Small town safety
Last week I had the opportunity to witness volunteers at work here in Burnham and I was totally impressed.
People fell right into place: these guys stopped traffic, this one communicated with the volunteer ambulance crew from Unity and there was communication to bring in a LifeFlight helicopter.
Those people had their positions. Along came a lady who is a veterinarian, she communicated to the first responder who arrived. The first responder started putting care in place.
There were people providing emotional support for the pickup driver who was hit by the motorcycle driver. The only concerns being displayed were for the two major characters. People who were not involved stayed back out of the way but were handy in case more help was needed.
I’m not taking the time to catch up with all the names of the volunteers involved; if they see this they will know who they are. But a big thank-you to the volunteers of the Burnham Fire Department, the Unity Ambulance crew, helicopter crew and all others who were showing they cared.
I have to add one thing: Bikers, please wear your helmets. I know for a fact that a helmet makes a difference. When my head hit the pavement, thanks to my helmet, it bounced 3 times with no injuries. Would have been a completely different ending without it.
Debbie Walker
Burnham
Confusing to voters
Charlie Summers, Maine secretary of state, has proposed wording for the same-sex marriage referendum in November that is incomplete, misleading by omission and potentially gives an unfair advantage to the opposition.
As a deeply religious person and a strong supporter of religious freedom and liberty, I urge readers to contact him by email (sos.office@maine.gov) or phone (626-8400). Please ask him to retain the wording proposed by those who have gathered the signatures for this law: “Do you favor a law allowing marriage licenses for same-sex couples that protects religious freedom by ensuring no religion or clergy be required to perform such a marriage in violation of their religious beliefs?” The deadline for public comments is 5 p.m. July 16.
The title of the law that was approved by the secretary of state last year is An Act To Allow Marriage Licenses for Same-sex Couples and Protect Religious Freedom. The citizens’ initiative that will be before voters this November will do both things. It will allow marriage licenses for same-sex couples and protect religious freedom for clergy people and religious institutions not to perform same-sex marriages.
The proposed version, “Do you want to allow same-sex couples to marry?” is confusing to the voter, potentially opens the door to misleading advertisements and can be used by opponents of this law to evoke fear and distrust with regard to religious liberty. It should be revised by the secretary to reflect the full intent of the law.
Douglas Kimmel
Hancock
Turbine effects
An application for an industrial wind development in eastern Maine is pending before the Maine Department of Environmental Protection with a decision to approve or deny expected soon.
This proposed development consists of 14 459-foot-tall turbines across scenic Passadumkeag Mountain — one of the highest points between Mount Katahdin and Cadillac Mountain.
The turbines would be four to five times as tall as the largest white pines the region is noted for. In addition, red, pulsating lights would be fixed atop the towers, severely affecting the nighttime views of this largely undeveloped area and reflecting across many nearby lakes.
Maine law requires such developments to have no unreasonable effect on scenic resources of state or national significance. This project, proposed by Quantum Energy, would be well within view of four bodies of water (Nicataous Lake, Spring Lake, Saponac Pond and Lower Pistol Lake) that are rated either “outstanding” or “significant” for their scenic character by the Maine Wildlands Lake Assessment.
The turbines would be within a few miles of Saponac Pond, and would literally loom over camp owners and those recreating on this very special body of water. A third party hired by the DEP to measure visual effects stated specifically with regard to the effect of the project on Saponac Pond, “this project would dominate the views that many users would experience.” Driving by Saponac on Route 188, you can’t help but agree.
If the visual effects of this project are not determined to be unreasonable, what would be?
If you have concerns about this project, contact the DEP project manager at 446-9026.
Chris Jackson
Bowdoinham
Arts in the Park
This past weekend we were blessed with some of the finest days of the summer so far, and the people came and came to attend Arts in the Park, (although I think the locals held out for the cooler weather on Sunday) and as they made their way to and from the event, the town was bursting at the seams.
This was the 17th annual event and was better and more successful thanks to the support and help from many — the artists, organizing committee, volunteers, musicians, food vendors, sponsors — especially the Bangor Daily News, our media sponsors who not only provided terrific coverage that attracted many visitors but also staged the midcoast photo contest. It takes a village.
The event will be back July 12-13, 2013. For information, visit www.artsintheparkbelfast.org or “like” us on Facebook.
