Found, but not lost
The major part of the second of Peter Kilgore’s “2 Found Poems” (Uni-verse, Jan. 30 BDN) is more than just “found.” It is in fact a rather close translation of the lyrics of one of the most famous and beloved songs of modern Quebec, Gilles Vigneault’s “Mon Pays” (“My Country”).
Here is the first stanza with my translation:
“Mon pays ce n’est pas un pays, c’est hiver.
Mon jardin ce n’est pas un jardin, c’est la plaine.
Mon chemin ce n’est pas un chemin, c’est la neige.
Mon pays ce n’est pas un pays, c’est l’hiver.”
My country is not a country, it is winter. My garden is not a garden, it’s the plain. My road is not a road, it is snow. My country is not a country, it is winter.
Richard Clark
Perham
Tank will help
I started my business in Searsport in 1987 and we have been successful as landscapers. The last two years, however, have taken an incredible toll. For the first time since we opened our business, we lost money.
We depend on a strong economy to make ends meet. I am supporting the propane tank in Searsport for the 12-15 permanent jobs that will pay $70,000 a year and the more than 100 construction jobs that will be here to build it over the next 18 months.
I didn’t retire to Searsport with a boatload of cash — I am part of the working community that needs to make a living. It’s time to say no to a moratorium that will kill jobs and keep money from coming to Searsport.
Wayne Ely
Searsport
Mainers not interested
Since late October, Maine Citizens For Clean Energy has been trying to sell Maine consumers an expensive product.
According to the BDN, the “renewable energy” PAC’s initiative would “control energy costs, create jobs and make Maine more energy independent by requiring electric utilities to invest in energy efficiency whenever it would reduce energy costs for ratepayers.” The referendum would have doubled the existing mandate on the amount of renewable electricity utilities must purchase.
Maine’s RPS is already the highest in the country. Many Mainers, including Gov. LePage, believe that further limiting Maine’s sources of electricity could be bad for our environment and economy.
This weekend on MPBN, Reed & Reed’s CEO stated that MCCE had gathered 70,000 petition signatures. His company, the premier contractor for Maine’s wind facilities, has donated more than $31,000 in goods and services to promote the referendum.
On Monday MCCE’s spokesman, David Farmer, stated, “Going for the 2012 ballot was always a race against the clock. Despite the incredible enthusiasm from the public and from hundreds of campaign volunteers, the clock was just a little too fast … to hit the deadline for the 2012 ballot.”
According to MCCE’s 2011 Campaign Finance Report, the PAC spent $93,000 on “campaign management and canvassing” and owed another $108,000 for “organizing, petition management and canvassing.”
Even $200,000 worth of “volunteers” couldn’t meet MCCE’s goal. Maine residents are doing their homework. It’s obvious many of us don’t wish to be forced by special interest groups to support low-value, high-impact pet projects.
Karen Bessey Pease
Lexington Township
‘Generic adult’ not needed
In the Jan. 26 edition of the BDN, Carroll Conley, executive director of the Christian Civic League of Maine, was quoted saying that, “Protecting marriage is the time-tested way for society to make sure as many children as possible are raised by their mom and dad. Moms and dads are both necessary; they are not replaceable by generic adults.”
As a single parent, I am deeply offended by Conley’s statement. I started out with a traditional marriage and am not single by choice but by tragedy. My husband died of a massive heart attack at the age of 42, leaving me with a 3-, 11-, and 16-year-old to raise on my own. I did not feel the need to rush out and replace their father with what I would consider to be a “generic adult” just to give them a male figure in their lives.
I am fortunate enough to have an incredible circle of friends, primarily female, as well as a couple of gay males, who have provided support for me.
I think it is sad that Conley and those who see traditional marriage as the only way are unable to see beyond stereotypes and imagine the possibilities for families in nontraditional situations. These situations stretch us, as well as those around us, to learn a new way to make families work. I’ll be supporting marriage equality here in Maine because we all deserve the right to make our families the way they work best for each of us, not just the way a select few believe a family has to be.
Deborah Parks
Caribou
Where gays come from
I agree with Mr. Mackin’s BDN letter to the editor “Body is a temple” that the primary intent of heterosexual intercourse is to procreate. However, I wanted to bring to his attention that this causes a problem with his theory that isolation of homosexuals on an island would cause them to become extinct.
If two gay people can’t procreate, then where are all these gay people coming from anyway? Heterosexuals. And as long as “straight” people keep using our bodies as vessels for the Holy Spirit, God is going to keep granting life to people who are attracted to the same sex.
If we were all created equally by the Holy Spirit I don’t understand why this means that someone who was born to fall in love with a person of the same sex is not allowed to show their love through the act of marriage. I will vote yes no matter how many times the gay marriage referendum is proposed.
Alice Anderson
Sedgwick
Snowless winter explained
In the Amateur Naturalist article, “A theory of climatology and my driveway,” by Dana Wilde, it is mentioned that “it is reasonable to think that this snow-melting January is a symptom of [global warming].”
To some extent that may be the case, but apparently the main reason is the fact that the Arctic Oscillation, or AO, is in its positive phase. Specifically, as reported by the National Snow and Ice Data Center, “the winter of 2011 has … seen a generally positive phase of the Arctic Oscillation, a weather pattern that helps to explain low snow cover extent and warmer than average conditions over much of the United States.”
In comparison, the AO was in its negative phase the last two years and that counted for the generally cold conditions Maine experienced last year.
The NSIDC is run by the University of Colorado.
Phil Sandine
Stockton Springs
DEBORAH,
You are wrong and we are right when it comes to this discussion on family.
ALICE,
God calls your vote an abomination.
amconservative – you stated that “God calls your vote and abomination.” How do you know this? Is it written somewhere? Did you talk to “God” personally? When this happen? What does “God” look like? Do you have witnesses? Any facts would be greatly appreciated.
I talk to my God daily. I see God daily in all of his creation. He has left me a book with laws, and the consequences of breaking those laws. He also has foretold the future and events that are leading us to the end of days. It is his law that I hold higher then all others.
Are you aware of theater of the mind? Can you tell where it ends and reality begins?
Just wondering, because I’ve rarely seen anyone so seemingly out of touch with reality as you appear to be.
You speak the truth. And, amconservative being convinced she is correct is endemic with this crowd. They are as convinced of their statements as you and I are about the earth moving around the sun. There is no point in attempting a discussion. The difference is you and I would at least listen to pre-Copernican beliefs. They won’t do that.
I will say that such attitudes make it easier for me to understand people like suicide bombers in the Middle East and what makes them tick (no pun intended). They are convinced – beyond a shadow of a doubt – that Allah and the Koran told them to do this. This level of strict belief seems little different than the Jesus and the Bible model. There is no connection with reality. That is why it is impossible to negotiate with them.
We saw similar behavior with Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum (being the extreme cases). They are convinced of their views and they live in an encapsulated world that supports these very limited views of the world. Once they got out into the real world and were exposed to many people with different views, their reactions were predictable. Both Bachmann and Santorum, when confronted with the reality of something contrary to their beliefs, and which was witnessed directly by them so there could be no mistake, we could see this confused, almost dazed looked on their faces as their strictly conditioned brains tried to process this dichotomy. I almost felt sorry for them as their brains took these hits. They really were not prepared or able to adapt to change. It is almost like a fuse blowing.
I have no explanation for how or why this works the way it does in the human brain. It would be interesting to hear from a psychologist/psychiatrist on this condition. As Mr. Spock would say, “Fascinating.”
But, in a nutshell, it is like trying to teach a pig to dance. All it does is waste your time and annoy the pig.
Excellent, thoughtful comment! AM is a constant pain for those of us who try to have a meaningful exchange on this forum. I don’t know if AM truly believes this or is simply trying to get a rise out of people.
Chuck if you change just a few words around you might see that you are describing yourself. You are letting your worldview cloud your thinking as much as the side you so vehemently oppose.
Beware a man who reads 0nly one book, be it the Koran, the Torah, or the Bible.
You need quotes around that….UNLESS you are Ben Franklin
muslims think that God himself wrote the Koran. It looks like AC actually thinks that God also wrote the bible himself. “He has left me a book with laws”, yes I know that technically he doesn’t say that but it’s not too hard to figure out what is meant.
