AUGUSTA, Maine — Maine voters will get their second chance since 2009 to decide whether the state should recognize marriage between same-sex couples.
The Senate on Wednesday went along with the House and voted to kill the citizen-initiated bill, sending it to voters this November.
In 2009, Maine voters repealed a legislatively passed gay marriage law 53 percent to 47 percent.
The latest effort to force a referendum comes after gay rights activists say many Mainers have changed their minds about the issue and are now willing to accept same-sex marriages.
Because the bill arises from the citizen initiative process, lawmakers had an option to pass it exactly as proposed or kill it, which sends it to voters.
The Maine Freedom to Marry Coalition says the Legislature has honored the will of voters.
And it will be defeated again.
You would think that there would be a longer period before you are allowed to vote on something again….Augusta is basically saying “We made this law once, then the residents of Maine turned it over, then it got asked of us again so we decided to just send it back to the votes who recently defeated the measure.”
The objective is to drain the prop 8 lobbyist groups of their money and make them stop interfering with social issues.
It has been 4 years. We changed the wording the way it was asked.
Not much happens in 4 years.
In an interview yesterday Emily Cain was whining because LePage is putting more DHHS cuts in front of them “again”, and they just voted on it. She, of course, will not be upset that we have to vote this down again.
There is a difference between simply voting this down and what happened the last time. It wasn’t just voted down it was passed by the state government. The people had to take the initiative, organize, and over throw what had been imposed on us. That says a lot.
Lets hope that Mainers will do the same and reject same sex marriage. It is wrong, and life has a way of catching up with bad decisions. Make it easy on yourself and vote “no.”
2+2=5 is wrong, letting William Shatner sing is wrong, but gay marriage is not wrong. Denying equality is what is wrong in this situation. Come on out of the 70’s and join us here in the 21st century, it won’t hurt, I promise.
God created Adam and Eve NOT Adam and Steve!
Nature has many species that exhibit homosexual behavior. So to try and use logic in your illogical God argument: If the Invisible Sky Wizard made the Earth and everything on and in it, then he also made those species, other than humans, that exhibit homosexual behavior. If the Invisible Sky Wizard is perfect, it follows that he is never wrong. Therefore, because he created species that exhibit homosexual behavior, and he is never wrong, homosexuality is logically not wrong in the eyes of The Invisible Sky Wizard. So unless you think you know better than your God, and are somehow more perfect than he is, I wouldn’t use him in your arguments anymore. Logically speaking he is on the side of gay marriage.
He also condemned homosexual behavior.No man should ever lay with another man. It’s in the Bible,look it up.
Look it up? Why don’t you? What about the parts you don’t like, are those just metaphors?
I prefer the Iliad to the Bible. When it comes to made up adventure stories, Homer is much better than Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. What you have to remember about your Fairy tale code book is that it wasn’t written by your Invisible Sky Wizard, it was written by men, who by the way, are fallible.
He also said a man can only divorce his wife for sexual issues and then if another man marries her he is committing adultery. You cannot go by the BIble that way.
You got one thing right, you are matching yourself up with the right species. How’s the weather down there?
You have your directions mixed up. As a homosapien I am actually higher on the evolutionary scale than you. Homosapiens being more advanced than homoerectus and all. If the words are to complicated for you think of it this way, I have a functioning brain and you are Terri Shaivo 5 minutes before they unplugged her.
You are having a battle of wits with the unarmed.
By discriminating against his religion you are only inciting him. We need positive not negative. Allow him his rights or dont ask him to allow yours.
I am not discriminating against his religion. He is free to believe whatever fairy tale he pleases. Where the issue becomes a problem is using that fairy tale as evidence in a debate, and attempting to use that fairy tale to require others who do not believe in that fairy tale to adhere to those rules.
“Organized religion is a sham and a crutch for weak-minded people who need strength in numbers” – Jesse Ventura
“Rational arguments don’t usually work on religious people, otherwise there would be no religious people”
That’s your argument? A bumper sticker style motto?
