PORTLAND, Maine — The campaign supporting a November referendum to allow same-sex couples to marry in Maine has announced that a new television ad will begin airing statewide Tuesday.
The ad features Pat and Dan Lawson of Monroe talking about why allowing same-sex couples to marry is important to their family, according to a press release issued Tuesday by Mainers United for Marriage.
The ad, which was developed through the Why Marriage Matters Maine Project, a broad network of organizations supporting the freedom to marry in Maine, is being paid for by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, a New England-based organization with offices in Portland and Boston, the press release said.
It is expected to continue airing through early September, David Farmer, spokesman for Mainers United, said Tuesday in an email. The campaign will begin airing its own television ads later in September, he said.
In the latest 30-second ad, the couple talks about being married for 30 years and their family.
“We have a set of twin sons,” Pat Lawson says in the ad. “One’s gay and one’s straight.”
“Marriage is a commitment that comes from your heart,” Dan Lawson says. “If that person wasn’t there, you’re not going to be complete. If my son finds someone that he’s in love with and wants to create a bond that’s going to last a lifetime, that’s marriage in my mind.”
“Our campaign is built upon honest and open conversations with Mainers about why marriage matters to all loving, committed couples,” Matt McTighe, campaign manager for Mainers United for Marriage, said in the press release. “The personal story of the real Maine family highlighted in GLAD’s new ad resembles the conversations we’ve had with tens of thousands of Mainers across the state who are changing their hearts and minds and growing more supportive of the freedom to marry every day.”
Pastor Bob Emrich, spokesman for Protect Marriage Maine, which opposes the referendum, said in an email that the issue is not that gays and lesbians want to get married.
“The issue is what is the true nature of marriage and what is the public purpose of the institution,” he said. “Our opponents believe that society should cater to the desires of adults and redefine marriage to accommodate same-sex couples.
“But if it’s the desire of adults that society is supposed to accommodate, why limit it to two adults?” he continued. “What do you do about the bisexual who forms loving relationships with both men and women? Should that person be in a three-person marriage? And if [so] why limit it to three? What about the desires of adults who wish to form polyamorous unions?”
Emrich said marriage is about what is best for children not adults.
“What marriage is about is society’s way of connecting children born of the sexual union of a man and a woman to the two people responsible for bringing them into the world,” he said. “We do this because children thrive and do best when they are raised by their married mother and father. This is also in society’s interests.”
The ad featuring the Lawsons is the second ad sponsored by GLAD and partner organizations, the press release said. The first ad, which began airing during the Olympics, featured the Gardner family of Machias.
It ran statewide after the Olympics ended for about three weeks on the broadcast networks, which include ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox, Farmer said.
“According to the coalition, they have put about $350,000 total behind the two ads,” he said.
Protect Marriage Maine has not set a definite date to begin airing television ads, Emrich said Tuesday in a phone interview.
“We feel it’s still too early to start airing ads because people aren’t really paying attention,” he said. “We are focusing on our grass-roots campaign and we are really encouraged by the response we are getting.”
David Farmer is a columnist for the Bangor Daily News.
You would view it different if you knew God’s truth and values. You have my prayers.
The same God who valued my ability to sell my daughter into slavery? He seems like a nice dude.
Helen you apparently are a very knowledgeable person as far as God’s truth and values are concerned. Perhaps you would be kind enough to answer one simple question for me. Could you give me the name of one person who you know for a fact that was denied entry into Heaven because they were gay? Thank you very much and I will await your reply.
Actually 4, you kind of have to be a believer or at least a person seeking answers to start such a discussion. To just deny everything is really better for other subjects. If you want guarentees as to who is 100% right or wrong, you will not find it in someones faith or lack thereof….If you expect to receive a fact for your confirmation and dont receive one…fairness would require you to also have that fact to disprove it…
Do you get dizzy when you talk in circles like that? The real fact here is that you and Helen are entitled to your faith, but it is no basis for creating or guiding public policy.
Keep religion out of politics and politics out of religion.
Just for the sake of argument…..You mean like carbon out of dioxide?
Anyone’s segmented perception of reality is stupidity. Bury your head for as long as you want but sooner or later you’ll want to come up for air.
I am a person seeking an answer as well as a believer. I didn’t deny anything. I have attended church almost every week since the day I was born. I just have a really big problem with people who profess to know what God’s desires are. Oh an by the way who gave you the right to determine who are believers and who aren’t. And in the interest of fairness I will tell you that I know of no one who was either allowed entry or was denied entry into Heaven for any reason. On the other hand I do not attempt to speak for the Almighty either.
If you ever were in a cemetery you would notice headstones that say
something like, sweet slumber, resting until we meet again etc.
God has not finished with man yet cause we are still here, when
he is done then all people will rise from their slumber and be judged
by God.
The story goes you will have a chance to straighten your sorry butt
out, if not off to he’ll with you.
If that doesn’t help let me say tbis, Judgement day hasn’t been here yet.
Can’t have cheating because if re-incarnation is the second chance and
you are doing it now , can’t have you telling others the truth so they can cheat.
Gee that sounds nice. So are you suggesting that we get a do over even after we have died?
They call it purgatory.
But I don’t know the Lord has not come yet or so they say.
I think this is hell and we all missed the first boat might be
this is the last chance
That’s exactly what it is. ‘A story.’ If you wish to believe it, that’s your right, but don’t try to force feed it onto other people.
So tell me where I said I believe and tell me
where I’ m “Forcing” anything on anyone.
Someone asked a question I gave an answer
I like to read, I read what you wrote and I
don’t believe you
When you vote to ban gay marriage.
So why do you hate unmarried hetro couples who have the exact same rights as gays, which is one less right then married people, we don’t get the S.S.I. death benefit of under $300.00 and their partners S.S.I. Why are gays trying to discriminate against us?
in order to gain those rights, a couple needs to be married. Nobody is stopping the unmarried heterosexual couple from gaining those rights. Nobody is making it illegal for them.
So it’s ok to force us into doing something we don’t want, but it’s not ok to force gays into staying un-married they don’t want? Leaving 2/3 of the population in the same place?
I just want to make sure I heard you right.
You are forced to be registered with the state when you are born and you will be forced to be registered with the state when you die. Marriage requires registration and as such, it is also something you must do if you want to be married.
If you feel this strongly about applying marriage benefits to single people, then are you working with your legislators on this? Or are you only using this argument in this forum as a tool against same-sex marriage?
I called someone can’t say her name and said this
as well as doing away with tax breaks for having kids
She didn’t like it cause it was “robbing” the government
marriage is foolish and more often then not
marriage wrecks a relationship . So many times
people split and found their spouse took loans
out forged their name and divorced leaving them
the bill. and it’s all legal
I see what you are saying, but some of those are issues that can be dealt with by setting up a contract before the marriage. And yeah, maybe marriage does sometimes ruin a relationship, but that’s less to do with civil laws and the government and more to do with the internal dynamics of the relationship. Marriages can also strengthen a relationship.