Yes, I agree. In reading my entry, I also did not do the comparison correctly. That is, Allah is to the Koran and God is to the Bible. Another would be, Mohamed is to the Koran as Jesus is to the Bible. Either way, the point is understood. Thanks for the eagle-eyes!
Excellent psychological analysis.
You would think with all the perfect people on this board that many must believe in God. Oh that’s right, us Christians know we aren’t perfect. The bible tells us so.
The problem, with some Christians is, that they expect others to be perfect, and judge harshly those who don’t meet their standerds.
You’re insane.
So, then, he didn’t actually SAY that this vote is an abomination…
Funny, though, that at my church and MANY others in the land, the take on this vote is different. How do you explain that?
So why do you support war? God and Jesus have been very clear about taking the life of another and forgiving seventy times seven.
I hope you are still sacrificing a goat every Saturday,
I have goats for sale.
He attempts to sacrfice a child on Saturday: “God said to Abraham, kill me a son.” AC will be out there on Highway 61 tomorrow.
“DEBORAH,
You are wrong and we are right when nit comes to this discussion on family”
– amconservative
“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
– Matthew 7:1-5
If you “see God daily in all his creations” then you should be seeing god in gays and treat them with equal respect. Perhaps it is that you misread Mark 11:14 where Jesus said God does not like FIGS. lol
yeah yeah–your god calls lots of things abominations. Why don’t you spend a little more time preaching to us about the evils of lobsters and other shellfish–about unclean swine and all unclean things. Hot dogs are definitely out. No more bacon. What about bearing false witness? You could make a full time job out of correcting the people on these boards who bear false witness. And the proud of heart…….let’s not forget them. The one’s who say things like “You are wrong and I am right”. Then there’s my personal favorite–the moneychangers. How about you and I get together and bring the full wrath of God down on all the evil moneychangers. That would really bring heaven on earth to honest working folks. You know something amcon? You’re full of malarkey.
Amcon may make a slave of another person, according to the Bible, as long as that person is of a different tribe. Also, if God tells him to do it, he may, like Joshua with the City of Jericho, kill every man, woman, and child living within the city walls . Let’s keep are distance from Amcon lest his Bible and God tell him to enslave us or kill us.
Am,you are wrong and we are right…. nener nener :)
Who’s we? Don’t include me. And you speak for God? Presumptuous on your part ins’t it?
You are reich, but not correct.
God told you this?
And are you saying that Ms. Parks did her family wrong by not getting a husband once her children’s father died? How do you have the gall to say that she is wrong???
It’s all so very confusing since Paul said it was “good” for widows to stay unmarried.
Yes, Paul suggested that celibacy was the best option for himself, for widows, and for everyone who was not already married. “It is well for a man not to touch a woman” (1 Corinthians 7:1). “I wish all were as I am. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. To the unmarried and the widows I say it is well for them to remain single as I do. But if they are not practicing self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than be afalame with passion” (1 Cor. 7:7-9).
So if everyone had followed Paul’s advice (and the unmarried remained unmarried and celibate), the human race would have already come to an end.
But Paul’s advice was based on his belief that Jesus was about to return at any moment, during Paul’s own lifetime. “I think that in the view of the impending distress it is well for a person to remain as he is” (1 Cor. 7:26). “I mean, brethren, the appointed time has grown short … For the form of this world is passing away” (1 Cor. 7:29-31).
Since the world as we know it was about to end — 2,000 years ago — marriage was irrelevant.
Amconservative says, “He [God] also has foretold the future and events that are leading us to the end of days.” Paul thought the end of days were in his own time. Amconservative thinks they are now. There seems to be a 2,000 year gap.
1Ti 4:1 But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons,1Ti 4:2 by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron,
1Ti 4:3 men who forbid marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth.
I did not “fall away from the faith,” I simply understand Paul’s statement about the end coming in Paul’s own time to be something other than a literal statement. If he meant it literally, he was literally wrong. If you take it literally, you are literally wrong.
2Pe 3:3Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts,
2Pe 3:4and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? Forever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.”
(re. 2Peter 3:3) Irrelevant to the original topic, and irrelevant to Paul’s comments on marriage as well. If people had followed Paul’s advice 2,000 years ago there would be no human race today.
(re. 2Peter 3:4) Doesn’t change the fact that Paul predicted the end times in his own time, as did Revelation 1:1, Rev. 22:7, and Rev. 22:20 — it will all happen “soon.” What did “soon” mean to the seven churches of Rev. 1:4? Weeks? A few months? A few years? Perhaps a decade? Surely not 1,900 years of more.
When will the son of man come? “You will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the son of man comes” (Matt. 10:23). How long does it take to go around to all those towns? 2,000 years? Matt. 16:28 — “some will not taste death before they see the son of man coming in his kingdom,” yet those people died nearly two thousand years ago.
It’s either a slight miscalculation — or, more likely — it is a metaphor, a parable, and not a literal definition. If you take it all literally it is literal nonsense.
P.S. Seen as having value only as slaves and brood mares, in Paul’s time young women and girls of child-bearing age were not permitted to practice celibacy. If they attempted to they were beaten, shunned, raped, or murdered.
“God calls your vote an abomination,” you say. Really? What does God say about voting? When did She tell you this?
Fortunately, I don’t even have to write ANYTHING to win a debate with you.
Wayne Ely- Regardless of where you stand on the tank issue, only a man who was looking to cut his business in half would take sides on any issue. Neutrality makes the cash register ring. Politics is the third rail when you depend on others to give you their money in trade for your services.
Richard Clark- Your found stanza would play well at the Blaine House.
Karen Bessy Pease- We are going to run out of oil sooner than anyone thinks. Any suggestions for alternatives to oil? What you call “pet projects” others call being realistic about our future energy needs and how to meet them, without oil, which we are going to run out of someday.
Phil Sandine- Thanks for the info. I guess that I am a little confused now. I always associated our weather patterns with the relative position of the jet stream. If it is above us, we get warmer temperatures, more rain, less snow. If it is below us, we get much colder air and more snow, less rain.
You cannot replace fossil fuels with windsprawl. End of discussion.
Mr Ely…put the Searsport tanks underground and maybe no one will care.
End of discussion? I certainly hope not. Or are you one of those who believes that we are never going to run out of oil? We should have had these discussions years ago.
Wind turbines have been the fad for 15-20 years now in Europe. They are a waste of money and do not reduce C02. Why keep that failed idea going? Let’s do something meaningful and deal with the problem. We won’t run out of oil, it will become too expensive to use except for war mongering. Cruise ships, Maersk shipping vessels, the military etc. are gross fuel users and wasting that resource. We should be making what we buy domestically. Do we need to jet all over the world to do business? Does the Arab sheik need 98 super yachts? Eliminate waste and we would stretch resources and reduce C02. I realize that is far fetched and against human nature. We need to set ground rules. Number 1 is not destroying the mtns. and ridges with road building and windsprawl. The bigger problem is burning coal in power plants. Those should be converted to nat. gas or nuke. Nat. gas needs stricter regs. for fracking also. Nuke waste can be safely be dumped in a subduction zone. Surely you do not believe millions of wind turbines is even a small part of the answer? C02 rose by 5.9% in 2010. Windsprawl is not helping.
I agree, conservation is our best option at the moment. Too bad those sheiks and cruise lines don’t see that. It has also cost us an insane amount of oil to have all our consumables made in China and shipped over here on those Maersk ships. I am a former chief engineer in the merchant marines and I can tell you all about ships and fuel consumption. I think that we should be concentrating more on nuclear for the moment and fire the spent fuel rods into space, right at the biggest source of radiation there is, the sun.
Nuclear Power is a bad idea. First let me state that I thought nuclear was the answer when I was younger but now I do not believe it is. Even before Japan’s nuclear disaster I was against nuclear power because of the environmental damage from mining, refining the ore and storing of spent fuel rods.
Mining for Uranium is one of the dirtiest, dangerous and environmentally damaging forms of mining there is. Uranium miners have a whole spectrum of illnesses from working in radioactive mines for long periods of time. The cost of moving the mined ore from mining sites to refining locations require immense amounts of fossil fuel, not to mention security, with dangers of accidents on the way. There is the potential for large areas of land becoming unusable for centuries if there is an accident at a nucleur plant. Storing the spent fuel rods is expensive and dangerous the way we do it now and if we find a location on Earth to store them it would have to be safe from geographic upheavals and political issues for 10,000 years. Humans have barely been walking upright for that long.