Chris Urick
Belfast
Driver’s license renewal
My Maine driver’s license is due for renewal in August. And for the first time in my life, I’m now required to provide proof to the state of Maine that I am an American. Not only that I am an American, but that I actually live where my current Maine driver’s license so indicates. I wouldn’t object if this was a one-time-only requirement, but the Driver License Renewal Notification seems to imply that the foregoing prerequisites may be required on each subsequent renewal. If so, why?
I was born in Patten in 1933 and, except for the 20 years that I was on active duty with the USN, I only have resided in Maine. And the Maine driver’s license is the only one that I’ve had these past 63 years. But, apparently that’s not enough.
Now I wonder. When the legislators finally decide that I need to provide some personal identification in order to vote, will the state then accept my Maine-issued driver’s license?
Donald C. Grant
Stetson
Douglas Kimmel, Thank you for a well thought out and well composed letter. May both sides educate themselves and see that this law has been written to respect religious beliefs while protecting the civil rights of all, regardless of how Mr. Summers chooses to present it.
Thank you, Mr. Kimmel, for the letter reminding us to make our voices heard. I have seen many people on this very forum telling us that churches will be forced to marry same-sex couples. This is not true, and keeping the original wording will help the voters see that.
Mr. Grant-I didn’t like that either, but I was told when I had to show my papers to prove that I am here legally, that we will have to show those papers only once to the BMV.
Donald C. Grant, I believe you can thank Charlie Summers and the MHPC/ALEC for that fine piece of legislation that in escence is designed to make us jump through more hoops to function as normal people. I’m sure Mr. Summers will trot out that he is trying to prevent driver fraud.
I’m afraid we can’t blame Mr. Summers for that. Rather, this is part of the REAL ID act. I believe this is what Mr. Baldacci had tried to prevent but Maine, along with a few other states that did not want to participate, was told that the state identification would not be accepted at airports and other federally administered security checkpoints.
I wonder what our Gazpacho governor feels about REAL ID….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REAL_ID
Will my Maine drivers license allow me to board a plane?
Yes. It is what I use all the time to board planes (as well as to enter Canada). The state of Maine has fallen in line and is now compliant with the federal REAL ID program.
I have seen people use passports to board a plane and, while it might be convenient, I do not like the idea of using a passport to travel within my own country. Not to mention the possibility of losing it on a trip when it’s not necessary to have.
So, why is Attorney General Eric Holder against voter ID laws to prevent illegals from voting?
I am sure you’ve read it before, but I’ll repeat it for your benefit. They affect certain groups disproportionately, such as minorities and old people. I can tell you know the answer by your use of “illegals.” You might also remember that voter fraud is not a concern. It might be better to address issues with voting from the top, such as the MASSIVE amounts of money anonymously donated to political campaigns to spread lies, half-truths, and outright balderdash.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/10/eric-holder-voter-id-poll-tax_n_1662847.html
“Under Texas’ law, Holder noted, a concealed handgun license would serve as acceptable ID to vote, but a student ID would not. He went on to say that while only 8 percent of white people do not have government-issued photo IDs, about 25 percent of black people lack such identification.”
Some people will then say that people SHOULD have an ID-how can you function without one? Well, some people can and they do. If we are told that we must buy an ID to vote, how is that any different from being told we must buy insurance?
Because our right to vote is a constitutional issue. We do not have to purchase anything to exercise that right. Congress decided it was time everyone paid for their health care. And, as we now know that did not violate our constitutional rights. So it is not a constitutional issue. Limiting access to the polls would be.
Exactly. Although they can counter by saying that the state can give them identification cards for “free,” but why should we pay for that?
Of course, a lot more goes into getting a concealed carry permit than a college ID, since Texas happily lets illegal immigrants–yes, illegal–attend.
That said, I don’t think voter fraud is quite the problem people scream that it is. But would you want to see some IDs if vans full of well dressed, white, male voters arrived in your town?
I see what you are saying about the gun permit, but if student ID is accepted in other states, why not Texas?
I would not assume that a van full of anyone is up to suspicious activity.
So let me get this straight… You’re against giving people an ID card “for free” which only costs about five dollars, but you’re for “free health care” that costs thousands of dollars? (If I am wrong, please, correct me).
Something is wrong here. Identification, if required (and should be required) by the states to exercise the right to vote therein, should be provided by the state without charging the individual directly. If you’re for “free health care”, you should be for “free ID”.
