ORONO, Maine — Two outspoken opponents of same-sex marriage are speaking out at the University of Maine on the first day of the school’s annual pride week.
Paul Madore and Mike Heath have formed the No Special Rights PAC and are raising money to campaign against November’s statewide referendum asking voters whether they want to legalize gay marriage.
They are distributing fliers, holding a press conference and speaking out against gay marriage Monday on the Orono campus.
They will be located just 10 yards from where a student alliance is raising the gay pride flag to kick off pride week.
Dean of Students Robert Dana says the university encourages diverse viewpoints as long they’re expressed in a respectful and civil manner.
To speak out and hold a press conference on the specific day that UMaine’s Pride begins, seems like an exercise in bad taste and disrespect. Pride is supposed to be about celebrating who we are, our culture, and how far we have come. It is about remembering victims of AIDS and anti-LGBT violence. Paul Madore and Mike Heath are only interested in instigating confrontation and interrupting what should be a peaceful event for LGBT students.
my god, PLEASE… I am all for gay marriage, mostly because I understand the constitution, but I am even more opposed to anyone even saying that this demonstration is in bad taste.
so what?
don’t go listen.
let them speak.
I am even in favor of Holocaust deniers being allowed to speak on passover… don’t listen, or DO listen and find out if they have any valid points.
it was not long ago that people were not allowed to speak about the earth revolving around the sun
Thanks, for supporting marriage equality. I completely agree that they have every right to form their demonstration. I only said it was in bad taste and disrespectful. Kind of like the Westboro Baptist Church protesting funerals. Completely legal, but won’t do anything to further their cause, and distracts from what the event is supposed to be about.
It reminds me of the Nazi rallies held in Skokie IL some years ago.About 20 Nazi sympathizers showed up and they were shouted down by hundreds against them.
so if the school allowed the KKK to hold a rally during Martin Luther King day, would that be fine as long as you don’t go to listen?
*I* wouldn’t like it, but that would be their right. And their mistake.
yes, absolutely, that is what freedom of speech is about.
there is no point to having free speech if all you are allowed to do is say “good morning, have a nice day”
free speech is supposed to be for objectionable speech.
(interestingly, the BDN website has blocked me from posting about free speech)
In the US they have that right. We may disagree with their statements, but must respect that right or lose our own. In Europe of course they have no legal rights due to their history.
“it was not long ago that people were not allowed to speak about the earth revolving around the sun”
Lets see…who was that oppressor? Oh yeah…the CHURCH. They executed and imprisoned untold numbers of people who dared to speak such heresy. As we all know, over time secular intellect won out and the Church was proven wrong. Very wrong. As it will be again on the gay marriage issue.
Good luck Mr. Heath in trying to sell your brand of hate to the future generations. lol
nevermind the label “hate”
use words like fairness and logic
under the constitution, a state cannot grant rights to some people and deny others the same rights, that is fair.
under Loving v. Virgina, the Supreme Court ruled that even though the state of Virginia did not prevent people from marrying altoghether, the state had no interest in preventing people of different races from intermarrying.
What is the state’s interest in preventing two men from marrying, especially if they want a home, a family and to raise children?
last, I gotta ask… what is the state’s interest in allowing a couple to marry if they do not want to, or are unable to have children? shouldn’t the “no gay marriage people” also stand up against marriage of sterile people?
He is obviously doing very well with donations right now, more than the gay side is getting. Hmmm odd i wonder why. We will see, both parties are really busy, but the campagin heath is running is getting lots of donations.
And you know this how? And if the PAC is receiving donations are they going to release the donor names as required by Maine law or are they going to take a page from NOM and refuse, file needless lawsuits and cost the taxpayers of Maine hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorney fees and court costs?
Yes, many are deceived into spending money to make other people’s lives miserable. Their money could feed and cloth people, but they would rather spend it on a campaign of hatred and intolerance.
Update on April 11:
What a fantastic response from everyone! I am rounding this up to $175 or $200, and will make this donation to Mainers United for Marriage this week to help their efforts. Your support of this post shows me that there are many readers out there who agree with our efforts to obtain civil marriage in this state, far more than those of us who engage in conversations here in the BDN forums.
My original post is below:
What harm would my eventual marriage do to Paul Madore and Mike Heath? I can see no harm that would come to them, yet they seek to keep me from obtaining the real and many benefits of civil marriage.
Since our country’s inception there have been groups like ours who have seen the promise of our Constitution, and petitioned our society for equal rights, access to government, and legal protections.
And all along the way there have been people like Paul Madore and Mike Heath, predicting doom and gloom and national destruction if we extend these things to one more group, race, sex, or other minority.
Every time they have failed in the end, and every time our nation has failed to self-destruct. This is just the next way in which our constitution is fulfilling its promise to ALL Americans.
I hope most Mainers will join me this November to vote for same sex civil marriage in our state!
For every “Like” this post receives before comments are closed, I will donate $1 to Mainers United for Marriage http://mainersunited.org to counter the lies and disinformation that Mr. Heath & Mr. Madore spread (I will round up to the nearest $25).
I will donate $2 to the No Special Rights PAC for every like your post receives.
The only ones wanting special rights are homophobic Christians who want to impose their belief system on others. They think that they are somehow special and that other people must live by their creed. I’ll be glad when they stop pushing for “special rights” to control other people’s lives.
@maineak99
Typical of a supporter of a group that practices hate, you can’t come up with a creative way to support your own cause so you instead try to tear somebody else down. I’m willing to bet your donation will never happen.
That would be your right, of course!
EDITED TO ASK: Now that comments are closed, where do you plan to send your $334? Michael Heath has yet to actually register his supposed “No Special Rights PAC”, so I think you will have a hard time honoring your commitment.
I’ve been looking and looking, and I don’t think the “No Special Rights PAC” actually exists. Or at least there is no way to donate money to them.
I for one am sick and tired of this issue being brought uop every cpl of years the people this state have voted against this, how many times are these people going to be permitted to waste the tax payers time and money, the only thing i can think of is they are hoping that over time people will get tire of voting on this issue and not turn out to vote then thet will get there way.i for one will now make sure that i am there to vote NO, i voted for it in the past but i think that the people of maine have already casted their opinion and it should be a dead issue.
This is only the 2nd time in Maine history that this issue has been put before voters, hardly “brought uop every cpl of years”.
Personally, I will fight for my right to civil marriage as long as it takes, because extending marriage benefits to same sex couples in Maine is the right thing to do to protect ALL Maine families and their children.
Well Ron let me correct some inacurate information in your post.
“I for one am sick and tired of this issue being brought uop every cpl of years the people this state have voted against this,”
Well this “fact” is printed over and over and no matter how many times it is repeated doesn’t increase the false claim of “every couple of years”. Maine has voted exactly ONCE in 2009 and that is NOT “every cpl of years”.
~~~~~
“how many times are these people going to be permitted to waste the tax payers time and money,”
See response above and I couldn’t agree with you more on this point. The rights of a minority should never be voted on by the majority.