So who created Steve? Evolution? Oh wait that disproves the bible… sorry.
He created Adam and Eve but people have evolved. He didnt create Adam and Steve? Do you think he created the mentally retarded? What about those born without legs? Do you think he created meatloaf?
“He” didn’t create anything. Adam, Eve, and Steve all come from a long line of descendants that evolved into homosapiens. Religion is about holding power over people. This gay marriage vote threatens that power. Religion is built on fear, but a fear they can use to gain more power over people. People fear death, religion says do as we say and you can live in Disney World for the rest of eternity. What this vote does is intills fear into those religious leaders that use fear. They love using fear as a tool, but hate having to feel fear. All who gain power fear to lose it.
Exactly why is it wrong? And don’t say it is against nature as the posts above disprove that. Since I am not gay, voting no will not change anything for me except leave me with a guilty feeling that I have helped deprive someone else of their rights and freedom.
First of all, “the posts above,” prove nothing. They are only posts. In answer to your question, for you to ask why it is wrong, anwers the question. Many folks just like you have never heard off, or have abandoned, the word of God. You are lovers of yourself, which is explained in the Bible. You don’t honestly know the difference between right or wrong. Your future is determined by the voting booth. You have that right to do so. Good luck.
The “word of God”? You are joking for sure. Right now there is a group of Orthodox Jews in Israel who have spent the last 30 years trying to trace the changes in the bible. They have stated they expect it to take as much as 200 years to discover all of the changes. That to most people would indicate how far from the original writings the current bible is. I do not believe in your fairy tales. I do resent any attempt by you or anyone else of your ilk to impose your superstition on me and others. If you were to come onto my property and start that bs you would be given one chance to shut up and leave.
The fact that you are too lazy to check the links provided in the posts above indicates you wish to stay ignorant.
It’s obvious that you are angry at God for not approving of your thoughts and habits. You are not alone. The more you search for an alternative to God, the deeper you get in your own fox hole until you cover yourself over, and no one will come on your property to dig out the bs.
Read this slowly so it will sink into your deluded brain. My anger is against morons who would allow their delusions to induce them to think they have the right to tell others what to believe and do. Personally I think you should all be locked in an asylum for the criminally insane. You are so obsessed with your delusions you cannot separate fact from fantasy, and will not look at anything which contradicts your narrow minded view. “Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help.”
God loves me just the way he made me. I will not lie to my God and pretend to love a man I cannot love so i can be accepted by men I do not know.
Then why has it been ok in the past. The BIble says that you can tell us we are wrong but that you should still love and accept. If you are not judging by the Bible then there is no other scientific evidence it is wrong. If you are judging by the BIble that makes you a Christian. If you are a Christian you need to sit in prayer because you are sinning.
The IRS just declared it will not recognize gay marriage. Nor do other states.
The IRS did not just declare it will not recognize gay marriage. It hasn’t been allowed to recognize gay marriages since DOMA became law. When DOMA goes, the IRS will recognize gay marriage. And FYI that a growing number of states do recognize gay marriage.
That would be homosexual marriage right? Gay can mean other things. Words do matter.
Are you incapable of understanding the fact that some words have multiple meanings?
Maybe you should keep updated on court cases. Like the one that was just decided…
And just what court case is that?? If you are talking about the Golinksi decision from about three weeks ago, the finding there was that DOMA is unconstitutional. But that won’t have any impact on the IRS until it’s a but further down the road … upheld, for example, by the SCOTUS. In the meantime, the IRS is constrained to follow DOMA just like it has for the past 16 years. Saying that the IRS “just declared it will not recognize gay marriage” … as if it is something that just happened, or is even something the IRS as a say in, is just misrepresenting the facts.
Actually 26 states and countries do. It is pretty common in many places.
I do not want to argue if gay marriage is right or wrong. I do want to discuss this point.
