I think that anyone who is reading my comments and your comments can see us for who we are, and I'm comfortable with those who read what I have to say and pass judgment on my point of view. Their judgment says far more about their personal character than it does about mine.

Vote NO on 1, Maine can once again lead the nation on an important issue of equality.

EJParsons wrote: " As for the Golden Rule: If I were involved in a lifestyle that was sure to send me straight to hell for eternity, I would want someone to intervene and, excuse the expression, set me straight. "

The Golden Rule suggests that you respect that others are convinced that your religious beliefs are faulty. You should accept that and live and let live. It also suggests that you do not use your religious ideas to impose upon others. that's morally wrong also.

If I was a christian I'd point out to you that the only thing that gets someone sent to hell under the christian religion is to not believe and accept Jesus as savior. That's it.

Besides which, homosexuals will not stop being homosexuals if they can't get married. So a stand that denies equal protection of the law is pointless as regards to your goal.

As it is, there is no doubt in my mind that the whole idea of an eternal hell is total nonsense. But I wouldn't try to prevent someone from following their beliefs so long as they don't try to force them onto others. A yes on 1 is an attempt to impose a religious belief onto others and that's simply wrong.

I see Mainer72 is back with a new username. Maybe the BDN banned her for those nasty offensive comments from yesterday.

Vote No on 1

"If you win you win. We will have to deal with gays running around holding each others hands kissing in front of kids, making parents upset."

Win or lose I think we should do this anyway. Just to see the implosion. Kinda OT I was watching FlashForward last night and it featured three, fairly chaste, lesbian kisses. Well I was on a TV message board and a mother was flipping out that her 8 year old daughter was exposed to such filth. It was quite amusing to see the other posters ask why she hadn't objected to all the straight relationships (some of which bordered on sex) the violence, the drinking, and why she was allowing her 8 year old to watch a TV-14+ show in the first place. Good times.

EJParsons, the whole "judge not lest ye be judged" concept comes to mind when I read your post. By looking at my lifestyle and deciding that I am going to spend eternity in hell, you are judging me. You can say that you're just going by what your religion teaches you, but there are thousands of deeply religious Mainers who have come forward and said that they feel God loves us all, and that includes our homosexual citizens. By deciding that God's love and grace is withheld from homosexuals, you are taking it upon yourself to judge us, even if you are using your biblical theology as your reason.

Please don't stand in the way of a good law that will honestly help many Maine families and their children. If you cannot condone our lifestyle, that is fine. You don't have to vote NO if you feel strongly it goes against your religious convictions. I'm just asking you to see that voting YES would hurt Mainers, and ask you not to do that.

7:15 AM, forHIMtoday, nobody here knew anything about you or your children until you responded to a hypothetical question in such an inappropriate way. I know you're stressed but you need to read and respond to what's written rather than misinterpreting and reacting.

"I know you're stressed"

He ain't stressed... he's drafting a wonderful document on how same-sex marriage has harmed states and nations where it's been granted... busy busy he is.

I can't wait!

EJ- My point is that you railed against the BDN for having mostly no on 1 letters today. And suggested that the paper had an agenda of only printing that point of view. This is just an opinion page, the opinions of the readers, not the paper.

Their coverage of the issue in the news section has been balanced.

9:30 AM, Coronadrinker, the APA's statement about sexual orientation and choice has been posted repeatedly. You have chosen to ignore it. Should I post it again?

crazyfingers - In order to accept Jesus as your Savior, you have to admit that you are a sinner, pray for forgiveness, ask Jesus to be your Lord and Savior, and repent from your sins. Repentance is the act of admitting your sins and turning away from them. Being that homosexuality is a sin against the body and an abomination to God, it is certainly a sin that has to be turned away from in order to accept Jesus as your Savior. It's not as simple as believing that Jesus was real and that He is the Son of God. Even the devil believes that, but he's not going to Heaven when it's all said and done.