~~~~~
“the only thing i can think of is they are hoping that over time people will get tire of voting on this issue and not turn out to vote then thet will get there way.”
Civil rights for a minority NEVER come easily and without constant political battles.
~~~~~
“i for one will now make sure that i am there to vote NO, i voted for it in the past but i think that the people of maine have already casted their opinion and it should be a dead
issue.”
Some how I doubt you “voted for it in the past” but if you did, what were those years exactly?
Posted for emphasis; as JD and True native have pointed out, this issue has been brought up only once before and it was put to a vote by the opponents of equality, not the supporters. Now it is the turn of supporters of gay marriage. There is no limit to the number of times a question can be put to the voters under a democracy. Personally I believe it should be voted on as many times as necessary until equality is granted to gay and lesbian couples. Freedom and equality do not always come easy or fast.
The only time it was brought to vote was when opponents wanted to reverse the legislative action that had passed supporting same-gender marriage. We have voted on it one time.
Using a phrase like “these people” is a red flag as it denotes ignorance, bigotry and intolerance.
The only people wasting money are those individuals and groups who are pouring millions of dollars into a campaign of discrimination and unfair treatment toward one group of our citizens.
As with other movements of equality, it doesn’t go away after one try, two or three tries. It doesn’t go away until equality is reached and when all members of a society have the same rights and privileges. It will never be a dead issue as long as tax paying citizens are denied basic rights given to other citizens.
Perhaps some adult ed courses in basic history and writing would help you understand the process and will help you to better communicate your thoughts in full sentences with proper punctuation and spelling.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120406234458.htm
Is Some Homophobia Self-Phobia?
ScienceDaily (Apr. 6, 2012) — Homophobia is more pronounced in individuals with an unacknowledged attraction to the same sex and who grew up with authoritarian parents who forbade such desires, a series of psychology studies demonstrates.
just read that interesting article myself…
I find it sad that some people have to live with that kind of self torment. I know a few people that will tell you they are homophobic and I seriously wonder if they are just suppressing the truth with hatred.
And, rights are something that never ever should go to a pubic vote — they either are a right or they are not. People entering into a legally contracted union are exercising their RIGHT to do so. Period!
There’s so much blatant ignorance in this state (as above), I think it will take a while before gays are allowed the same rights. One thing is certain; we will not back down until we have the same rights. That’s why this gets “brought uop every cpl of years”, and will continue to appear over and over until it’s passed. If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
I think all of us who are heterosexual should have a straight pride week,
They have it every day.
If you feel that you need support and encouragement to live true to yourself as a heterosexual, I encourage you to do this.
Or go to any sporting event in our nation, that would work too.
Really? How does “pride” fit in with being straight? Are you proud of saying to those who would oppress you because of your sexual orientation “We’re not going to let you keep us down any longer”? Are you proud that you now have the courage and support to be who you are as a straight person? Are these the reasons for your “straight pride week”?
Or did you not really think that comment through before you posted it?
Bisexuality immediately doubles your chances for a date on Saturday night. ~Woody Allen
APPLAUSE!What a great idea!Notice the difference in likes between your post and the opposing $2 offer.
A repeat comment
Do you have to get permission from the BDN to hold a fundraiser in the comment section for Mainers United for Same-Sex marriage ? Don’t they usually charge for space for that activity?
Hmm, that’s a good question, if I am running afoul of any BDN policies, I’d stop of course.
For the record, I am not affiliated with Mainers United for Marriage in any way. I am not soliciting donations for this group from anyone who is reading these messages.
I am simply a Maine citizen who supports their cause, and donates money to them. I plan to make a donation this week, and I thought this would be a fun way to determine the amount I plan to donate.
For this reason, I don’t think this qualifies as a fundraiser, because I am not raising any funds. I am simply donating my money, out of my own pocket.
KikiEM why didn’t you ask the same question of maineak99 that posted they would “donate $2 to the No Special Rights PAC for every like your post receives”?
If you are going to be the BDNs comment section monitor for fundraising please apply the moderation equally across the board.
I most definitely mean for it to apply to the $2.00 commenter also.
To bad your actions don’t backup your words.
“To (to should be too) bad your actions don’t backup your words.”
*********************************************************
My actions? What’s with that? Do you have a private detective following me around? As far as I knew, my comments are the only thing you have access to.
Point #1 – when one cannot defend their position KikiEm one normally either attacks a) spelling, grammar, sentence construction, etc….or 2) the poster themselves.
Point #2 – You took issue with ConvivialVisits for “raising funds” for Mainers United for Marriage. I pointed out that you failed to make the same comment about maineak99 and his $2.00 offer to No Special Rights PAC. You responded with a very weak “I most definitely mean for it to apply to the $2.00 commenter also” (words) but never posted that (I checked) under maineak99 (actions).
So…
“My actions?” Yes, your actions.
“What’s with that?” You are inconsistent with your actions. You only find fault with the actions of people that defend/approve of SSM. But when people that oppose SSM do the same thing you turn a blind eye to those actions.
“Do you have a private detective following me around?” No.
“As far as I knew, my comments are the only thing you have access to.” Yes and they tell me more about your character then you could possibly know or understand.
OK jd2008jd
well said- I ‘Liked’ it too…
Going to be a few fights, better get the cops ready..
the University should sell tickets and Pay-per-view, so they can help off set the pay raises…
Good idea…
nah, we don’t bother anymore.
is Lamar and Booger going to square off from revenge of the nerds?
Lamar, he was hillarious……..
It’s not like heterosexuals haven’t make a perfectly good mockery of marriage so why do they feel they are in a position to bad mouth and protest against gay marriage. Seriously, we have bigger issues.
53% of marriages end in divorce. Do you suppose I can assume that 47% are successful? Those couples who have failed marriages aren’t making a mockery out of marriage. Marriage is Marriage. It’s intent is to partner for life, love and respect each other, remain faithful and weather the storms of life together in good times and bad times. When couples fail to understand that and do not remain faithful to very serious marriage vows, it’s their “relationship” that they have turned into a detestable nightmare and an unbearable situation. The sanctity of the intent and purpose of “marriage” still remains unscathed. So I say, let us applaud, respect and admire the 47% who understood the seriousness of the vows they took during their marriage ceremony and remain faithful to each other until death parts them.
Homosexuals also would have similar percentages of failures and successes, whether they live together or have a civil marriage ceremony.
Of the 53% of marriages that end in divorce…..59 percent of marriages for women under the age of 18 end in divorce within 15 years. The divorce rate drops to 36 percent for those married at age 20 or older. ” “Cohabitation, Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage in the United States,” M.D. Bramlett and W.D. Mosher
Divorce Tax Now!
