MINNEAPOLIS — In one TV ad, a husband and wife talk fondly of a lesbian couple who moved into their neighborhood. In another, a married couple speaks of wanting fair treatment for their lesbian daughter. A third features a pastor talking supportively about gay unions.
Each of these ads ran recently in states with gay marriage questions on the November ballot. What’s missing? Gay people speaking for themselves.
Four states, including Maine, are voting on gay marriage this fall, and gay rights groups are pouring tens of millions of dollars into key TV markets in hopes of breaking a 32-state losing streak on the issue. But even as gay people and same-sex relationships gain acceptance through pop culture staples such as “Modern Family” and “Glee,” the idea is still seen as dicey by media strategists involved in the ballot campaigns, resulting in ads that usually involve only straight people talking about the issue.
The decision to keep gays in the background has been widely noticed in the gay community and debated on gay-oriented blogs, with some activists complaining that the move contradicts the central message of the gay rights movement for a number of years.
“If we don’t show ourselves, people aren’t going to get comfortable with who we are,” said Wayne Besen, director of Vermont-based gay rights group “Truth Wins Out,” one of many that presses gays to live openly with pride in who they are.
But others counsel deference for the complexities of public messaging, pointing out that the ads are designed to speak to the fears and values of the heterosexual majority, whose vote will decide the issue.
“The moderate tough guys we need to flip to win a couple of these races are still the ones who say that gays are gross,” said Andy Szekeres, a Denver-based fundraising consultant who has worked on several state campaigns and had access to focus group data. “Pushing people to an uncomfortable place, it’s something you can’t do in a TV ad,” said Szekeres, who is gay.
The definition of marriage is on the ballot this fall in Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington. Beyond those, according to the Human Rights Campaign, 37 states prohibit gay marriage while six and the District of Columbia permit it. Gay activists and their allies hope that any wins in November would throw new momentum their way at a time when polls nationwide have shown growing acceptance for gay marriage.
Six of the seven ads broadcast in the contested states this year have featured only straight people talking about the issue. One ad, which played only in Maine, included a firefighter who talked of being accepted by his colleagues. The ads, along with most that ran in the 2008 campaign in California and in other past statewide races, rely on heterosexual family members and friends of gays talking about how the inability to marry has deprived their loved ones of rights and opportunities they should have.
Gay marriage opponents, who also have well-funded campaigns in the four states, plan to begin airing ads soon. In recent interviews, an organizer said the key message is aimed at parents, suggesting legal recognition could result in their kids being told in school and in society that it’s OK to be gay.
Gay activists who have worked on the marketing campaigns say that in this battle for public opinion, it’s better for gays to stay in the background.
“The simple truth is that we are trying to win over the people that are not yet with us,” said Matt McTighe, campaign manager of Mainers United for Marriage, which is pushing the ballot measure to legalize gay marriage in that state. “I’m a gay man, and the general rule of thumb for me is that an ad that meets my emotional needs is not necessarily the thing that’s going to change a typical voter’s mind about gay or lesbian people.”
A May 2011 poll by the Pew Research Center found growing acceptance of gay people on a number of fronts, but still plenty of doubts. Fifty-eight percent of poll respondents said gays should be accepted in society compared with 33 percent who said they shouldn’t. More people thought gays raising children was bad for society rather than good, though the largest number of respondents were neutral on the question. The same poll found 45 percent support for gay marriage rights, up from 35 percent just two years earlier.
The first ad broadcast by Minnesotans United for All Families, which is trying to defeat the state’s proposed constitutional ban on gay marriage, is aimed at parents. It features Kim and John Canny — two straight Catholics, Republicans and parents of three daughters from a Minneapolis suburb who discuss coming around to support gay marriage after a lesbian couple with an adopted son moved into their neighborhood.
The lesbian couple is briefly glimpsed in the ad, but not heard from.
Alexander Zachary, a gay man from Minneapolis, complained that the ads he has seen reflect an “antiquated mind-set.”
“This isn’t San Francisco in 1973, where all the gay people live in one neighborhood and all the straight people live everywhere else,” he said. “We’re not this hidden culture anymore, so why act like it?”
Richard Carlbom, manager of the Minnesota campaign, declined to say if future Minnesota United ads would feature gay people. Upcoming ads will “articulate why gay people want to get married,” he said.
Many straight people “are on a journey on this issue, and the most effective way to encourage them is to show them other people who have taken the same journey,” and come to accept gay marriage, Carlbom said.
Bil Browning, a Washington, D.C., gay activist and writer, recently called a straights-only ad that ran in Washington state “a heterosexual snoozefest” on his blog. He pointed out that gay activists seem to be using the strategy even though they’ve yet to win a campaign. In the 32 states where the issue has been on a statewide ballot, gay marriage advocates have lost every time.
“Maybe it’s time to re-evaluate these strategies and include our families, actual LGBT people,” Browning said. “We’re never going to win if we can’t show our faces. It looks like we have something to hide, and we don’t.”
Associated Press reporter Rachel La Corte in Olympia, Wash., contributed to this report.
Huh – I could swear there is a gay guy in this ad from Mainers United for Marriage:
http://youtu.be/y6E6v0XmSSM
Is that ad legal? Most city or town employees aren’t allowed to politicaly campaign.
They are allowed to do so on their own time.
What’s missing? Gays, potpourri, and rainbow flags.
BTW…does anyone know whether Barney Frank will be starring in one of the pro-gay marriage ads? Maybe we could get a peek at some of his marriage photos. Would that “flip a couple of moderate tough guys?”
Are YOU a member of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas? They are notorious for posting anti-gay Hate Speech on newspaper websites all over the United States.
We know anti-gay Hate Cults from away violated Maine campaign finance and disclosure laws in 2009. The anti-gay Hate Cult, NOM, appealed their conviction to the US Supreme Court but was turned down–but they are STILL in VIOLATION of Maine laws.
want to take a peek do you? titillating for you, perhaps?
me thinks you protest too much.
and if you don’t get that reference, I’m not surprised.
You realize don’t you that the exhibitionists are less likely to get married? So, your antipathy is based on blind stereotyping.
What are you so scared of that you hubby mite leave you for a man ?
I used to somewhat respect you, but now, not much. You’ve had the same attitude that we’re all fashion fruits or the happy ones in an ad showing their kids. BZZZ wrong answer! Many of us played your game, love our kids, but neither went true to our reality or stay in your closet out of convenience .You’d be surprised just what pigs men are.
I am a bred and born Northern County fruit face that lives his life the way I was brought up but, I don’t like to be lumped with a stereotype that you seem to adhere to, nor do the married ones that make up my friends. We are plenty and don’t want to be known, are not obvious because we aren’t light in the loafers. Sorry for my incoherent rant, but your lack of knowledge (ignorance) of the vast majority of us is appalling. Watch out for your hubby at the supermarket because it’s my best place to pick up husbands. Seriously
Whats missing in the ads? How about a couple of sexy gay girls in skimpy clothes jello wrestling in a kiddy pool, then soaping off in a steamy shower… brake to the evening scene of them sitting cuddling on the sofa discussing their day… Men would vote for that…. You may think it’s a joke but look at how advertizers push products with beautiful women.. Nobody even knows what the ads about until the last 3 seconds…
I think the NO ! ads should include stonings.
Well, if we were not a secular State with equal rights for all , wouldn’t that be the fundamentalists, Christian and Muslim, both, solution to their abomination against God’s will (as they decide it to be) problems ?
What else is, then, Biblically speaking
….except for too radical liberal Jesus teachings, of course ?
you have to admit the shallowness of Americans buy product with nice looking women in the ads. that was the question.. Want to win the race play by their rules and you might be surprised.
After the Maine Ethics Commission caught anti-gays RED-HANDED in 2009, and that at least one of them is STILL in VIOLATION of Maine Law, it’s just HILARIOUS you’d say ANYTHING about “play by the rules.”
I said play by “their” rules, not by the rules.
Anti-gays were caught violating Maine law last time. No use trying to deflect that FACT.
I see you like making up things as you move along. Please read the comments, you have more support then you think.. “PLEASE READ THE COMMENTS BEFORE REPLYING”. What was the top post, it was refering to the title of the story.. If you don’t get it then I’m going to assume that you are truly not in support of gay marriage and are a rouge poster here to stir up hate for gays.
Still trying to DEFLECT from the criminal acts anti-gays committed to throw the 2009 Hate Vote, huh?
Well, that’s why the psychologists have called that mental disorder “homoPHOBIA” since 1953, huh, ptkitty?
LGBT Mainers will be back again and again until we establish our equality. We haven’t been in the closet for 40 years now–and anti-gays are the ones in the closet now. If being anti-gay was so all-fired popular as anti-gays claim, you could all give us your full names and addresses.
Very revealing. We know all about your AGENDA.
It’s called the United States Constitution. You should read it and stop SPITTING on it.
Thanks for your informed comments. You’ll see me in Nov. casting my Yes vote.
peace.
Thank you for your support. You are protecting your own equality as well.
moi?
Please forgive my error, it’s very stressful being a political football.
i feel ya, that’s why i reached out.
<3
I wish more Americans understood that!!
that’s really the scary part: how little the majority of us understand our own form of government. I am confident marriage equality will pass, if not Nov, then by the SCOTUS, it is the only legitimate outcome. But our country will still be left with a majority of its citizens not believing in science, scorning rules of reason and thoughtful debate.
What the “gay agenda” looks like:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html
Sometimes I wonder if we should feature anti-gays in our advertizing. We know MOST Americans reject and condemn the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas. Maybe we should remind those on the fence that Fred Phelps and his “G*d Hates F*gs cult represent anti-gays.
That’s because gay marriage isn’t about gays or marriage. It’s about equal rights for all families living in this great country.
Two gay people are NOT a family. Neither can they HAVE a family
There are same-sex couples raising families across Maine.
ALL Maine families deserve the important benefits civil marriage conveys, so they may protect the lives they build together, and the children they raise together.
The gay movement is not about family and marriage- its ALL about sexual orientation.
Only to those who are obsessed with the sex lives of others. That’s one of the symptoms of the mental disorder, homophobia. I only WISH my partner and I had as much sex as anti-gays fantasize about us having.
I am hardly ‘obsessed’ with you sex life. But your sex life if you are gay/lesbian is at the very root of the argument. Everything else you throw on it is but smoke and mirrors. I pray people would not be naive to you Agenda to redefine the legal definition of marriage and turn public sentiment towards it using words like ‘love’ and ‘family’ so you can practice an immoral lifestyle with legal and public approval. It is not about equal rights either. You have all the same rights as heterosexuals. You want special rights for a lifestyle that you choose.
After all the times you have claimed LGBT Americans are “all about sex,” it’s too late for you to deny your overarching obsession with “gay sex.”
I know that God is true, but you are far from it. God may be getting pretty tired of you spewing hate in His name and when He calls you on it remember, You’ve been Warned!
In the year 6565 Ain’t gonna need no husband, won’t need no wife
You’ll pick your son, pick your daughter too
From the bottom of a long glass tube
Great song ….. haven’t heard it in a long time. Of course they were a bit off in the timeline. Reproduction has never been contained to only husbands and wives …. marriage is not what makes men and women fertile. Test-tube babies have been a reality since 1978, the year the first baby was born using the technology.
That’s just as true as the bible!
The Root of the matter is that it is all about ALL their legal (NOT SPECIAL) rights.
The Federal court ruled in a recent NY case against the IRS where a survivor of a 30+ year relationship that had to pay $350,000 for her inheritance tax, It was argued that if they had been allowed to marry, the issue wouldn’t have arisen. The IRS (rightfully) had to give it back.That is what most of the gays really want. The ones wanting recognition of marriage itself are in the (very vocal) minority. My udder half and I know a few long time couples here in Boston that will tell you exactly that. We are of the age to take our estates seriously, gay or straight. Is any thing “special” about THAT? No, we are comfortable in that everyday right. Why not extend the sane to them? I guess such a simple argument might be over your head.
Thanks again for your support. The ladies were married in Canada, and New York recognized their marriage at the time of the one lady’s death. Unfortunately, the IRS has NOT returned the blood money.
Any cause that is so simply obvious is a no brainer. I’m sure we’ll disagree on other topics, but not on this one!
Not quite the way I remember the NY Post reporting it. they were married in Canada. but were not recognized at the time and got caught up in the ‘yes or no’ in NY. No matter the semantics. It shouldn’t have been in question anyway. Like I said; I’m a pragmatic realistic guy. But the ACLU need not apply :)
So why not argue to change the specific laws that are discriminatory rather than lump them into ” marriage ” ?
Why not? There are too many legal nuances to legislate.
It would be so much easier to just get over the ‘marriage’ word and move on. No?
Because specific rights, benefits etc are 100% tied to a Civil Marriage License ….. they are specifically awarded to married couples only. How much time and expense are you actually willing to “give” as a taxpayer to review and rewrite hundreds of laws to open them up to include same-sex couples as “partners or members of a civil union” rather than limited to “married or spouse” as they are now? In contrast, how much time and taxpayer expense would it cost if same-sex couples were allowed a Civil Marriage License?