Let's put that concept into more understandable terms. Let's say that you met Bill Gates and he was impressed with your computer knowledge and made you an offer to work for him. You accept the position, but then find out that you can no longer use a Mac computer, even though you've used Macs for years and like them a lot better. You want the pay and benefits that Bill Gates offers, so you hide your Mac from him. He comes into your office one day on a surprise visit and finds you on your Mac. Do you think he's going to keep you on staff now that he's just found out that you accepted his terms but have not abided by them? Maybe he'll give you a second chance. But your dishonesty and fraud will probably get you fired.

ConvivialVisits - 10:47 AM - When you take "judge not" out of context, it becomes meaningless. Read the entire passage and you'll see that it does not apply. And I'm not judging you; I'm simply pointing out what I believe. If you don't believe that, that's your choice. If you want to take the chance that there is no eternity, then that's your choice. As for God loving us all, of course He does. We are all His creations. But, He also loved everyone He drowned in the flood. He also loved everyone He destroyed in Sodom and Gomorrah. And He loves everyone that He will destroy when the world takes up arms agaisnt Israel at Armagaddon. He truly loves us all, enough to send His Son to die for our sins. He loves us enough to give us His Holy Word to guide us through life. He loves us enough to give us rules, morals, and a path to Heaven through the blood of Jesus. God also gave us all one power, and that's the power to choose. We can choose Him and the plan He has for our lives. We can choose to reject Him and go our own way. Either way, deep down inside we all know that there is a God and that He wants us to do what's right.

One more thing, most here know that I no longer live in the state, so I'm not voting on this issue, just expressing my beliefs and opinions. If I were there, I would vote yes without reservation. A yes vote is moral and is best for traditional familiy values and the best for America. And that's my opinion.

11:02 AM, tedlick, I'm sure you're right. pastormarc thought he was going to throw his weight around last night at 10:16 PM with more misinformation. I responded soundly and we haven't seen him yet so he's looking for research somewhere that was bought and paid for by some religious organization or religious college.

JetMech - Balanced? Nothing could be further from the truth. Every article BDN has printed has been slanted, biased, and worded in ways that make their stance glaringly obvious. Saying that BDN has been balanced is like saying that MSNBC is balanced.

Ok....we need to reestablish that religious beliefs are not on the table when we talk about civil law. There is much too much talk about religion in this forum. Religion is the most infamous oppressor when it comes to human rights. ALL RELIGIONS.

I'll bet he's shakin' in his boots. LOL

I responded soundly and we haven't seen him yet so he's looking for research somewhere that was bought and paid for by some religious organization or religious college.

11:28 AM, EJParsons, because the best the yes side could come up with was Emrich's psychotic tirade a couple of weeks ago, and before that, the attorney who actually helped the "No on One" side more than the yes side.

Well yes and no WIlliamDS. I certainly agree that religion should not be on the table when it comes to law in this country. However I think history has shown that it has been, time and again. While we can strike it from the final product we can't stop people from voting according to their religious beliefs.

My biggest problem with this referendum is that it’s happening at all. Because they allow this to be put to vote they are allowing people to vote away rights based on personal feelings and religious bias. That is wrong, I don't care which side of the issue you are on.

This is an interesting article by a former Evangelical Christian Brent Childers, on why he now believes in the rights of gays. Very thought provoking.. I posted the link to not flood this site (this is getting to be a bad habit). Here are just two of the passages to give you an idea of the content.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/216910

And I know better than anyone, since six years ago I was one of those bigots. At that time it would have seemed abominable to even consider attending a "gay-rights" event. To me, these would have been the people tearing apart the very seams of our culture and our country.....

It's because something deep inside told me that I needed to step out in faith onto a bridge of knowledge and understanding. I didn't know where this bridge would take me but something was telling me it was a path I needed to walk. My own mother challenged me in 2003 to look at my beliefs and the true intent behind the teachings I held in blind faith. "Do you think your views are Christ-like?" she asked me. Her question was dead on: once I walked away from the Church's teachings of rejection and condemnation, my relationship with God transcended to a higher spiritual plateau. I realized an unparalleled sense of spiritual clarity when I opened my heart and mind to a genuine expression of love, compassion, and acceptance of all sexual orientations and gender identities.

11:38 AM, HRH419, he was citing research that doesn't exist. It was rhetoric. He never produced the sources. The only credible sources for such studies come from, he American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, or the American Sociological Association.