I intend to vote for same sex civil marriage in Maine this November — what I don’t understand is what harm does gay/lesbian people do to me? How does it affect my right to work, my religious right to worship as I want to, to raise my children? NO HARM AT ALL – CAN’T ANYONE SEE THIS??? I hope people will look at things like this at the polls!!! Hopefully the right to marry for gay/lesbian people will pass and this will be done with!!!
I think what the opponents of same-sex marriage groups are especially uncomfortable with is the storeroom of same-sex marriage materials and books ( already published and waiting in the wings) that will be added to the curriculum and required social instruction in the public schools. (beginning in elementary grades) The Harry and Larry Get Married and I Have Two Mommies books that are in storage, waiting to be unleashed in the Maine public education system.
Same-sex marriage extremists elicited a false and alarming notion (in the 2010 elections) that opponents of same-sex marriage were claiming that teachers would be teaching kids how to become homosexuals. That was a nasty scare tactic and a lie. Opponents of same-sex marriage don’t want the same-sex marriage books introduced in the schools at all and to be an educational requirement added to the curriculum.
This law does not require any changes to our school curriculum. This nonsense was used in the last vote and is not based on truth but on lies and distortion.
I would hope that most voters in Maine have the intelligence to realize that this is not true.
“This law does not require any changes to our school curriculum.”
*******************************************************
Even though it is not part of this current same-sex marriage vote in the Novemeber election…if it should pass this time….the opponents of same-sex marriage believe that the next campaign launched by homosexuals would be to have their lifestyles taught in the public schools and demand that it be included in social education (like sex-education) I was under the impression that as long as something is illegal, it can’t (logically) be introduced in the school systems.
So you admit that you’re lying and just made all that up ?
There is nothing I am lying about. I heard a supporter of same-sex marriage (a radio host) ranting and railing that “opponents” were claiming that if the same gay marriage material and books were introduced into Maine school systems (that have been introduced in the massachusetts school systems) that the same-sex marriage opponents were saying that teachers would be be obligated to teach children “how to become homosexual.” No opponent ever said that. That supporter of same-sex marriage was the one lying.
Opponents didn’t and still don’t want the materials in the schools system at all……and not that they thought teachers would be teaching kids how to become homosexual.
I’m only saying what I perceived the clash and the argument was about in the last election. In a nutshell…here is what i took away from the last debate. “Legalize same-sex marriage and the the next logical thing to follow would be a requirement to teach alternate lifestyles in the public schools” (because gays and lesbians can’t really promote same-sex marriage for the LGBT lifestyle to be added to school curriculums until the marriage part becomes legal.) You can’t require something to become part of social education in the schools if it’s illegal)
We can’t require something to become part of social education in Maine schools, period. Curriculum is set at the local level.
If you care what is taught to your children in schools in Maine, pay attention to your local school board, not the statewide gay marriage debate.
KikiEm
Point #1 – What is taught in your local school system is NOT forced down from “above”. If you are concerned about what is taught in your local school system, I would suggest that you attend your local school board where THEY determine what is taught in YOUR local schools.
Point #2 – Parents in Maine (and Massachusetts) can opt out of sex (health) education classes. This is true now and will be true after the November vote.
Point #3 – Being a homosexual or heterosexual or bi-sexual is not illegal in any of the 50 states.
So, I will say again if you are going to post a lie at least post something new and original.
Point #3 – Being a homosexual or heterosexual or bi-sexual is not illegal in any of the 50 states.
********************************
Same sex marriage is illegal in the state of maine. I know it’s not illegal to be LBGT.
Actually, same sex marriage is not illegal in the state of Maine. If a married same sex couple moved here, they would not be arrested.
Civil marriage to same sex couples is prohibited in Maine, no licenses are issued to us here.
I remember that we had to take a form home to our parents to let them know about this part of the class and that my parents could opt out of it. That was in the late 1970s…
Marriage is not taught in Maine schools at all, though. Your misinformation is baseless.
That’s true….but there was never any reason to have educational classes on marriage. It was always assumed that marriage involved a male and a female.
yeah, and a lot of really bright people don’t care to have their children have to read about the “theory” of evolution.
it is not a theory.
that said, I wish the schools would (and wish people would DEMAND THAT the schools) teach only academic subjects and stop the social agendas.
NOTHING but academic courses, NOTHING.
and that includes the pledge of allegiance, if necessary.
My kids were recently taught that the US committed genocide during the spanish american war, in the philippeans. Did we also commit genocide in Dresden during WWII? or is that going to be in another textbook once the indocrination talking points turn a different direction?
Tyler you might want to read some history before you make comments about it.
The United States did commit atrocities during the Philippine Insurrection (1899-1902) and so did the Filipino’s (First Philippine Republic, Katipunan, Pulajanes, Sultanate of Sulu and the Moro).
The Japanese still deny (for the most part) the atrocities they committed during WWII too. The Bataan Death March, use of slave labor, enslavement of woman for “comfort” (prostitution), the Rape of Nanking, cannibalism of POWs, etc…Just because a country denies its history doesn’t mean that it is all “peaches and cream”.
Huh? There are warehouses of books that have been published but not released, because somehow we’re waiting for same sex marriage to come to Maine?
The big problem with this theory is that public school curriculum is set at the local level, not dictated by Maine state law.
Another problem with this is it’s entirely unrelated to civil marriage equality. Fighting against what is taught in schools doesn’t change one iota regardless of whether same sex marriage exists in this state or not.
I listened to both sides of the debate in the last election. I’m only conveying what I understood from that heated debate what the issues were…..pro and con. All I’m offering to this topic is my own understanding of the positions of both sides. (from 2010.)
It is as if someone told me to come to Maine……listen to supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage and then return back to where I came from and report, as best I could, what both sides were all about. That’s all I’m offering in my comments……what I interpreted to be the issues…on both sides.
BTW…..what do homosexuals think (as a whole) of President Obama’s fixed position in his opposition to same-sex marriage? I don’t see the gay community confronting him on his position or holding any large rallies to challenge his inflexible position with the same-sex marriage issue.
If you don’t see Obama being confronted and pressured by the LGBT community, then you’re not paying attention.
Also, schools teach current events. To the extent that the topic of homosexuality would be raised, marriage wouldn’t change a thing. We as voters are discussing it and so it could be discussed in school as well — that’s independent of its legality.
The Obama line is straight out of the NOM talking points playbook, btw. The idea is they divide the LGBT community against the Democrats in office. They have similar goals to divide us from the black and latino communities.
This attempt to use these tactics is clumsy.
Evidently there was a New Mexico gay couple at the egg roll hunt on the WH lawn who intended to confront the President on his refusal to sign an Executive Order protecting workplace discrimination based on sexual orintation. Is that the the kind of confrontation you are referring to?
Confrontations of that nature aren’t apt to catch my attention but this one does every year because the media always concentrates on the President making an appearance with that great big easter bunny. It is an affront to me, because Easter is not about bunnies and eggs.