I will say that forging a name is never legal, even if it’s a spouses name. While I worked in a bank, I saw spouses sign names like that all the time and I could never accept it.
Sorry you think that way but if your spouse takes iout loans without your consent signs your name to it and you get divorced and your eex doesn’t have a job or make enough to pay the loan(s) you get to because when you marry the gov. looks at it has a business partnership and that makes both of you or at least one of you pay your business bills.
My partner and I have been together over 25 years we have no urge to fix what’s not broke
We both always worked don’t care about the $278.00. Death bennie and have our own s.s.i.
You can only claim one after your 67 so the others is moot. You can give your retirement fund to anyone evev you dog
Are you saying that it is legal for a person to forge a spouses name on a document? When I said I couldn’t accept the forged signature, I meant that I was not allowed to perform that transaction with the forged signature, not that my personal feelings were an issue. Is that what you mean when you say, “sorry you think that way”?
I know all about this situation-these things happen sometimes because one spouse doesn’t pay attention to what’s happening with the finances. Also, a prenuptial agreement can take care of many of the issue you mention.
That’s great that you don’t feel the need to marry but some couples do. In fact, I know one couple where one partner works in a job that doesn’t give social security but instead the retirement is a federally administered retirement benefit that cannot be given to anyone after death. Those benefits are more than $278. It’s nice, though, that you don’t think that $278 a month is not anything important. That’s the equivalent of gasoline for a month for some people!
A friend of mine spouse took out 2 loans without consent of spouse
who had no idea until divorce time when they got a list of what
they’d get. Which was nothing but clothes a few personal items
all the car loans and 2 personal loans amounting
to about 75k and credit cards they didn’t know they had.
It wasn’t that they ignored finances they just didn’t know the spouse
also had a p.o. box for these bills.
It’s not that I think $278.00 is nothing but it might as well be when
you have hospital, funeral, and buying a place to deposit
the remains of a loved one, it might as well be nothing.
Prenups are supersede by state laws. Like if you make it 10 years
you can lose 1/2 of your s.s,i. and retirement damn is the prenup.
Since the government has blown through SSI my advice to your
unemployed friend to get a job.
By the way everyone will take from the SSI, retirement long
before anyone receives it.
I didn’t say that my friend was unemployed. Rather, the partner’s job will have a better retirement benefits than his job will.
Yeah, those are the risks and people should know about them before they enter a marriage and a couple should always talk to a lawyer to make sure that all questions are answered. Some people think the risk is worth it and as it stands right now any two people of opposite genders can marry or not. We are saying that we want to have that option too. And it’s not limited to just gay people. If that guy from a few years back wants to marry his fishing buddy so that they can enjoy the benefits, then that’s fine. There are already straight couples that do the same thing.
Checking your credit report on a regular basis is always a good thing and that will show all accounts in one’s name, even if the spouse uses a P.O. box for the bills. Also, forging a signature is illegal so there could be legal recourse there.
When you marry, your suppose to be one in the same, a business partnership, Banks look at you that way.
So it’s not really illegal to forge a spouses name. Thats part of marriage, whats mine is yours and yours is mine, we’re in it together, better or worse, my debts are your debts, we’re a team, we go down with the ship or up with the sail.
Then again if your not married but support someone you can claim them on your taxes.
What???
My point exactly, a person comments then someone comes along
makes assumptions twist what you say comes up with something
totally opposite of what one did say. Then the person who warped it
gets mad and call you names for something you didn’t say.
So I assumed they wanted me to do the same thing. How was I to know
only others can do that, how was I to know reading a Bible made me a
believer or not or I’ m forcing religion on people.
How was I to know only gays can’t be forced into a life style but I
have to be to get equal treatment
What???
I still don’t understand how you equate one group not being allowed to marry the person they love with one group that can and chooses not to.
Still don’t get it, wow, why should We be forced in to doing something
we are against to be treated equally.
If you don’t understand that you shouldn’t vote or decide anything
until you can get it.
The government uses marriage to borrow money from the reserve and
other countries . The collateral is that you’ll likely have kids so they
borrow on that too. Now we have a debt we can’t pay, the children you
have can’t pay , your grandchildren can’t pay and yet when you marry
the gov. keeps borrowing on assumption.
Still don’t get it? quit what your doing move back to your parents read
some history books
I hope you’re not a teacher with that attitude.
So, you want the government to be able to use your single status to borrow money from the reserve and other countries….?
Can I read a history book without moving in with my parents? And what history book would you suggest? I’m sure if I’m left alone to make that decision, I’d choose incorrectly…
I am very knowledgeable on the Bible. I have read it cover to cover many a time. I have spent much time studying the Bible and can tell you the the Bible is replete with it’s condemnation of the sin of homosexuality. Those who are living in gay relationships are practicing unrighteous, immoral living. NO unrighteousness will be in heaven. The Bible is clear that people who are living this way are doing so because they are in a state of unbelief. They need repentance and faith towards God.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 :
“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. ”
I really pity the Lawson family. They think they are helping their son when what they are really doing is helping their son along to the way to hell and judgement.
Homosexuals can be saved and changed but it won’t happen as long as they won’t acknowledge their behavior as a sin and offense against a Holy God. God is love but He is also to be feared because there is a day of judgement coming.
Homosexuality is a sin. Romans 1:26-28 :
“For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; ”
The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to
heterosexuals. Does that mean that God doesn’t love heterosexuals, or just that they need more supervision?
Adulterers are in that same list. Do you have an all out assault on those who divorce?? Jesus is VERY clear about divorce. Why aren’t you worried about them going to hell? Why aren’t you pushing for legislation to make divorce illegal? Won’t God be angry if you just sit idly by and do nothing to stop divorce?
And what about people living together? Why haven’t you tried to make that illegal? Put people living together in their proper place at the fringes of society because of their abomination against God like you want to keep the LBGT community.
Why are you only concerned with the so-called sin of homosexuality and not with divorce and living together? Those are the two greatest threats to marriage.
One group of people should not be forced to live by another group of people’s religious beliefs. Let’s keep religion out of politics.
You mean all divorces are because of adultery? No, God will only be angry about those like you who believe they are perfect humans. The LBGT community is just that, anti-God. If you preach like that, then you do not practice your own beliefs, you are bringing politics into religion by mentioning legislation and legalities.
I think that some people don’t recognize divorce, so any sexual relations that occur with the new spouse is still adultery.
Jesus clearly defines adultery and divorce. Whenever a man or woman lies with another other than their original spouse, they are committing adultery. He is very clear.