Why is Question ONE the ONE question out of all the question that are so rightly concerning all of us Today the BDN is showing there support for.

Why indeed is # ONE the overall Question facing us on NOV 4th

Well in going to the store and within 6 miles having an oncoming State Police and a Sheriff Officer not stop me for doing well over the speed limit. I personally think they had a higher mission going on in protecting all our freedoms from the bad guys, than stopping just another speeder.

For whatever reason while going to the store for my two addictions (coffee and Cigs) the guy that is going to a party Saturday night with all his motorcycling friends. And when the party is done and before everyone leaves. I will be telling them where I stand on the Gay Rights Issue. Why am I waiting for the party to end. That’s a givin. It also gives my friends that might be undecided to really think. I have no idea what a lot of their reactions are going to be for taking such a stance. All I know is that I am one of many Alfa Males in this State and Country that do not take prisoners that try to hurt the pack. And that I am married to a like minded pack member.

Anyways while on the way back from the store I got thinking about the on going debate of why Our President received the Noble Peace Prize.

It just flat out hit me right in the face.

For me it was not directed to our President. It was given to the Representative of America. The Noble Peace Prize belongs to the People of America for there wonderful accomplishment of voting in the First President of the United States that is Black. And all that entailed and demonstrated to the rest of the World.

Yes America we have demonstrated again that the Number ONE issue for America the Brave, IS FREEDOM FOR ALL and standing up for our own Citizens and the Citizens of the World in our never ending Quest for World Peace. That was demonstrated by a very high% of American Citizens. Change in America and what a Change it Was.

I am one American that is so very proud for America!!!!!!!!

There is no need for me to tell anyone on how I will be voting on what is Right for all the Citizens of the World.

Your Dream Doctor King is still alive and Well with ME.

11:40 AM, TolBig80, oh I agree! It's shameful. My point is, people should be following their religions as they see fit but not expecting the laws of the land to conform to their religious beliefs. That is unconstitutional but they are so indoctrinated that they can't see that.

11:54 AM, ElectraGlide, I hope you aren't voting on the 4th. Check your calendar.

Okay...on the count of 3...everyone hold hands and sing along....then after the vote we all can go on slamming each other

Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya

Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya

Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya

Oh lord, kumbaya

Someones singing lord, kumbaya

Someones singing lord, kumbaya

Someones singing lord, kumbaya

Oh lord, kumbayah

Someones laughing, lord, kumbaya

Someones laughing, lord, kumbaya

Someones laughing, lord, kumbaya

Oh lord, kumbaya

Someones crying, lord, kumbaya

Someones crying, lord, kumbaya

Someones crying, lord, kumbaya

Oh lord, kumbaya

Someones praying, lord, kumbaya

Someones praying, lord, kumbaya

Someones praying, lord, kumbaya

Oh lord, kumbaya

Someones sleeping, lord, kumbaya

Someones sleeping, lord, kumbaya

Someones sleeping, lord, kumbaya

Oh lord, kumbaya

Oh lord, kumbaya

11:54 AM, ElectraGlide, stop making me cry! LOL You put it very well. "An inclusive society makes a strong nation." When everybody is treated equally under the law, they are free to work for the common good. Struggle and hardship in the population creates internal decay and takes away from the forward momentum in the quest for peace and justice.

WOW

12:02 PM, LilMikey, LOL go pound sand.

Did you know that Mainecare pays for artificial insemination of Lesbians who are already collecting welfare for kids they can't afford?

concernsme: the closing paragraph of Mr. Childers' article is particularly powerful:

"I remember the first time I met Sean Kennedy's mother, Elke, sitting in her family's living room just months after she had lost her precious son as the result of a senseless and hate-filled act of violence. And I will never forget that momentary look on her face when I explained to her that I once was someone whose attitude had helped perpetuate the societal climate in which her son lived and died. It was a moment in which I realized the depths of the wounds I may have inflicted upon a gay teen contemplating suicide or a perpetrator looking to justify hate violence. It is a moment that commands me to continue to march, to speak out, and help others experience the spiritual blessing that comes from unshackling the chains of religion-based bigotry and prejudice."