I’m talking about President Obama, who always holds an Iftar dinner at the White House at the beginning of Ramadan. (Separation of Church and State flies out the window on that one) However, we don’t see the President appearing on a WH portico with someone disguised as the Greek Goddess Diana while holding a Ramadan event of children’s games of Muslim charades being held on the WH lawn.
I’m talking about a gay rally that could be held on the national mall protesting the President’s non-support of gay marriage. A rally like that would make the nightly news and front page headlines. That would catch my attention.
But what I’m saying is that there are small confrontations like that that are sponsored by larger civil rights groups (the couple didn’t do this all on their own accord) and larger ones (do you not remember the equality march on Washington in 2009? or even the one here in Maine re: DADT?). There is a tremendous amount of pressure on the President from the LGBT community.
At the same time, I think they realize that they do need to both forceful and forgiving with the President, especially given the manner in which congressional Republicans are behaving. Obama has done much for the gay community than any other President and the alternatives in this race would certainly take step backwards.
President Obama’s unwillingness to back the support of gay-marriage inclusion in the Democrat Platform has nothing to do with Republicans. His continual position on same-sex marriage can’t be blamed on Bush or the Republicans. His anti gay-marriage position has been a long-held position of his.
“Obama’s endorsement isn’t needed for the party to adopt a gay marriage plank, officials note, but with a high-profile issue on which feelings run high on all sides, staying neutral could be difficult.”
“Political advisors argue that an election-year epiphany on the issue would be seen as simple political opportunism at a time Obama’s campaign is eager to highlight principled decisiveness. And gay marriage remains controversial among at least one major constituency the president needs: African American voters. Pastors of black churches, for example, have led the effort for a referendum in Maryland to overturn the state’s new law allowing same-sex marriage.” (Michael A. Memoli, Washington Bureau)
Barack Obama is certainly “on the horns of a dilemma”
I didn’t blame his position on Republicans. I said that the gay community is operating in reality when they understand that the President can’t do everything on his own. He can’t force Congress to vote for things. That was clearly my point when I said “congressional Republicans.”
And actually no, your quote is a bit off. Black Churches are being put off as recently revealed documents from the National Organization for Marriage show that NOM was actively seeking to create a racial divide on this issue. Many of these Churches have spoken out on the disgusting nature of that tactic.
Obama hasn’t exactly remained neutral either. Notice how they’ve stopped defending aspects of DOMA in court? Notice how they’ve issued statements re: marriage amendments/referendums in various states?
OK………..why are you quick to close a blind eye to Obama’s vacillations on same-sex marriage and at the same time, robotically call opponents of same-sex marriage homophobes and bigots?
My quote isn’t a bit off. It is verbatim from the article by Michael A. Memoli, Washington Bureau.
I see what you’re saying, but Obama does not actively work AGAINST us. Some Republicans (and some Democrats, yes) do what they can to prevent us from even having the basic protections that all Americans have the right to.
Alright. Are you reasonably comfortable with the supposition that Barack Obama is just a dithering, befuddled and confused bigot? Still kinda, sorta workin’ it out?
And if he is a dithering, befuddled, confused bigot….on what basis do you attribute his indecisiveness to?
You’re the bigot present though.
Because, he’s not my hero or model. He’s an elected official. He’s the best choice out of the options. I’m not robotically calling anyone those names — only when it aptly applies.
I didn’t say you misquoted. I said the analysis in the quote is off. Quit twisting words and trying to play gotcha. It’s ridiculous.
You said…and I quote “And actually no, your quote is a bit off. ”
**********************************************
I quoted Michael A. Memoli verbatim (LA Times Washington Bureau) from his article of yesterday, April 9th. What you would have to say is, Michael Memoli is “a bit off” with his analysis.
No words were “twisted” and I don’t see any evidence of my playing gotcha. I’m not engaging in any sort of a gotcha game.
What happens when you continue reading is that you see I was obviously refering to the analysis in the quote. That’s why context matters.
And yes, you are twisting words and playing gotcha. The LGBT community is allowed to have opinions independent of the opinions of those that they vote for hold. A pratical person realizes that positive and important change does not happen over night and you can’t get everything you want at the snap of your fingers. The gotcha comes in when you start calling that hypocrisy. There is a huge difference between what Obama says (while not pushing for gay marriage, he still is supportive of the community in other ways that are not merely symbolic) and what a guy like Santorum says.
Ok…..fteagles…I certainly recall from times before that you customarily call me a liar, a gotcha game player, a word twister and I haven’t made a reference to hypocrisy as yet (today)
So settle down…..you’re right you’re right…you’re right. You’re always right.
Oh one more snippet..I would not vote for Santorum.
And I substantiate my claims. So refute that instead of trying to play like you’re a victim.
Also, you’re going to pretend that this: “why are you quick to close a blind eye to Obama’s vacillations on same-sex marriage and at the same time, robotically call opponents of same-sex marriage homophobes and bigots?” isn’t refering to hypocrisy? Get real.
This just in:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obama-gay-marriage-20120410,0,3902296.story
You must have misunderstood, then. I never saw any reference to books “in storage, waiting to be unleashed in the Maine public education system” (your words). That is a very specific accusation, I’m sure you have some sort of link to support this claim?
And you mischaracterize the 2009 vote (not 2010 as you claim)… the misleading, lying ads from “Stand for Marriage Maine” claimed that the gay marriage law would lead to homosexual issues being taught in our schools, which was a total fabrication as Mark Mutty himself acknowledged. You change the specifics of the issue and then claim it’s fabricated, when it’s you who are fabricating the false history you attack.
There ! I could have sworn I saw those ads “claiming that the gay marriage law would lead to homosexual issues being taught in our schools.” Now you have verified it for me. Because I reference those ads in my comments, supporters of same-sex marriage leap to the conclusion that I believed the ads and agreed with them. I was recalling what the issues of the two sides were in 2009 (thanks for correcting the year) The accusations of lies and lying has become so convoluted…..I guess one would have to say…the lies are flying all over the place.
BTW…..what do homosexuals think (as a whole) of President Obama’s fixed position in his opposition to same-sex marriage? I don’t see the gay community confronting him on his position or holding any large rallies to challenge his inflexible position with the same-sex marriage issue. May I assume it must be torturous for the gay community to tolerate the President’s firm conviction that marriage is between a man and a woman?
Then you aren’t paying attention. The gay community appreciates the progress thus fair, but is extremely frustrated with how slow things are moving. They confront him constantly about this — even this weekend at the White House’s Easter egg hunt.
Have you not read the headlines recently about the community pushing to have marriage equality adopted in the Democratic platform?
I have never liked that Obama didn’t support marriage equality. However, it is more likely that he might (and is) changing his position than the Republican alternatives in 2008.
It IS a difficult topic for many people. I do wish, though, that people don’t automatically assume that ALL Republicans do not support and all Democrats do.
I was trying to be careful when I refered to congressional Republicans. Politicians are very different than voters. I sincerely doubt any current Republican politicians in the House or Senate would support a federal law that legalized gay marriage. I know, however, there are some Republican politicans that support the repeal of DOMA. And, of course, there are Republican voters who are very supportive of gay rights.