As for sending the spent rods into outer space, it sounds good but is way to dangerous. Failed rocket launches happen all the time, just last month a Russian rocket failed to reach orbit with a satellite and fell back to earth. What kind of environmental damage would be caused by a payload of spent nuclear fuel rods falling back to Earth if the launch vehicle failed to achieve orbit. I shudder to think of it.
So, no I do not believe NUclear Power is a smart nor safe means of generating power.
You make some valid points concerning safety. I believe the technology is well within our reach to address these issues. France is one big reactor and Germany is not far behind. I think that we will end up using a combination of alternatives in the future. A magic bullet just doesn’t exist to replace fossil fuels at this point in time. We never should have put all our energy eggs in one basket in the first place, in my humble opinion.
——————————
Germany is actually trying to get off of nuclear power and has set a goal of decommissioning all nuclear power by 2020. I wish them well.
I truly believe that we should have stuck with Edison, instead of Tesla. D/C can be stored, A/C can’t. Everyone could have generated and stored their own electricity in the first place. Can you imagine how different our world would be if we had stayed straight juice instead of burning fossil fuels? A finite resource. Flight and space travel would have surely been delayed, but the long term benefits would have been huge. Not to mention, it would be tough to wage a battery powered war! Lol.
——————————
One of the reason cited for not having wind turbines in maine is the damage to the environment and scenic wonders of Maine.
Do some research on mountain top mining for coal in WV and the drive to get that form of mining allowed in other states and then complain about a few wind turbines and their damage.
I have thoroughly researched mtn. top removal . 532 flattened mtns. so far. The US is increasing coal exports to China . It makes no sense to escalate C02 emissions there as we try to reduce emissions here. You claim “a few wind turbines”? They want a couple THOUSAND in Maine alone while clearcutting trees and spraying to prevent regrowth. That is not Maine. I would rather go without power until I could set up solar panels. If Maine did construct thousands of turbines the coal industry would keep flattening the mtns and their coal exports would keep increasing. I do not trust any energy company to respect the environment. Fracking needs to be heavily regulated and alternatives found to stop the chemicals from being pumped underground. If they can’t do it with steam and water they need some new tech ideas. Base load generation without coal means new nuke tech. with the waste dumped in a tectonic plate subduction zone. Frivolous windsprawl is wasting money. I hope solar can make a difference soon. It can go on rooftops and not ruin the countryside.
Are you aware that Obama just gave permission to open up areas off shore for wind farms. That is the area we shuold be creating wind farms in Maine. Off shore so no one is affected by the noise or the sight of them.
Currently, no one alternative form of energy is in position to replace crude and natural gas. All should be evaluated on a cost effective basis.
Wind does not replace oil.
We do not burn oil here in Maine or in most places in the U.S. to make electricity.
We use oil to heat and drive.
We do not heat or drive with electricity. If we did, we’d have to find inexpensive electricity not wind, which is close to being the most expensive.
We have 160 years of newly discovered clean domestic natural gas. In 160 years there will be real breakthroughs – things we can’t even imagine. They won’t involve wind turbines.
Pretty bold prediction. Only time will tell and only history will hear.
——————————
The prediction is debatable, like all issues in this arena. However, the preceding facts look quite accurate.
Patten pete is wrong.
In SIXTEEN years we will have real breakthroughs in energy production that will make these so called “green” years look like the dark ages.
I tend to agree with you – it’ll be far less than 160 years.
But look at a 160 year span of time in modern history. It’s pretty remarkable how much things change during such a lengthy interval. History tells us good things will be happening technology-wise. We might not even use electricity as we know it.
If we don’t do something about the build up of CO2 and other warming gases, humans may not even be here in 160 years.
You’re right – it could be an ice age!
Stop watching Al Gore movies.
Yes, it is quite possible that Northern Europe and northeastern sections of North America could indeed be thrown into an ice ageor a period of intense cold by Global Climate Change.
A large part of Europe is more northern than Maine is but it is kept warm by the Gulf Stream. The Gulf Stream is pulled north in its current course by the sinking of heavier, saltier water in the North Atlantic. If that colder, saltier water becomes warmer, less saltier (say by the melting of Greenland’s Ice Cap) then the Gulf Stream would no longer flow northeast towards Northern Europe but would instead flow in a more easterly direction towards Spain. If that were to happen then Northern Europe and the northern Eastern Seaboard would become much colder.
Can’t happen, you say? Studies of the North Atlantic have shown that the water is less dense and warmer than it was just 30 years ago and that the pull of the sinking water is not as strong as it was 30 years ago, so it is already starting to happen.
My sources are not Al Gore or his movies but several noted scientific journals that I have read.
You need to stop getting your information from sources that have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are.
It’s complicated. The BDN had an article on it earlier this weak. The jet streams are a conundrum but the oscialltions are currently are keeping them north with few buckles to drag cold air down to us. And then there’s El Nino and La Nina (the current condition, no pun intended) and the feedbak or feed forward on AGW and these two powerful phenomena is yet to be determined.
On the subject of gay marriage…
It’s called free will. Psychological factors and related experiences in a person’s life greatly influence sexual choices. You’re not born gay, but like an addict you will always crave what you once had. I quit smoking cigarettes for a whole year, and then just like *that* I picked my habbit up where I left off at, which was about a pack a day. It is near impossible to fight addictions, but usually addictions are born from choices you make in life. That’s not to say homosexuality is an “addiction,” but it is *like* an addiction.
I’m not against a secular-state recognized civil marriage for homosexuals. I could care less if they do get married or not, it doesn’t affect me one bit… But it isn’t something you’re born with. As proof, I would like to refer to Columbia University Professor of Psychiatry, Dr. Robert Spitzer’s studies, in which people either did or did not change their sexual orientation. If you were “born gay” as many would like to argue, there would be no person who is now gay that was never heterosexual, nor would there be any heterosexual who was once gay; but there are people just like I mentioned in both cases. He’s a guy who supports homosexual equality, but has been lambasted over the political ramifications of his study.
Do I agree with same-sex marriage? No, but I’m not going to vote yes or no on the issue. I just don’t care that much. But I would like to remind everyone poised to vote against it, that this government is a secular government meant to represent all people who live under its rule, homosexual or otherwise. (Remember, you don’t have to vote for or against it, so just don’t vote). I’m a Christian, and I whole heartedly support the idea that we should “render unto caesar what is caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” It’s not going to matter if the state of Maine recognizes a legally binding document between two homosexuals, because if you’re doing the right thing you’ll still go to heaven. Don’t worry about what other people are doing, focus on yourself and lead by example. That’s the best you can do, because in the end, you can’t “save” anyone.
Sexual atraction is not ‘Free Will’. Once your sexual orientation is determined either by genetics and/or nuture it is almost impossible to change. I could no more change my sexual orientation from heterosexual to homosexual than a homosexual could change their orientation to heterosexual.
As to whether or not a ‘gay gene’ exists the jury is still out but it appears that there may be the case.
‘A number of studies have looked at homosexuality in twins, all with similar
results. For example, in one study, if one identical twin was gay, the other was
also gay 50% of the time. If they were fraternal twins, they were both gay 22%
of the time. And if one was adopted, the chances fell to 11%.’
There also appears to be a hormonal componant to being gay.
‘There is some evidence that increased steroids in the womb may increase the
chances that a girl will be a lesbian.’
‘The animal evidence is also pretty strong that what happens in the womb can
affect the eventual sexual orientation of the fetus. For example, exposure to
differing amounts of testosterone or estrogen in the womb can affect whether an
animal is hetero- or homosexual.
http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=155
This link has more information.
http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/genetics_of_homosexuality.html
If you’re citing the Hammer studies, they’re total fabrications. No study has reproduced the same results, meaning it’s bogus. The fact that you include adopted children proves that it is an environmental factor (nurture vs nature, ie a psychological factor) rather than genetic.
Furthermore, gene-“therapy” or drugs can alter the state of mind, further imbalancing a person to be prone to behavior other than what would be the outcome if none had taken place. It’s like alcohol. I know people, as I’m sure others do, that blame alcohol for their problems rather than themselves.
Bad analogies since alcoholism is usually a genetic disease due to enzyme imbalances in ethanol metabolism or other enzymic effects in the brain. So, are they to blame for their problems? Being born with enzyme deficiencies?