It IS Special rights. They chose to be gay. They were not born that way as is a black person or as a heterosexual. Marriage benefits belong to qualified married partners not to people of the same sex
You guys really really need to get together ….. is there genetic proof that people are born heterosexual or is it a choice? Could you cite the scientific proof (the scientist(s) who discovered it, the year, publication of this finding) of this genetic code, the gene or genes, that proves beyond scientific doubt that people are heterosexual ….. if there is such a code then it will be easy to prove whether or not people choose to be gay or lesbian….. scientists would just need to look at ones DNA.
Again, preaching falsehoods, especially the last two sentences. And if the lifestyle is immoral, it’s going on anyway. Therefore the object of SSM is solely for family formation and preservation.
What else CAN anti-gays do but LIE?
Obviously obsessed with the sex YOU IMAGINE other people are having.
Look, it’s none of your business, I know plenty of straight couples that don’t have sex and are married. So you’d be OK with gay marriage if they didn’t have sex ? What are you, the sex police ? Don’t you see how gross and twisted it is for you to pry into people’s private lives this way ?
How is it any of your business, and how is your obsession with the things YOU IMAGINE they do, healthy ?
Let’s not ignore the vast number of unmarried heterosexuals who engage in sexual relations without being married (with far more admonitions in the Bible) …… a far greater percentage of the population than LGBT individuals. Not a priority for same-sex marriage opponents. Hypocrisy?….. not in their minds.
I don’t have to ‘imagine’ anything. I can read a dictionary and get a pretty clear picture. In fact I think I will encourage more people to do that. Maybe it won’t look so pretty as the nice words you are using to describe it. It’s immoral
How does what happens behind closed doors affect or impact what you do in your everyday life?
So you are only obsessed with sexual orientation …. the fact that there are human beings who exist that are emotionally, romantically and physically attracted to members of the same gender? And you assume that because gays and lesbians identify as gay and lesbian, they actively engage in behavior that you use religious beliefs to condemn. Is it your belief that all gays and lesbians have active sex lives? Do you believe that all heterosexuals who identify as heterosexual also have active sex lives?
You want the special right to discriminate unfairly. Gays and lesbians want the same rights and freedoms I already have. My marriage won’t be threatened if another couple gets married. My marriage won’t be threatened if gays and lesbians get the same freedoms and rights I already enjoy. Let’s stop the prejudice and bigotry — let’s treat everyone fairly and equally.
I’m sure that’s true! :)
Oh gee Mr. Carrotman, I’m not sure anyone is obsessed with your sex life, quite the contrary. I could care less. I love the way you throw around the word bigotry, mental disorders etc, not unlike a child who throws a fit if things are not “just so.” You assume if we are not gay we are against you, I don’t believe I have ever had the hate in my heart that seems to be dwelling within yours. Your views, slander & warped opinions may very well be the reason many gay people get a bad rap which you then can turn around & cry bigotry. Would your attitude & anger be contributing of the homophopbic problem in society? You may be doing more damage towards your G/L community than you know. May you somehow find peace in this lifetime, please know that we, atleast I, do not hate you. Get rid of that anger.
Get real, support for nationwide marriage equality is growing 5% every YEAR. Even right wing publications like US News and World Report document that:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/07/27/new-study-support-for-gay-marriage-grew-faster-in-past-two-years
“According to the report, polling data from sources including Gallup, CNN/ORC, ABC/Washington Post, and Pew Research Center indicate that average support for legalizing gay marriage grew at a rate of approximately 1 percent per year between 1996 and 2009, but the rate increased to 5 percent growth per year from 2009 to 2011. “That’s actually a 500 percent increase in the rate of change,” Benenson said at a press conference. “We rarely see that kind of upward spike in support around an issue.”
Because of that growth, several national polls show a majority of Americans now support legalizing gay marriage, including Gallup (53 percent), Public Religion Research Institute (51 percent), CNN/ORC (51 percent), and ABC/Washington Post (53 percent).”
That’s all the proof anyone needs to see that LGBT Americans are WINNING for standing up to anti-gay Hate Speech and LIES, and that anti-gays are destroying their own anti-gay agenda.
So sexual orientation, sexual behavior and intimacy have nothing to do with why you are against same-sex marriage? And they have nothing to do with the arguments others post here?
no, it’s about equality under the law.
MBE
Also obviously not true.
Oh such ignorance, pathetic really.
You know in your heart you are wrong— there are absolutely gay and lesbian families across Maine, and across our country.
How sad that your obsessive judgement blinds you to even simple truths.
Not true. It’s ALL about equality under the law.
Gays and lesbians should be treated the same under the law as I am (I’m a straight married guy).
Not too long ago, gays could be arrested just for going to a gay bar.
In many states today, gays can still be fired just for being gay, or kicked out of an apartment, or denied a loan, just for being gay.
And in many states, including Maine, they can’t marry the adult person they love, and receive the benefits of legal marriage.
Marriage is a good thing; it promotes fidelity, loyalty, and family stability. If these things are good for my wife and I, they’re also good for gay and lesbian couples.
Because I’m for marriage, I’m for letting people get married. Marriage is not threatened by people who want to get married.
So let’s treat everyone fairly under the law — let’s give gays and lesbians the same rights and freedoms that my wife and I take for granted.
Even if their family doesn’t include kids (and many couples can’t or choose to have any), they deserve the same financial benefits of a legal marriage. But I’m sure I’m preaching to the choir with you. :)
Thank you for your support, and please “preach” on and show anti-gays there are more Mainers who favor EQUALITY than the anti-gays who want to destroy equality and hurt gay and lesbian Mainers.
My udder half and I are not the least bit activist, but if something doesn’t make sense, it doesn’t make sense. We also can’t abide unfounded misconceptions! :)
Thank you for your support, and the hundreds of thousands of Mainers like you! I do hope we can win this in November, though we all know this is coming one day regardless. It’s just the right thing to do, to treat Americans equally under our laws!
While I am no longer a citizen if Maine, and we are fiscally conservative and social moderates, we believe in what’s fair. Here in Mass it was a judicial ruling that brought around SSM. Most (or all) have decided that after close to a decade, the sky didn’t fall, marriage wasn’t destroyed, they don’t want multiple person unions…….. In other words the world hasn’t collapsed and is now a “who cares” issue for us. It doesn’t affect me or mine, but is only WHAT’S FAIR!
PS Our mental support won’t work for your cause. I can only try to convince my County siblings, but history has shown me that does’t work!
Just WHO claims same gender couples “don’t have families”? The Child Welfare League of America says there are at least NINE MILLION children of same gender parents.
“Question: How Many Children Have Gay Parents in the US?
According to the Child Welfare Information Gateway, between 8 and 10 million children are being raised in gay and lesbian families.”
http://adoption.about.com/od/gaylesbian/f/gayparents.htm
” A 1995 National Health and Social Life Survey by E.O. Lauman found that up to nine million children in America have gay or lesbian parents (Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, 2002). ”
http://www.cwla.org/programs/culture/glbtqposition.htm
Before some anti-gay tells that standard anti-gay LIE that same gender parents are somehow inferior to mixed-sex parents:
“A growing body of scientific literature demonstrates that children who grow up with 1 or 2 gay and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual. Children’s optimal development seems to be influenced more by the nature of the relationships and interactions within the family unit than by the particular structural form it takes.”
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;109/2/341
You are good argument for better sex education in our schools, GodIsTrue.
that’s funny, I can think of several families where the parents are gay.
so, your statement is not true. it’s doesn’t hold water. it’s based on incorrect assumptions.
It’s based on the biblical description of family- a man, a woman and in most cases children who are born to them.
A “biblical description” would include a man, 700 wives and 300 concubines. Is this what you have in mind?
A “biblical description” would also include David and Jonathan.
A “Biblical description” also includes the consequences of Solomon’s sin. You’d include that if you were treating the Scriptures honestly…
Unless, of course, you have chapter and verse ready to indicate that God approved of this arrangement.
Of course, there’s one HUGE problem with your relying on the Bible instead of the United States Constitution–the Bible is IRRELEVANT in a discussion of the law, but the Constitution’s guarantee of “Equal Protection Under the Law” is THE LAW.
I’m always sorry to see how disloyal anti-gays are, always trying to SUBVERT the Constitution. If you hate our country so much, dirigodad, why don’t you move to a theocracy?
I see you’ve decided to play the “change the argument because I’m losing” game. Fine.
Everyone already has the opportunity to get married. Some people can’t because they don’t want to play by the rules (see under law).
I’m beginning to think you’re actually someone who’s actually opposed to gay “marriage” because you’re coming off as a caricature of a supporter.
Get real, anti-gays are losing. DADT is gone, DOMA is about to be revoked by the Supreme Court, four more states (California too!) will establish marriage equality this fall, the President and the Democrats will sweep the elections, and no amount of anti-gay cheating can change any of that.
reminding you that we live in a Constitutional nation is not changing the subject. it IS the subject.
do you have chapter and verse ready where god says gay people should not enjoy equal protection under the law?
If you are treating the Scriptures honestly, you’ notice that the sin was not having 700 wives and 300 concubines. Solomon’s sins (according to the Bible) were that he seduced a married woman, Bathsheba, and had her husband killed. Everyone agrees that was a sin. Also, he let his wives worship foreign gods. But nowhere at all does then Bible say that his sin was polygamy. So, please treat the Scriptures honestly.
By the way, I’m a straight married guy — I’m just not prejudiced.
You’re asking me to treat the Scriptures honestly and yet you say Solomon seduced Bathsheba and had Uriah killed?
It was David.
Wow. Pot, meet kettle.
Yes, of course, King David. I misspoke (or miswrote, as the case may be). A slip of the tongue, or keyboard.
But while mine was a slip, you missed the whole point. Solomon and David are never criticized in the Bible for being polygamists. David is criticized for having Uriah killed — but 2 Samuel 12:8 has the prophet Nathan speak for God, “I gave you your master’s house, and your master’s wives into your bosom [God here approves of David’s polygamy]and gave you the house of Israel and Judah, and if this were too little, I would add to you much more ” (presumably including more wives). So the problem for Nathan (and God) isn’t that David was a polygamist, it’s that he was an adulterer and a murderer.
And as for Solomon, he is criticized, not for polygamy, but for letting his wives worship idols. So, again, please treat the Scriptures honestly.
Prove, objectively, that your deity is real and the true author of a book called “the Bible” and we will all agree with you. Absent that proof, you are demanding others to defer to a fantasy. Your beliefs are just that, beliefs. Not facts, not reality, just feelings dressed up as facts by humans who confuse superstitions with wisdom. You have made yourself a slave who calls his shackles “Freedom and Salvation”.
But it’s not that he has to prove there is a God-that’s really just silly. No one can or cannot. The issue is whether his interpretation of the Bible that MANY people follow (both for and against SSM) should be the one that everyone else follows, including those who aren’t Christian.
Biblical description of marriage also includes selling your daughter, and plural marriage.
If you think those two things are wrong, then you agree that the Bible is a beautiful, but contextual document and should be interpreted figuratively, not literally.
Please provide chapter and verse where the Scriptures condone anything but a one-man, one-woman marriage. The Bible reports on it as historical fact – right alongside showing the consequences of engaging in it…it never indicates God’s blessing.
See under Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, etc.
That’s coming from a literal reading of the Scriptures.
Get real, digigodad, you even mentioned Solomon in your post!
Here’s Betty Bowers, America’s Best Christian®, explaining how DEAD WRONG YOU ARE, complete with the relevant Bible verses:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFkeKKszXTw
After you’ve absorbed that, will you come back and admit you were wrong?
Nope. Nothing there about God condoning anything other than one man, one woman.
Anti-gays always lie. Any normal, non-homophobic American knows the Bible is full of all sorts of other forms of marriage, including that between David and Jonathan.
1) Please cite chapter and verse on David and Jonathan being “married” or anything beyond being best of friends. If you won’t/can’t, you’ll have exposed yourself as the liar about whom you’ve been ranting.
2) I’ve acknowledged that the Bible addresses plural “marriages” as a historical fact. No one is arguing that. You seem to have trouble comprehending that. The Bible exposes the sin for what it is and reveals the consequences associated with it. It nowhere defends or condones them. Please cite chapter and verse stating otherwise or we revert to you exposing yourself as a liar.
The Bible says that children of people of different faiths are illegitimate.
The Bible says marriage isn’t about love, marriage was originally an arranged affair.The entire concept of romantic love is not even a biblical construct, it came WAY after the Bible was written, during the Middle Ages.The Bible includes polygamy. Are you arguing for polygamy as “traditional marriage”, because according to the Bible, it certainly IS one form of it.The Bible describes marriage as being about the husband owning the wife’s property, including her slaves.The Bible also describes Levirate Marriages, and also describes brides that could not prove their virginity as being stoned to death.The Bible describes raped women forced to marry their rapists uncritically, as well as slaves being assigned other slaves to marry, soldiers marrying prisoners of war against their will, and men having wives as well as concubines.These are just some of the “traditional” biblical marriages in the Bible.Now, you’re constantly arguing for your own little interpretation of the Bible, and ignoring that legal marriage has absolutely nothing to do with church, or biblical marriage. You constantly ignore the parts of the Bible that contradict your own assertions and pretend that there is something holy and immutable about the way you interpret this. You also compleatly ignore the fact that int he middle ages all one needed to do to be considered married was to simply say “I marry you”, and that yes, there were same sex marriages even way back then.So forgive me if I find your remarks entirely dishonest and reprehensible to laughable, because they consist primarily of a series of fraudulent lies.So you have absolutely no room to call anyone here a liar.