“There!” you say?
You made very specific accusations that there were warehouses full of literature that people were holding on to, waiting to dump into schools in Maine as part of some curriculum change. Not only was there no truth to this, there isn’t even any truth to the real lies and misinformation that the anti-gay-marriage side spewed in 2009.
I have specifically and thoroughly disassembled your argument and proven how incorrect you were, so you now say “the lies are flying all over the place.”
One side is lying, and that is the side againse same sex marriage in Maine. Those of us who support marriage equality have been truthful, honest, and up front as to why we believe civil marriage is an important benefit same sex couples in Maine need.
Please be honest here, you are the one spreading these lies and disinformation, and when we call you on it you claim “oh I was just referencing [lies and misinformation] in my comments” as if that makes it okay.
Your original words began “I think what the opponents of same-sex marriage groups are especially uncomfortable with is…” followed by your outright fabrication. Even if we give you the benefit of the doubt and insert “that the gay marriage law would lead to homosexual issues being taught in our schools” you are still lying.
The “Stand for Marriage Maine” group, funded by NOM and the Catholic Church, knowingly ran misleading and deceptive ads in 2009 to scare voters into supporting a veto of our rights. Their tactics were unethical and immoral, yet you take them at face value as if they are true.
You should re-examine your opposition to same sex marriage, and at least come up with something truthful instead of these outrageous fabrications based off misleading, debunked lies.
http://www.mafamily.org #5. Textbooks, library books and other literature in schools. It was my understanding that the opponents of same-sex marriage were fearful that literature of this nature (obviously already published and on the shelves in the Mass. schools) would begin appearing in Maine public school libraries and would be the next step after same-sex marriage was passedby the voters (2009)
Wherever Massachesetts obtained access to the inventory source of published materials (down to elementary grade level) introducing the gay lifestyle as an alternative choice has to be somewhere? Storehouse, warehouse, wholesale warehouse, stockrooms et al…………those materials have to be in a depository somewhere.
Perhaps I should have said, …..materials and books amplifying the gay lifestyle to elementary grade levels (King and King) are out there somewhere, floating around in space instead of an actual storehouse of materials.
Oh, now I see the issue! You think this is Massachusetts!
The Bangor Daily News is a Maine newspaper. The referendum we are voting for in November is for Maine voters.
Massachusetts does not control the school curriculum of Maine. In fact, not even the Maine State Legislature controls the school curriculum of Maine! As I said before, that is done at the local school level in Maine, we run things differently here than they do in Massachusetts.
The misleading and deceptive advertising run in Maine in 2009 asserted that offering same sex marriage to Maine families would result in gay marriage being taught in our schools. Mark Mutty himself is on camera admitting that they knew these ads were misleading lies.
But what does it matter? Are there are not stories where a family has one parent or grandparents raising a child? What does this have to do with law? Stories reflect our culture. Are we supposed to shelter our children from reality now?
Kiki this was pointed out yesterday…the state of Maine does not set local school curriculum. That was true in 2009, it is true today and it will be true next year. If you are concerned about what is taught in your local Maine school system, go to a local school board meeting and get involved, stay engaged and maybe even run for a school board seat. But please, stop posting examples of things that have nothing to do with Maine and have no influence on how we educate our children here in Maine.
Now, let’s check out your website link.
Massachusetts Family Institute where do they stand on:
SSM – they oppose it. http://www.mafamily.org/issues/marriage-and-family/same-sex-marriage/
Civil Unions – they oppose it. “MFI opposes the passage of any legislation that would bestow the same rights and benefits of marriage on a relationship other than one between a man and a woman, including same-sex civil unions or domestic partnerships.” http://www.mafamily.org/issues/marriage-and-family/civil-unions/
Cohabitation – well not as clear cut but I think it would be safe to say they oppose it. “Beyond the increased risk of divorce, cohabitation also increases the risk of domestic violence for women, as well as an increased risk of physical and sexual abuse of children.” http://www.mafamily.org/issues/marriage-and-family/77-2/
Fatherlessness – I guess they have no issue with “Motherlessness”. http://www.mafamily.org/issues/marriage-and-family/fatherlessness/
Exactly. It’s a false comparison, both sides are not lying, just one is. By the way, have you seen the No Special Rights PAC handout from UM? It’s insane.
http://www.towleroad.com/2012/04/maine-anti-gay-activists-give-us-money-and-go-to-the-polls-to-fight-sodomy-based-marriage-and-evil-h.html
You don’t see a slight problem with saying “Only one side is lying?” You’re 100% confident in that statement?
GLAAD’s and other homosexual lobby groups’ penchant for classifying mainstream pro-family conservative critics of homosexuality (and homosexual “marriage”) as “extremists” who are morally equivalent to racists who fought against black civil rights. However, most African Americans who oppose the pro-homosexual agenda deeply resent the racism analogy.
So I stand by the more realistic view of……”the lies are flying all over the place.”
One such black pro-family leader is Ken Hutcherson, a Washington State pastor and one of two black leaders included in GLAAD’s targeted list of 36 pro-family advocates. Hutcherson coined the phrase: “Don’t compare your sin to my skin.” He has argued forcefully – including in an AFTAH radio interview – that all attempts to equate opposition to the sin of homosexuality with racism are fraudulent. (americansfortruth)
::::error:
Your comments are ridiculous. One leader of a black group does not speak for the whole. A comparison isn’t saying two things are identical. The struggle for gay rights is analogous to the struggle for black rights, women’s rights, etc. Discrimination is discrimination. Period.
Nothing you state here is GLAAD or any other homosexual lobby group lying. You simply point out that some African Americans disagree with the valid civil rights comparison (and your point is directly out of the NOM playbook to try and pit blacks and gays against each other).
Lies and deceit are explicit tactics used by NOM. Lies and deceit were tactics that worked in the Prop 8 vote in 2008, and they used the same lies and deceit in Maine in 2009. Mark Mutty admitted they knew they were lying in their ads, and they ran them anyway. To him, the ends justified the means.
(and your point is directly out of the NOM playbook to try and pit blacks and gays against each other).
*********************
No it isn’t ! I haven’t read the NOM playbook. My quote is from a very recent article by Michael A. Memoli verbatim (LA Times Washington Bureau) from his article of yesterday, April 9th. The title of the article is
Obama Faces Pressure Over Same-Sex Marriage
My apologies, last month some released NOM memos detailed this very strategy of pitting blacks and gays against each other on this issue, it was covered in the press but not very vocally:
http://familyscholars.org/2012/03/27/confidential-nom-strategy-memo-provoke-the-gay-marriage-base-fan-the-hostility/
I had to go to the gym and then a little grocery shopping or I would have replied sooner.
Thanks for your civilized reply, (and your apology!) A commenter by the ID of Regular Joe has been thoughtful, articulate and civilized towards me also. I don’t know if it was you, regular Joe or someone else who said the gay community would be out in force this summer…in a concerted effort to change hearts and minds.