A gay marriage bill was proposed by a Senator from Trenton, Maine in his last term before term limits applied to him. His daughter is a lesbian and this has been a fully known and public fact going back at least a decade. The bill was voted on an approved in both chambers and became law when Governor Baldacci signed it.
In my opinion that Senator introduced a bill that would benefit his daughter that he knew would pass because his party controled the house, senate and the Governors Office. He could have introduced this legislation in his first term as all those majorities were in place when he first became elected. However he choose to wait to introduce the bill when he knew he would not be facing reelection.
In my opinion this senator did things in a somewhat sneaky way. My other opinion is that the the whole way Gay Marriage was handled by our politicians in this circumstance was wrong. We all know that the bill was reversed by a vote of citizens.
In this circumstance the Maine Senate did not decide they were going to make large decisions that would redefine society. Instead they are going to allow the Voters of this State to decide. That is a decision I agree with.
I hope people can understand my post.
Yes I get it, it was political trickery, like LePage is doing with many of his bills, waiting til the end of a session so discussion will be minimal. That is politics. Like a pocket veto, or the rider that has nothing to do with the original proposed bill. The Senate and House passing on this is no different. They know it will go to the people’s vote, and they don’t have to weigh in on a highly charged issue. If it passes or doesn’t, no House member or Senator, or even a political party gets blamed. By passing it on to the people, one could say they also used a trick of politics.
” WARNING ” This post may contain information not suitable for the liberal mind.
Gay marriage puts us in conflict with nature. Conflict with nature leads to serious consequences, therefore help protect our state from calamity and vote NO on any issue that remotely resembles gay marriage.
Nature encompasses the reality that some people are homosexual, that they can build the same kinds of loving, committed relationships most people associate with straight marriages, and can form the center of healthy, productive, happy families. I suggest you read up on some legitimate, peer-reviewed research on the matter, or get to know a few same-gender couples and their families personally. Because you’re sense of what conflicts with nature is a bit out of touch with reality.
I can call myself a polar bear but that doesn’t make me one.
Two people of the same sex cannot be married. They can live together, they can
have a civil ceremony and have all the legal rights of a married man and women,
but they cannot be married. Marriage is an institution of God. One Man One
Women joined together by God. Words matter!
Civil unions do not convey all of the rights of marriage, such as inheritance, child support and responsibility, hospital visitation rights, etc. Marriage is a legally defined institution.
Then change the “civil union” laws and leave marriage alone.
See OldeDaveNJ’s post above. It is clear and to the point of why having two sets of laws for the same thing does not work. Besides the explanation provided there it would add another government expense to maintain separate laws.
Of course words matter, but definitions evolve. Unless you want to keep having marriage be man with woman/women (of the same race) as his property .
We are talking about civil marriage, not religious marriage. Those have been two distinct things for time immemorial. Your personal religious beliefs are irrelevant to this topic. Civil marriage is the state recognition/support of marriage through the granting of certain benefits and protections to couples for purpose of fostering stronger families, be they composed of just the couples themselves, couples w/ biological kids, or couples with kids from adoption, IVF/surrogacy, or previous relationships. And all those reasons apply just as strongly to same-gender couples as to straight couples. And FYI that, as things stand, it is impossible to formulate state laws that give same-gender couples all the legal rights of marriage without using term “marriage,” because of interactions with Federal statutes like ERISA. It is probably impossible regardless, since trying to achieve equality using separate-but-equal laws seldom works very well. We’ve had civil unions in NJ for five years, and still have problems … and a State Civil Union Review Commission found that such problems are inherent w/ civil unions.
Historically marriage had nothing to do with God. It was coined in the 6th century as being related to a Godly love. But, you have a right to your beliefs and I understand your point. Please try to say it with nicer words as we all should. We are all in this together, life and country I mean.
Homosexuality has been documented in over 1500 species, including the birds and the bees. So please explain where the conflict with nature comes from.