I don’t see an issue with requiring people to present identification, to verify that they are eligible to vote when going to the polls. If there is no verification process, then the laws concerning voting are pointless. Why have pointless laws? Does our process of government not matter anymore? Should we just start making stuff up as we go along? If ever there were a slippery slope, this is one…
(Oh and for the record, your drivers license / state ID, should be more than enough. Everyone should have, at the very least, a state ID.)
But not everyone does and they do cost money — that constitutes a poll tax. No one is for “free health care”, I think you’re just slandering to make your point. Anyway, this law may protect against some voter fraud (though there seems to be little to no evidence of actual fraud), but it negatively impacts and discourages millions of legitimate voters. The solution isn’t proportionate to the actual problem.
Do you actually know anyone without an ID? You even need an ID to borrow a book from the library. You need an ID to use a credit card. You need an ID to purchase alcohol, to fly, and numerous other situations. There are so many instances where you need an ID. I personally do not know one person who does not have a form of Identification.
Good for you, but it’s not relevant. If an ID costs money and you require one to vote, then it is a poll tax. Period.
But the Supreme Court just declared that a tax is all right. Your argument no longer holds water.
Besides, it’s an empty argument in the first place. I’ll bet if you walk down any street in any town in Maine and ask each person for a picture ID, 99.9% would have one ready to show. The truth is that the left refuses any attempt to make the system honest.
Um, no, not at all. The Supreme Court has never said a poll tax is constitutional. Don’t spread misinformation
Your statistic about 99.9% is obviously made up as well.
There is no truth in your comment at all. You talk about the left not being honest, but then you make these posts that are clearly full of lies. That’s hypocrisy.
Take a walk down your main street and prove me wrong. The only ones that won’t show you a picture ID are hard line left wingers. But, they’ve still got them. They have to have one in order to get the things they need from the government.
Stop lying.
Read the Constitution. The 24th amendment prohibits a poll tax. Ever, period. “But the Supreme Court just declared that a tax is all right. Your argument no longer holds water.” That is a lie.
99.9% of the population does not have a photo ID. That is a lie. You can’t back up that statistic because you’ve made it up. You’re also trying to slander liberals and by saying of course they have IDs they need them to get public assistance. That’s a disgusting lie and you know it.
You screech about honesty, but you are incapable of it yourself.
It’s the left that have labeled this a poll tax. It’s just another veiled attempt to demonize those of us that actually want fair elections. Why are you so afraid of fair elections?
LOL, nice try at changing the subject. Address your dishonesty first and then we can move on.
I and many others have already outlined why your disenfranchising thousands and millions of voters doesn’t constitute a “fair election.” We’ve already asked you to prove fraud and you’ve been unable to beyond creating lies and slandering people you disagree with. For you to suggest that elections as they are now are unfair is just ridiculous. Worse, you can’t even admit when you’re wrong or when you’ve been dishonest. So much for personal responsibility.
Actually, we all DO know about a Maine vote that was UNFAIR, the 2009 anti-gay Hate Vote. We KNOW for a FACT that the anti-gays threw that vote. But the GOP doesn’t want to talk about their own known vote fraud.
“It’s just another veiled attempt to demonize those […]”
The pot calling the kettle beige…
“It’s the left that have labeled this a poll tax.”
Translation: “Mommy, mommy, the mean, mean “left” won’t go along with our GOP lies! Waah! Waah!”
No one has to show GOP apologists our IDs. You aren’t the vote police.
“Don’t spread misinformation”
If GOP apologists would take that advice, they would have nothing to say except “I hate this group! I hate that group!” and “Please vote against our own best interest so the GOP will try to hurt minorities!”
But, EJ, they didn’t say a poll tax is alright.
A tax is a tax is a tax. Or is it a penalty? I’ll have to ask the President. Oh, wait! He doesn’t even know the difference.
A photo ID and pre-registering should be mandatory in all states. The bunk about no fraud is just that….bunk. There is no way fraud can be detected if there are no rules, and that’s what the left relies on in order for them to cheat. And they do cheat.
And you have evidence of that? You don’t. Typical. None of your claims can be backed up with facts because you’ve made them up out of pure hatred. There is no other reason to lie the way you do.
“because you’ve made them up out of pure hatred”
We can see the evidence of that. Good point, wolfndeer!