If that be so, I recommend you make a serious effort to keep fwteagles under wraps along with jd2008jd. If people with the attitudes of these two approach the undecided, on the fence or even people who are anti-gay marriage and have more of a need to hit them over the head with a sledge hammer, treat them with contempt and hurl the usual labels at them, they will truly not serve you well or the gay community. You’ll have to send them off on a sabbatical somewhere.
I will apply a reflective and studious approach to the issues you refer to… E.G. ****tangible benefits to couples and those that are unavailable outside of civil marriage and your references to marital status for determining eligibility for programs, inheritance, and transfer of legal authority.
I didn’t hurl labels at you, so quit trying to play like you’re the victim here. Gay kids are beaten up, killed and driven to suicide because of anti-gay attitudes in this country — yet you’re the poor poor unfortunate soul? Get real. Quit asking for those who are oppressed to beg for your support. It’s disgusting.
And yet you regurgitate their talking points essentially verbatim. Wow.
You should re-examine your opposition to same sex marriage*************************************************
You really shouldn’t “presume” what my position is on same-sex marriage.
Okay, then what is your position on same-sex marriage?
I can’t recall when we voted on gays and lesbians having equal rights to employment..no discrimination in the workplace due to sexual orientation, non-discrimination in access to living quarters, harrassment in the workplace et al. I voted in the affirmative for them to have all those rights enforced and honored.
I have consistently been opposed to same-sex marriage. At this point, I’m undecided. That’s a change for me from before. My daughter and son-in-law are supporters of same-sex marriage. We have reasonable and respectful discussions about this up-coming election and the issue being on the ballot. (They don’t condemn me or call me names…label me ignorant, stupid, dumb or a homophobe and bigot) )
I’m thinking it over and I know someone as entrenched as you are in being pro gay marriage…”thinking it over” might be something you would denounce…..but that’s where I’m at
I
appreciate that you are thinking it over. That’s what most of us ask
and that’s what we hope more people will do over the summer as we reach
out to talk face to face with our fellow Mainers.
What would cause me to remain opposed is gays and lesbians or their supporters on this comment site and those in my everyday life who come at me with a nasty and angry attitude (like I’m vermin) …calling me cutting and unkind names…..as you can probably see just from this site….homophobe, bigot, liar, backward, old and ignorant, out of touch , even a nazi. The labeling, animosity, hatred and intolerance that comes at me from from the gay community (because of my differing position) would give anyone pause with my standpoint to even care about or be concerned about what they are attempting to convince us of.
Anger, animosity, labeling, name-calling never convinces anybody of anything.
Please understand that after a
lifetime of being exposed to such hate and animosity and sometimes even
violence, sometimes it is, unfortunately, easy for us to jump to the
conclusion that people who disagree with us are hateful. Sometimes it’s easier for us to take the offensive position until we are shown otherwise. I am guilty of that as well sometimes.
You’re going to demand tolerance of intolerance? That’s ridiculous.
fteagles….you’re right…you’re right…you’re right. How often do you have to hear that from me.
you’re right…you’re right…you’re right. you’re right…you’re right…you’re right.
I might say…if you think the way to help same-sex marriage get passed in November, being cruel, mean-spirited, labeling, name calling and yes…being intolerant is probably not the way to go. You’re willingly fomenting long lasting offense to potential voters.
LOL, yes, you’re the victim here.
You have a chance to vote for or deny the rights of a historically repressed minority group. But really, the gays should be begging you for the rights you already enjoy. Yes, those gays should worship at your feet….”please kiki, please, give me those rights! I swear I’m deserving of them!”
If you want to play this power game, then yes, you’re nothing but a bigot. Live loud and proud. Have fun telling your grandchildren how you voted. I’m sure they’ll sing your praises.
You’re not really getting it, are you?
fwteagles….you’re right…you’re right…you’re right. you’re right…you’re right…you’re right. you’re right…you’re right…you’re right.What more do you want? ….you’re right…you’re right…you’re right. you’re right…you’re right…you’re right. you’re right…you’re right…you’re right.
Demanding gays beg you for rights is disgusting. Of course I’m right.
I really don’t think that that is what’s happening here.
“What would cause me to remain opposed is gays and lesbians or their supporters on this comment site and those in my everyday life who come at me with a nasty and angry attitude (like I’m vermin)”
I’d say that’s what it sounds like. Kiki asking them to prove how much they deserve equal rights. That’s a little offensive.
No, I may have accused you of spreading lies and misinformation, and your concerns seem eerily similar to the talking points from NOM’s playbook on this issue… but it’s entirely appropriate for someone to be thinking this issue over, and I don’t think I’ve called you bigoted or homophobic.
For me, it is a question of equal treatment under the law. Civil marriage conveys real and tangible benefits to couples, and many of these are unavailable outside of civil marriage. Issues such as access to military base housing for spouses of soldiers on active duty cannot be conveyed with Maine’s domestic partnership registry, as one example.
There are over 1,100 benefits and privileges contingent on marital status at the federal level alone. That sounds like a mouthful, but the meaning here is that there are a lot of laws on the books that reference marital status for determining eligibility for programs, inheritance, and transfer of legal authority.
Honestly, I am fine with civil unions for everyone just as much as I’m for civil marriage. I am not hung up on the name, but I am hung up on the need for equal treatment under our laws— and a separate system of civil unions for gays and lesbians, and civil marriage for everyone else, would not pass constitutional scrutiny.
I acknowledge concerns over what is taught in schools, there are a lot of school curriculum choices nationwide that I do not agree with— but in Maine we have far more local control over what gets taught to our children than in other states. So it really is a non-issue in regards to same sex marriage here.
I appreciate that you are thinking it over. That’s what most of us ask and that’s what we hope more people will do over the summer as we reach out to talk face to face with our fellow Mainers.
KikiEm if you are going to lie in your posts at least come up with something that is original.There is no “storeroom of same-sex marriage materials and books” waiting to “added to the curriculum”. That lie was tried during the last vote and after the vote it came out that it was a lie.
What is taught in your local school system is NOT forced down from “above”. If you are concerned about what is taught in your local school system, I would suggest that you attend your local school board where THEY determine what is taught in YOUR local schools.
Legitimate question: Can anyone/group raise a flag on campus?
great question wonder about the legality now.Should be challenged. What if it was a religious flag
I have no problem as long as you have no problem with allowing Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists to raise their flag as well.
Timmy several weeks ago their was an article about a Muslim speaker that was going to speak OFF campus to a UMaine Muslim Student Organization. Maybe you missed the article and the “Christian” posters saying he shouldn’t be allowed to speak. One went so far as to say he should “not be allowed to speak on campus’ when the event was at the Islamic Center of Maine which is located on Park Street in Orono.
Diversity is a wonderful thing. “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself” should be a motto we can ALL learn from.