LilMikey: I can't sing that song. Every time we sang it at scout camp, it rained. The last time, when I was a Cub Scout leader, I warned the boys about singing it (tongue-in-cheek, of course) but they sang it anyway.

Luckily the tornado missed us.

12:10 PM, boogyman, and you wonder why you are called a bigot. To my knowledge, Mainecare does not pay for fertility services. Each case, of course, is managed individually. If they are paying for fertility issues for lesbians then they are also paying for non-lesbians.

YOUR SOURCE?

WilliamDS....Yes I have the 3rd highlighted very well but thank you.

I must of been thinking about another Party

The biggest party for Freedom since the last Indepence Day Party

There have so so many Parties in our History

Party On America Party On

boogyman...please source your 12:10 PM post.

No.....YOU need to prove what you said is true. I know what I learned about Mainecare and if you have facts that are different, you need to prove them.

See? The burden of proof is on the accuser.

Randy Thomas on Christian Change and Contentment

Note the wonderful concluding comment, applicable to all believers, on change through — and contentment in — Christ from Randy Thomas (left) of Exodus International. This is reprinted from Randy’s blog: — Peter LaBarbera:

Homosexuality A Product of The Complex Roles of Nature and Nurture

From OneNewsNow.com:

The attempt to prove that homosexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there’s no homosexual “gene” — meaning it’s not likely that homosexuals are born that way.

For decades, the APA has not considered homosexuality a psychological disorder, while other professionals in the field consider it to be a “gender-identity” problem. But the new statement, which appears in a brochure called “Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality,” states the following:

“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles….”

That contrasts with the APA’s statement in 1998: “There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person’s sexuality.”

While it is important to find out all we can about sexual identity and development the other side of the coin is that we all have a right to self determine what we do with our lives and sexuality. I didn’t have to know whether it was genetic or not in order to pursue, learn and live my life the way I see fit.

The article interviews and quotes Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber and their recognition that some people “change” through a relationship with Christ:

LaBarbera stresses that even though elites will not recognize the change, that does not mean the change does not exist. In fact, both Barber and LaBarbera believe that God changes people through Christ — regardless of the sin.

I appreciate their recognition of “change” through a relationship with Christ and that “change” happens regardless of whatever a person is struggling with. For me, the fact that I no longer identify as gay, do not participate in homosexual behavior, no longer have life dominating temptations, have experienced a strong degree of orientation shift is all secondary “change.” It’s all secondary to the fact that my goal is to love, abide, grow and be content in Christ … regardless of circumstance.

That’s “change” enough for me.

now someone please had william another tissue.

oh no..MORE CUT AND PASTE??? VOTE NO ON 1

forHim do you have an actual point? Or do you just enjoy spamming the board since you have nothing of substance to add? What exactly does it prove if it IS a choice? Choice is protected by law, we are all free to pursue that which makes us happy.

12:27 PM, forHIMtoday,

As usual, posting off-topic (and from oneNEURONnow no less).

Now, did you ever find your evidence of harm caused by same-sex marriage?

We really want to see this masterwork of yours that will show us how same-sex marriage has hurt folks in relevant states and countries.

Come on now... be a big boy and show all us nasty homos how much evidence you have.

12:27 PM, forHIMtoday, you still don't get it. The issue is....."gay people are human beings." I'm not getting into this "choice" debate with you again as it isn't the issue.

Only research from The American Psychological Association, The American Psychiatric Association, or The American Sociological Association on behavioral sciences is credible.

Studies paid for by religious organizations are invalid because they hire researchers to find the results for which they pay. The researchers' funding gets cut if the desired results are not found.

OneNewsNow is a member of the following organization. Think they have an agenda?