I do not profess to be perfect as you do and I don’t profess to know the will of God for another’s life. I am merely calling you out on picking and choosing which scriptures that you fixate on. You are one of those cherry picking Christians who accuse others of ignoring what the scriptures say when you are the one who is choosing to pick on one group you have defined as sinners.
Sorry, but when I vote in November, my vote will have nothing to do with religion. Religion should not be interjected into the political arena. You want to force others to live by your belief system. That is unAmerican. Either you embrace the founding principles of this country or you don’t.
Perfectly stated TrueNative! Thank you.
They are cherry pickers. Unless they are with the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (TFP), then they actually do actively work against all that! (Remember them from 2009? They were the men wearing red sashes outside of Home Depot).
Why don’t you read those admonishments again, you are simply attempting to twists numbers around. But being perfect as you are then you will only come up with the same statement.
I think it’s very easy to condemn something you don’t understand. I can quote the Bible, too, but God doesn’t really care about how well I can quote stuff other people wrote down. He does care about humanity, though, and in the end, it’s going to be about how you treated your fellow man. I’ll continue to pray for all of you who lack true understanding and compassion. And remember, we are all sinners. Your sin weights just as heavy as others…if in fact it is a sin.
Your right, God doesn’t care how well we can quote other men. But He does care about how we quote the bible which is His Word given by Inspiration of God, written exactly in its original form as God wanted it to be even though He used different human instruments to pen HIS Words. He has preserved His Word and we all have it in reliable translations in our own languages.
The bible does NOT say anywhere that “in the end, it’s going to be about how you treated your fellow man” and that’s all that’s going to matter. In the End what is going to matter is what you did with Jesus Christ and His Holy Word.
God says homosexuality is wrong so it’s wrong because He said it not because I said it.
AMEN TO THAT!!
Helen probably cannot do that, but being perfect as you are, you should be able to answer your own question. In retrospect, can you give me the name of one person who you know for a fact that was allowed entry into heaven because they were pro gay marriage minded?
That isn’t the question. The accusation is that gays go cannot get into heaven.
because he has great values, Someone that live a great, wonderful life. Went out and made the world better, cared for his fellow humans would be denied entry because he simply didn’t believe in god. What kind of backward values are that?
The discussion is civil marriage, not religious marriage. It’s time to put up or shut up. Unless you’re going to give up the legal rights and protections that come with marriage, unless you’re going to give up getting legally married and settle for a religious ceremony alone — then I’m calling your bluff. This isn’t only about religion and you’re lying if you say otherwise.
and you would view it differently if you actually got to know some gay people and realized that we are all human beings, deserving of the rights that all American citizens should enjoy.
Helen – I appreciate your viewpoint but it really comes down to this for those of us who are for Marriage Equality. Religion and secular civil marriage are apples and oranges. I hope you understand that a civil marriage has nothing to do with your church and would in no way affect you, your church, or your religion.
Had the States or the churches many years ago used different terms for “marriage,” we would not be having this discussion. I actually have heard people tell me, “Oh, fine, but can’t you call it something other than ‘marriage’?” Well, there you go – it’s just semantics. We really cannot call it something other than “marriage” because it is supposed to be recognized at the same level as legal marriage is for straight couples. Naming it something else is a legal nightmare that would end up in the Supreme Court and would eventually end up being called “marriage,” anyway, so let’s just skip to the chase and call it what it is – civil marriage.
For example, take a straight couple. They go to City Hall, they pay their $2.00. They obtain a marriage license. The trot down the hall to a Notary Public. They have a marriage ceremony performed that has no mention of God, Christ, and or any other deity. The NP signs the paperwork and that couple is legally married. This scenario I just stated happens dozens of times every day. My grandparents were married by a Justice of the Peace in Portsmouth back in 1926. Nothing new at all.
Now, some churches would consider that couple “not married” as they did not get some kind of ceremony or blessing from the church, but if the couple does not belong to that church, or any church, that would not matter.
As far as the State goes, all other States, the Federal government, and all other countries are concerned, that couple is legally married. Case closed.
That is all we want. There is no church involved in any of this. Of course, if a gay couple wishes to be married in a church, they certainly can approach a willing pastor to do so, but that is up to the pastor and the church and all that. The pastor will be acting as an agent for the State and fulfilling the State requirements just as would a Notary Public. The add-on here is the religious ceremony supplied by that particular church. It has zero effect on you and your church.
I hope you understand the distinction I am trying to make. The actual legal marriage aspect of what Marriage Equality is all about is not in the slightest different than what has been going on forever in the secular civil marriage world, except that the couple is same-gendered.
That’s the problem. You want a law that will REDEFINE marriage. The new legal definition will no longer be the traditional biblical view of marriage. People need to wake up to thisfact if they think such a legal redefining won’t effect those who disagree with it. It will be the law. We will no longer be able to protect our children from the new legal, yet perverse definition of marriage being taught to our children in our schools. Our hard earned money that goes to taxes will be paying for such things that we disagree with. Businesses will have to provide the burden of proof if a homosexual applies for a job and complains he was not hired because he was a homosexual even though he may not have any qualifications. Those who rent to the public and do not want gay couples living under their roof are going to be very limited as to how they can prevent that. I get so tired of the ‘it won’t effect the heterosexual couples and their religion’ argument. It is going to effect a lot of people in a lot of ways if this is passed. May God take the wool you are trying to pull over people’s eyes away.
You are trying to REDEFINE the legal definition of marriage. This is what your whole agenda is about. The definition of marriage between a man and woman (the only marriage sanctioned by the Bible) has been around since the beginning of time. You want to take the bible out of marriage and degrade it to a civil certificate that means whatever you want it to mean.
Can you sell your daughter into marriage for three goats and a cow? Can a man have multiple wives? Can he kill the ones who commit adultry without legal consequences? Can black people marry white people? Is your wife your legal property? The definition of marriage has been evolving for millenia. Within the Bible you will find many definitions of marriage, as you’d expect of a book written over several thousand years by dozens of people in different cultures. There is no reason whatsoever to pretend that allowing same sex marriage is anything but a continuation of a long process toward recognizing the loving relationships between two adults who want to marry.
You can’t find in the bible “many definitions of marriage”. God has said from the beginning that it is between a man and a woman and no where in the bible does it say different.
“And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. “(Matthew 19:4-6) In God’s eyes the definition of marriage is not evolving. It is not His doing that man dishonors the sacred institution of marriage with divorce or trying to make it something perverted like gay marriage.
Marriage as defined in the bible and yes, they are all 100% factual. It is all in your bible for you to read.