What always causes me to pause and wonder is when I hear people like Madore and Heath speak as they do on the issue of Marriage Equality. It is almost surreal. How out of touch with reality can these people be? And, why can they not comprehend this? I see little difference between their justification of their viewpoint and that which we saw in history when arguing against blacks and women having the right to vote, or on this issue of inter-racial marriage, or an number of other issues.
All of those anachronistic views were justified by some perceived violation of a religious tenet, followed by a prediction of doom, gloom, and the end of civilization as we know it. Have they no sense of history? Have they not heard these arguments before and also witnessed how false they are? It is much like listening to a Eugenics speech of the 1920’s. It is strange to watch because the speakers truly believe what they say no matter how odd it is.
Heath and Madore are entitled to speak. That is their right. In fact, perhaps letting them speak will show their listeners just how much they have slipped from reality. It may be a blessing in disguise especially if their speech was juxtaposed against similar historic references.
Haters on campus. Doing what they do best.
Your wrong, they are doing what they need to do to get it not to pass, not saying im for it or against it right now. I know that i have feelings against the rights, you all deserve rights
They should be honest — they are ANTI-MARRIAGE gay, straight, interracial — they really don’t care … they just hate the idea of two people wanting to make a voluntary a legal commitment to each other.
In this instance, since being gay is a genetic a common variant throughout multiple species, if they can force it back into the closet, they can ensure gays have biological children — so their numbers will increase (giving these guys more targets for their bigotry) .
Also, if they can prevent a formal commitment (straight or gay), they stand to see promiscuous behavior continue, and thus enhance the spread of various diseases.
Their goal is anything that will create the most harm to the most people…. it’s that simple.
Can not wait to donate and help. thanks guy’s
hey tim…no need to put an apostrophe in guys
Did any gay activists try to make your Easter all about their agenda ?
Who’s the better neighbors ?
Please think about that when it is time to vote.
Otherwise, sure, YOUR right to free speech is so very important , too
got it, fine.
It is just your right, but aren’t you No Special Rights, guys just so very special, too,
Paul Madore and Mike Heath ?
You conservatives are losing the class war for this kind of classless crap.
But hey, that is your right, too.
I said my piece, and now I will exercise my not so very special right to non-violent,
non-cooperation with the vile intentions and objectives of the No Special Rights,
bores, party crashers, and outta State financed PR specialists.
Good day to you all, here.
B’bye.
Both parties looked extremely busy today. I really think its gonna be a close race like last time
Who cares if gay people want to be married? They should be miserable like the rest of us.
Seriously though, I don’t think two people of the same sex getting married is going to unravel the space time continuum. Chances are good that they’re already living together as a committed couple anyway.
And, forgive me for being a little self-serving here, but if Maine allows gay marriage, our beautiful landscapes and ocean frontage would make this a great marriage destination. That would be a tremendous boost to our economy.
Let gay people get married and we can get back to fixing the important stuff like drug addiction, violent crime, unemployment, cancer, etc.
no because it isnt that simple – once voted in we will start to argue about definitions, and teaching and all kinds of considerations that INDIVIDUALS and maybe groups raise . It will go on after the vote either way. Id be for it if it truly was a simple matter it is not
Bisexuality immediately doubles your chances for a date on Saturday night. ~Woody Allen
The only ones trying to make it something that it isn’t are the homophobic people who make statements like this. Most same-gender couples will be too busy celebrating and enjoying their lives and their new found security within their family to care much about school curriculum.
Stop making this more than it is. Mainers are smarter this time to see through the scare tactics used by those who wish to oppress our citizens.
We’re already arguing about all of this with the current situation of discrimination. This is unrelated to civil marriage for same sex couples.
Let’s afford each other civility and equality, grant civil marriage to gays and lesbians, and let those unrelated issues pan out on their own.
OK FrederickMueller I asked this above and didn’t get an answer so maybe you will attempt to answer it.
You are making a positive affirmation that states and districts that allow SSM are arguing “about definitions, and teaching and all kinds of considerations that INDIVIDUALS and maybe groups raise”. So please list the arguments, etc…by state and the specific issues they are arguing over. To assist you in your response I have included the states and districts that allow SSM and the years SSM couples were allowed to first marry.
Massachusetts (2003)
Iowa (2007)
Vermont (2009)
Connecticut (2010)
District of Columbia (2010)
New Hampshire (2010)
New York (2011)
Maryland (Passed 2012 scheduled to take effect in January 2013)
Washington (Passed 2012 scheduled to take effect June 2012)
crickets… they can never point to negative effects, because extending equality to all Americans is a good thing.
I wish I had been there.
Seems that too many people do not understand the “special rights” agenda of the vote this November; or, maybe you do, and do not care–in either case, if this vote passes, it will not have a positive effect on Maine and her people.
What in this agenda is “special” rights?
And what will be the negative effects? What are the negative effects in Massachusetts or Iowa?
The Christian zealots who want special rights to control everyone’s lives and morality does indeed have a negative effect on Maine and her people.
@4lifeandFREEDOM???….I believe MOST people DO understand the intent of this vote and that is why they support it. The only “special rights” being passed around are those given to heteros who want to marry. If this vote passes, it will have an ENORMOUSLY positive effect on Maine and ITS people (far as I know, the state of Maine is not female). Sounds to me like you are “for….freedom” only for those YOU deem worthy of it.
Expound more on this…
Please list the negative effect SSM had on the following states, districts and the people which reside there in:
Massachusetts (2003)
Iowa (2007)
Vermont (2009)
Connecticut (2010)
District of Columbia (2010)
New Hampshire (2010)
New York (2011)
Maryland (Passed 2012 scheduled to take effect in January 2013)
Washington (Passed 2012 scheduled to take effect June 2012)
crickets…
It’s always crickets when this question is asked.
I support Marriage Equality even though I don’t necessarily agree with the idea of same sex marriage. I just choose to look at the bigger picture which is: What right do we have to tell others how to live their lives? If they’re happy, they’re happy. Let them be and let them live their lives.
Thank you, mattOT. We want the same happiness our other married friends, both straight and gay couples.
Exactly. I think we can all recognize there are different ways to live and that even though what’s right for us isn’t always right for another, it doesn’t mean we should start using the law to punish or try and change those people.
I am glad that Michael (now “Mike”) Heath has formed the “No Special Rights” PAC. I too believe that heterosexuals should not have special marriage rights.
What “special rights” are you imagining that gays and lesbians are seeking? All they want are the same rights and benefits that opposite sex couples receive by marrying. It is the opposite sex couples who receive special rights such as inheritance, social security benefits, and about 1000 more legal benefits from a state recognized marriage.
What is a Special right ?? To me its a Right that no one else can have . Like handy cap people have a special place they can park an they are the only ones that can use the parking spot so that a special right
Heterosexuals do.
Anyone can get married, even if you’re gay. All you have to do is marry one of the other gender. Don’t tell me that gay people can’t get married because they can.