Give me a break. I don’t care what you do in private….
But are you comparing yourself to a worm that happens to have both sex organs?
There are no species, male to male, other than a human with defective DNA, that will allow something to be jammed up their rectum for sport.
Could you name maybe even half of the 1500 species that you claim?
If you don’t care then why are you spending time thinking about it? No one is asking for the right to engage in sexual activities between consenting adults — we all already have those rights. Gays are by far not the only ones to engage in that “sport” either.
This is about marriage.
Why don’t you look it up yourself? Use that thing in front of you. No… the other thing called a keyboard and computer. Just google “Homosexuality in Nature” or “List of Animals Displaying Homosexual Behavior”.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Homosexuality+in+Nature I don’t think he can do that on his own so I help the neighbor.
LMAO!!
Anal sex really isnt the norm. He is correct though. Homo and Bi sexuality is the norm in nature.
I had a gay cat… explain that.
Homosexuals may “Unite” any time that they want to, in their own privacy like most Normal people.
I just don’t want to have to see *it*, hear about *it* or waste taxpayers hard earned money
debating the issue ever again,
$$$,$$$,$$$ + voting about *it* = Major TRADITIONAL FAMILY Malfunction !!!
There’s alot more important issues to get all worked up about, like lowering my Golf Handicap !
See ya’ at the Polls in Nov. ,,,,,, you poor sport losers,,, :+/
Where are the serious consequences in The Netherlands where it has been legal for years. They live in peace, have low divorce rates and lower crime rates. Nature, by nature, is more homosexual than anything. Just like people. Even cave drawing depict homosexuality.
Another chance for Maine to live up to its motto–Dirigo.
If Maine’s voters choose discrimination over equality again, then I propose a change of motto–maybe status quo, eh?
Headline should read: “Maine Senate kills gay marriage bill, time for you to vote again on this”
Right, but this time it was changed the way we were asked to change it. This law will protect religious entities. Only the ones who are tax exempt though. The lawsuits you hear about are only against the for profit groups.
“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman.” ~ Pres. Barack Obama
What’s your point?
He did say that but you are taking it out of context. He also believes that all people should have the same rights and privileges and his opinion is evolving. Of course this is what he believes. Until we are shown otherwise we believe in Santa and the Easter Bunny. Obama is a very intelligent and fair man. He does not discriminate. He has a right to his beliefs but also a responsibility to uphold the Constitution. He will.
I can’t wait to see this pass.
With the republican war on women, the unemployed and the workers, as well as their attempts to disenfranchise many voters, there is a good chance gay marriage will become legal in Maine in November. The conservatives have passed or attempted to pass so many laws against the average person that I believe the voters will reject any thing coming from the republican party and their right wing money bags. I do hope we find out who backed the vote against gay marriage in Maine the last time. Those cowards have still not revealed their source of out of state money.
What a drama queen.
There is no war on women, we just don’t want us, or our employers, to pay for male or female contraception. If you think we should, then why shouldn’t your employer pay for your groceries too? You need food to stay healthy too don’t you? Why shouldn’t your employer have to pay your water bill? You need that even more than food or sex to stay healthy.
There is no war on the unemployed, the welfare recipients, or anyone else. We simply won’t allow it to become a way of life. If someone is unemployed for 6 months or more, then maybe they need to start at the bottom and work their way up in a different field, because there is obviously no need for their field of expertise. Maybe there is need for their expertise in a different town or a different state. People have to be willing to do whatever it takes to survive and provide for their family. Look what your ancestors did to survive. They took a boat across the ocean to a different unknown land in hopes of providing for their family. They were willing to work and defend their new country, not burn the American flag or fly the flag of the country they came from. These days people think that they should be paid to sit on the couch rather than possibly move across the state to make a living.
The same could be said for homosexual marriage. There may be other places where it’s accepted and they would be more comfortable. When it’s defeated here again, would you agree that it’s time to give it a rest?