Man + woman
Man + Wives + Concubines
Man + Woman + Woman’s property
Man + Woman + Woman + Woman
Man + Brother’s Widow
Rapist + His Victim
Male Solider + Prisoner of War
Male Slave + Female Slave
God Never called any of those things marriage. Your misusing the Bible.
You are correct that god never called any of those things marriage because it is man that wrote those words, not any god. But man did call those things marriage many times in your bible.
Man did not author the Bible. They were only the human instruments used to write the Words down writing under the inspiration / superintendence of the Holy Spirit. They were God’s Word in the original writing and we have them in reliable translations in our own language to read.
And ALL His Words are True. I guess you will find that out some day. Hope you come to believe it now in faith instead of later in judgement.
It is all true through and through.(2Pe 1:20-21)
“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. ”
Where in God’s name did you find that idiocy?
In the buybull.
The Bible.
This is what comes of translating the Bible to suit your own needs and beliefs.
I will try to answer your points.
First, I don’t see the problem. Call it semantics, but I wouldn’t say SSM redefines civil marriage. Changing the law amounts to removing the gender restriction currently in the law. However, two people being together and all that – that has not been redefined. The concept is the same. Who is eligible to participate is what will change.
Yes, when SSM becomes law, it will be the law, but I fail to see how this affects you or anyone around you. From what exactly do you need to protect your children? I disagree with your use of the word “perverse.” That is an opinion and apparently yours. Some would call inter-racial marriage “perverse.” I am sure many did a half-century ago.
Your diatribe about housing and jobs – just do me a favor and replace the word “homosexual” with “black” and re-read it. That’s exactly the way we interpret your statements.
You speak of how SSM will affect everyone but you haven’t provided any statements as to exactly how they will be affected.
Whether you believe it or not, civil marriage exists without any mention of God or the bible or anything. We didn’t create that definition. That’s the way it has been for a very long time. Really, just ask some Notary Public to provide you with a copy of the marriage ceremony statements he has to say. You won’t find any mention of God in it. Now, that’s the case regardless of straight or gay couples.
Agenda? Really, you need a new word. Take my word for it, there is no centralized “gay agenda.” There just isn’t.
If you really want to know about civil marriage then don’t take my word for it. Call up City Hall, a Notary Public, or an attorney and ask them. They will tell you what I told you.
Here’s another point – can you grasp/accept that a straight couple could be married in a civil marriage by a Notary Public and both participants are atheists? If you can do that, perhaps you can understand that there are two forms of marriage – a civil one and a religious one. What the religious people opt to do is entirely up to them. I don’t have a dog in that fight.
“Your diatribe about housing and jobs – just do me a favor and replace the word “homosexual” with “black” and re-read it. That’s exactly the way we interpret your statements.”
*********************************************
To pull this sock inside out, perception is reality, as you state so eloquently…
*********************************************
“Agenda? Really, you need a new word. Take my word for it, there is no centralized “gay agenda.” There just isn’t.”
You tell me why you have to call it marriage and hi-jack the traditional, been around for thousands of years definition of marriage? It’s an agenda. You want to Redefine marriage to fit your our definition.
It makes no difference whether people get married in a church or a civil ceremony. That is not the problem. It is what you are trying to do to the legal definition of marriage that is the problem.
Why aren’t you just trying to get relationship rights under the term same sex couple in stead of using the term marriage?
This is America. We were founded as one nation under God. People like you are destroying that foundation. We don’t need another Sodom and Gomorrah.
Those of us who are standing against homosexuality are being a blessing to this country. Abraham prayed on the basis of righteous people being left that God would not destroy the wicked city of Sodom.
(Gen 18:26)
“And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. ”
Homosexuality is CURSE to our society:
(Gen 13:13)
But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly.
(Gen 18:20)
And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;
(2Pe 2:6-8)
And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;)
“Why aren’t you just trying to get relationship rights under the term same sex couple in stead of using the term marriage?”
This is a legal issue. The legal definition of marriage exists at the State and Federal level (and with all other countries). The problem arises because right now, all States recognize marriages performed in other States. So, a couple married in Florida need not be married again in Illinois. This is not necessarily the case with other forms of partnerships. For example, civil unions are not recognized by all other States and are not recognized by the Federal government. Marriage is. When a couple is married in one state, they are not “straight married” or “gay married.” They are simply married. The law needs to be blind to the genders of the participants. In order to have equal civil rights the legal term, “marriage” needs to be used. It just so happens that your church uses the same term for its non-legal wedding ritual. I wish all civil marriages for all people were named something else, or your church used another word, such as “union,” but we are stuck with the system we have – both civil and religion use the same term to mean similar but different concepts.
“This is America. We were founded as one nation under God. People like you are destroying that foundation. We don’t need another Sodom and Gomorrah.”
I will leave all the religious stuff to others who (1) care, and (2) can better speak to the issue. But, I will say this – there are plenty of well-known and respected churches out there who are more than willing to perform same-sex marriages as soon as the law is passed. Apparently, your church is not one of them. I find it fascinating that you espouse the loss of “religious freedom” while denying that same freedom to other religions.
Really, my suggestion to you is to take a chill-pill and relax. It’s only a word. It doesn’t apply to you. Your prediction of the collapse of society is ridiculous. If all 45,000 gay people in Maine got married, no one would notice. Your religious leaders claim we only make up 3% of the population. Of that, I’d be surprised if 50% married, so you are down to 22,500. Yawn. And, news flash for you – whether SSM passes or not, there will be no more, and no less gay people in Maine. There will be no more, and no fewer gay families. The only difference will be whether my partner of 15 years and our 12 year old daughter obtain the same legal rights as the couple down the street. We are not going to magically disappear if SSM is voted down.
I know you won’t listen to anything I’ve said because like many people, you drank gallons of the religious Kool-Aid all your life and anything that remotely questions the absolute-ness and infallibility of your religion must be wrong. I assume you are Catholic – there aren’t that many Fundies or Evangelicals in Maine. I empathized with you – I have so many Catholic friends who watched their “anchor” disappear when the countless scandals at the RCC broke out. Now, the nuns are revolting, no one is joining the seminary, the churches are closing down, nuns are in a big shortage, the laity is aging, and the pews are sparsely populated and most of those folks are elderly. You don’t see many young families at the church these days.
You have my condolences.
we weren’t founded as One Nation under God. That’s the pledge of Allegiance! That was man made! God didn’t write the Pledge. Man did.
Your god is not law.
Why is that so hard for you?
My God is the Lord. Your god is no god at all.
Your lord is not civil law.
Simple fact.
God is Judge of All. Simple fact. He will have the final say.
No, that is mythology, not fact.
Simply something you have chosen to believe.
Your mythology is meaningless on this plane of existence.
Your response has NOTHING to do with religion. Seperation of church & state and all. Are you afraind kids will
I am married and am an atheist. Is that not a marriage then? In your world am I not legally married?