You, Sir, are certainly no Bible scholar, historian, or expert on the history of marriage. You are, however, quite resplendent in lying about all three.
You, like carrotcakeman, have failed to provide any Scripture reference that lends credibility to your post. First of all you state that the Bible says marriage isn’t about love. Where?
You don’t address my point that the Bible states that it reports plural “marriage” as a historical fact, but that it also reports on the consequences of that sin – as a matter of fact, you paint the picture otherwise, which makes you the liar.
The Ten Commandments specifically mentions adultery as something that we shouldn’t do but we have no laws against it do we?
If you want to argue that the Bible should be used/cited as a source of civil law then shouldn’t you be fighting to institute laws that punish adultery?
According to a recent article in USA Today, there are a number of states that still have laws on the books criminalizing adultery.
From the article: “About two dozen states still have criminal adultery provisions. While
prosecutions remain rare, they do occur. And beyond the criminal realm, these
provisions can be cited in divorce proceedings, custody disputes, employment
cases and even to bar people from serving on juries.”
I’m all in favor of it, considering the havoc that adultery wreaks on the basic societal building block known as the family.
And how about that anyway? Think the writers of said laws might have been influenced by the moral code found in the Scriptures? Just sayin’ that there’s a pretty good chance…almost makes you wonder if any of our other laws were influenced by the Bible, doesn’t it?
Excellent research dirigodad…B+ but you could have earned an A if you had simple look for the penalties.
For example, while rarely prosecuted the penalties in the United States vary from:
A life sentence in Michigan, to
A $10.00 fine in Maryland, to
A Class B misdemeanor in New York, to
A Class 1 felony in Wisconsin, to
A fine no greater than $500.00 and/or imprisonment for no more than one year in South Carolina.
The enforceability of adultery laws in the United States is unclear following SCOTUS decisions since 1965 relating to privacy and sexual intimacy of consenting adults. However, occasional prosecutions do occur.
And here are the last two paragraphs for the USAToday Article:
“Some individuals learn about these provisions for the first time in divorce and other cases — where the criminal character of the alleged conduct can be cited to justify penalties. Of
course, adultery is and should remain grounds for a divorce — but without being a crime. Adultery is a clear violation of the contractual obligation between a married couple and rather obvious evidence of a loss of intimacy and fidelity.
While the Puritans had many redeemable qualities, their use of colonial laws to execute or beat or brand people for immorality was a savage tradition. This country has matured to the point that we can put away criminalized moral codes and leave such matters to individual citizens, their families and their respective faiths. It is time to allow couples to police their own marriages.”
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-04-26-column26_ST_N.htm
You’re changing the argument mid-stream, JD. That’s disingenuous at best and downright deceptive. Your quote – “The Ten Commandments specifically mentions adultery as something that we shouldn’t do but WE HAVE NO LAWS AGAINST IT DO WE?” (emphasis mine)
The fact is we do have laws against it, as I pointed out. End of story.
Dirigodad you do understand that the SSM question we are voting on is a Maine law don’t you? It does not change the laws anywhere else. You do understand that too right?
Adultery as far as I know is not a criminal offense in Maine. Neither is being a homosexual. It is not illegal to engage in sodomy either (which heterosexual or homosexuals engage in).
The Bible also requires us not to eat seafood. Imagine a law like that passing in Maine.
Leviticus 11:12
Anything living in the water that does not have fins and scales is to be detestable to “you.”
no oysters, clams, lobsters…
SingleTrackGirl, that was Kosher law, overruled by the life and death of Jesus Christ- not applicable to Christians! We eat plenty of seafood! Have you ever heard of “context”? You are taking tiny snippets of a thousand page book and acting as if you are a Biblical scholar. You’re selling yourself short by mistakenly throwing around Biblical passages without reading and understanding the rest of the book.
Christ states that a woman shall remain silent and refer to her husband on all matters. You are agains tthe Bible with your post. God Bless.
Not applicable to me, oops.
But for your clarification the verse says “Women should remain silent in the CHURCHES.” Of course, that’s up for lots of interpretation…
exactly! up to interpretation…..
I interpret the Bible to support my belief in equal rights for all God’s children. I believe Jesus saw it that way too. I don’t need to quote a verse to know that his was a gospel of love for all people.
I completely agree– Jesus commanded us to love everyone. That’s something I strive for each day. I have many gay friends and a gay family member, and I love them no differently from anyone else! They know that about me, but they also know that I won’t be voting to change marriage laws. It’s something we can disagree on that differentiates us, but doesn’t divide us. You don’t have to interpret anything in Bible to get the clear message of “love,” but love doesn’t mean altering the clear message God established when He created marriage between a man and woman.
I always enjoy commenting with you, SingleTrackGirl!
thank you, and I respect your opinion. your loved ones are lucky to have you.
likewise!
Pick and choose…
Right on…three basic rules of interpretation.
1) Who said it?
2) To whom was it said?
3) What were the circumstances?
Interesting that any piece of writing makes more sense when they’re approached this way.
You are correct that they were not married. However, at Jonathan’s death, David said:
“I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me.
Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women.” 2 Samuel 1:26
The Bible approves of same-sex love, such as the love between Ruth and Naomi, and between David and Jonathan. The conventions of their day did not allow same-sex marriage.
But the conventions of the day did allow polygamy, and the Bible approves of many polygamous marriages, including Jacob’s two wives (who were sisters to one another) and two concubines. God approves so strongly that he changed Jacob’s name to “Israel” and made him (and his wives and concubines) the parents of the nation of Israel. Interesting.
Great info, thank you.
Isn’t is shocking that two men could love each other so much and not have sex? What’s wrong with you? Only in America do people look at male friendship as emotionally void and without expression of love. In Eastern cultures, it is completely normal and accepted to express your love of a male friend. You don’t believe males can have an emotional, loving relationship without being sexual partners? What kind of sad world do you live in?
And Naomi and Ruth were mother in law and daughter in law, who promised each other to look out for one another after Ruth’s husband (Naomi’s son) died. Nothing about that story invokes any lesbian themes- just LOVE. Your interpretation of love clearly can’t be separated from sex. How sad!
I said David and Jonathan loved each other. The Bible speaks approvingly of their love. You want to make this about sex; I didn’t.
Again, with Ruth and Naomi, you brought up lesbianism. I never did. I said that Ruth and Naomi loved each other, and that the Bible speaks of their love approvingly.
You made it about sex. The right-wingers are obsessed with sex.
Marriage is mostly about love, not mostly about sex. Why are you so obsessed with sex?
YOU are the one that suggested that these Biblical relationships were romantic in nature, rather than shared love between friends and a mother/daughter. I don’t see these relationships as romantic or sexual at all- YOU made the claim that David and Jonathan loved each other during a time that same-sex marriage wasn’t allowed; clearly expressing your belief that their relationship was not purely a loving friendship.
If you did not intend to compare these relationships to the same-sex marriage debate, why on earth would you bring them up in this forum? That’s just ridiculous.
There’s no indication that David and Jonathan’s relationship was anything beyond two guys who were best friends.
There’s no indication that Naomi and Ruth loved each other beyond a daughter’s love for her mother and vice versa.
There’s no indication that God or the Bible approved of Jacob’s multiple wives/concubines. God blesses people despite their sin – a wonderful lesson on the grace and love of God. The scriptures reveal, however, the problems that arose because of Jacob’s sin.
First of all, Jacob was no saint humanly speaking. His name means “supplanter” and he lived up to it. Multiple times, he had to learn hard lesson after hard lesson because of his stubbornness.
Secondly, his offspring serve as a beautiful reminder of the heartbreak, problems and issues that arise because of not following God’s plan.
I never said that David and Jonathan, or Ruth and Naomi, had any kind of sexual relationships. I said that the Bible approves of their love for one another.
Same-sex relationships, like opposite-sex relationships, are mostly about love, not sex. It’s the right-wingers who try to make it all about sex.
As for Jacob, the Bible never disapproves of his polygamy. The fact is that the twelve sons were born to Jacob by four different women — his two wives, who were sister, and their two slaves who were Jacob’s concubines. And God approved sufficiently to make Jacob (Israel) and his 12 sons the patriarchs and founders of Israel.
In the history of human civilization, marriage has NEVER existed on the basis of “love”. Sorry to wipe away the romanticism, but it’s true. Yes, people who love each get married. But the law does not require love for a legal marriage.
& of course the Bible approves of LOVE between same-gendered people. Who is trying to argue against that??? God commands mothers to love their sons AND daughters and fathers to love their daughters AND sons. God also commands us to love our neighbors as OURSELVES. no gender stipulation! I have no idea where you get the idea that “right-wingers” believe two people of the same sex cannot love each other. We have family members. We have friends. We have gay family members, and gay friends.
You’ve taken a totally unnecessary tangent. We all know Naomi and Ruth loved each other the way most mother and daughters do. Nothing sexual about it. Nothing revolutionary about it. What point are you trying to make?
Why? Again, it’s a matter of civil law, not your chosen religion.
You and I agree on the general principle here — let’s let all adults have the same equal freedom to marry — but the Bible does not say David and Jonathan were “married.”
David did say, at Jonathan’s death, “I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me.
Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women” 2 Samuel 1:26.
The Bible certainly approves of same-sex love, such as the love shown between Ruth and Naomi, and David and Jonathan. However, the customs of their times did not allow them to get married.
The Bible disapproves of rape (whether same-sex, as at Sodom, or opposite-sex), and St. Paul criticizes temple prostitution, male prostitution, the exploitation of children, etc. Three verses in the holiness code in Leviticus show disapproval of sexual relations between men (although not women); Leviticus also condemns eating pork, shellfish (such as lobster), getting a tattoo, shaving your beard, sowing a field with two kinds of grain, and wearing a garment made of two kinds of fabric (such as a cotton-polyester blend). Paul says all of these laws have been replaced by the law of love.
The Bible also tells us to welcome the stranger and seek justice for the oppressed person. Jesus welcomed everyone to the banquet table, especially people who were regarded as outsiders. He said, “Judge not, so you will not be judged.”
The crime at Sodom was inhospitality. God sent the angels to destroy Sodom before the men ever asked to ‘know the angels’.
That fact is overlooked by the many who refer to and quote Genesis. If they read the previous chapter and applied context they would not be able to use the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in the way they do ….. best to ignore the preface and context of the ensuing story. Chapter 18 is the forward to Chapter 19 ….. the grievous sins are not specified, not even one, but a multitude that are identified in other books that reference the cities. And then the one they point to refers to strange flesh, not homosexual acts. Yet so often they claim we take passages out of context. Of course it is the same in Romans …. so often they fail to paste the selected passages beginning with the background and “reason” and completely ignore the historical setting. It is easier to use the Bible as a weapon than it is to actually use it as it was intended.
That’s a hoot! So, if I do a lookup of the word “Sodomites” in the Bible, I see 4 passages that reference the kings of Israel removing them from the land. They were removed because they were inhospitable? Doesn’t make any sense.
Also, reference Isaiah 3:9 – “The shew of their
countenance doth
witness against them; and
they declare their
sin as Sodom, they
hide it
not. Woe unto their
soul! for
they have rewarded evil unto
themselves.”
God rained down fire and brimstone because or a lack of hospitality? That’s not a credible argument.
Remember, the Old Testament wasn’t written in English. You read the English word “sodomite,” and assume you know what was written in Hebrew, assume it’s a good translation, and assume you know the definition of the original Hebrew word.
Nowhere does the Bible say the sin of Sodom was adult, loving, caring relationships between people of the same sex. To the contrary, in Genesis 19, the men of Sodom tried to commit an act of violence — attempted rape — against Lot’s angelic (male) visitors. The crime described in Genesis 19 is primarily a crime of violence, and secondarily a crime of inhospitality (we are to welcome and protect the stranger in our midst).
Jude 7 says that Sodom “indulged in sexual immorality and unnatural lust,” and attempted rape certainly fits into that category.
Ezekiel 16:49-50 says the sins of Sodom were “pride, gluttony, prosperous ease, and failure to aid the poor and needy. They were haughty and committed abominations.” There are many abominations in the Bible (such as eating shellfish). Certainly attempted rape, the violent crime of Sodom, must be an abomination.
Deuteronomy 29:22-28 suggests that the sin of Sodom was idolatry.
In Matthew 10:5-15 Jesus himself suggests the sin of Sodom was inhospitality.
But nowhere at all does the Bible say the sin of Sodom was loving, mutual, consensual, caring, gay or lesbian relationships.
Specifically what sins did God state in Genesis Chapter 18 as his reason for His planned destruction of Sodom? Did He list them or was the city committing a multitude and He believed there was no redemption for this multitude? The treatment of strangers was one ….. you can not deny that, it is mentioned over and over in many Books of the Bible, both in the Old Testament and the New. It was the subject of many of Christ`s parables and lessons.
Either you haven’t read the Bible, or you didn’t pay attention.
But dirigodaddy… your god is voluntary… it is not civil law.
Riiiiiiighhhht…the Bible had no impact on American civil law. What else did you learn in the land of make-believe? Reference the USA Today article I cited earlier…
That’s not what I said… why would you lie? Isn’t lying against your god’s commandments?
I said your holy book is not civil law. Most of your “sins” are perfectly legal.
Our legal system would be the same without your petty mythology.
You’re a vile and evil man.
As for your article, I’ve never stated that adultery isn’t a crime in some places… but it’s not a federal crime, nor is it a crime in all states.