The 2000 ruling by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) determined that in accordance with the 1964 Civil Rights Act that if an insurance policy covered prescriptions, which most do, it must therefore cover any contraceptives that are prescribed. This was the law throughout the 8 years of Bush’s term, and is the law in 26 states, including Maine. The republicans did not object until 2011. Now that it is an election year, they have finally noticed because it might be an issue to attract their extreme conservative supporters.
Examples of the republican war on women;
1) The New Hampshire House of Representatives is considering a bill which declares that abortion causes breast cancer, in spite of complaints against it by the American Cancer Society. There is no scientific basis for that claim.
2) Arizona is considering a bill to allow employers to fire any woman using birth control. The fact that it would violate privacy laws will probably result in a federal lawsuit.
3) Texas is cancelling funding through medicaid for women’s health services, resulting in the federal government withholding federal funding.
4) Virginia passed a pre-abortion ultrasound law. It originally required an intrusive (read RAPE) method, but changed the bill after massive protests from women and doctors.
5) Through out the US there are ongoing efforts to defund Planned Parenthood, which uses 97% of its funding for birth control and cancer prevention through pre-screening and referring potential candidates for further tests.
6) Some republican candidates have openly declared one of their first acts if elected would be to remove federal and state funding for PP.
These are just some easily found examples of anti women’s health laws being pushed throughout the US by republicans. The last I looked there were over 1000 bills being written across the country.
I have no problem paying for birth control pills if they are prescribed for medical reasons, which they sometimes are for women with uterus problems. As for paying for birth control for every healthy man or woman, I think they should pay for their own. Since this would be men and women, it is not “against” women.
I’m also not against Planned Parenthood. I would much rather give low income people free condoms or even an abortion, than pay for some unwanted child for the next 20 years. Obviously if they can’t afford birth control, how can they afford a child?
It’s about personal responsibility, which nobody seems to want these days, not against women.
So basically you object to the way the law is written, which provides birth control to anyone with a policy that covers prescriptions. We can disagree on that point, but my biggest problem is the pervasive effort on the part of republicans, and some democrats, to move us back to the 1960s when birth control consisted of keeping track of the time of the month and abortion was done in back alleys by a “doctor”.
Brazil, which is 73% Catholic, restricts abortion except in cases of rape of a mentally disadvantaged woman, although they are changing the law after a 12 year old was raped and got pregnant. As a consequence, annually between 200.000 and 400,000 women in that country end up needing emergency medical care for problems related to pregnancy.
In Zimbabwe, they just passed a law making universal health care available to pregnant women. I am not sure exactly what that covers, but IMO should also cover cancer screening and other preventative medical procedures.
Did you put it out of it’s misery?
And we’re supposed to believe that those against gay marriage aren’t hateful or bigoted.
You can if you wish….but I wouldn’t.
What you believe is what you believe. Just like them. However, when they take away my rights it is wrong just like when you take away theres with your words.
How am I taking away anybody’s rights? By dissenting their hatred? That’s not taking away their rights. As they are allowed free speech, so am I.
Nope it lived a full and happy life. :)
Why are people complaining about the sanctity of marriage when there is none. America has a 50% divorce rate, and self proclaimed Christians sin more than the atheists. If all atheists where to be deported out of the US the prison system will decrease by 1%. The main reason I support gay marriage as a straight male is because government has no right in making religious laws as dictated by the constitution. Marriage in it’s self is a joke as it causes more harm than good even when only straight people marry. People kill over marriage because everyone gets screwed in a divorce.
When I mentioned to a gay friend that this would be put before the voters, his response was ” Why in heck would anybody want to get married?” Not exactly what I expected, but he has a point.
The way to look at anything is to look at a case study. The Netherlands has had marriage for all since 2001. They live in peace and prosperity. They have a low divorce rate, a low STD rate and a low crime rate. By telling people their religion is bad isnt helping our cause. We have facts on our side. Please argue with dignity.