Also, are saying or implying that gay orinetation can be “changed”? Are you a supporter of the husband of Michelle Bachmann and his ilk? Talk about bogus policies with no research basis whatsoever.
Please refer to Ryan Sorba’s “Born Gay Hoax” with cited materials.
The point is moot. Instead of citing ‘studies’ that support your point of view, why not talk with some gay folk and find out what’s happening with them? With my gay friends it strikes me that it comes as naturally to them as leaves on a tree. Why would anyone ‘choose’ to be gay? Just so they can get in your face? I rather doubt it.
See what I mean… I cite real studies, and they’re either not good enough or just a “moot point” to you and people like you. You don’t want to believe it’s a choice you make, because poor little you wants to not be accountable for anything you do. But when it comes to OTHER people’s problems and opinions, well now, then it’s definately their faul! They weren’t born like that, but I was! Ridiculous.
So, you are telling me that you made a conscious decision to be heterosexual?
Correct. Ceegen says he/she was not born this way. Heterosexuality must be a choice, then.
And all the time I thought I was born straight — and right-handed. Little did I know they were choices!
Ceegen/Pat Riote has a split/personality.
Yeah, I did. As a child, I wasn’t attracted to girls or boys. But from watching TV, listening to older people talk as I grew up, and all sorts of things going on around me, it kind of shaped my world-view. I still had my own ideas, but I would venture to guess that had I been raised in a homosexual household, I might very well have turned out to be gay. It’s always a possibility that could have happened, but more study in this area is needed.
People are so bent on finding a genetic link they’re not worried or talking about psychological factors. It could very well be that as a result of certain chemical reactions in the brain occurring at a time when a subject is viewing material of a sexual nature, this could help shape a person’s sexuality. It’s a big combination of the two, very related, but primarily nurtured and not an inherent trait.
Oh and so you’re not confused, yes I am Ceegen, too. I use “Ceegen” to post from college because the computers at college like to freak out when I use my Disqus moniker.
Research one of his main “cited” materials ….. “Homosexuality in Perspective” (1979) and you will find that Virginia Johnson has made it public that the study results were “entirely fabricated”.
The study cited identical twins, fraternal twins and adopted brother. If there were not a genetic componant than the incidence of gay boys with gays brothers would be the same for all three types of brothers not show the marked difference according to how genetically similiar they are.
Again, if there were no genetic componant then identical twins, fraternal twins and adopted brothers would have the same percentage chance of having a gay brother. Adding adopted brothers highlights the fact that environmental factors are not as important as genetic factors in whether or not someoen is gay.
No where in any literature is gene therapy or drugs been used to explain being gay. Did you even read teh links? One of them is a religious site that describes in detail all of teh different theories on why some people are gay and others are not.
Did the study include parental influence? Friends? Other family? Past experiences? Most studies only focus on one area, and they all come up short of proof, because there is no one factor that decides it.
Yes, the sites I linked to talk about genetic, environmental and hormonal causes.
http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=155
http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/genetics_of_homosexuality.html
Read the sites yourself and see
I did. The “godandscience.org” link vaguely references ONE study of deeply rooted psychological scars from childhood abuse when considering sexual orientation. Children who are abused are 3 times as likely to be homosexual when they get older than children who are not abused.
No one’s focusing on all the psychological factors, because people want a solid genetic link to make this “something you’re born with” rather than a behavior born of choice, or at the very least of factors other than genetics. The reason this is, is because psychologists have yet to find (and I think they never will find) the cognitive ID of a human, the “me” in my brain. They can’t point to a certain area of the brain and say “oh, that’s it” because we’re more than just flesh and blood. We do have a spirit, a soul.
The gay/straight twin study conducted in California in 1993, conducted by a gay doctor, by the way, was never finished. In addition, the entire study was researched and debunked by a group of Canadian doctors in 1999.
Was the group of Canadian doctors gay or straight? Because if they were straight then their findings are bogus.
Actually, they were Canadian.
So a gay doctor can’t be impartial but a straight one can? How does that logic work?
Just gay judges can’t be impartial too, I guess.
~rolls eyes~
The gay doctor fudged the data in order to support his personal agenda. The Canadian doctors simply did the study properly and proved him wrong. And they did it with his notes and data.
You seem to make that excuse a lot when you don’t like something, just claim it was a “fudged.” What does it matter anyway that a person is born gay? It’s obviously not a trait that easily changed. It doesn’t harm anybody. So what’s the problem? Why should we protect choices like a personal choice to be religious and not the choice to be in a gay relationship?
I heard that it harms kittens.
Or is that something else….SOMETHING harms kittens, I know that much….
I don’t have a problem with a person’s personal choice to be gay (and it is a personal choice). And I don’t have a problem with protecting their personal choices. I do have a problem, however, when that personal choice is used to push a drastic change to things such as traditional marriage or military service.
But, what everyone seems to be missing here is the FACT that the Canadian doctors debunked the research altogether. But, I guess that facts aren’t important. At least that’s what you lefties are always saying about those of us on the right.
What’s very obvious is that facts aren’t important to you. Didn’t you complain about DADT being repealed? Claiming hoards of service members would leave? That the sky would essentially fall?
You don’t care about facts or science, so quit trying to act all superior like those are the kinds of things you base your opinions on. That’s a lie and you know it.
I was predicting what would happen. Predictions aren’t facts until they come true. And they will.
Why would the military fall apart here but not in Canada, England, Australia, Taiwan, Germany, Israel, Serbia, Russia, Spain, etc. In fact, the Dutch have allowed open gays since 1974 and it is estimated that 10% of the total force is gay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_military_service which also provides references).
“fall apart”? Never said that.
Well, for crying out loud! How can I keep track of everything everyone says! It’s just a big jumble and I am STARVING.
In any case, take out the “fall apart” and substitute the word or concept you did use…
They will? It’s been over a year since repeal and nothing.
Repeal of DADT did have an effect: Dick Cheney avoided serving in the military five times through deferments because he knew that gays would eventually be allowed to serve openly.
Well, as I said before-they are CANADIAN! MY GOD!!!!!! (Just joking.)
Has any link been posted about this Canadian study? I might have missed it…
But as for DADT-it seems that there has been little negative ramifications so far. From what I have read and heard, there has been much support among the younger personnel of their fellow servicemen and servicewomen who have come out.
so far. Time will tell just what damage the repeal of DADT will cause. I have a daughter in uniform, and I can tell you that the ripples are still effecting things, and it’s gonna get worse before it gets better. That is, if it ever gets better.
What does your daughter say?
I have friends who are in Iraq and I haven’t heard anything bad.
But why wouldn’t it get better?
(The Canadians allow open service, btw).
I have a very good friend in Afghanistan. He’s a military chaplain. Sure has been busy lately with the changes and all.
And, whoopee for the Canadians. Their military isn’t at all like ours.
And what does he say about these changes? You are implying that there are bad things happening, but what? What does your daughter say? Wht damage is occurring right now?
So, a study by the Canadians we should believe but we should dismiss their military!?!?!? Well!! THAT is a slap in the face to our friendly neighbors to the north!
Come on, RJ. I’ve read you long enough to know you’re not stupid. There is no comparison between our military and the Canadian military with the exception of guns and uniforms. We’re bigger, more powerful, and better organized.
As for what my daughter and the chaplain says, all I can say is that it’s rarely positive. The moral is down, the tension is up, people are walking on eggs, additional training has got people looking at each other in strange ways, trust is down, and esprit de corps is suffering.
By the way, more and more are refusing to re-enlist, and we are losing a lot of god folks.
If you knew me that well, you’d know that all the Canadian talk is tongue-in-cheek.
I have heard the opposite from other sources. There are many reasons why moral might be down-is it really because American who are gay can now openly serve? Are people down because they can’t harass their fellow service members because they think they’re gay? If those are truly the reasons, then those units had poor training. Or is moral down because of other issues? (http://www.militarytimes.com/forum/showthread.php?1588689-DADT-What-s-Next)
As for losing a lot of good folks, the DADT resulted in the loss of over 14,000 good people while it was the law (http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/03/25/261_DADT_Discharges_in_2010/). Some people may not want to re-enlist because of gays being accepted in the military, then that’s a personal issue and quite frankly, that might be an indication of severe bigotry. That they would but their issues with gays ABOVE serving their country, well, that’s fine. There are many fine young men and women who are absolutely fit to serve that will take their place, including some of the 14,000 that were unfairly discharged (http://www.sldn.org/blog/2011/12/).