Again, the bible doesn’t enter into the picture, nor can it be used as defense for your views in court.
See my quote from Scalia… it shows you what you’ve got coming in your life.
I hope it pleases you.
rom: Disqus
To: tedlick@yahoo.com
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 12:25 AM
Subject: [bdn] Re: What’s missing from pro-gay marriage TV ads? Gays
dirigodad wrote, in response to Tedlick Badkey:
Riiiiiiighhhht…the Bible had no impact on American civil law. What else did you learn in the land of make-believe? Reference the USA Today article I cited earlier… Link to comment
Moses had how many wives? And Moses is one of God’s most important prophets and leaders.
Well, I’m sure you can point me to the passage in the Bible where God tells Moses to only have one wife at a time. I’m waiting…
I can’t believe that Im getting involved with you, but there is no archeological evidence that Moses actually existed. He went into the desert (no one knows which), married a tribal leader’s daughter long before the Exodus. The Bible only mentions one wife. Polygamy was really quite rare at the time. A whole different story than getting your dad drunk two nights in a row for some diddling just to keep the human race alive. As an ex seasonal mideast archeological volunteer and an avid reader of of such periodicals as “Biblical Archeological Review”, I have some idea of what I’m talking about. And as an agnostic I question the validity of any organized ‘god’.
I still can’t believe I’m somewhat agreeing with you!
Actually you pretty much slammed me to the mat, but, hey, great info, thanks for lessoning me!
God told Adam and Eve that – and just as you would pass things down to your offspring verbally, so were Adam, Eve, Noah et al.
You’re right – Moses had two wives. Question for you. Ever consider that Moses first wife, Zipporah died and then Moses remarried? The timeframes involved where these two women are mentioned are vastly different.
See – in your haste to make the Bible say something it doesn’t, you took complete leave of common sense and made yourself look rather foolish…
The first polygamist mentioned in the Bible is Lamech, whose two wives were Adah and Zillah (Gen 4:19).[1]Abraham’s 3+ wives were Sarah, Hagar (Gen 16:3, 21:1-13), Keturah (Gen 25:1), and concubines (which are also referred to as “wives” in other parts of the Bible) (Gen 25:6). The concubines were Hagar (Gen 16:3, 25:6) and Keturah (Gen 25:6, I Chr 1:32). There is no reason to presume that he had concubines other than Hagar and Keturah. Hagar, like the slave women of Jacob’s wives, was more of a surrogate mother than a concubine in the normal sense as it appears that after using her in place of Sarah to provide a child, Abraham does not appear to have had sexual relations with her any more. Jacob’s four wives are Leah and Rachel (Gen 29:28) and despite an oath with their father Laban to not take any additional wives (Gen 31:48-54), Jacob took Bilhah (Gen 30:4) and Zilpah (Gen 30:9). As with Hagar, Bilhah and Zilpah were surrogate mothers to provide children on behalf of their mistresses, Leah and Rachel. It does not appear that Jacob continued to have sexual relations with the two women. In each of the three cases of Sarah, Leah and Rachel, each woman commanded her slave to have sexual relations with their husbands respectively. Neither Abraham nor Jacob took it upon themselves to approach their wives’ slave women. Moses’ 2 wives Zipporah (Ex 2:21, Ex 18:1-6) and an Ethiopian (Gk “burnt face”)(Cushite < כושי, kooshiy, ultimate meaning unknown but from ancient times signifying Upper (southern) Egypt, Nubia, and dark skinned (see Jer 13:23) or even red haired people) woman (Num 12:1), which Moses was permitted to marry by God, despite all the rest of his people being forbidden to take a foreign (because foreigners were per se pagan) wife. There is dissent on this. Some think that Zipporah, daughter (Ex 2:21) of a Midianite priest (Ex 2:16, Ex 18:1, 2), is the "Ethiopian" woman. Other opinion is that Zipporah died and Moses married an Ethiopian woman in her place. Interestingly enough, Aaron and Miriam were punished for disapproving of Moses' forbidden marriage. Gideon (also named Jerub-Baal) "had many wives" (Judges 8:29-32). Elkanah, Samuel the priest's father, had 2 wives: Hannah and Peninnah (1 Samuel 1:1-2). Often, people studying King David, get confused between his "wives" and "concubines" because the Bible calls 10 of his concubines "wives" in several places. An accurate list of David's wives would include at least 4 named wives: 1) Michal (1 Sam 18:27, 19:11-18, 25:44; 2 Sam 3:13-14, 6:20-23), 2) Abigail of Carmel (1 Sam 25:39, 1 Chr 3), 3) Ahinoam of Jezreel (1 Sam 25:43, 1 Chr 3), 4) Eglah (2 Sam 3:4-5, 1 Chr 3), and 5) Bathsheba (2 Sam 12:24). David also took "more wives and concubines" in 2 Sam 5:13, 12:7-8, 1 Chr 14:3, bringing the total women to a minimum of 5 + 2+ additional wives + 2+ additional concubines = 9+ women. Three additional women are mentioned, but we are not told if they are wives or concubines: 1) Maacah (2 Sam 3:3, 1 Chr 3), 2) Abital (2 Sam 3:3-4, 1 Chr 3), and 3) Haggith (2 Sam 3:3, 1 Chr 3). The new total is 12+ women for King David. And lastly, there are the 10 concubines, or "wives" as they are also referred to as, in 2 Sam 5:13, 15:16, 16:21-23, 1 Chr 14:3), bringing David's total women to at least 22+ "wives/concubines". David's son, Solomon, chose 700 wives and 300 concubines, totaling 1,000 women in 1 Kings 11:3. The Hebrew and Greek terms translated into English as "wife" simply means "woman," that is, "female human being." It is by context that it has to be determined by a translator whether it should be translated "wife" or "woman" ("woman" < "wif" woman as we mean by it today + "mann" human being, individual member of mankind) the kind of human being suitable as a wife as we mean by it today.
Seemingly in support of polygamy, in addition to the many examples of plural marriage, the Pentateuch also lists guidelines and rules concerning the taking of multiple wives; noting that "If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights, [Ex 21:10] and making it an obligation for men whose brothers have left a widow to marry her and support her family.[Deut 25:5–10] These verses encourage or promote polygamy and there are no verses in the law or Old Testament Bible that clearly forbid this practice.
Further is the practice of the levir (Latin "husband's brother," that is, the widow of one's brother: the surviving brother is the widow's brother-in-law). The Hebrew is יִבֵּם, yabam, yavam, signifies to perform the duty of a brother-in-law to the widow of one's brother who did not provide an heir to her husband (De 25:5). Its literal meaning is unknown. The firstborn child, or son, resulting from the sexual relations between a man and his brother's widow was listed and considered the son of the deceased (De 25:6). No allowance is given for a man who already had a wife. If he does not want to take his brother's widow, she has the right to publicly denounce and insult him (De 25:7-10). The first reference to this custom, which was later incorporated into the Deuteronomic Code, is found in Gen 38:8, 9. When Onan did not want to provide a son to his deceased brother, Er, but did not want to be publicly denounced and insulted by his brother's widow[original research?], he conformed with the requirement to have sexual relations with her but to avoid providing an heir to his brother's name, thereby losing the right to inherit his brother's estate to the child, he withdrew his member from his sister-in-law and "destroyed" his sperms "on the ground" (Ge. 38:9). For this act YHWH (LORD in the KJV) killed him (Ge 38:10).
The Pentateuch also gives a list of laws that applies to the person of Judean kings. One of the laws regarding kingship states: "The king must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you, "You are not to go back that way again." He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray." (De 17:16-17, New International Version (NIV) Bible translation). The New Living Translation (NLT) also gives an accurate translation of these verses: "The king must not build up a large stable of horses for himself or send his people to Egypt to buy horses, for the Lord has told you, ‘You must never return to Egypt.’ The king must not take many wives for himself, because they will turn his heart away from the Lord. And he must not accumulate large amounts of wealth in silver and gold for himself." Other versions substitute "multiply" instead of "take many", but this is more of a confusing translation because it alludes inaccurately that "more than one" may not be permitted. However, if you look at Deut 17:16, the same word "multipy" or "take many" is used with regard to horses, and clearly a king will need more than one horse. So these verses are referring to not amassing a great number of horses and wives.
The prophet Nathan speaking for God confronting David with the murder of Uriah the Hittite said that he (God) would have given David more wives if he had wanted them.[2Samuel 12:8] God Himself, Who is usually (except to Arians and those with a similar belief) understood according to John 1:1-4 to be the God later incarnated, born of a woman, is portrayed as a bigamist (a polygamist with two wives only) in Jeremiah 3, Ezekiel 16 and 23. And in the New Testament Jesus is portrayed variously as the husband of His wife, the church (Rev 21:9, 22:17), in a strictly monogamous relationship, teaching that He has but one church, and as the "husband" of each individual Christian, who has a relationship with Christ analogous to the relationship of a wife to her husband in the flesh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy_in_Christianity
Thank you STG! I was going to comment on that, but you did much better than I would have.
wiki to the rescue!
Gosh, what an effort. Good for you SingleTrack! I am seriously impressed. Sadly it won’t change dirigo. These people interpret the bible to suit their own agenda. As I say in my own post, this has nothing to do with religion, it is about civil rights, equal rights, for all Americans. It is no one else’s gosh darn business who the heck I choose to marry. And that would be true regardless of what anyones bible said.
Great stuff, thanks!
In the spirit of cut and paste…
In 2 Samuel 12, the Lord, speaking through Nathan the prophet, says to King
David, “I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your arms,
and I gave you the house of Israel and Judah; and if that had been too little, I
would have added you many more things like these.”At face value, this
seems to suggest that God gave David multiple wives, and then stood ready to add
to his harem with divine sanction. Of course, that’s precisely the problem with
pressing Scripture into a wooden literal labyrinth, because—in truth—if Nathan’s
words are anything at all, they are ironic. David had just murdered a man in
order to have another woman appended to his harem. Despite the generosity of the
very God who had made him sovereign ruler of the land, the king had stolen the
wife of a servant and that to satisfy his carnal lust. Thus, in language that
dripped with irony, Nathan the prophet pronounces judgment against Israel’s
king. As such, 2 Samuel 12 hardly constitutes divine approval for the practice
of polygamy.
http://hankhanegraaff.blogspot.com/2009/08/does-2-samuel-12-approve-of-polygamy.html
The other passages you cite don’t even come remotely close to indicating God’s approval of anything other than one man, one woman.
Funny thing, providing bible quotes to justify one’s point of view. People have been doing that for centuries to legitimize torture, war and discrimination against women (as many of the passages above seem to do).
If you read the Bible, as I have, as you seem to have, and you don’t come away with a sense of humility and love for all people, then you NEED TO READ THE BOOK AGAIN.
Using the Bible to discriminate is disgusting.
Maine issues marriage licenses = marriage licenses are a civil law issue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSXJzybEeJM
You write, “See under Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, etc.”
Let’s see: Abraham married his half-sister, Sarah. Illegal today, I believe. But God made a covenant with him and promised that his descendents would be greater than the grains of sand on the beaches — and gave them a miraculous childbirth in their old age.
Jacob had two wives (Leah and Rachel were sisters to each other) and two concubines, Bilha and Zilpha. Also illegal today. But God approved of Jacob so strongly that he changed Jacob’s name to “Israel” and made him the literal father of his nation — his 12 sons from those four women were the founders of the 12 Tribes.
David had fourteen wives. Also illegal today. But God approved of David so strongly that he promised that his descendents would be on the throne forever.
Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines — and the Bible says he was a very wise man. We are told that God disapproved of Solomon letting his wives worship foreign gods, but nowhere does the Bible say that God disapproved of the size of the harem.
So the Bible doesn’t just report these marriages as facts. The Bible says that God favored all of these men, and it never says that God disapproved of these marriages. (Yes, the prophet Nathan chastised Solomon for seducing a married woman, Bathsheba, and having her husband killed, but that was more than mere polygamy.)
The Bible approves of these men and most of their marriages, including polygamy. If you are holding these people up as examples for us to follow, we’ll have to change a lot of laws before biblical marriage is legal in Maine.
Who cares? Your buybull is not civil law.
“buybull” LOVE IT!!!!
There are very few “historical facts” in the Bible. The Bible is only a book of Bronze Age myths with a few references to actual events .
Could you tell me how many wives that King David had? I’m looking forward to your answer. And explanation.
He had many. God never provided his approval. David’s family life stunk because of it. End of story.
I don’t remember any instances of ‘sellling daughers’ in the Bible. You need to inform yourself before you make comments that are incorrect. Just because you view the Bible in a contextual form does not make it so.
Try Exodus 21 …..
Those things are never approved in the Bible.
In most cases? Our laws are not based in biblical “descriptions”. Only a minority of the Ten Commandments appear in US statues. And Christians do not have a monopoly on morals. We are not a theocracy.
Are a man and a woman who do not bear children a family? Are a man and a woman who marry late in life a family? Are unmarried people whose parents have passed away still part of a family? Is extended family … aunts, uncles, cousins, nieces and nephews etc …. family? Are single individuals and the child or children they adopt a family? Are gay and lesbian couples who adopt or use medical assistance to bear children a family?
It all started with a Mother and a Father… think about it
For God’s sake, there will STILL be mothers and fathers and married opposite gender couples as well! AND, there will be couples who don’t WANT kids! Sheesh marie!