And your “examples” of how this will affect you are very telling. Apparently you are a homophobe. Not Christian-like at all.
That’s simply not true. Nobody wants to take the Bible out of marriage. That’s simply YOUR fear and paranoia talking. You need to keep YOURSELF out of OTHERS marriage. They don’t need YOU in THEIR homes and bedrooms. You need to mind YOUR OWN business and worry about how YOU will get to heaven. I don’t understand what it is about homosexuals that heterosexuals are so afraid of. It’s not catching you know.
God condemns rape, not love. There is nothing sinful or immoral about two loving people blessed to find each other in this world, seeking to protect the life they build together with civil marriage.
Thats the same lie you keep repeating over and over but never provide the Scripture vers to back your claim. It doesn’t exist and you know it. The Bible condemns homosexuality from beginning to end, not only that but it describes it AND gives the reason for it.
The bible says far more in favor of slavery than it says against homosexuality. To claim it condemns homosexuality “from beginning to end” is absurd, and clearly we should take some social conventions of the time in context— or are you also seeking to restore your moral right to hold slaves?
More importantly, the six passages that speak about sodomy are not speaking against the committed, real love we hold for one another. They are speaking against rape and victimization.
The buybull is NOT US or Maine civil law.
It is a choice YOU have made, toots…
Nobody is forced to adhere to the tenets of the buybull or any other book of mythology.
God is love my friend.
A myth to you maybe but not to all who seek him, enuh said on both subjects, the one in the article and the one you chose.
Helen, you are absolutely corect!!!
Religion does not have the right to tell all American’s how to live. All Americans are created equal, with the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
“Religion does not have the right to tell all American’s how to live.”
***************************************
Then the church institution of “Marriage” is not what you want, it would appear. You have other opportunities including your free choice to create your own institution and call it whatever your heart (no matter how it came to be) desires.
I believe you are starting to get it! That’s quite right – we don’t really care about the church institution of marriage as that is merely a ceremonial rite and carries no legal weight in the secular world. However, there are churches ready and willing to perform SSM when the law is changed.
We don’t need to create a new institution. It’s already there. It is called civil marriage and it is available to (almost) all. If we could get the law changed to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples, then that would be ideal. At that point, same-sex couples could be married in a civil ceremony by a Notary Public and they could be married in churches by those pastors and churches who support SSM.
Those churches who do not recognize SSM? They don’t have to do anything.
That is it in a nutshell.
So, you have it quite right. The church institution of marriage is up to that particular church. The civil institution is the one we want.
And, to clarify, the church intitution of marriage and the civil (government) institution of marriage are not connected. They are not the same. One does not imply the other. The only connection is that when a pastor performs a marriage and signs the marriage license, he is doing it as a favor for the State. The State considers his actions of performing the church ceremony sufficient to cover the couple’s agreement to the contractual terms of the civil marriage certificate. The couple does not have to appear in City Hall and be married all over again by a government official (as is the case in many places in Europe).
The definition of “Marriage” is taken. Other relationships can be defined by any other word of choice.
Your church may have its definition of “marriage” but the civil version of it has changed over time, many times. There used to be legal bans on inter-racial marriages and marriages to first cousins and any number of age restrictions. Civil marriage has changes many times and, again, this is ALL we are talking about here. Your church does not own the word “marriage.”
The fact that your church uses the same word for its version of “being wedded” has nothing to do with the civil version.
In the secular, legal world, a concept that is defined as being identical,and in fact is identical, usually (I cannot think of an exception) is called the same thing. For example, I hear forever that people want to grant gay couples “exactly the same rights as married straight couples” but they want to call it “civil unions.” This is the equivalent of calling white people “married” and black people “black married.” The law rightfully does not like this “distinction without a difference.” It leads to problems.
For example, if civil unions were absolutely the same as civil marriage then civil unions would be recognized by all other states, the Federal government, and all other countries. They are not. Therefore, civil unions are not equal to civil marriage.
You have to get past this idea that civil marriage and religious marriage are forever entwined. They are not and never have been. Go to Europe. They are distinctly different.
Mainers are not Europeans.
This will be in the court of our public opinion and decided very soon.
Court of public opinion? Yes, we have such a stellar history of leaving civil rights to the voting masses.
– The Women’s Right to Vote (1920) finally settled by legislation after MEN voted it down.
– Loving v. Virginia (1967) – SCOTUS had to decide because the voters of VA would not allow inter-racial couples to marry.
– Civil Rights Act of 1964 – Enacted by Congress because the South felt “those darkies” were not entitled to the same rights as us God-fearing and chosen ones (whites).
– Voting Rights Act of 1965 – Enacted by Congress to allow everyone to vote and not just those who owned land, paid a poll tax, or who could read.
Yes, the Court of Public Opinion has its laurels upon which to rest.
So, what will you do when the People actually DO vote in favor of SSM this time around? It seems like a pretty good chance they will.
And, by the way, my reference to Europeans is that the way they have separate civil and religious ceremonies is identical to the way we do it here. The only difference is that our pastors are granted the right by the State to act as an agent for the State, similar to a Notary Public. In Europe, the pastors mostly are not hence two separate ceremonies. The net result is the same – our pastors do their religious ceremony and in doing so, the State acknowledges that to be sufficient for the couple to have agreed to the marriage contract (license) issued by the State.
I also will add – what is the end-game here? Do you think the States that have enacted SSM will eventually repeal it? Do you think DADT will be brought back to life? Do you think DOMA will survive the Courts? What about Prop-8 in CA? That has been shot down twice by the Courts.
The older, religious crowd who is anti-SSM is dying off and younger people are coming up the line who are reaching voting age. Their acceptance of SSM is over 70%.
The trend line for pro-SSM continues to climb while the anti-SSM line continues its downward trend.
So, looking ahead 20 years, just where do you see SSM at a national level?
Maybe to you, but not to those who seek Him, enuh said on both subjects. The one in the article and the one you chose.
I think God would probably have more of a problem with you standing in the way of love that two people sharing a life of love together. Where does your hate eminate from? I say hate because you are judging others without even knowing them. I also want to point out that if you believe marriage should be a religious institution maybe all marriages should be held in the Jewish tradition, or maybe in the Hindu tradition, maybe even have Muslum marriage ceremonies? Would that make you happy? The point is the world is filled with many different kinds of people, all God’s children. I remember a song from Vacation Bible School growing up it had the line”all God’s children have a place in the choir”, I think that says it best! Moreover that Vacation Bible School was held in an Episcopol Church and my family consists of practicing Catholics. The point being we can all work together to make the world a better place filled with love rather than hate.
you know anyone can sling garbage that has nothing to do with the conversation.