The American Family Association (AFA) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that promotes conservative Christian values[1][2][3][4] such as traditional marriage, anti-pornography and pro-life activism,[5] as well as other public policy goals such as deregulation of the oil industry and lobbying against the Employee Free Choice Act.[6] It was founded in 1977 by Rev. Donald Wildmon as the National Federation for Decency and is headquartered in Tupelo, Mississippi. Donald Wildmon serves as AFA chairman; his son, Tim Wildmon, is AFA president.[5]

The AFA defines itself as "a Christian organization promoting the biblical ethic of decency in American society with primary emphasis on TV and other media"[7][8] It pursues its views and other issues through a number of activism efforts, including boycotts, buycotts, Action Alert e-mails, publications on the AFA's web sites or in the AFA Journal, broadcasts on American Family Radio, and lobbying.[9] The legal efforts previously promoted by the AFA Center for Law and Policy were eliminated in 2007. Chief among its efforts were the recognition of Christmas in seasonal print advertisements; the criminalization of homosexuality;[10][11][12] lobbying against same-sex marriage, and in opposition of equal-rights and hate-crime legislation that would include sexual orientation and gender identity under categories already protected[13][14][15] and advocating censorship of print and electronic media.[16]

The organization has an annual budget of roughly US$14 million and owns 180 American Family Radio stations in 28 states.[17]

"other professionals" in what field? LOL The APA IS the field. The field to which they are referring is Theology, not behavioral sciences.

Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber? LaBarbera is a white supremacist, Barber is a singer. Credentials? Christian dogma.

forHIMtoday you never answered my questions from earlier today....when did you add a daughter to your family?

Wow that sure is some interesting reading out there on Peter LaBarbera....what a nutjob! VOTE NO ON 1

tolbig, the actual point is that homosexual can be overcome. The point is thousands have overcome it, its just not politically correct or popular to publish those testimonies from people that have actually overcome this immorality. If you really peel back all the layers of this onion what you'll find at the core of all this is a battle between Gods righteousness and man's righteousness. Read what the scripture say's in 1Cr 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,

1Cr 6:10 nor thieves, nor {the} covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

1Cr 6:11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

See verse 11." Such were some of you." PAST TENSE! Once you were "that" and now your not. You have been washed, sanctified (made holy) you have now been justified (just as if you never did it) That is the incredible promise of our Lord. you don't have to live this life of sin, you can be free from it. That is why Christians are so adamantly against this being touted as an alternate acceptable lifestyle, it is anything but that.

Heard a very interesting comment this morning on WVOM from Reverend Bob. For those of you who do not know Rev Bob he is an ordained CCC minister in the Bangor area and he was taking calls on an "Ask the Reverand" segment.

One caller asked him did he believe that the story of Sodom and Gomorrah was about homosexuality and his answer was "No". He went onto say that his reading of the text and scriptures leads him to believe that cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed not for homosexual acts but for being "inhospitality" to travelers and visitors.

So I did a quick internet search while I am home for lunch and (I know some of you will take issue with the source) found this on Wikipedia.

"There are two prevailing views of the sin of Sodom in Christian thought. The typical conservative position is one that holds that the demand of Lot's countrymen was referring to a militant solicitation for homosexual sex, while the opposing non-sexual view sees the destruction of Sodom as being due to inhospitality, as illustrated by the gifts of God to Abraham for his gracious action, contrasted with consequences of the behavior of the city's inhabitants."

"The contention between the two positions primarily focuses upon the meaning of the word know, in verse 5:"

Basically it boils down to this - is the translation from the Hebrew word "know" mean

- Getting to know i.e. getting to know some one new, or

- Getting to know some way in a "carnal" way, i.e in a sexual way

Source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_and_Gomorrah

I thought this was interesting as many posters have used to Sodom and Gomorrah story as proof that God does not approve of homosexuals. There is much more information then what I posted here so if any one is interested, just visit and read the information for yourself.

William - 11:35 AM - I know why you would love to get rid of all religions. Without religion, especially Christianity, there would be no guilt.

concernsme - 11:41 AM - That 'something deep inside' was the voice of Satan, not God. Satan leads so many away from the Truth so he can use them to do his business.

1:00 PM, forHIMtoday, when that is on the ballot, then we'll discuss it. Right now the ballot issue is "do we want to treat all Maine's taxpaying citizens equally under the law. Do we want to repeal a legislation that was intended to improve the lives of a minority. 2.5 people out of 100 identify as gay. Do we want to continue to marginalize them?