I am fully aware that a male and a female conceived me, that my mother bore me and that I conceived 3 children with my ex-husband and I bore them. I am also fully aware that two of my brother`s children were conceived by a male and a female … but the males and females that conceived and bore them are not their mothers or fathers …. my niece has biological parents but my nephew had an egg and a sperm donor. They never met the definition of parents or mother and father and they did not love him enough to give him up to anyone who would …. he was taken from them. My point here is that the ability to conceive and bear children does not make the individuals mothers and fathers or even parents.
Maine issues marriage licenses = marriage licenses are a civil law issue.
That’s true. And gay marriage is illegal in Maine and we hope to keep it that way!
And what happens when the SCOTUS rules in favor of SSM? What then?
They will be accused of having been bought off by the gay mafia.
That is not true. Marriage between same-sex couples is not illegal in the state of Maine. Illegal implies there is a law against and a civil penalty or punishment applied. Many same-sex couples have legally married in other states or Canada and many have held private ceremonies officiated by clergy …. they are not subject to penalty or punishment under civil law in Maine for doing so. They are not recognized by Maine law but they are not illegal.
The bible says I can marry multiple wives and have a concubine. Is that the type of biblical marriage you are referring too? Abraham had 2 concubines and Solomon had 300.
The Bible does NOT say you can marry multiple wives. Abraham and Solomon both did wrong things. God never put His approval on multiple wives and HE NEVER put any kind of approval on gay relationships. HE DID define marriage as between one man and one woman.
“But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. :
(Mar 10:6-8)
Please don’t continue to break God’s commandment, stop lying, the bible says NOTHING about polygamy.
The question of polygamy is an interesting one in that most people today view polygamy as immoral while the Bible nowhere explicitly condemns it. The first instance of polygamy/bigamy in the Bible was that of Lamech in Genesis 4:19: “Lamech married two women.” Several prominent men in the Old Testament were polygamists. Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, and others all had multiple wives. In 2 Samuel 12:8, God, speaking through the prophet Nathan, said that if David’s wives and concubines were not enough, He would have given David even more. Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (essentially wives of a lower status), according to 1 Kings 11:3.
I know that cleave means to adhere loyally and unwaveringly (ie stay with always) but that one flesh thing can be interpreted many ways. See the thing is Mark 10 is very specific … it addresses divorce and the one and only reason it is acceptable for a man to divorce his wife. The most interesting thing about the Bible is that it was written for a male audience … women were not taught to read, they were only to listen to a church leader or the male head of their family as to what was contained within. That whole one flesh thing could be whatever a male wanted it to mean.
Your holy book is not our civil law.
You can scream about it all you want, but you’re just wrong.
“born to them”? Really? So adopted kids somehow are less than kids “born to them”?
See… you are a fine example of everything wrong with religion. Maggot.
So, let’s be clear, your view is that gays and lesbians shouldn’t be allowed to raise children. I assume your view is that they shouldn’t have contact with children and that you think they are sick and sinful–right?
Gay couples should ABSOLUTELY NOT be allowed to adopt children. They are living deviant, perverted lifestyles and should not be entrusted with the care of a child.
Now, this person is not who we would call a “soft-supporter.” A voter like this would be someone who supported Michael “call me Mike” Heath’s failed referendum attempt that would have repealed the law that allows gay Americans to be more American with almost all rights as other Americans. These rights included being able to adopt, not be fired from a job, not be evicted, etc., because of teh gay. So, this voter would someone who we would thank for his time in talking to us and then politely smile, turn around, and walk down the path as insults and “ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE” are hurled at us.
Thank you for your time!
I am sorry that you believe that gay couples should not be allowed to adopt (you know many states do allow gays and lesbians to adopt) ….. I have seen more than my share of kids raised by their biological parents or some variation of male and female couples who live deviant, perverted and harmful lifestyles that are irreparably damaged: physically, emotionally, mentally ….. every kid deserves to be raised by adults who love and protect them.
Thank you for continuing to show your utter disdain for gay and lesbian human beings …… May God have mercy on your soul for the vile judgments and pronouncements you hold in your hateful heart.
What if I’m not religious? Does that mean I have to live within the strict limits of what your version of marriage is, or anyone else’s religious or ethical interpretation of what marriage should be? Of course not. I am an American and it is my Right as an American citizen to total equality, and thus to marry whomever I want. This issue is a national issue and I wish the US Congress had the intestinal fortitude to stand up for what is a civil rights issue for all Americans. Dang!
I wish people would answer this question. But they can’t. If they say that this IS a country where we have freedom of religion, then their argument about why this is bad doesn’t fly so well. If they say that this country is built on the Bible, then they run the risk of sounding like American Taliban.
The proof that they do not totally support Freedom of Religion is they willfully deny those denominations who support same-sex marriage the same Freedom of Religion to witness a Civil Marriage License that they have been given the courtesy of by the secular government.
Gay marriage is NOT legal in Maine so NO you don’t have the right to marry whomever you want.
Again ….. same-sex marriage is not legally recognized but it not illegal and there are no laws against it. Same-sex couples are not prosecuted or fined or imprisoned for marrying each other.
Alcoholics anonymous books only list the man as the drunk. Does that mena that only men are alcoholics?
Not so. Completely invalid statements.
Why do you want to HURT our families? Does HURTING people give you some kind of thrill?
Obviously not true.
Take the log out of your own eye before you try to remove the speck from your neighbor’s eye — Matthew 5:7
And you are wrong…
PS: you and your kind don’t know a true god… you only know a monster.
Sorry, but you are way out of synch with the modern day United States, where being gay is legal and also considered perfectly healthy. Gays can also raise children, legal and healthy, and no Republican leader on the national scene is saying they can’t or shouldn’t.
In other words, your view is antiquated and, frankly, a primitive form of ethical code that predates the understanding of human rights and equality.
Because times have changed doesn’t make wrong’s right. I would much rather be out of sync with modern im-moral-ism than out sync with the Word of God.
“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!”
(Isaiah 5:20-21)
And no matter what happens around you, you always have the choice to remain in sync. But are you obligated to force the rest of us to be in that same sync?
Myself and my partner are raising beautiful children. They are caring, well adjusted, excellent student, active in sports, drama, and school government. God Bless you and I will pray you will never be judged as harshly as you are judging us.
I pray God may mercifully give you repentance that you may escape the judgement of God that is coming .. and homosexuality is on His list to judge.
And there are several of us who pray that God has mercy on your soul for what comes from you mouth and your heart.
They are, and they can.
You’re not very bright, are you?
Wow you have really twisted this issue. It has nothing to do with homosexuals wanting to get married. It’s about wanting society to accept their aberrant behavior.
Society already accepts us. 80% wanted and GOT DADT revoked.
If your ” facts ” were correct : 80% wanted DADT revoked , 5% increase of support per year as you stated in an earlier post than why is this even an issue ? With the ” facts ” you quote gay marriage should pass without a fight however the fight continues. Advertising firms continue to make tons of money on this issue. Consider for a moment that these advertising professionals continually produce loosing ads so as to continue to reap finincial benefits from this seemingly never ending battle. Something seems amiss! And by the way , never drink and post !
It’s still an issue because anti-gays are still CHEATING and THROWING these votes.
then you misunderstand the Constitution entirely. I’ll assume you are an American citizen, so I find that aberrant.
Your side should get together and decide what argument you all are going to use: personal distaste, reproduction, sin, sinful behavior, incompatibility of genitalia or compatibility of genitalia, aberrant behavior …… missing from these arguments is a legal argument for denying Civil Marriage.
Why do opposite-sex couples marry ….. is it wanting society to accept their sexual behavior …. that appears to be your main focus. Why do opposite-sex couples who are beyond childbearing years or opposite-sex couples who are incapable of reproducing get married ….. do they also just want society to accept their sexual behavior? Please share your thoughts on why their marriages are accepted by society and why the state and federal government(s) legally recognize them.
Contrary to your assertion that same-sex couples only to have their sexual behavior accepted …… it is love, respect, commitment etc …. just like opposite-sex couples. Why don’t you spend some time actually talking and listening to some rather than listening to anti-gay propaganda?
I have spent plenty of time with people who support homosexuals marrying. My conclusion, wow they’re really encourage dysfunctional behavior.
Thank for ignoring the majority of my post:
Why do opposite-sex couples marry ….. is it wanting society to accept
their sexual behavior …. that appears to be your main focus. Why do
opposite-sex couples who are beyond childbearing years or opposite-sex
couples who are incapable of reproducing get married ….. do they also
just want society to accept their sexual behavior? Please share your
thoughts on why their marriages are accepted by society and why the
state and federal government(s) legally recognize them.
As your moniker states, letrythisagain.
Which argument is most beneficial to opponents in gaining votes againt same-sex marriage: aberrant behavior, reproduction, incompatible and or compatible genitalia ……. you guys are all over the place and have yet to come up with a legal argument that will stand up in court?
What’s funny is that some of these straight people seem to think that gay marriages would somehow be different and continue to be hotbeds of passion and lust and not fall into the same old routine that straight marriages experience!
You didn’t really expect an anti-gay to be honest, did you?
I support heterosexual couples beyond child bearing getting married because of basic biology the penis fits into the vagina. If you want to live with someone of the same sex, fine but don’t call it marriage.
Did you know that that same penis can go into other orifices in the other party in that marriage, just like in SSMs?
And, really, do we have a bedroom police here? You sound more and more like you’d be more comfortable with the laws in Iran than what we have here.
I knew Joe would chime in sometime and yes Joe I am well aware of other places men have their penis in. Joe is it any wonder why people have the health issues they have. Here’s a thought for you, good morality makes for good medicine. Joe I know your comebacks so don’t waste my time. Good night
Whew! I was afraid you’d make me spend the rest of the night going on and on about how inconsistent you are. Like the fact that a monogamous married couple can still use those orifices and not get a disease. Such acts in a monogamous relationship falls outside this new and different take you have on sodomy. Conversely, regular vaginal sex can also lead to disease when one isn’t using protection outside of a monogamous relationship. So, I won’t bother then, because you know all this already!
Did you know that lesbians are far less likely to contract STDs and HIV than heterosexual women? Did you ever wonder why the the rates are so much lower?
Are married couples who engage in acts of sodomy…. you know, the other places men put their penis … as immoral as same-sex couples and should they be banned from marriage because of these acts?
Sounds like couples should just put it where it belongs.
By the way http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9553208/Living-together-no-longer-just-a-trial-run-for-couples-study-shows.html
So then why do homosexuals want to get married?
The link is specifically regarding the trend of heterosexual couples in England cohabiting rather than marrying. They thought they had the same legal protections and rights as civilly married couples but are have discovered that they do not. See same-sex couples here know they do not have the same rights and protections as married folks and that is what we are seeking, through being allowed Civil Marriage Licenses.
Want to share the significance you saw in regards to SSM?
Did you know that that same penis can go into other orifices in the other party in that marriage, just like in SSMs?
And, really, do we have a bedroom police here? You sound more and more like you’d be more comfortable with the laws in Iran than what we have here.
Did you know that that same penis can go into other orifices in the other party in that marriage, just like in SSMs?
And, really, do we have a bedroom police here? You sound more and more like you’d be more comfortable with the laws in Iran than what we have here.
You continue to confirm that to you marriage is all about coitus ….. marriage is so much more than sex acts…… have you not figured that out yet?
Well said!
I don’t care how good looking and charming pro gay ads may be dressed up they will always look disgusting to me. The gay movement at it’s roots is ALL about sexual orientation. Dressing it as family and decent is a lie. When I see two gay people kissing or talking about their relationship as if it was a natural outflow of ‘love’ it makes me want to puke. I believe figuratively it makes God want to puke. Their sinful lives are like the sin of the children of Israel in the old testament. They were described by God as sick, with oozing wounds, putrefying sores. Their lives were a stench to His nostrils like dead rotting flesh. They were spiritually sick and wouldn’t acknowledge it. The gay/lesbian lifestyle is sick and disgusting and No Smooth, clever tv ad is going to change that.
“Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evildoers, children that are corrupter s : they have forsaken the LORD, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel unto anger, they are gone away backward. Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment. ”
(Isa 1:4-6)
“When I see two gay people kissing”
Was that you peeking into our bedroom window last night?
You should let go of this judgmental disgust you hold in your heart. Your obsession is blinding you to love in this world.
You call it obsessed if you want. Whatever it is I will keep at it until this vote is done, doing all I can to expose the false, misrepresented, immoral portrayal of what marriage is by the pro gay media.
Psychologists identified homophobia as a mental illness and published their results in the Journal of the National Institutes of Health in 1953. Psychologists report that the most commonly observed symptom of the mental disorder homophobia is an inability of those so afflicted to accept documentation that contradicts their deep-seated phobia and hatred of LGBT Americans. That might be the reason that poster refuses to believe in that mental disorder.
Smoke and mirrors again. Always throwing the homophobia word around every time someone speaks out against the gay lifestyle. Believe me I am not afraid of gays or their sexual orientation. My fear is the in God’s face ‘I have the right to be gay and demand my rights’ attitude. Great nations have fallen because of their immorality and rejection of God’s moral laws. The gay lifestyle is a curse to our society. You have love for no one but yourself.