Yes the GOP
Troll much?
Oh please, like you’ve ever posted on the BDN before.
Well, with this being my 140th comment here at the BDN, I would say yes…yes I have posted here before.
Not sure what that has to do with his trolling.
well ‘isn’t that sweet’ 0:16. Its not about being sweet.
Firstly to avoid being banned or ‘this comment has been flagged for review’ again I would want to say to you – hear me out. I will not be voting this year for anything anyway but here is my opinion on gay marriage.
Personally I don’t think gay marriage or in fact gay relationships are right. However my belief is that I don’t care what people do in their own homes or in private is going to affect my life. Its when they infringe on my right to go somewhere publicly and be berated by them for being straight, or get hit on by them its when it affects me.
No one is being berated for being straight. If you get challenged on your views it’s because you think it’s valid to create laws based upon moral disapproval alone. Gay people should have the same right to legally affirm their bond like straight people can. If you’re against equality for gay people, then you’re not being berated for being straight.
I have been personally a few times in bangor/orono at what used to be Ultra-Lounge and at Barnaby’s. I don’t have a problem with gays doing what they want to do in their own home…
my case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXPKwxwxDyw this is a transgendered male to female who wants the same thing.
Al, I agree.
Do as you want at home. I could care less about that.
However, do not push it on me day after day after day. Do not ask for any special treatment.
Do not try to teach my family that it should be the norm, it is not nor will it ever be.
It is an end run around insurance benefits as far as I am concerned.
Another special interest group seeking something out of the norm because it suits ’em, the heck with the rest of us.
Interesting you talk about insurance benefits. My husband of 13 years and I work out of our house on our own businesses and would pay the same amount for insurance if we were married in the state of Maine as if we were single in the state of Maine. So where do you get your information??
How is it special treatment if they get married dose that mean you or other striaght couples can’t get married ??
I would actually suggest that it is heterosexual, married couples who receive the special treatment before the law and that it is they who are a special interest group. After all, married couples receive special treatment through tax, property, family, and inheritance law. Similarly committed couples who have built lives together are denied this, which is what needs to change. So in order to not be a special interest group, would you be willing to agree that you should not benefit unfairly from tax, property, inheritance and family laws that were created specifically so that married couples, a special interest, can benefit and prosper? I would. Perhaps it is better to allow other similarly committed couples to receive that same special treatment. Equality before the law demands some give on this. Gay couples just want the same security that being married provides many people, perhaps even you, and I see no special interest in that. I would wager that there are plenty of gay committed couples who have been together longer than you and your spouse even. What is being sought is equality before the law which is a civil rights issue.
I think that heterosexual men should stop pushing their agenda on women in bars.
What special treatment hon?
You mean the special treatment that the choice of religion gets in the Civil Rights Acts of ’64 and ’68?
You mean special treatment like that?
So let’s see if I am correct here: I am gay, and that is fine as long as I stay at home? You mean I cannot gay grocery shop, or gay bike ride, or gay walk down the street??? I am a human being first and foremost and being gay is not about having sex all the time Al. Being gay is part of my life, but it is not who I am as a person. I pay my taxes just as you do, I put my pants on one leg at a time , the same as you. Gay people are everywhere in your life and I bet you don’t even know it.
Live your life and I’ll live mine with my husband of 13 years. thank you
Nobody’s going to hit on you Al…
But if they did, why is it any different than you hitting on someone?
Hypocrisy, thy name is wingnut.
So, by that token, he welcomes being hit on by all women?
It’s the right and fair thing to do. If marriage had nothing to do with the law, then why do people get legally married at all? This is about allowing gay people to enjoy the same rights that straight people do.
When someone else is allowed free choices, it doesn’t impact your right to a free choice. If I decide to marry a Jewish woman, it doesn’t mean everyone has to marry a Jewish woman. It doesn’t mean all Churches will have to have those kinds of marriages. It just means I’ve made my own choice. You get to make your own choice. Why does it have to extend further than that? Why do you think you have to right to dictate how others live? That’s so un-American to me.
Nice ad.
GREAT ad showing real people in the state of Maine who are fighting for their families. Thank you for fighting for your son!!
Best
Seth
Yes, but no thanks to abandoning the Bible, and God’s good values. Seth, wow, what a comment for your beliefs as a human.
You sound rather judgmental there. Do you know Seth well enough to make such accusations, or are you applying what YOU think a human’s beliefs should be to him?
Bravo to you Seth. It is a great ad. Thank you to the folks that opened their hearts to all of us.
He is my husband in my heart CP and none of the vitriol you will write here will change that. Marriage isn’t about the piece of paper, it is what two hearts share together.
wow, just wow. Where do you come up with these things? You need to get out more and perhaps live a little.
I can guess what cp444 said based on my interactions with him in the past. He very predictable and his arguments are getting easier and easier to debunk.
My arguments are not any easier for you to debunk, you have just slipped so far down in immorality that your conscience is no longer bothered by lying.
Your arguments are patently hysterical… the product of a mind desperate to kill something one has no rational argument against.
You’re a very sick person.
I’m sure this wasn’t funded with any out-of-state money.
And if it was we know where the money came from….unlike NOM and 2009 that is still refusing to release the donors names despite losing at every legal turn.
So if a man doesn’t get married, he’s not living according to God’s will?
Perfect…
Oh my, you are really obtuse aren’t you?
And the problem here is……? I guess you don’t believe that spousal benefits in your company should extend to same sex couples. Perhaps your company should be fair and drop your spousal benefits too.
unlike you cp, beastiality never pops into my head.
How am I to know His laws, as he intended them?
Probably is the keyword Doug. Rather then probably I was asking Helen for an actual persons name.
Because your non married straight employees always have the chance to marry. Every single one of them could marry tomorrow and their spouses would have benefits. We don’t have that choice. Why is that hard to understand???
Gosh that is nice of you Doug to suggest I get a new hobby. Do you do that often or just when you don’t have a come back?
I hear you. What astounds me is that some of the naysayers on one hand claim marriage is all about religion and that is the only “true” marriage and all that. Then, this same group of people acknowledge that in order to obtain a divorce, one must go to a civilian court! Can they not, therefore, draw the conclusion that any marriage in the USA for which a state marriage license has been obtained is, in fact, partly a civil marriage?
The average marriage consists of two parts – the state sanctioned civil marriage (as evidenced by the state-issued marriage license) plus an optional religious ceremony.
This could not be any plainer.
This is why couples end up in Divorce Court and not Divorce Church if their marriage fails.
The courts long ago determined that a marriage license is a binding contract. Once a divorce is considered, the goal of Divorce Court is to dissolve this legally binding contract (the marriage license). A “divorce” in a church is another kettle of fish and I will leave that to the particular religion to handle. But, a divorce in a church has no bearing on a divorce in the secular world. If you want a legal divorce then you need to go to the Courts and dissolve the marriage contract.