How about PROVING that such fraud has ever happened? The ONLY election fraud we KNOW happened is anti-gays have committed vote fraud–the Maine Ethics Commission caught anti-gays RED-HANDED in 2009. The anti-gay Hate Cult, NOM, is STILL in VIOLATION of Maine laws.
http://www.americaslibrary.gov/jb/modern/jb_modern_polltax_1.html
Isn’t it funny how the people who screech about the President trampling over freedoms and the Constitution are the ones trying to argue that a poll tax is constitutional? It’s literally directly in the plain language of the Constitution that there can never be a scenario where a poll tax is appropriate.
It’s just like very thing else they yell about, it’s all about me, and to hell with everyone else. The right have been screaming it’s my money, it’s my country, it’s my god, Well listen to this, I don’t give a damn about your money, I have my own and I’m will to share it. I love this country, it’s as much mine as it is yours, maybe more because my family fought in the revolution. and you can keep YOUR god, I have one I like better. EJ Parsons, you have put down a belittled people on this site for years. If you felt, belittled I’m sorry, if you can’t take it don’t dish it.
I don’t know what your problem is, and why you’re getting so hatefully irritated, but I was commenting on the need for people to have a picture ID in order to prove who they are before they vote. If you have a problem with that, then you have the problem, not me.
Why is it that liberals can’t handle the views of others? Why is it that liberals have to have things their way all the time, and aren’t even willing to engage in a mature dialogue with those that feel otherwise? Must be that they are following the example of their leader. After all, he can’t even do the decent thing and apologize to Gov. Romney for the lies that his campaign are spreading.
“you’re getting so hatefully irritated”
“you have the problem, not me”
Personal attacks…
“liberals can’t handle the views of others”
“liberals have to have things their way all the time, and aren’t even
willing to engage in a mature dialogue with those that feel otherwise”
Hate speech…
And, last, but not least:
“apologize to Gov. Romney for the lies that his campaign are spreading”
We all know for a fact it’s the sleazebag in the magic underwear that LIED. Whining about the President mentioning these lies is just one more reason why all reasonable Americans reject and condemn the spiteful, hateful and immoral attacks from GOP apologists.
Yes EJ, I do have a problem with you, and other like you. It’s your holier then tho-ness, your lies, and twisted piety, it makes me sick. Why should the President apologize for telling the truth!
I live in a small town, Almost everyone knows who I am. I never have to show my Id.
Apples and oranges. The GOPers are demanding increasingly hard-to-get IDs which they KNOW cause an undue burden on the elderly, the poor…
Good point. I’ll have to think about that. I would like a general health care system that covers anyone. I don’t think that healthcare should be only for those who can afford it. But I also don’t think that we should have ID to vote. I also think that this current round of voter ID and registration laws is a partisan ploy to reduce the number of poor and minority voters, most of whom vote mainly democratic. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-21/republicans-voter-suppression-project-grinds-on.html http://www.npr.org/2011/09/17/140539204/do-new-voting-laws-suppress-fraud-or-democrats
For starters, a background check is required for a CWP, and it’s not for a student ID. Exactly what percentage of voter fraud is acceptable to you?
Student ID is acceptable in Kansas, Alabama, New Hampshire, the Dakotas, Virginia, Washington, and a few other states. Even less than student ID, some without a photo even, is accepted in many states. Why not Texas. I am not saying that the CWP SHOULDN’T be accepted, but why not student ID when other states accept it? http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/voter-id.aspx
What is the current percentage of voter fraud?
“What is the current percentage of voter fraud?”
Great question. How about it, GOP apologists? They are always making that wild claim.
You’re claiming there is voter fraud, so the burden is on you to prove that it exists.
I wouldn’t hold my breath for any proof that voter fraud exists. While GOP apologists can name ONE or TWO individuals who mistakenly registered to vote but are not eligible, there has NEVER been ANY proof for the wild claims GOP apologists are making.
Exactly and they want to pretend that this is about having a fair election. One or two cases out of millions of voters? Hardly a rampant problem. Worse, they’ll burden millions of voters to fight against those very race instances (if ever) of fraud? There is no proportion between the problem and the solution — that’s how you know their intentions are much darker than they’re willing to admit.
Can you document that illegals have voted enough to make any difference in any election? GOP apologists are always claiming that has happened, but I’ve NEVER seen any PROOF of that wild claim.
Don Grant
This is just payback for killing all those cats down in Searsport those many years ago !
“Do you want to allow same-sex couples to marry?”