Vote NO on ONE

MaineCare will pay for penile implants for impotent registered sex offender though F.Y.I. What a great plan that is huh?

forHim the point is that it isn't something that HAS to be overcome for me. For you it obviously is, fine, overcome it all you need to if that makes you happy. Homosexuality only needs to be "overcome" by those that believe its wrong. I happen to believe it's pretty darn great.

That tome you keep quoting ad nauseam has NO meaning to my life. None. It's about as relevant to me as the Cat in the Hat.

JD - 1:05 PM - Reverend Bob might be ordained, but he's spreading lies if he actually believes that S & G were destroyed for being inhospitable. And you repeated his lunacy.

Sorry, my comment was in reponse to 12:16 post.

EJParsons - not true. I have no religion, yet I still feel guilt. Try again.

I think a better way to look at it is that without religions there would be no justification for intolerance.

1:07 PM, EJParsons, I wouldn't go so far as to say that but you're pretty close. I, however am not taking steps to bring that about. I know it's protected under the constitution. My personal beliefs about religion are not the issue. I post facts.

Vote NO on ONE

"the actual point is that homosexual can be overcome"

No, the actual point is that you have serious hangups (to a pathological level) regarding homosexuals.

The issues aren't about how you feel about homosexuals. It's about same-sex marriage, which you have already proven is harmless.

We thank you for proving that too!

1:09 PM, realist38, SOURCE? With no source posted you're just gossiping. Mainecare is not the issue. Gay marriage is.

"MaineCare will pay for penile implants for impotent registered sex offender though"

No source, no fact.

BTW, that registered sex offender can marry. Why haven't you bigots taken up arms against them?

Just curious.

EJParsons

"Those who favor the non-sexual interpretation argue against a denotation of sexual behavior in this context, noting that while the Hebrew word for know appears over 900 times in the Hebrew Scriptures, only approximately 1% (13-14 times) of those references is it clearly used as a euphemism for realizing sexual intimacy. Instead, those who hold to this interpretation usually see the demand to know as demanding the right to interrogate the strangers."

"Countering this is the observation that one of the examples of "know" meaning to know sexually occurs only three verses later in the same narrative:

Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing...

—Genesis 19:8

A major text in regard to these conflicting opinions is that of Jude 1:17 (KJV):

Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

—Jude 1:7

This reference to "going after strange flesh" is understood as possibly referring to sex with strangers, sex outside of wedlock, or possibly something akin to bestiality."

"Many who support the non-sexual position contend that as the word for “strange” basically means “another,” “other,” “altered” or even “next,” then the meaning is unclear, and if the condemnation of Sodom was sexual, then it is likely that it was because women sought to commit fornication with “other than human” angels, perhaps referring to Genesis 6 and or the apocryphal book of Enoch. Countering this, it is pointed out that Genesis 6 refers to angels seeking women, not men seeking angels, and that both Sodom, and Gomorrah were engaging the sin Jude describes before the angelic visitation, and that in any case, it is doubtful that the Sodomites knew they were angels. In addition, it is argued the word used in the KJV for "strange," can mean unlawful or corrupted (Rm. 7:3; Gal. 1:6), and that the book of Enoch condemns "sodomitic" sex, (10:3; 34:1) thus indicating that homosexual relations was the prevalent physical sin of Sodom."

TolBig80 - But, if you never knew about religion and you were never taught or learned morals, then your guilt level would be almost nonexistant. We feel guilt based on our spiritual connections and our sense of right and wrong. Without religion, would we have a sense of right and wrong? Would we have morals? No. And we wouldn't have guilt, because there wouldn't be a need for it.

Does MaineCare pay for brain transplants?

JD - Right foot on red.

tedlick, you're are such a piece of work. What do you want for proof, the pervs hospital record? A listing of his bill?

I don't have a problem or feel threatened (you wish) by you being "in a union" with someone of the same sex, I have issues with you wanting to label it marriage.

You can call me a bigot, I've been called worse by better!

VOTE YES ON 1!

Leaning on religion is for weak minded people,as evidenced by as many of the "yes on 1" people.Religion in modesty is one thing,but some of you people are lunatics.