Well, of COURSE you’re terrified–of freedom and equality! If you don’t like hearing about homophobia, stop illustrating what it is with your posts. Spare us that LIE about The Roman Empire. Spare us that LIE about your plaster deity, MANY major Christian and Jewish denominations are marrying same gender American couples every Saturday.
By the time Rome fell it was a Christian theocracy.
Correct again. CHRISTIANITY destroyed the Roman Empire.
Speaking of smoke and mirrors. Your rants are just as ephemeral.
Maine issues marriage licenses = marriage licenses are a civil law issue.
You are wrong…. the word homophobia works perfectly for you! You are the one who gets disgusted everytime you see two men expressing love to each other. Get a freaking grip, and I don’t mean on your bible.
Why don’t you get a dictionary. “Disgusted” and fear are not the same thing. The Bible is the standard Now, Yesterday and Forever. He is judge and jury on everything and He as already passed sentence on homosexuality – it’s sin. If you don’t hold to the Bible as the standard and authority you have set yourself up as judge and jury. And we SURE DON’T NEED THAT!
Are you among those who pledge to uphold the laws of God before the US Constitution …. there are those who have pledged to disregard US Civil Laws if they are in conflict with their beliefs. I said a year or so ago that the US will have another Civil War and it will be a religious based war; theocracy vs US Constitution.
The Bible has been translated many many many times and some meanings have changed. How do we know which version is the right one?
pro-equality media. get it right.
When the media stopped repeating anti-gay LIES, anti-gays became angry and started attacking the media–just as anti-gays attack ANYONE who won’t help them HURT gay and lesbian Americans.
After reading many of your above posts it’s become painfully obvious that you indeed have been hurt , perhaps you should consider consulting with one of those psycologists you are so fond of quoting !
I’m not the one with the mental disorder, homophobia.
You’re not alone…there are many out here working to stand against this. But, it’s not just about sexual orientation…they want the easy path to the benefits they feel they are being denied, so they want to attach themselves to something that so many hold dear. WE are supposed to change civilization/society for them? NO!
How many of those working to hurt LGBT Mainers are from away, like the last time? How many anti-gays will commit criminal acts, like the last time? Why should YOU be able to decide WHO gets rights and who does NOT?
Shame on you for trying to SUBVERT the United States Constitution. What other parts of the Constitution do you want to rip out and burn?
#1 I’m not from away, nor are those of which I speak.
#2 I don’t commit criminal acts, so what you ask has
nothing to do with me or those who work with me to
stand for traditional marriage.
#3 You have rights…you DO NOT have the right to demand
that society change for your deviant behavior.
#4 I am not in any way ashamed for standing up for what’s
right, nor will I ever apologize for it. It’s you and those like
you who should be ashamed.
It’s very easy to deny you are from away, but we know much of the anti-gays last time were from away. It’s easy to deny you haven’t participated in criminal acts meant to poison our political process, but the Maine Ethics Commission caught anti-gays doing just that last time. It’s easy for you to deny your shame at your efforts to subvert the United States Constitution, but that denial just confirms what we all know:
Anti-gays always lie.
It’s also easy to PROVE you LIED about LGBT Americans. Sexual orientation, whether gay or non-gay, has been shown by science to be inborn and unchangeable, and psychologists have shown being gay or lesbian is just as healthy and “normal” as being non-gay. Here are several respected websites (and a citation from Fox News for the doubters) that document this:
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/03/differential-brain-activation.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155990,00.html
http://www.livescience.com/health/060224_gay_genes.html
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w27453600k586276/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/06/16/172/
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/17/science/sci-gaybrain17
http://psych.fullerton.edu/rlippa/bbc_birthorder.htm
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12465295
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2006/06/26/brothers=gay.html
http://www.medpagetoday.com/OBGYN/Pregnancy/3641
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080617151845.htm
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local&id=6209976
http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.html
Where is YOUR documentation for your wild anti-gay claim about that hate speech you posted about LGBT Americans, that we are “deviant” and “should be ashamed”? I’ve provided documentation that counters your wild claims, HRH419.
So funny!!! Completely typical!!! I knew exactly what to expect from you…you poor sad, lost soul. You can take your links and stew on them all you want. I know the truth, and sadly you do not, nor will you until it’s too late. And if your comment below refers to “deviant” it is what it is…and you know it. It’s what makes you SO upset. You keep stewing and spewing…I’m not wasting any more time trying to get you to see something you’ve turned your back on because it didn’t suit what you want to be ok. I have phone calls to make and emails to send…time is running short.
Wild claims…now there’s a stretch. Lash out much?
You’ve been wasting your time all along, trying to infect others with this overarching hatred and fear you feel toward your fellow Americans who are LGBT. But thanks for admitting you can’t prove ANY of this vicious HATE SPEECH you posted here.
Yes, I’m sure you need to run off and commit a criminal act in violation of Maine’s campaign finance laws that you hope will poison our political process AGAIN, like in 2009, and that you will be able to throw another election.
Are you sure the Maine Ethics Commission isn’t listening in on your phone conversations?
You are the one blind to the truth.
Maine issues marriage licenses = marriage licenses are a civil law issue.
I am not ashamed of the civil marriage I entered into with my same-sex spouse. I am not ashamed of the life we built together. I am not ashamed of the love, respect, devotion and commitment we shared. I am not ashamed of identifying as her widow. Why do you believe should I be ashamed?
Lyn, you are one of the few on this issue that doesn’t
immediately attack another because they don’t have
the same, or a supportive view. I didn’t mean in any
shape or form that you should be ashamed of your
life choices. I don’t like the vicious attacks and name
calling. Sorry if I offended you.
Statements that address same-sex marriage supporters such as this are offensive:
#3 You have rights…you DO NOT have the right to demand
that society change for your deviant behavior.
#4 I am not in any way ashamed for standing up for what’s
right, nor will I ever apologize for it. It’s you and those like
you who should be ashamed.
Yes I realize that you were addressing one poster, however as a gay woman who not only supports same-sex marriage but was legally recognized and civilly married to a same-sex spouse, I am not ashamed of standing up for equal treatment. We are not asking for society to accept “deviant” behavior ….. we are asking that the love, respect and commitment that we share be treated equally under civil law to the love, respect and commitment shared by opposite-sex couples. What I have seen in these forums is that love, respect and commitment couples vow to each other has been superseded, minimized and ignored ….. the majority of arguments are based on sexual relations and behavior ….. which are IMO a very small piece of a life-long marriage. Sex is not the basis for any marriage that endures the test of time.
Although I’m puzzled as to your thoughts on why the demands
of this group should be allowed, I respect your opinion.
IMHO the behaviors that we’re talking about are deviant of
the norm, remember, IMO only. Religion aside, call the unions
civil marriage…whatever, just don’t force a change of society
as a whole to suit a certain group. All of this aside…I hope you
and your family are well.
Does this indicate HRH is beginning to realize all the hate speech he or she has posted is defeating the anti-gay agenda?
CCM, this will be my last exchange with you. Read my
posts and compare with yours…your “hate speech”
speaks for itself.
You mean, read your posts which are still here? You mean like the one where you told everyone you enjoy looking at photos of simulated “gay sex”?
HRH is less offensive IMO than Godistrue and others …. she is much more civil than others. All too often we are told we do not call each other out for comments …. I really am tired of that accusation …. no one from the opposition has made any effort whatsoever to call Godsitrue out for his incendiary diatribes. I see that as the most demonstrable hypocrisy in these forums.
HRH419 …… the question in Nov. is asking that same-sex couples be allowed to be married (IE to be issued a Civil Marriage License) …. every couple who marries is awarded benefits, rights etc via their Civil Marriage License. We ARE asking for Civil Marriage …. we wish for our same-sex unions to be called, treated and legally recognized as Civil Marriage.
Petitioning for equal treatment under the law is NOT demanding, it is asking …. and the 14th Amendment is clear that US citizens shall be treated equally under the law.
My family is doing wonderfully ….. and I guess I am doing as well as can be expected under the circumstances …. certainly it will get easier in time … we just never know how much time.
How exactly would allowing SSM change society as a whole?
I was re-reading this post this morning …..
What you refer to as demands, I do not see as demands …. US citizens have the right to petition and ask to be treated equally under Constitutional Law or to add laws or repeal laws. If I remember correctly, in 2009 a group opposed to the law that extended civil marriage to same-sex couples, petitioned to have the law overturned. Was that demanding or asking? IMO asking.
You are currently working to defeat the referendum in Nov. …. are you demanding support or asking for support? IMO asking.
As far a deviations are concerned …… any difference from a majority is deviant. Left-handedness, blue eyes, vegetarianism, physical or learning disabilities, red hair, birth marks, OCD ….. over the course of history some of these deviations were considered and treated as evil, we have learned that they are not evil but variances within homo sapiens. All human beings differ from others in one way or another, some are evident and some are not …… the norm is a term that refers to similarities of a population. Deviation refers to the differences. Not all deviations are abnormal or immoral, they just are not characteristics shared by the majority.
NONE of those ” from away ” voted it down the last time !
“NONE of those ” from away ” voted it down the last time !”
We don’t know that to be a fact wood. NOM has refused to comply with Maine law so we don’t know WHERE the funds came from to repeal (it was a repeal vote the last time, not a “voted it down” one) SSM in 2009.
And now NOM has provided more money and I doubt they will comply with Maine law this time either!
If you want to play you have to play by the RULES.
“Voted”, not funded…
And who knows how the vote in 2009 would have come out without the funds from an organization that broke Maine law.
The point…is that the poster clearly said “voted”
And that vote was clearly funded by a group that broke and continues to break Maine law. How much money did “No on 1” raise prior to NOM sending a big fat check this time?
jd…I have no idea…you’ll have to pick your battle somewhere else.
I made one original point…”voted” That’s it. Nothing more or less
No, what you are trying to do is DEFLECT from the established FACT that anti-gays COMMITTED CRIMINAL ACTS TO THROW THE 2009 HATE VOTE. And no one is fooled by your attempt at deception.
Oh? I’d say you’ve been greatly deceived, but not by me : )
You’re the one trying to deflect from the criminal acts anti-gays committed to THROW the 2009 anti-gay Hate Vote.
I’m not trying to pick a battle. I am pointing out a fact. The vote in 2009 was largely paid for by a group (NOM) that broke Maine Campaign Finance Law and continue to break that law.
How about you call your marriage Holy Matrimony and forgo the legal recognition and benefits awarded to you by the state and federal governments ….. if you do not want the government to legally recognize and extend equal recognition, benefits and rights to same-sex couples in Civil Marriage then perhaps it is time for those with religious arguments to take a stand on their beliefs and separate themselves from government involvement. Please remember that Civil Marriage Licenses were created to prevent specific couples from marrying.
And I should change what has been for ages because? Call your union
something else…I don’t care one way or the other what the lgbt community
does amoungst themselves. You and I both know this is the path chosen
because it is the easiest, quickest way to the benefits. This group has NO
right to demand that society change to suit them.
Holy Matrimony has been around far longer than the term Civil Marriage. Holy Matrimony supports the beliefs of the faith-based arguments that marriage is between one man, one woman and God; God sanctioned, God ordained. Clergy are extended the courtesy of officiating and witnessing a Civil Marriage License ….. state officials are not extended the courtesy of officiating Holy Matrimony, only a Civil Marriage License. Many are offended that the state or federal government will in time recognize that same-sex couples deserve and should receive equal treatment under civil law. Petitioning for this is not demanding, it is asking and is within the rights guaranteed the the US Constitution as well as the State Constitution. There is a significant population that enters into Civil Marriage without a church or clergy entering into their witnessed contract. Those marriages are separate from faith-based witnessing but they are treated exactly the same by law. My suggestion is that those who believe as you do, petition to separate Holy Matrimony and Civil Marriage based on who they choose to officiate the license.
When confronted with the possibility they might lose their SPECIAL RIGHTS and SPECIAL BENEFITS, anti-gays stop telling us how “holy” and “sactified” their relationships are and show everyone they are afraid they WON’T GET AS MANY BENEFITS if LGBT Americans get the same rights.
That shows that anti-gays are parasites. Thanks for revealing the true nature of anti-gays, HRH.
Because it helps people… makes their lives more secure… whereas your lust to harm them is sickening.
It is you, CP444 (my little snuggle nugget), the old BigFootinHeels, dirigodaddy, god”ain’t”truth, and all the other hateful bigots that will receive my laughter and mirth when you lose in court. The greater your discomfort at seeing others secure the same privileges and protections available to you, the happier I’ll be.
And your tone says it all. Sad.
My tone registers disgust at your lust to harm law abiding citizens.
If that “says it all” then good… you deserve all the derision you get.
Just remember…you harvest what you plant…
As do you.
This is what you do to people… you cost old women hundreds of thousands of dollars when their partner dies. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-gaymarriage-appealbre88p1hw-20120926,0,1578667.story
I really hope that makes you happy.
Ted, I don’t look at links, so don’t waste your time.
As I’ve stated before, I don’t give a hoot one way or
the other what choices you or others make. But the
line is drawn when you try to force others to accept
or support something because it is going to benefit
you. You don’t have that right. And yes, I continue
to be very happy with my life and choices, thanks.
We live every day with the idea that there are others living their lives in our neighborhoods, towns, cities, states, etc., doing things that are legal that we may not like or accept. That’s part of living in this country. If civil marriage becomes available to me and my boyfriend, this will be one more thing that happens that others may not like, but that doesn’t have any direct impact on those who disapprove.