Sure. there will be some issues and it might be rocky here and there, but it will settle down. More and more younger people know that gays are NOT a problem. I know many young servicemen and women and it’s an absolute non-issue with them.
And does you friend the chaplain share your prejudices?
As it is your personal choice to be religious, would you support discrimination against fundamentalist Christians as you support discrimination against gays? A gay, by your theory, can avoid the discrimination by his own volition and become straight. Similarly, a fundamentalist Christian can choose to become a mainstream Christian and avoid the same discrimination.
Response to both of your posts. If you deem the CA study to be invalid becasue the researchers were gay, then the Canadian study should be doubted if they were straight. Sauce for the goose …
But they are CANADIAN!!!!!! That explains a lot aboot it, eh???
LOL
I didn’t deem any study invalid.
Two things…
You will note that both links I provided were from 2008 and one is even a religious site. So if the studies they are quoting was debunked in 1999 don’t you think they would have not used them a citations for their conclusions?
You should also note in my quote it says ‘A number of studies…’ meaning they are grettng their data from more than one study.
But to use your grounds for discounting a study you disagree with, I will debunk any study that says being gay is not genetic if the authors of the study are straight and/or have religious backing. Fair, right?
And we thought you despised Canada’s “socialized medicine.”
As a gay person, let me tell you that you are so far off base, it’s comical. Well, almost comical.
Try asking us what it’s like, rather than posting absurd statements such as equating it with addiction. It’s sexual attraction. Was I born with it? I don’t know and neither do you, so kindly stow the arrogance.
What I do know, and you’re welcome to take notes and maybe learn something, is that I’ve had same-gender attractions since childhood. I had no gay friends. I grew up in a small town in the 60’s with no gay TV shows, movies, books, etc. Just the feelings that were part of my nature and kept hidden away.
I know what’s natural and what’s chosen in my life. My sexuality is very natural. There’s nothing addictive about it, either.
By the way, did you choose your attitude toward gay people or were you born that way?
Prejudice is usually cultivated by family, friends, and some organized religion. Children are usually quite non-prejudiced.
I am not prejudiced against homosexuals, but the evidence points towards no genetic link what-so-ever.
The people who are more easily addicted to alcohol, do so because they have markers which predisposition them to be easily addicted to the alcohol. It doesn’t make them alcoholics, it just makes it easier for them to be alcoholics. Hormonal imbalances and the like are not the cause, but are contributing factors.
While I was in the Army, one of my best friends was gay. My cousin-in-law is gay. I don’t have a big problem with it. Doesn’t bother me one bit.
Then be a friend to your gay friends. Consider not making absolute statements based on certain evidence that points in a direction which supports your point of view. It makes you sound petty and in need of validation…and might I add, prejudiced.
Science is still at work on this and I suspect we’re many years from a consensus. In the meantime, you might benefit from spending less time reading studies and more time talking with your cousin-in-law on the subject.
Let’s not lose sight of the real issue here…people.
Yeah, because they haven’t been doing studies on this for the past 50 years, at least. And if I don’t read the studies, and don’t quote them, people like you say “oh well that’s just your opinion, science proves otherwise.” But, when science somehow proves you wrong, it’s all just “well it hasn’t been proven *yet*” as if the verdict is in before the jury deliberates!
But, what makes you think I haven’t talked about that issue with my cousin-in-law? Like, the subject would somehow never come up? He doesn’t deny that it was a choice he made. Not all gays agree on this issue either.
Sometimes we need to be very clear on the meaning of the word “choice.”
Is it choice?
I DON’T choose to be attracted to men. What I feel when I see someone who looks like Tom Selleck is much deeper than what I feel when I see Christie Brinkley. That is something I cannot change.
I DO choose to be who I am and to accept that I am gay. I DO choose to allow myself to follow my heart and be with a wonderful man with whom I share my life. And of course, this is something I can change and that many people here, it seems, would want me to change.
I don’t care if you want to change or not. Be who you want to be.
He wasn’t replying to you. Oh, nice subsequent edit there.
Thank you?
Well that’s very strange. Tom Selleck is not a homosexual, yet you are attracted to him. It seems that the homosexuals where whining that they could be housed in the same military barracks with normal men because they aren’t attracted to them. You all shot down the comparison that it’s no different than a normal man being housed in the female barracks.
So the homosexuals will say whatever it takes to get their own way. Who knew?
Whatever are you talking about!??!? I don’t think ANYONE said that gay men aren’t attracted to straight men.
What you are either not remembering correctly or choosing to twist is that we have said that we are not attracted to ALL men. We have also said that men and women, both gay and straight, who in the military should be professional and be respectful to each other above all else.
This is one of the craziest spins I’ve seen! Holy cow!
Mr. Selleck played a gay character in a movie, though (In and Out). Nice to see someone with such a macho image be open enough to take on such a role.
So you’re saying that your cousin-in-law chose to have same-sex attractions? How is that even possible? You can choose to come out and lead a gay lifestyle, but choosing who you’re attracted to in the first place? Not so much…
He said he wasn’t attracted to men until his later years of high school, but didn’t mention specifics.
Oh did I mention my sister-in-law is gay too? She’s admitted in a round-about-way that the only reason she’s gay (or at least bi, she still “hooks up” with men from time to time) is because she was abused as a child by a friend of the family. She has deep trust issues, and I don’t blame her one bit for the way she is, but it’s still a choice she made. I have more contempt for the person who did that to her than anything else. I love my sister-in-law.
Hey what about country music? Are we born with musical preferences? Because I hated country music until I was about 16 and I moved out-of-state from southern California.
How about movie preferences? Are we born with movie preferences? Some people, (I can’t remember exactly what the name of the movie is for my own example), watch a movie and hate it the first time around but then watch it again at a later time and then like it.
Or what about food preferences? Ever eat something you didn’t like as a kid, but then got older and then suddenly did like it?
Things can change.
So by your logic, you could turn gay at any minute. Well, good luck with that. It’s a fabulous! life.
Haha.
That’s really funny coming from a homosexual. It seems that homosexuals are the ones who “need validation”. They also appear to be the most prejudiced.
Validation? No, we need understanding. That’s a huge difference. Until people like you comprehend that difference, the bias against us will continue.
And regarding your comment about us being prejudiced, don’t confuse that with fighting back against those who would keep us hidden away.
Not true Pat, the evidence is pointing more and more to both genetics and environment inside the womb during pregnancy.
You mean that’s more than a blob of tissue in there? Really?
Easy, there…much happens in 9 months. It’s all in the timing.
Even if someone chooses to “be gay” after being straight after so many years, it’s still there in that person’s make-up.
Yes but disposition towards is not the same as a solidifying factor. If it were as simple as a certain part of the brain, or a common hormonal imbalance, then drugs or brain injuries could change the behavior one way or the other. The fact is, it doesn’t. Nothing changes until the person wants it to change.
Like the guy having “awake” brain surgery done on him, the surgeon accidently touches the person’s brain and the person’s hand twitches. The surgeon says “Oh I made your hand move,” to which the patient replies “Yeah, but I didn’t *want* my hand to move.” If choices and things we did in life were just born and bred into us, then getting someone to want to do something would simply be as easy as surgery or drugs, but it isn’t.
If everyone grew up accepting homosexual behaviour as normal, then no one would question it, and people would be more open to the idea themselves with a nurturing environment. Environment factors quite heavily on a person’s decision.
While I disagree with your theory of homosexual origins I appreciate your efforts to be tolerant. Thank you
And you totally missed that point in the last “letters” debate on gay marriage. You were lambasting me on trivial matters, even when I was agreeing that gay marriage should be legal. In fact I think the only reason you argue with me, is because I reference the bible, and God. I especially have reason to believe this after your comment about how you view Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden as being prisoners! That’s something I’ve only heard come out of a theistic Satanist’s mouth! God is the bad guy!?
Nah, I wasn’t lambasting. You started going on about the snake and the story of sin in the Garden of Eden. It’s actually pretty funny. God comes off as grumpy and petulant. And everybody likes to hate the snake for all the wrong reasons. If you don’t like my interpretation of Genesis cover your ears when I tell you the story of Joseph and the coat of many colors.