Seriously? This is such a disingenuous argument.
I would never ask someone to enter into a commitment such as civil marriage with another whom they have no real attraction.
This same logic was used in the south to keep blacks from voting. The US Supreme Court ruled that such “Jim Crow laws” were unconstitutional.
That’s a weak argument. They tried it while trying to uphold the bans on interracial marriage.
They said, “Anyone can get married. All you have to do is marry one of the same race. Don’t tell me interracial couples can’t get married because they can.”
This was addressed by the Supreme Court, and luckily those people were a little brighter than you.
The right is not simply to get married, but to get married to the person of one’s choosing. Would you like it if someone said you must marry your cousin from Greece? MUST… the state is telling you that you that if oyu want to get married, you must marry this woman. And you say, no, you are in love with a different woman and the state is keeping you from marrying the other woman. The state answers, “no, we are not preventing Dumbar2 from marrying, he can marry his cousin from Greece”.
Silly, huh?
Legally? In Maine?
From the Prop 8 Trial Tracker: (http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/2011/12/02/michelle-bachmann-on-same-sex-marriage-and-alexandra-petris-response/)~~Jane Schmidt, a student at Waverly High School, in Waverly, Iowa, recently asked Michele Bachmann, “Why can’t same-sex couples get married?”“They can get married,” Bachmann responded,
“but they abide by the same law as everyone else. They can marry a man
if they’re a woman. Or they can marry a woman if they’re a man.”(In Iowa, same-sex marriage is the law, at least for now, but never mind that.)She later expanded on
this in a response to someone else: “Every American citizen has the
right to avail themselves to marriage but they have to follow what the
laws are. And the laws are you marry a person of the opposite sex.”Really?This is the sound of a
thousand heads hitting a thousand desks.I’m glad Bachmann wasn’t there for history. “Why can’t Rosa Parks sit at the front of the bus?”“She can sit,” Bachmann would say. “She can sit at the back of the bus.”I’m glad she isn’t my waiter. “Is there a vegetarian option?”“The vegetarian option is steak,” Bachmann would say, not blinking an eye.“Is there a way for people in wheel chairs to access the sixth floor?”“There’s a way. They can take the stairs,” Bachmann would say, still not blinking.“There doesn’t seem to be an option for Republicans to vote.”“Republicans can vote. They can vote Democrat like everyone else,” Bachmann would say, blinking a little in confusion.“I’d like to find a synagogue.”“There’s a synagogue right
here,” Bachmann would say. “It’s a church.”“Do you have apples?”“Yes, I have oranges.”At
first Bachmann’s remark seemed like a peculiar thing to say, coming on
the heels of her sensible remark that, “I think we have forgotten what
true tolerance means. True tolerance means allowing people to express
themselves and
their beliefs.”But then it made sense.As Bachmann would say, “We allow you to express different beliefs. You can express different beliefs that agree with us.”~~
Yawn…I am so tired of this. I want both sides to SHUT UP and let the voters decide! When the votes are in and someone can declare victory…I want the other side to go away quietly and show a little class. Something that neither side is showing to this point!!
If you are “tired of this” why do you bother to read and post?
jd2008jd…the person that is quick to critique and try and correct everyone while responding to someone who has the guts to actually have an opinion!
When was the last time you actually made a comment that wasnt part of a response to someone else and included an actual independent thought? Im waiting…
Little testy this morning bronbren?
Much of what I post is independent thought. I ask questions and challenge positions. If I read something that is out and out incorrect I will correct it. If I read something that is an out and out lie I will correct it.
Don’t like my posts. Skip over them. You are not the first to criticize and you will not be the last.
I normally DO skip over your posts…I mean responses to other people’s posts! My original post was simply the way I feel about all of the back and forth. I didnt even offer up where I stand on the topic as a whole.
I have no problem with asking questions. The problem is that you ask questions in order to bait people in while you already know the answer. When they offer up an answer that may not be entirely correct, you pounce!
You rely on your intelligence to over-power people on this forum…and I agree, you appear very intelligent yourself. See, no one ever gets the chance to challenge your stance on certain issues because you never offer it up…its always a response to someone else!
Take your own advice, if you dont like my posts…skip over them. If you did that in the beginning we wouldnt be having this conversation…
do the voters also get to decide on whether Jews can own real estate? or whether women and girls should be the personal property of their fathers, handed to their husbands?
people should not get to vote on fundamental rights.
apples to oranges…I understand where you’re coming from but it’s not going to change the way the system works. It will be decided by a vote–nothing you or I can do about it!
are you serious? it’s time to come out of the basement and join the real world, frederick.
I saw Frederick’s original comment, but did not have a chance to respond.
His point of view is offensively incorrect, to state that homosexuals are incapable of having loving relationships is routinely disproven as many of us live lives with our partners for decades in love and support of each other.
Today, I am celebrating my 13th anniversary with my husband (for that is how I think of him in my heart). On our first date, he fixed a hole in my sweater. On our second date we updated the pot and pans in his kitchen and shopped for TVs. We have been through a lot in 13 years, but he is still my best friend and the only person in the world who accepts me, warts and all.
IT is because of our love for each other that I would like to be able to marry him. Civil Marriage affords us a platform to celebrate our commitment to each other as well as affords us the many protections that civil marriage brings to a partnership of two people.
I don’t want a religious ceremony. One of the first friends we made together as a couple has become a notary to marry us when the time comes. I find that to be one of the best pieces of having a wedding ceremony, so that our friends can join and be a part of the actual ceremony.
thanks for reading. My fingers are crossed for November.
See, the wise students should place a table next to theirs and hand out fliers asking for donations to get a ballot initiative together to vote on whether Jews should no longer have the right to own property in the state of Maine.
And Hillel should put up a table asking for a vote on whether ONLY jews should get to own property in Maine,
and someone elese should put up a table with some other outlandish idea behind it, and make a complete mockery of the antimarriage folks.
just bury them with satire and make them look like the fools they are.
I like this idea!
Question One -the Movie is playing at UMaine tomorrow night, by the way. A great opportunity to see the inner workings of the campaigns in 2009, including eye-opening talk from Mark Mutty.
Yawn. This really doesn’t need to be voted on again. Maine has spoken. You lost…
So how does SSM impact you personally?
This isn’t a game with winners and losers. This is about committed, loving couples who absolutely deserve the ability to protect the lives they build together.
If you are bored with our struggle to achieve equal treatment under the law, don’t vote on the issue.
Guess what, our state allows for citizens initiatives. If you don’t like it and/or are too lazy, then skip over the question.
Does this mean that once an issue comes up it can never be addressed again? The is how it shall be evermore?
What if the people of Maine speak again and say yes, wouldn’t that be valid?
Why not let issues come up again and again-it’s the way things work. If it is not to be, then it won’t happen. If it IS to be, then it will. You can then bring forth a question to rescind it like in California-that will be your right as well.
Question One Documentary tonight at UMaine!