Frankly, I have to much on my own plate to worry
about what a complete stranger is doing. We all make
our choices and have to live with them. I hope some
sort of civil union manifests itself for you and yours.
I just don’t feel it should be attached to “marriage”.
Personally, I think it will have a direct impact on
society down the raod, I guess we’ll see. Thanks for
being civil.
Yes… we all make our choices.
And you choose to harm people. You’re a very evil person.
Can’t name any of these items “down the road” can you?
I’m thinking now, you can’t.
I’m done with your disrespect Ted.
There is no disrespect. It is simply calling you out on what you are: someone who actively seeks to harm law abiding citizens. In fact, you are someone happy that your choices harm law abiding Americans by your own words.
No disrespect in calling you exactly what you are. You have admitted it. Why be ashamed of it?
We aren’t “disrespecting” you when we catch you lying and prove you lied, or when we catch you telling readers here you get off looking at photos of simulated “gay sex” and tell readers what that means. Maybe you should tell the truth about LGBT Americans and keep your substitute for a sex life to yourself. You will notice I have NEVER discussed MY sex life!
You forced an 83 year old woman to pay over $300k in taxes when her partner of 44 years died.
I’m sure that gets you hot & bothered, don’t it?
Nobody’s forcing you to accept anything… as I’ve told you before, you can be just like the KKKlan… and that is your right. You already share their mindset of hate, why do you think we’d treat you any differently than them?
And I’m glad you’re happy that you hurt law abiding American citizens. It tells folks a lot about how horrible a person you really are.
Your quest is not even Quixotic, it’s futile.
Well, at least you’ve admitted you plan to commit criminal acts to throw the vote, just like the last time.
When you use the Bible to justify your hate, something tells me you are using the Bible wrong!?!
You are correct. 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 1870. Many major Christian and Jewish denominations condemn misusing the hate-based mistranslations to attack their fellow Americans and are marrying same gender American couples now.
The spin started with the King James Version. For example, KJ I did not want any questing of royal authority. And there’s a good possibility that at least one of the committee of 50 who did the translation was gay.
You’re right.
There were many questions as to whether or not King James himself was gay.
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.
Blinded by your prejudice, you can’t see the truth.
Blinded by you immorality. You can’t see the Truth
Maine issues marriage licenses = marriage licenses are a civil law issue.
i agree with you 100% about being very disgusting,this world is going down hill fast.
It’s going downhill because people do things you think are disgusting? That’s rather judgmental.
If America is going downhill, it’s because of anti-gays and other right-wing nuts trying to HURT our country. We KNOW anti-gays are trying to SUBVERT our CONSTITUTION.
I spent a considerable amount of time this past year in a state where same-sex marriage has been legal since 2004. Public displays of affection were common place, however over that period of time I can recall seeing one same-sex couple that were holding hands on two separate days and more opposite-sex couples than I can remember walking with their arms around one another, holding hands, kissing, embracing ….. etc. What are you observing in the County …. rampant PDA by same-sex couples and little to none from opposite-sex couples?
Is religion all you have little one?
Good… it will fail you in court.
And when you have lost in court, what will you do?
Your immoral philosophy will fail you in God’s Court. Time is running out. You can’t win against Him – victory vote or not in November.
I don’t buy into your belief in a “god’s court”. You and your kind make a mockery of faith.
You wield it as a weapon used to harm people.
Nothing to win against “him” as I already have: we do not live under “his” law… which is my victory.
I have no illusions of November… I hope you have no illusions about what will come your way in court.
You need to get your head out of that bible, and into real life. One day, our children (yes, I’m gay and plan on having children) will look back upon this and ask why it was ever an issue.
Heterosexual behavior and identity is ALL about sexual orientation ….. opposite-sex marriage is ALL about sexual orientation ….. do you believe that God does not react the same when He sees opposite-sex couples kissing, hugging and engaging in sexual behavior outside of marriage or even married couples engaging in acts of sodomy …. does He not see that their actions are 100% lust, not love and smell the same stench and want to puke? Why are you not seeking to make pre-marital sex illegal or acts of sodomy for opposite-sex couples punishable under civil law? Surely He would wish you to do so. It is far more prevalent in today’s society to see opposite-sex couples engaging in public displays of affection ….. do you publicaly or privately confront those couples in the name of God?
Of course those immoral heterosexual relationships are wrong BUT they are not trying to REDEFINE marriage by changing the law. One thing I have notices in many replies from the gay marriage supporters is the constant sidetracking to get off the main subject.
Okay those immoral heterosexual relationships are wrong BUT …… you will give them a pass because a) they are not as immoral as same-sex couples b) they are heterosexual c) they choose not to marry even though they are not barred from doing so by civil law but they could choose to at any given time …. d) they will be forgiven because they don’t make God as sick as same-sex couples.
Thank you for not addressing my points.
How weird that you’d quote the bible while showing such bigotry.
Your bigotry sickens me.
It’s not bigotry! We have rights to vote as we want just as you do!
You do NOT have a right to hurt your fellow Mainers who are LGBT, NOR do you have some right to subvert the United States Constitution.
I…. don’t know what to say to such ingrown …
World English Dictionary
bigot (ˈbɪɡət) — a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own***********1. so yes, you are a bigot2. of course you can vote any way you choose. this is a discussion forum, we are discussing ideas.3. read the Constitution sometime and you will understand that it doesn’t matter how Maine votes this Nov. Equality is a Constitutional issue. Marriage equality will be decided by the SCOTUS, in due course, the way our country works.
Obviously, that definition doesn’t apply (it’s not even logical) because time after time up to this point, the traditional marriage view has won the majority of votes, putting the gay “marriage” crowd much closer to the definition of bigot.
In fact, since you are intolerant of the idea that marriage is solely between one man and one woman, it’s just as legitimate to apply the bigotry tag to you.
Hmm… Is being intolerant of an invalid, intolerant view bigotry? Profound philosophical issue. Maybe we should drop the labels and concentrate on the valid view that the SSM antis don’t have any argument other than their particular religious viewpoint. They will not be affected by SSM since they won’t have to perform any marriage they don’t wish to.
It’s good to see that someone understands the logical incompetence involved in calling those who support traditional marriage bigots – I suppose we’d disagree with whose religious worldview is invalid and intolerant, however.
Perhaps our time would be well spent pointing out that this is not a battle of religious versus secular. To the contrary, this is a disagreement between those who hold a Biblocentric worldview and those who hold a religious humanistic worldview and desire to impose it on the rest of us.
Disagree about imposing your religious worldview on the traditional marriage front? Your side’s actions and words say otherwise.
What this is is a battle between Americans and anti-gays. We Americans will NOT allow anti-gays to TRASH our Constitution.
i did not call the original commenter a bigot because he/she is against SSM. I call him/her a bigot because of the crude and disgusting comments made, which are now erased.
The buybull matters not little lady.
We all know that’s just another anti-gay lie, one of their swirling vortex of lies.
The difference between me and you is I am biased towards expanding rights for all people regardless of gender, and you choose to limit rights to those who are the same as you.
Since my view is inclusive and your view is exclusive, I am not the bigot, you are.
no you are, no you are, no you are…..
well, I didn’t have to wait too long for a childish response.
By “traditional marriage” I assume you mean “one man and as many women as he can afford,” like the biblical King Solomon with his 700 wives and 300 concubines.
The Bible says he was a very wise man, but how did he ever find time to govern Israel?
Courts will trump them all little lady.
And what will you and your kind do then?
Is there anything more pathetic than an anti-gay denying he or she is a bigot? They could at least be honest about themselves and what motivates them to try to HURT their fellow Mainers who are gay and lesbian.
Yes. A gay “marriage” supporter throwing around the word “bigot” while engaging in bigotry himself/herself.
Glad I could help.
No matter how many times anti-gays claim their intended VICTIMS are the “bigots,” normal, non-homophobic Americans ALL KNOW THAT’S JUST ANOTHER ANTI-GAY LIE.
Read STG’s definition of “bigot” above. History has shown that it’s much more applicable to you than me.
No matter how many times an anti-gay whines that his intended victims are “bigots,” we all know that’s just another anti-gay lie.
Okay, I’m a straight married guy. I believe that everyone — gay, straight, whatever — should have the same freedom to marry that I already have, the same freedom that my wife and I take for granted. We didn’t have to go and ask every voter in the state for permission to get married.
I’m for the freedom to marry because I believe marriage is a good thing, and the benefits that marriage promotes (family stability, fidelity) should be available to all adult couples.
So, I favor giving everyone the same equal freedoms.
On the other hand, some folks think they are the only ones who should have the freedom to marry. They are prejudiced against people who are not just like themselves. They may not realize that their prejudice is bigotry, but it is.
I know how to flip the poll percentages around real fast – show 2 men kissing on the lips or 2 women doing the same. Those people who say they’re in favor of gay people marrying will wither on the vine pretty quickly when confronted with these public displays of affection. The opponents of gay marriage are missing an opportunity if they don’t show this in at least one ad.
You say you want us to provide you with soft-core porn?
“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
lol
Are you totally nuts carrotman or just tipping a few tonight?
Anti-gays always resort to such vicious personal attacks when they can’t handle the documentation we provide, complete with website addresses, so all readers can see what motivates anti-gays.
Let me finish it off for you. “…and I know it’s true because I read it on the internet!”
Isn’t the Internet where you copy all the anti-gay LIES you paste here? The Southern Poverty Law Center identifies the anti-gay Hate Cults you get them from.
LOL! Only thing I looked at on the internet while addressing your screeds tonight was your Betty Bowers video – something you posted. Funny, though…you seem to be very competent with copying and pasting URL’s.
Get real, we’ve read your exact anti-gay lies many, many times before, from the few other anti-gays. We can even tell which anti-gay Hate Cult you got which lie at.
Looks like they’re even more desperate.
Let’s deal with that logically. If that is true, then apparently you and other Christophobes are sick of the gay lifestyle and ready to repent of your sin.
If the shoe fits…
Anti-gays and logic? Anti-gays clearly AVOID logic. Since most Christians reject and condemn homophobia–since most LGBT Americans are Christians–why would WE be “phobic”?
Anti-gays just dig themselves deeper and deeper…
I’m not quite sure you understand what logic is. Maybe if you yell a little louder, I might be convinced that you do…
Backing up your claim to logic while letting your emotions hang out may not be a real winner. Just sayin’…
Whenever an anti-gay can’t refute the facts, they stoop to making personal attacks like this. This habit they have of attacking ANYONE who won’t help them HURT gay and lesbian Americans is the #1 reason for the collapse of the anti-gay agenda.
I’ll entrust the readers of the BDN to determine just who has been attacking whom…
Yes, and you will see anti-gays are whining their posts are being deleted, so we know what BDN readers think of anti-gays.
So that’s the requisite for marriage? An audience has to watch you and your partner kissing and if they approve or not, you get a marriage license?
If you find it difficult to deal with people displaying sincere love and affection toward one another, that says more about your character deficiencies than ours.
You know, Phyllis, your civil rights are only as safe as your willingness to defend those rights for your neighbor. Especially if that neighbor is someone that offends you.
Poor poor Phyllis. We have had to put up with PDA from straights forever and had to get used to it and now you will. By the way, ask anyone under 30 about seeing two people of the same sex kissing and they will look at you like you have come from another planet as they have grown up with depictions of gay people in their everyday lives! Get Over It Phyllis!
While many people find two males kissing repulsive those very same people would find two females kissing extremely exciting.
i.e. the popularity of the “Girls Gone Wild” video series, etc…
People are simply not repulsed by two females kissing.
We are your neighbors, your coworkers, your family and your friends. We are people, the same as you, and we deserve to be treated equally by our government.
I am voting YES on 1 in November, because all Maine families deserve the benefits of civil marriage, that we can protect the lives we build together, and the children we raise together.
I agree, everyone is entitled to equality. Let’s call it a civil union & chances are you would get more YES on 1. Trying to blend into the category of the definition of word marriage is the issue,
get your own definition which entitles your civil union to all the rights of the heterosexual marriages & I do believe it would be a non-issue. I know I will vote yes once we are not forced to define it as marriage. Would this be good enough? Probably not , & I will continue to vote no.
Get real, it’s too late for anti-gays to say, “We would have given you half a loaf, if ONLY you wouldn’t demand REAL equality.” Most of those dirty anti-gay Hate Votes deny same gender partners ANY legal recognition. What kind of Americans would LGBT Americans be if we accepted second class citizenship through fake marriages?
You won’t get a chance to vote again, the US Supreme Court is onto anti-gays.
Since so few ‘families’ are not ‘married’ nowadays, how about we get out of the nomenclature and just call a civil marriage a marriage and a church wedding a ‘Holy marriage’?
It makes us sound SO much more superior! Of course we’ll have to get a much better ring, but it’s small in comparison to giving them the SAME legal rights while still showing the world that we have the better marriage. What’s in a word in our ever evolving language anyway?
It’s not like we’ll start talking like those messed up Englishmen with their “I have to spark up a fag*ggot”. right?
Ah, but there is not civil union anywhere which gives the full range of benefits that marriage does.
New Jersey’s State Supreme Court set up a Commission which proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
So this is really about money and not marriage.
find me one marriage that’s not about money!
as if.
Some folks say “Let’s keep marriage for straight folks, and let gays and lesbians have a second-class institution called civil unions.”