No, God is caring. He was warning Adam and Eve about a situation that would cause them to die (spiritual death, not physical). God knew Satan would twist that meaning “to die” to be a physical death, but did not directly intervene because we are allowed free will. If we didn’t have free will, there would be no such thing as evil or love because it wouldn’t be a choice. There would also be no point in Jesus being Messiah, either.
Ceegen=Pat Riote= whom else??????
Exactly! {tr011 alert}
No, just those two IDs. I can’t post from the college computers with “Pat Riote” because the browsers aren’t updated, and so for some reason they freeze up when I log into Diqus… But not Yahoo.
But yeah, keep believing Satan’s version of the bible, see how that works out for you.
Don’t worry. It’s going to work out OK. God and I have an agreement. He doesn’t bother me with a lot of decorator rules for temples, petty hates, bizarre punishments, dumb menus, odd menstrual prohibitions, weird myths and I accept the more humane aspects of Christianity. Worked so far.
Can you give us a list of those versions of the Bible that are Satan’s? I’ll take it to church with me tomorrow to show my minister. Hopefully we don’t have any of those!
Spitzer has stated that his research has been misused and misrepresented. Any change was extremely rare:
Spitzer told the New York Times in Feb.
2007 that, “Although I suspect change occurs,
I suspect it’s very rare. Is it 1 percent, 2
percent? I don’t think it’s 10 percent.”
“If some people can change – and I think
they can – it’s a pretty rare phenomenon.”
http://www.respectmyresearch.org
The point is, they do change. If it were something you were born with, you wouldn’t be able to change. You’d have no choice!
Not true, people can be brainwashed to do things they would not normally do and at a much higher rate than 1 to 2% and homosexual retraining is just that, brainwashing.
The fact that only 1 to 2% can change their behavior points more to genetic/hormonal/environmental then it being a choice.
So you could change your orientation, not your sexual behavior but your orientation if you wanted to? You could change your romantic attraction from the opposite gender to the same gender…..?
You did.
Not an answer.
Deflection.
hmmmm …. a blast from the past ….. different username, same arrogance.
I’m straight, cp444. I can’t change my sexual orientation. Can you?
No I didn’t …… it was called denial. You missed the crux of the first question: “change your orientation, not your sexual behavior but your orientation”.
I was born left handed at the time it was believed that left handed people were “somewhat disabled.” I was “taught” (brainwashed) to write with my right hand. My penmanship is terrible, I do everything else with my left hand, but as to writing I was changed.
From Alan Chambers, President of Exodus International (who once defended sexual reorientation change efforts) January 2012: “The majority of people that I have met, and I would say the majority meaning 99.9% of them have not experienced a change in their orientation or have gotten to a place where they could say that they could never
be tempted or are not tempted in some way or experience some level of
same-sex attraction.”
I think that’s a great site. Thanks for posting it. Although I doubt that many people who abuse these statistics or who want to believe the manipulated facts will look for the truth, at least it’s out there on this site.
You apparently acceded to the notion our government is “secular”, yet you need to remember it was clearly founded on Christian principles. What we are seeing today is an “anything goes” mentality, which is not surprising since many people have either abandoned their Christianity or take it for granted, thus ending up by replacing it with many divergent philosophies or no philosophy at all. This inevitably will lead to many clashes as different forces represented by each philosophy or lack of any compete for superiority.
Yes, Christ did lay down the ground rule, “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God.” But who owns your conscience, Caesar or God? Obviously it’s not Caesar. Atheistic Communist Russia for decades and decades tried to rule over the consciences of men by exposing school children to a systematic campaign of propaganda. The campaign worked to a significant degree as large segments of the population were left with no lasting hope and only with what the state had to offer: a promise of a better life on earth only, for you (maybe) and for future generations. As a result people resorted to drugs and alcohol and despair, which eventually caused the Soviet Union society to become largely dysfunctional and eventually to collapse.
When I vote I represent my values that are shaped by faith AND reason. I don’t let other people’s values affect my decision on whether I should vote or not, for I know these people will vote according to their own values that are often in conflict with mine. You are right, our government is meant to represent all people, including people of faith. So don’t let others with different value systems influence you not to vote. Indeed it is your civic and religious duty to become informed and to vote.
Lastly, on the question of SS marriage: If the ballot question is passed, it might not affect you directly. But think about what Carroll Conley, quoted by Deborah Parks in her letter, said: “Protecting the traditional definition of marriage is a way to ensure as many children as possible are raised by their moms and dads who are not (equally) replaceable by generic adults.”
In contrast, permitting SS marriage can only ensure more children will be separated from their moms and dads through such means as artificial insemination, in vitro fertilization, and surrogate motherhood. It would also ensure more children would be adopted or raised by SS couples in lieu of opposite $ex couples that more closely resemble parents of traditional families. Finally, if SS marriage is approved by the voters, the court system will undoubtedly force schools to teach that families consisting of two moms and two dads are the moral and ethical equivalence of those consisting of a mom and a dad, regardless of what you teach your children at home.
Karen Bessey Pease–There is a term for people who refuse to see the truth. It’s called hiding your head in the sand. Every day we are faced with choices about how to alleviate or exacerbate the coming end of fossil fuels. We would be very well served to be more proactive and less reactive in finding and using new and renewable energy sources. Oil has many uses much better than burning and it is a travesty how we are cheating ourselves out of a wise application of resources by our ostrich like stance.
Please explain how wind turbines reduce the use of oil to create electricity in Maine.
You can’t? Do you know why? We don’t burn oil to create electricity in Maine.
True enough. I am up in Toronto all the time and I am stunned by how low the electricity costs are there – something like $0.038/kWh.
See: http://www.energyshop.com/electricity-prices-toronto-residential.cfm
Somewhere, there was a spreadsheet that compared various fuel costs per BTU. In Maine and most USA locations, electricity was the most expensive at something like (going from memory here) $4.00 per unit vs. $2.00 per same unit (for the same amount of heat). This chart also considered efficiencies, as well. So, a NG furnace at 98% efficiency vs. oil at 85%, for example.
Anyway, my point is that if electricity were cheap enough, one could heat with it. Now, this does nothing really for cars except that the product used for heating oil now could be used for gasoline, thus reducing overall oil usage. And, of course, what could simpler thn electric heat? No piping, no plumbing, nothing special. Put it anywhere.
My dream would be to park a few dozen solar panels on my 85 acre farm, bankroll solar generated kWh’s, plug in my hybrid car, and tell CMP and its suppliers to keep their damn electricity. Oil shortage? No problem. Gasoline shortage? Well, not for me, at least for the first 40 miles.
Deborah Parks, Thank you for sharing your experience and proving that Love is the most important component in creating a family, not gender. Your children are very fortunate to have you as their guide in this life and because of you and others like you the world is a better place to live in.
Her letter was all about gender. A male is not needed to raise a child in her matriarchal world and she sees no problem in that. Males are not needed.
She never said that. You did.
Read. Read again. Read and understand.
When I was a kid, we were taught to respect others. This lady is a widow raising three kids. I would cut her a little slack.
I agree… Thanks Chuck.
Karen Bessey Pease , Mainers dont want them.
1000MW hydro = four thousand GRID scale WIND turbines. four thousand, four thousand, as far as the eye can see.
Change the law…….
double like. We NEED Hydro.
Karen , good points. You are right as usual. Anyone doing any homework realized long ago wind power is minimal energy for maximum money and no help weaning us off fossil fuels. As long as the US fuels huge ships at 500,000gals per fill we see that there is room to conserve. Want a cruise? Go sailing!!! Save fuel. Mainers need affordable energy, not windsprawl.
Enroncrooks is a genious!
http://pinetreewatchdog.org/2012/01/19/puc-staff-no-go-for-energy-firms-wind-deal/
Wanna buy some wind turbines cheap? Good condition, hardly used.
Ms Pease, a good letter. Any special interest group promoting “clean energy” that doesn’t recognize hydro power as a renewable energy source is not to be taken seriously. This was a special agenda pushed by the industrial wind lobby. Mainers are too smart to fall for that.
The liars at First Wind finally get caught.
Kudos to the PUC!