How is that confusing? That’s about as straight forward as you can get. Plus, both sides have their own objections to it, so I’d say it’s fine.
Sure, the question by itself is clear, but there is more to the law than just allowing us to marry the person we love. Why shouldn’t that be part of the question, ESPECIALLY since it was part of the original question on the petition that over 100,000 people signed.
It’s plain and simple, and the religious BS doesn’t matter. You people assume that everyone against homosexual marriage is some religious fanatic, and that is far from true.
You assume too much. I do not assume that at all. It’s ironic that you accuse “you people” of assuming things that aren’t true and while making that statement, you are guilty of the same thing. I know that not all people who oppose SSM aren’t religious fanatics.
You must be aware, though, that the question on the petition did include the part of the law that provides religious exemptions and that there are some people, even those who are NOT fanatics, to whom that matters. So why shouldn’t it be in the question?
Well, there are a few anti-gays who try to keep violating the US Constitution by denying marriage to same gender American couples because these anti-gays know that LGBT Americans are SUBSIDIZING them. Yes, they place their own PROFIT above honoring the Constitution.
I don’t see that’s any better than the “religious wrong” who seek to force their “beliefs” that are not even in the Bible onto all other Americans.
Chris Jackson – the facts are in, wind power is an outright Enron-inspired scam that produces virtually no electricity that Maine needs but just increased CMP transmission rates by 19.6%.
Google:
“What every Maine ratepayer needs to know”
Douglass Kimmell, Donald Grant: good letters.
Isn’t it telling that the anti-gay marriage side has to rely on lies to keep people voting with them? The state doesn’t force churches to marry interfaith couples or couples with individuals who have previously been divorced — so why would they step in in this case?
You’re right! The many Christian, Jewish and other denominations that are marrying same gender couples now are being denied their right to practice their religion freely in 44 US States. These denominations have married same gender couples in 7 US States and the District of Columbia:
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Metropolitan Community Church
Reform Judaism
Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
Unitarian Universalist Church
United Church of Christ
These and many other denominations reject the hate speech inserted in the bible to hurt LGBT people. Modern Biblical scholars have proven the Bible was intentionally mistranslated relatively recently in order to provide “Biblical cover” for then-rising levels of homophobia. For example, the word “homosexual” didn’t even exist until 1850.
1850? What did they call them before that?
There was no concept of sexual orientation as a fixed trait/identity. They spoke only of behavior/the act. There is a difference between action and status.
And the actions are clearly spelled out in the KJV and the original Scriptures, in that they state that any sexual conduct outside of a man and woman married relationship is a sin against the body and a sin against God, therefore making it an abomination.
What about the other abominations that you actively engage in and yet don’t try to use the law to ban? Another example of far right hypocrisy.
And what would those abominations be?
I’d say the blatant dishonesty from you is pretty egregious.
Good point, wolfndeer. How about it, Mr. Parsons? You constantly promote “the Bible,” what about the part that says “Thou Shalt Not Lie”? Where does it say you can ignore that if you hate and fear your fellow Americans who are LGBT?
How much time a day do you spend fantasizing about all those “abominations,” Mr. Parsons? Please read the scientific study I documented above.
Pork
Lobster
Poly-cotton blend clothing
Working on Sunday
Must we go on? Anti-gays routinely IGNORE the stuff in the Bible they find inconvenient.
But what is the single MOST INCONVENIENT part of the Bible for anti-gays?
“Thou Shalt Not Lie.”
Anti-gays ALWAYS LIE.
About 400-years ago, a group of religious authorities (sanctioned by King James I of England), secretly manipulated the English version of the Bible to reflect their own heterosexual attitude; they opposed the king kissing other men in public. But in revised versions, religious authorities re-defined the Greek word “arsenokoites” of 1Corinthians 6:9! The most accurate translation, abusers of themselves with mankind [KJV], was pretty vague.
Nevertheless, they replaced this vague 5-worded text with the not so vague and purposely targeted 1-word text, “homosexual(s).” Either way you cut it, this text does not describe homosexuals. This campaign gave those who were looking for a reason to justify their own homophobia a license to openly express their bigotry.
Sorry, Mr. Parsons, we are NOT impressed with your faked Bible passages.
We have all noticed that anti-gay posters always fixate on the private activities of same gender couples–yes, about our sex lives. Scientists know why anti-gays do this:
“Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014