Back in 2009, I explained all this and have been repeating myself for years now. If they don’t believe me, just go ask any divorce attorney and confirm it. There are two issues here – civil marriage and (potentially) religious marriage. You notice how most couples, once they obtain a civil, legal divorce, do not bother to go to the church and ask for a religious divorce.
Again, this is as just the way it works. Why they don’t get this just baffles me.
Plus, churches are free to accept or deny any couple religious marriage. There are churches who refuse to marry blacks or interracial couples today, just as there are churches who hold marriage ceremonies for same sex couples today. None have any bearing on the civil marriage license.
Well, you are speaking logically and we know that has little to do with emotion and religion. No matter how I explain, plain as day, they don’t get it.
What’s with all the deleted comments on both sides? This is bull-. There were 100+ comments just a couple of hours ago and now much less.
i agree wolf,, if bdn’s mod’s don’t like the comments they should stop inviting them with these topic’s. or,, get some new mod’s.. getting so you can’t say anything. to bad a new paper couldn’t come in and give some competition.. and as for the topic at hand,, good for this couple, just like the couple that opposes it, stand and deliver. the vote is in november and lets hope everyone votes, either way is fine,,, just vote.. i’m tired of the bickering and “who’s right” syndrome.
I asked that same question at 4.00 pm and that comment even got deleted.
C’mon moderators, what is going on???
That is a good question. I posted a response to someone who trotted out God’s law, and I did not resort to name calling or even anything particularly harsh, but I know my comment was removed. I also had seen some of the original comments, at least some of which were not disrespectful or insulting, and they are also gone. It is a strange policy where insulting comments to other posters are allowed to stand but reasonable responses are not.
You put gay people in the same box with criminals. There is no victim in a homosexual relationship. To suggest that being gay is the same or similar to pedophilia or robbing a bank IS hateful.
The homosexuals use the argument that since Jesus didn’t mention it, it was all right. I was just pointing out that there are many things that Jesus didn’t mention. Does that make them all right?
You know exactly what I was commenting about. You just choose to turn everything I write into a chance to argue and insinuate.
I give you the benefit of the doubt even when you don’t deserve it. You coupled homosexuality with 4 different things that all involve victims — I’m supposed to believe that’s a coincidence?
Alot of comments arer being flagged in here. I guess the pro marriage gang doesn’t believe in the freedom of speech. Me personally I don’t care what people do in their bedrooms it’s none of my business and I’m not that curious.. The story is about sexual choice isn’t it.
They’ve been flagged for people on both sides. Quit screaming victim when you’re not.
Wow….eleven a.m. until five twenty-seven p.m. ….you spend way too much time on the computer reading comments.
Beautiful day….
Actually Jesus did speak about children many, many times EJ. I would have thought you knew that.
As far as incest in concerned, define incest. In some states 1st cousins cannot marry but in Maine they can. So does that mean incest Maine has legalized incest in the form of 1st cousins marrying?
I really don’t that Jesus would be concerned about running red lights but he did speak about stealing. Again I thought you would have know that.
How do you know what Jesus said? Oh, from the Bible you say. The same Bible that Jesus Himself inspired men to write. The same Bible that condemns homosexuality from beginning to end. The same Bible that says homosexuals will not see the Kingdom of God.
Madness.
The first recorded homosexual marriage was the Emperor Nero who married his eunuch Sporus.
Nero dressed Sporus up in the clothes of his dead wife, the Empress Poppaea, whom he kicked to death in a violent rage.
Not all is sweetness and light in the homosexual community.
Bruce LaVallee-Davidson is another example.
To portray as good what has been regarded as perversion by all previous generations is a measure of this society’s deep confusion and wickedness.
There can never be a right for homosexuals or lesbians to marry.
America is sick and getting sicker.
Even this ad states that the parents wept when their son told them he was “gay.”
You see, it is all lies and illusion from the get-go, even the word “gay” and the name “GLAD.”
Are you trying to say that all homosexuals are psyo like Nero was. You talk about society’s confusion…. oh my. Trying to get the splinter out of society’s eye before you have gotten the board out of your own, ha…
We get it, you have a deep-set hatred for homosexuals.
But the truth is that there are loving, committed couples here in Maine who seek the very real and tangible protections of civil marriage. And allowing these families to protect the lives they build together is simply the right thing to do.
19 people in the homosexual community liked this blasphemous comment.
Wake up, people.
When I clicked on this story at about 1pm, there were 137 comments. Where are they and the dozens missing on the other stories? Hello, BDN?
Slow news day? A video and a front page online article simply telling us that a couple will appear in a video approving of same-sex marriage…..um, ok?
It’s Maine— slow news day is when we run articles about turtles crossing the road!
I can only assume that anybody who believes gay marriage is only “fair” or is “the right thing to do” or gay people “only want the same rights others have” also, in the interest of fairness believe that affirmative action/quota programs (which are unfair and in many cases end in a less qualified individual getting a job) should be outlawed as they are “unfair.” If you believe that everyone should just be judged as humans (and your sexual orientation would not factor in, to say, marriage) then a person’s race/gender should not factor in to a job interview/application/offer.
You vote that those programs should go away and I am all with you on gay marriage….so long as we are all about “fairness.”If you cannot agree with that, then try to understand why some may not agree with gay marriage….or must I just be a hate monger for even hinting at the notion that the best person should get the job, regardless of race/gender, etc).
I can’t speak for everyone, but yes I believe affirmative action laws go against the ideal of equal treatment under the law. A person’s race, gender, sexual orientation or religion should not be a factor in a job interview, application, or offer.
I am a Libertarian at heart, though I am a registered Republican in Maine. And I absolutely support same-sex marriage, for it abides by our Constitution’s demands that we extend protections equally to all Americans.
Actually, yes, I do.
I agree with that too. I believe people should be judged on ability and not skin color. However, I do think that socio-economic backgrounds should be considered sometimes as well because that can have an effect on that person’s ability.
At the same time, telling me that I must vote a certain way on an issue that isn’t even up for a vote before November 2012 before you agree with supporting same-sex marriage is wrong.
Sodom and Gamorrah , just two words to remember when you vote, how much farther will you let it go before saying enough is enough,
Dipsh*t and dumb@ss makes perfect sense….
Since our country’s inception there have been groups that 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 predicting doom and gloom and national destruction if we extend these things to one more group, race, sex, or other minority.
And every time they have failed, 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.
Your mythology has nothing to do with it, sweetheart.
You’re welcome to it, but it is not our law.
Gomorrah is misspelled. If someone is using the internet to discuss an issue, one would think that the person making the comments would use that same internet to ensure that the spelling of the key concept of that point is spelled correctly.