1:21 PM, EJParsons, wrong. We all have morals and I guarantee you I'm more moral than you. We feel guilt when we cause harm or hardship to others.

realist38, would you support us changing things so everyone's commitment was called civil union in the eyes of the law, but only religious institutions could conduct marriage ceremonies?

I'm fine with equality, either way it falls. But too many folks who are "fine with civil unions" aren't really fine with it at all if it means they have to have it called that too. And that is, in essence, an empty compromise because you're not compromising at all.

Vote NO on 1, it is a good law that protects all Maine families and their children.

Tedlick, here's your SOURCE for the FACT

http://www.maine.gov/dhhs/oms/pdfs_doc/news_can_use/section_90_highlights_phys_020909.pdf

It has to be "pre authorized" and I know what that amounts to with MaineCare.

Don't be so bitter just because you're going to lose, It really isn't very becoming on you, obvious yes, becoming no.

What the bible says is irrelevant! Maine and the US are fortunately not a theocracy. Laws must have a secular purpose. Revoking laws must be done for a secular purpose. Equal protection of the law is a secular purpose. What the bible says is not.

1:25 PM, realist38, what does someone's penile implant have to do with gay marriage? And if you make a statement of accusation the burden of proof is on you, otherwise it's just hearsay and if you can't find a source..... it never happened. Unless of course you were the patient.

"What do you want for proof, the pervs hospital record? A listing of his bill? "

Can't be proven with evidence, tis but hearsay.

"I have issues with you wanting to label it marriage"

There are already married same-sex couples in this nation. "Marriage" is a term that already includes them. You're just a bit slow on the uptake.

Again, even though we don't have kangaroos in Maine, we still define them as marsupials. The bellyaching about the term "marriage" is the same thing: they're married, so we include them under the definition of "marriage". Get over it: you're too late: it's already done.

And yes... you are indeed a bigot.

Vote NO on 1: insure equality and fairness for ALL Maine citizens and their families.

EJParsons wrote: "TolBig80 - But, if you never knew about religion and you were never taught or learned morals, then your guilt level would be almost nonexistant. We feel guilt based on our spiritual connections and our sense of right and wrong. Without religion, would we have a sense of right and wrong? Would we have morals? No. And we wouldn't have guilt, because there wouldn't be a need for it."

What an ignorant comment. Religion is completely unnecessary for morality and ethics. Morality and ethics are based on values and values are learned regardless of the source.

EJP I don't see how you can draw that conclusion with any sound basis in logic. My personal sense of morality does not come from religious teaching. The bible teaches that man should have dominion over the animals. Accordingly I should be able to kill them with no sense of guilt. If i were to go home and kill my dog, I would feel guilt. The bible does not teach that killing animals is wrong. That comes from my personal belief that I would have violated the trust of a creature that relies on me to care for it.

1:29 PM, realist38, were does it say......penile implant for a sex offender? You should know that all men are assumed to be heterosexual so one can see how penile implant gets on the list of "pre-approval required."

As ted said. The sex offender is allowed to marry.

1:29 PM, realist38,

Very good! A statement by someone on the Yes side that can actually be held up with evidence and fact! I'm very proud of you realist38...

As for losing, I've already told you that I don't think it matters. It just means you guys have to listen to more about us til we're done in the courts (which is a slam-dunk).

Not bitter... I'm just honest. Facts are all that matter in this instance. And the fact remains: there is no harm from same-sex marriage: there is no productive function of government by keeping this group of people unequal under the law: there is no reason to believe that the Supreme Court of Maine won't make very short work of your victory.

Exactly tedlick, the thing that the Yes side doesn't seem to grasp is that the definition of marriage has already changed. Maine is just trying to bring the law in line with the change to ensure equal protection.

Regardless of the outcome Nov. 3 gay couples that want to refer to their union as married will do so, and nothing will change that. So all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the definition of a word will be for naught; the change has already happened.

forHIM is scouring the 2 APA sites and the ASA site for studies to support his fears. Sad.

Looks like that sense of right and wrong based on religion worked for the Catholic priests.