Attention see First Wind Liars caught!
http://pinetreewatchdog.org/2012/01/31/puc-releases-confidential-transcript-in-wind-energy-case/
Fitst Wind Liars caught, attempting to subvert Maine Law!
http://pinetreewatchdog.org/2012/01/19/puc-staff-no-go-for-energy-firms-wind-deal/
KUDOS, Maine PUC, upholding public trust, and state law!
First Wind Willfully trying to subvert process.?..to the AG, Sanctions, remove from Maine for future business?
Lets hope so!
The Slime balls caught….read the full transcript….see the below to get started.
Trying to slip it under the professionals at the “Present PUC”
http://pinetreewatchdog.org/2012/01/19/puc-staff-no-go-for-energy-firms-wind-deal/
Other related First Wind slime balls of honor…
Angus King and son Jr of First Wind
Kurt Adams of First Wind
Hinck and Hinck, Fitts, Du Hoax
More….
see:read the transcript for some entertainment too please. linls found via the below to actual transcript.
http://pinetreewatchdog.org/2012/01/19/puc-staff-no-go-for-energy-firms-wind-deal/
Do you think AG Schneider will reopen the Kurt Adams COLD CASE whitewashed by Baldacci’s compliant AG Janet Mills?
Deborah Parks, Alice Anderson: good letters.
Wayne Ely
It’s nice to see the REAL Mainers take time out from their busy schedule of trying to make ends meet in order to debunk these NIMBY FROM AWAY attitudes.
Thank you very much.
I would ask that you encourage others with your attitude to post here as well.
Wayne-Most people in Maine are not business owners. Most of them, particularly the fine people that comment on this site, are employed by someone else or living off the state. I would dare say that many are unemployed and occupying mom and dads basement. I hate to sound harsh but it is reality. Look at the posts form the left wing liberals. They clearly think business is bad, wealth is bad, and everyone should share their wealth, more of it, with the fat and lazy. Sad really.
Of course the tanks make sense. The fact Searsport has this opportunity is a great thing. Keep fighting the fight against the ignorant neighbors in your town. You know what they say about opinions.
Good luck to you and your business. I am sure you and your current or future hard working employees could use the work to pay for mortgage, heat, food and bills without getting it all for nothing. Everyone must make sacrifices in order to be successful and survive, the liberals and socialists just don’t think it should be them, just us business owners in the community. They are in for a rude awakening.
You base your perspective on unfounded preconceived notions. I dismiss your conclusions as being founded on your personnal unprovable assumptions.
Very insightful comment there, Bushfan.
I agree Bonny. It’s not too often that comments are on here that don’t stereotype and generalize.
~rolls eyes~
LOL
Thank you. I am glad you could understand it.
DEBORAH – My condolences for your loss and my best wishes for you and your family. I was a child of a similar situation. My father died at age 50 after his third heart attack. Mom raised two kids and put them through college working as a waitress. My hat goes off to her every day for the sacrifices she made.
May I give you a bit of advice? My mother never remarried. Once, when I was perhaps 7 or so and dad had been gone a couple of years, Mom asked me if I would like a new father. I was young and did not grasp the implication. I regret now that I told her no. I did not want a new father. I had a father. I loved my father. My father died. No one was going to replace him. I was hurt she’d even ask such a question. It almost “dismissed him” in my young mind. Had she asked me, “Do you mind if I get remarried?” the answer would have been, “No, of course not.”
It is all in the wording, I suppose, even at those very young years. Good luck. Thank you for your very reasoned and sane answer. Don’t believe the misguided rantings of some bible-thumper. The simple truth is they are nuts, and they don’t know they are nuts, and that’s the definition of crazy. Your family is as valid as anyone’s. Many of us grew up in single-parent households. That is just how it works out sometimes.
ALICE – Thanks for your positive response toward gay marriage. Although I am not religious, I appreciate your comment and view. As you can see from these postings, not everyone agrees with you and apparently your vote is “an abomination.” Well, I did not realize so many people had direct lines to God. Apparently, they do. For some, it is an overseas, long-distance, person-to-person call and sometimes those lines can be noisy, confusing, and hard to understand. For you, I think it is a local call. Thanks for your support.
Just a pet peeve folks:
The phrase is, “I could NOT care less,” not “I could care less.” If you “COULD care less” you would. You can’t.
Spell-check and homonym usage could be improved.
Do this and earn a gold star for your writing. Thanks.
Mr. Language Person
Actually you are wrong. The phrase “I could care less,” (popular in the Sixties) was spoken as sarcasm.
The taxpayers and utility customers of Maine are best served by the ability to buy the electricity, available at the cheapest cost, regardless of where it was generated. I would buy all my power from Quebec Hydro and Point LePreau, NB if I could.
When we have these “green power” regulatory schemes around, that is just become the accepted way for those in positions to buy political power, to direct some more “redistirbution of wealth schemes” in their directions.
Reed and Reed and Cianbro are both great companies that employ many people but when you see them publically weigh in on things like green power, there is no doubt whose “interests” they really have in mind, and it is not the consumers!
It is wrong to use politics to benefit a few taxpayers, at the expense of all the others.
Exactly.
Thank you for the thoughtful and supportive letters, Ms. Parks and Ms. Anderson.
Sears Island is a taxpayer funded indusrtial port site- if you cant put another tank there then where? The complainers should have looked around before they bought or been successful in stopping that development plan in the first place – too late now.
Phil Sandine,
You’re wasting your time trying to explain a logical and natural phenomenon to people who want to lower the earth’s human population by about 3 to 5 billion people to “save gaia” and all her beloved creatures.
Lets see:
“logical”
7 Billion people and counting, fresh water resources depleted, fish population headed for extinction, arable land not sufficient for the population, most of the population growth comming from uneducated third world parents, and all of those people aspiring to the life lived of overindulgent first world countries?
Since I was born (in the mid-twentieth century) the population of the USA has doubled. Some (including me) might say the quality of middle class life has declined by the same percentage. US citizens in the 1970’s were aware of the population explosion and took measures to limit the size of their families. Because capitalism (the economic system under which we live) needs at least 3% growth every year, the government opened the floodgates and now 60% of new population in the USA comes from immigration. The lesson is when democracy and capitalism clash, capitalism wins.
The lesson also is when the idea of capitalism is in trouble (not enough grist for the insatiable mill) the Christians can be counted on to support this Ponzi scheme. No accident then that the Somalian refugees burying Lewston in social service debt were brought here by the Lutheran Church.
There should be a law that when people or organizations bring immigrants here they must be financially responsible for them for the first five years they are here. That might help these “do-gooders” understand that their actions have repercussions.
Talk, such as the comments of skullfire, about Sears island being an “industrial port site” is simply untrue. Skullfire should consider getting the facts straight before disseminating this misinformation.
In 2006 the Democrats (this time) managed to coerce some of the environmental crowd to sign onto a highly manipulative document that merely considers this particularly foolish and unneeded scheme. Fortunately for all of us, no one is really interested in investing $200 million-plus destroying the largest wild island remaining in public hands on the East Coast in pursuit of a nonsensical and thoroughly impractical enterprise that will only hemorrhage money, most of it straight out of the small taxpayer’s pocket as part of one corporate welfare package or another.
Potential big investors, not treehuggers, have demonstrated that reality best of all. Despite virtual bribes and other enticements from the state inviting industry to have its way with the western half of Sears Island, despite a six-figure worldwide advertising campaign, five years have come and gone without even a nibble.
The further reality is almost no one has ever really stood to benefit economically from the various silly industrial enterprises proposed for Sears Island over the past half century. One exception to this, of course, have been the usual big business-oriented career politicians in both parties whose stock in trade is corporate chamber of commerce hot air. Another class of opportunists has been a small army of state bureaucrats, land trust executives and academic prostitutes who find an excuse for their paychecks in keeping the pot ever stirred up while they concoct schemes, attend meetings and labor over endless position papers and purported studies.
Oh, and it must also be acknowledged that this last time around the speculators at RailWorld in Chicago also hoped to gain a big windfall at our expense, turning over for a profit the rusted assets of the bankrupt Bangor and Aroostook Railroad. This would have been once taxpayer money had finished paying to polish up these same assets by helping set up the re-branded Montreal, Maine and Atlantic Railway with a modern marine railhead extending onto the island. (In the interim, MMA’s owners have still done quite well for themselves, thank you, with the taxpayers giving them a gift of $22 million last year in return for the state getting the privilege of taking over responsibility for that half of the old B&A’s original trackage, RailWorld’s monopoly stranglehold on freight rail service in Aroostook County, that has proven least profitable.)