Emrich claims they aren’t airing ads yet because it’s “too soon…”
Why? Probably because his track record is to air lies and deceit, and if they wait until a couple days before the vote we won’t have adequate time to respond to such deceitful tactics.
It worked for them in 2009, after all. Where IS Mark Mutty this time around? He’s on camera clearly showing unease at the lies his side was spreading, and worrying that he will be remembered for his un-Christian “ends justify the means” campaign he ran.
I hope that this time around Mainers can clearly see that there are many Maine families who deserve the important protections of civil marriage, and will find it in their hearts to allow us equal access to this important institution!
Sooo………now the BDN is publicizing an upcoming ADVERTISEMENT?? Of course, it IS an ad for the BDN’s own pet cause, so I guess it makes sense.
Yawn.
This ad was shown on WAGM tonight- nothing offensive about it
Why do you flag people who think Gay marriage is wrong?Their post are no more offensive than the same Sex Marriage peoples post on this site.
Lots of haters in here today, first amendment haters that is.. People who agree with SSM seem to be the biggest haters by flagging every opposing comment.. I have nothing in this fight, but from what I’m seeing happen here supressing opinions is making a difference on how I will vote on this one.. I will sit and eat cake with you but please don’t shove it into my face.. I know I am not homophobic yet being told I am one because I have my own ideas about SSM has changed how I will vote.
I missed the earlier comments, but there do seem to be more flagged comments than usual. I’m not flagging any, not even “Sonofbangor” and his ridiculous displays of disgust.
Meh, Son of Bangor is harmless… he’s so far in the closet he’s getting fondled by the lion king of Narnia and all this talk of gay folks makes his willie twitch…
That makes him lash out.
He’s harmless.
My post didn’t even get posted so that it could then get deleted.
BDN, can you tell me upfront what the 8 acceptable words are to use, and I will try to form them into a sentence? Thank you.
Marriage is a legal union and has nothing to do with religion, unless a couple chooses that path.
I chose to be married in the Catholic church but many of my friends were married by JPs. We
respect our vows equally. A religious zealot once told me “if you attend a church that supports
homosexuality God is not there”. Serously?? Live and let live.
RAmen!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SDJlogZQP4 < my thoughts
And just what makes you think someone wants to touch you?
Slow news day huh BDN ?
Also, it appears to me that you & your stellar staff seem to have the market cornered on The 1st Amendment…. & I quote,
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
You seem to forget that we live in America where we have Freedom of Speech, yet if someone disagrees with one of your news articles, your peons behind the keyboards are quick to delete an opinion that is contrary to yours, what a bunch of Hypocrites!
Needless to say, those of us that live in central ME. are stuck with your sorry excuse of Reporting the news in an unbiased manner,,,, What a joke y’all are.
Keep up the good Socialist Propaganda Spew & don’t forget, The Truth Shall Set You Free.
Peace & Love to you and yours.
Hypocrites Anonymous 12 step program available upon request.
Call 1-800-GET-REAL ;<)
First amendment does not apply to private property, which this site is. Just like you cannot come into my home and espouse views I consider harmful, the same is true in this private forum.
Not only that, but I don’t think they delete comments simply because they don’t agree with them. They address comments that violate the terms of use and SOMETIMES there is an overlap between those comments that violate and those comments that express opinions with which they disagree. However, the latter, I’m sure, doesn’t play into the decision to delete those comments.
I can say that I don’t really care about government or religion but when they step in between two people that are in love and want to get married (ie two men or two women) than neither the government or the religious zealots should get involved. Marriage is beyond that of children but for the love two people have for each other. I have friends who grew up and were raised by a gay couple and they were the best people I have known.
Maybe they want their two sons to abandon God’s beliefs and burn the bible, then get married. I mean so what, they believe in same-sex marriage, why not just keep it in the family. No wonder they live in Monroe.
God has blessed these people, how can you not see that? We should celebrate whenever two people find loving, supportive relationships that they wish to affirm with civil marriage.
Jesus told us to love one another, and not judge each other. I fail to see why they must burn their bible because they wish to share a lifetime of monogamous commitment and support.
Your god has nothing to do with it, hon.
Please people!
Your religion is NOT our civil law! What you feel your deity is saying to you through whatever means is not the basis for our granting civil contracts.
I’m glad you have it! That’s just swell! You’re welcome to it! But this idea that because your chosen deity says “boo” about something, so “boo” must be law is no different than an enforcement of sharia law upon the people of these United States.
In terms of our civil law, your mythology is not a consideration.
Good grief…
God is Love- a persons sexual orientation has nothing to do with their ability to be in a committed loving relationship.. I can remember when the same things were said by hatemongers when mixed racial marriages started taking place.
I am sure that when the people against same sex marriage put out their ad, it will get equal coverage in the BDN like this ad did.
They already got coverage with 600+ comments last week when it was announced that a married couple will be running the anti-SSM campaign. (Did we ever learn where they’re from?) http://bangor-launch.newspackstaging.com/2012/08/15/news/state/married-couple-hired-to-run-campaign-opposed-to-same-sex-marriage/
So, it’s a matter of time before we start to see the nonsense from that side soil the airwaves and intertubes of Maine…
SSM side got coverage when their new leader was announced….did we learn where HE was from? not Maine, I believe. I am talking about getting press when an ad is made, not when there is news about change of administrators of the sides. I guess it depends on which side you are on to notice the “nonsense soiling” going on.
They wept because of what they knew he would have to endure from the likes of you.
My response word for word Convivial!
Twenty years from now current young Americans will have
children their own current age. They will have witnessed the birth of their babies
and marveled that her body could have possibly presented brand new, perfect
life to their custody with no instruction from either’s intellect and from that
day on they will be forever changed. Instinct should be enough to preserve
traditional marriage as the union of one man and one woman despite all that has
challenged the institution. Instinct naturally
births protectiveness for these babies but way too often we have fallen short. The
moment of first breath melts us in the hush of incredible goodness and we know
we have to do better for them as the blush fades from the bud. The Christian
beliefs so many of us hold need to be re-affirmed, constantly. Sinners and
imperfect, all of us, we know what we need to do and know that it’s up to no
one else.
Same sex marriage supporters are sure our natural born will finish
the walk we started back in the sixties away from what we know as the best method
of protecting our families. This current debate is all about us too whether or
not the debate opposition wants to respect our beliefs and opinions. Despite charges
that we obsess about their lives and relationships that’s never been true for
most of us who have been busy living our own.
Human relationships fail all the time, whether traditional or otherwise but we know the definition of marriage and have the responsibility
to preserve it through our own example with vows of commitment to one man, and
one woman for reasons which need no explanation.