As for the rest of us, our children and generations to come, the best use of Sears Island is to leave it as undeveloped and as undamaged as possible. In a world of imperiled natural places, it’s the only decent as opposed to economic thing to do. Reversing the impact of misguided industrialization is unlikely and in any event almost impossible. Moreover, tourism and those qualities of place, the so-called Maine “brand,” identified and analyzed so eloquently in a Brooking Institute study a few years back, are the true economic engines of most of the state and certainly of the Midcoast. The oldest, the most dependable and the most sustainable industry, this is also by far Maine’s biggest employer.
Leaving Sears Island undeveloped and maintaining sanity in the face of short-term industrial development pressures in Searsport and upper Penobscot Bay — like a totally unneeded behemoth propane tank looming 14 stories into the sky over Route 1 and the bay — will not only help preserve what makes our way of life so attractive, it will actually also contribute to the economic welfare of ordinary citizens.
The best use of Sears island is a base for OSV’s to support deepwater drilling off the coast of Maine and Nova Scotia. To leave the island undeveloped is economic stupidity and savages employment opportunities for the people of Maine in the name of elitist environmental extremism.
Kindly note, Pete, that as vapid as your paean to Sears island was, I did not phlag your specious soliloquy as you did my reasoned reply a day or two ago. For shame, dude.
I am uneducated on the subject of Sears Island, BUT I do know this. Maine is off the beaten path. We are at the dead end of the supply line. Down here in Washington County they have tried (endlessly) to get an oil refinery, a LNG terminal, or a deep-water port for docking oil tankers.
I do have some knowledge of petroleum products and their distribution. There is no pipeline into Eastport, Robinston or Calais. There is no interstate in Washington County. One might be forgiven for asking; “Why put a distribution site so far from the bulk of consumers?” The answer being no one else wants this stuff near them so we get it by default.
I suggest a field trip for those folks who want Maine despoiled by this industry. Go to Elizabeth New Jersey and take a good sniff of the air. Ask yourself if you want your children breathing that. Go down to Revere Beach in Massachusetts, and try to imagine how beautiful it would be without the industrial sprawl. On the way back you might want to stop in White Plains New York at the site of the former Grand Avenue Bridge where 15 years ago a tank-truck carrying 100,000 pounds of propane on Interstate 287 hit the bridge abutments. The highway was depressed at this point, but the flames still made the 40 foot jump on to Grant Avenue and Clinton Street. the blast wiped out 5 houses, killed three people, and broke windows, and rattled dishes off shelves up to 7 miles away. The death toll would have been much higher had the hour not been 3AM
Last stop …Corpus Cristi Texas where the refineries explode and burn every couple of years. Maybe a side trip to talk to some widows and orphans about what it feels like to live next to a bomb twice as destructive as the one that leveled Hiroshima.
Please stop attacking gay people they are all produced through straight people. All people have different chromosomes which makes them who they are. Some people have more testosterone than others; some have more estrogen; some have both a penis and a vagina; people are all different depending on their chromosomes. Why is there bias? Why are people so damn judgemental for those who are different from themselves. My experience is that gay people are the least threatening people I have ever met. Live and let live. Roman Catholic Church take notice please.
You’re right, most gays don’t deserved to be dumped on. Most of them acquired their SS attraction through unfavorable circumstances they had no control of as youngsters. For that reason the Church has a special ministry to assist them in coping with their disorder. So please, don’t dump on (or attack) the Church for being willing to help them.
Regarding the jobs forthcoming from the tank development, what they neglect to tell you, is that they already have
current personnel (trained and knowledgeable) who will be filling at least some
of those positions. It happens all the time. Promises,
promises, promises.
Mr. Ely, there will be
fewer lawns to mow, driveways to plow, and septic systems to install when folks
start moving AWAY from the tank site. And, no new construction will
be forthcoming either!
2Pe 3:3Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts,2Pe 3:4and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? Forever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.”
I think Propane is a perfect fit for Searsport. Most people at the antique shops and campgrounds are full of gas anyway.
What a liberal love in this site is.Anybody makes a a statement thats not part of the extreme left wing socialist beliefs and a dozen of ya are on em like smell on stink.Bunch of bullies.
Thank you for sharing.
your welcome
It’s not our fault that conservatives aren’t very smart and make stupid statements that liberals refute. You have read the study about intelligence and Republicans haven’t you?
There is no excuse for being a bully.
Bully is word that’s being way overused these days.
What word would you use to describe a group of people who gang up on one person for their beliefs or differences .
Sally, I think this argument about who is smarter doesn’t accomplish anything worthwhile. If anything, it only causes more division. We’ve seen this type of argument regrettably used against black Americans before to no avail. If I were you I wouldn’t bring up this matter any more. Besides, statistical studies, such as the recently released study comparing the intelligence of liberals and conservatives, are very complex not to mention the fact they can be very misleading as well.
Hey, I wasn’t the person bringing up the topic. Take it up with the person that said, “What a liberal love in this site is.Anybody makes a a statement thats not part of the extreme left wing socialist beliefs and a dozen of ya are on em like smell on stink.Bunch of bullies.” Or do you approve of that statement.
BTW: Refuting outright lies is not bullying.
I agree with you that refuting outright lies is not bullying. But your reply didn’t actually address the admittedly unseemly comment by the poster and only added more fuel to the fire. That said, be assured my comment was not intended to put you down. Unlike some posters, you seem to be willing to listen to reasonable arguments.
Nice job, Deborah, Alice, and Karen. Fight the good fight.
Don’t forget to capitalize “Bible.”
I think YOU are the one hiding your head in the sand, not Karen.
Who’s on first?
If you want to be gay become a priest and they will accept you otherwise get in the closet.
I generally agree with Deborah Parks’s assessment of traditional marriage.
““Protecting marriage is the time-tested way for society to make sure as
many children as possible are raised by their mom and dad. Moms and dads
are both necessary; they are not replaceable by generic adults.”
Children are better served by being raised by their natural parents in a partnership of mutual love and dedication. Yes, a natural parent can be replaced in circumstances such as when a death of a parent occurs but not equally so. Therefore, I would find it necessary to qualify the last part of this statement with the modifier “equally” so that the final phrase would read “they are not equally replaceable by generic adults.”
Perhaps there should be a Bureau of Parentage that would enforce such “ideals.” All children get one straight mother and one straight father! Widows and widowers get a new spouse assigned to them! Single and divorced parents give their children to the bureau for a family better fit to raise children! Gays and sterile people never are allowed to raise children! Everybody wins!!!
This comment of yours sounds like you are creating a situation that doesn’t exist and has not existed in this country for at least many decades. For instance, I don’t remember a time in my life when people were legally punished for being homosexual. If anything much of the old laws against homosexuality have been relegated to the ash bins of time. No, sticking to the traditional definition marriage doesn’t require enforcement.
you know, im getting sick of the christian community constantly refering to homosexuals as being wrong or sinful or in some disgusting cases calling them abominations. it may refer to homosexuality being a sin in the bible but its reffering to homosexuality being taken to the extreme, such as male prostitution and in romans, men seeking relations with young boys, not to men who truly love each other and want to be together for the rest of their lives. dont twist the gospel to suit your own agenda, thats not what it was meant for, it was meant to learn from. and another thing, did jesus himself not say that the 2 commandments witch you are to follow the most are love the lord your god with all your heart, mind and soul and love thy neighbor as thyself? im pretty sure he didnt say love thy neighbor as thyself unless their gay, and in my opinion its despicable that we focus on this instead of the teaching of jesus. he didnt come to this earth and preach to only people who went to church and followed god, in fact he spent more time with the people who didnt because he wanted to set an example that just because youre one way, doesnt mean god wont accept you, he accepts anybody who accepts him, he doesnt discriminate and neither should you. i have a feeling if jesus came back to earth now hed be disgusted by the way the bible has been used as a catalyst for exiling people and being bigoted and close-minded. we are all created equal and in gods own image, dont you think if he didnt want gay people to be aloud to truly love someone of the same sex he wouldn’t have made them that way? stop using god as a platform to shun people you dont agree with and start using the way it should be used, as a teaching tool for being accepting of everybody, regardless of their preferences