We tried that kind of thing in the past : “Let’s let Whites have first class facilities, and let Coloreds have separate bathrooms, railroad cars, drinking fountains, schools, and let them sit in the back of the bus.” We called it “separate but equal,” but it was never equal, because the implication was that black people weren’t good enough to use the same facilities as white people.
No one should be treated as if they were second class citizens. The institution of marriage should be equally available to all adults whether they are straight (like myself) or gay or lesbian.
Do you partake of the benefits and rights afforded to you by having a Civil Marriage License or do you and will you forgo any and all monetary benefits you are eligible for due to having one?
Calling it a civil union is like saying we can ride on the bus, we just have to sit in the back.
If we want to eliminate civil marriage nationwide, and institute civil unions for all, I am all for that, and that would abide by our constitution.
If you are proposing that we create a separate system of rights for gays and lesbians, that would not pass Constitutional scrutiny, any moreso than segregation did.
Pretty sure that no one “owns” words … telling people to get their own word implies that you think you can own a word. It’s just a word. You know, “a rose by any other name…”
Yes, I have lots of neighbors coworkers, friends and family member who engage in aberrant behavior. It doesn’t mean I must pander to it.
I am voting No on 1 in November, because we must never accept aberrant behavior as being ok.
No, you are planning to vote no because you want to SUBVERT the United States Constitution. I’m ashamed of you, lets. Anti-gays are SPITTING on the Constitution by voting no.
Anti-gays CHEATED to THROW the previous Hate Vote. Criminal activity–THAT is what is TRULY aberrant behavior, whereas ALL psychologists and psychiatrists agree being LGBT is just as healthy and “normal” as being non-gay.
You very good at presenting the latest talking points of the homosexual crowd.
Having been in the field of psychology, I am well aware of how our profession got hood winked into accepting homosexuality as being normal and healthy.
So now anti-gays say the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION is “the latest talking point” of LGBT Americans? Thanks for telling every reader here you DO INDEED SPIT on our Constitution!
Spare us this “having been,” we all know anti-gays can’t accept that psychologists established homophobia is a mental disorder in 1953.
Interesting, did you drug and lobotomize and give ECT to gay people ?
I got the impression that you’d done violence to gay people from your posts, I just didn’t realize that you’d done it as someone in a past position of authority.
Oh please spare me the drama, I am well aware how dysfunctional the gay community is.
No more dysfunctional than the hetero community, everyone that walks the face of this earth has his/her own issues.
Do you “practice the debunked “reparation therapy” like Markus Bachmann does? It clearly didn’t work for him!
I assume you are saying you are no longer involved in the field of psychology. That’s a good thing.
You see your prejudice as “normal.” It may be average, but it is not normal.
Take the log out of your own eye before you try to remove the speck from your neighbor’s eye — Matthew 7:5
Sorry to disappoint you, but I am still very much involved.
Is your name Paul C. Cameron? Has your membership in your professional organization been revoked?
As a former psychologist one would assume you know the damage that lying to oneself can do to an individual ….. how much damage is done to an individual and their loved ones in living a lie? Is one more healthy denying a fundamental part of themselves or accepting a fundamental part of themselves? Is one more healthy pretending to be something they are not or accepting who they are?
Have you actively sought to deny all of those neighbors, coworkers, friends and family members who engage in aberrant behavior the right to apply for a Civil Marriage License or any other right others have or do you let it slide?
I have friends and neighbors who are left-handed. This was once considered aberrant behavior — when my first wife was a little girl, the teacher hit her with a ruler every time she wrote with her left hand. Left-handed people still face discrimination in some countries.
Being gay is like being left-handed, it is natural, but it is not average. A majority of people are born right-handed, and a majority are born straight. That doesn’t mean they are any more normal or natural, just more average. A minority are born lift-handed, and a minority are born gay. That doesn’t make them aberrant — being gay is natural and normal, just not average.
Hey I’m left handed, I live in a right handed world and have never expected the world to pander to my abnormal tendency.
We dumped the prejudice against being left handed just as we as Americans are rejecting homophobia.
But you do expect to be treated like everyone else. You wouldn’t want a law that said left-handed people can’t get married. And you would object to the teacher who hit the left-handed first grader when she tried to write with her left hand.
I don’t pander to religious extremists, but I do not stand in the way of their equal treatment under our laws.
You will still be free to hold disgust in your heart toward gays and lesbians who simply want to be treated equally by our government, that is your First Amendment right.
It’s our government that shouldn’t discriminate, because that goes against our 14th Amendment rights.
Point …make,
Match[es]
“The e tough guys we need to flip to win a couple of these races are still the ones who say that gays are gross,”
Game- decided in Nov.
I was never involved in these discussions prior to 2009. I’ve lived in Maine many years and never made it a secret that I was gay, and no one ever made me feel uncomfortable here. Not my neighbors, not my coworkers, and not even the people I interacted with in neighboring towns. I never saw any need to be vocal about my need for equal treatment, because I saw no one visibly wanting to treat me differently due to my sexual orientation or the gender of my soul mate.
When the Catholic church of Maine and NOM organized to take away rights our state legislature had granted me in early 2009, I suddenly became aware of an entire subset of Mainers who saw me and my life as some threat to them. I decided I needed to become engaged in these discussions to put my point of view in front of them.
Most of the time, I realize I’m not changing their minds. But along the way I have found so many others here who support my rights, even if they aren’t affected by my lack of them.
So thank you— and thanks to everyone here who stands up for the gays and lesbians who are fighting for equal treatment under Maine law, who are willing to take time to counter these baseless accusations and hurtful attacks that these trolls put forth.
thank you for reminding us all how beautiful Maine people can be.
I never thought about gay+marriage either until about the same time. I have a gay friend, he and his have been a relationship for over 15 years. I just can’t stand there in front of them knowing I have rights that they don’t have.
So, Todd and Tom….this fight is for you, and for you Convivial…and for all the other loving, good Mainers out there who live in peace and harmony with their neighbors and with themselves.
The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution requires and guarantees “Equal Protection Under the Law.” This applies to the US States as well. The Constitution is being VIOLATED because of the misdeeds of the anti-gays. They are SPITTING on our Constitution and America this way.
pick and choose what part of the consititution you want to follow
LGBT Americans, along with the MAJORITY of Americans, choose it ALL, and anti-gays’ efforts to strip the 14th Amendment is doomed to failure.
Speaking of cherry-picking the Constitution (or the Bible for that matter)
I plan on it.
I’m sorry to learn you plan to SPIT on the United States Constitution that way. If you hate America, freedom and equality this much, why not just pack up and leave?
Here’s a frequent anti-gay LIE:
“You have all the same rights as heterosexuals.”
No, LGBT Americans DO NOT have the SAME right to legal marriage as mixed-sex couples do. The Iowa State Supreme Court unanimously established marriage equality in April 2009, and this is their answer to “You have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as anyone else”:
“It is true the marriage statute does not expressly prohibit gay and lesbian persons from marrying; it does, however, require that if they marry, it must be to someone of the opposite sex. Viewed in the complete context of marriage, including intimacy, civil marriage with a person of the opposite sex is as unappealing to a gay or lesbian person as civil marriage with a person of the same sex is to a heterosexual. Thus, the right of a gay or lesbian person under the marriage statute to enter into a civil marriage only with a person of the opposite sex is no right at all. Under such a law, gay or lesbian individuals cannot simultaneously fulfill their deeply felt need for a committed personal relationship, as influenced by their sexual orientation, and gain the civil status and attendant benefits granted by the statute. Instead, a gay or lesbian person can only gain the same rights under the statute as a heterosexual person by negating the very trait that defines gay and lesbian people as a class-their sexual orientation.”
http://www.iowacourtsonline.org/Supreme_Court/Varnum_v_Brien/Supreme_Court_Ruling/
libertarian opinion: if gay marriage is legalized we will have to legalize polygamy as well. other wise it is discrimination, polygamists have families, just watch reality tv
Nonsense, marriage is between TWO people. You’ve only served to denigrate libertarians too.
We ALL know what “polygamy” is REALLY about, we read all about Warren Jeffs. These old codger Fundamentalist Mormons PRETEND to marry some barely post-pubescent girl, and in the morning, after the codger has had his “fun,” he bundles the child off to the welfare office. Legal marriage is impossible for girls that young and would destroy the old codger’s welfare scam.
welcome back carrotcakeman.. Now your making up the rules for someone who is in love with more then one person.. Why can’t someone marry 4/5 people and live with them all?
Sorry, no, I won’t feed any of the sexual obsessions of anti-gays, not this fantasy about barely post-pubescent girls OR their obsession with the private lives of loving, committed same gender couples. Once again, the polygamists DON’T WANT legal marriage, that’s just another anti-gay LIE.
if three adults over the age of eighteen want to be in a plural marriage, how can you deny them their rights if gay marriage is ok?
Let me know when these three people actually stand up and tell us that. So far, NO ONE wants polygamous marriage, all the Fundamentalist Mormons want is their “fun” with young girls and to use them for a welfare scam.
i really like your reasoning, if the anti-gay marriage people define marriage being between a man and a woman it is hate, but it is perfectly okay for you to define it as being between two persons. i could make some interesting comparisons to your Fundamentalist Mormom rants but i am not going to lower myself
“but i am not going to lower myself”
Anti-gays have already LOWERED themselves to supporting Warren Jeffs’ criminal child sexual assault and welfare fraud.
But you will NOT drag LGBT Americans down to anti-gays’ and Warren Jeffs’ level.
freedom of religion is in the Constitution specifically, gay marriage is not. it is pathetic how you HATE anyone who has a different opinion than you. i pray for your tormented soul
Is there anything more pathetic than anti-gays whining their intended victims are “haters”?
Freedom of Religion? When speaking about First Amendment issues in regards to marriage equality, it’s always important to remember it isn’t just a matter of those denominations who tell that LIE that they’d be forced to perform same gender marriages. The major 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 1870.
ministers, clergy, and notary publics should not be forced to perform ceremonies they have religious objections to. down the road i can see where people like you would love to call those objections hate crimes when they are in fact principals!
Why don’t you just GIVE UP this silly anti-gay fantasty? Why on EARTH would any LGBT American want to be married in your Westboro Baptist Church or ANY skanky anti-gay Hate Cult when the MOST BEAUTIFUL churches in American WANT to marry us?????
i hate to be the one to tell you this but you and the Westboro Baptist Church have a lot in common.
Such desperate lies from anti-gays. YOU are the one who is endorsing the Westboro creeps.
not me. i believe in free speech for just about any topic, but their actions at funerals has no justification
You’ve already done so, as well as endorse the activities of Warren Jeffs.
Fail.
“ministers, clergy, and notary publics should not be forced to perform
ceremonies they have religious objections to. down the road i can see
where people like you would love to call those objections hate crimes
when they are in fact principals!”
“Minister, clergy” and religious denominations that do not agree with SSM are NOT forced to marry anyone. This was true in 2009 and it is true today. Nothing in this law will force “minister, clergy” and religious denominations to marry a same sex couple.
Now, notary publics hold a civil license issued by the state. They are required to provide those services regardless of the person(s) gender, national origin, sexual orientation, etc…They are governed by the laws of Maine and the Maine Civil Rights Act and anti-discrimination laws. If you are going to offer your services to the general public you must offer your services to the general public without allowing personal prejudices to enter the equation.
you will note i said down the road. if gay marriage passes you will see further ballot questions in future years. radicals will never respect religious objections to gay marriage and will go after ministers and churches that refuse to perform the weddings.
SSM has been legal in Massachusetts since 2004 so surely you can find an example there of the damage “down the road”
And if not there the Vermont must contain some examples as Civil Unions first came into being there in 1999.
Remember your claims about “polygamy” and whining why the media ignores that? The media ignores the ENTIRE anti-gay slippery slope LIE because they know it’s just anti-gay lies.
i really like how you just automatically assume every polygamist is like Warren Jeffs. that seems a rather intolerant opinion. that would be the same as automatically assuming you are like Bob Carlson. a blanket opinion is a blanket opinion
Are YOU a “polygamist”? Do YOU want to pretend to “marry” underage girls, then use them in a welfare scam? YOU BET I AM ‘INTOLERANT’ of criminal child sexual assault and welfare fraud!
no i am not a polygamist nor do i consider myself anti-gay. simply trying to make a libertarian point. could answer this question directly without going on a rant about Mormons. assuming gay marriage is legal in maine, 3 people all adults, all consenting, a woman 2 men, are in love and want to be in a plural marriage and have the same rights you want for yourself, how can you deny them that? strictly hypothetical, just answer the question based on the facts i’ve given you don’t make up stuff or stand on your soapbox. a simple answer is all that is necessary
Now, that’s a laugh! You’ve promoted “polygamy” in HOW MANY posts? You’ve ATTACKED LGBT Americans by comparing us to criminal child sexual assault and welfare fraud and then you claim you are not anti-gay? This is NO “hypothetical question,” it’s an attempt to make LGBT Americans guilty by association.
Fail.
I’ve already answered you, NO, I WILL NOT endorse criminal child sexual assault or welfare fraud!
the legitimate gay marriage proponents must cringe whenever you post something online. why don’t you appear in a commercial and spread your message?
Because the few remaining anti-gay posters ARE cringing, as YOU have proven.
cringing NO vomiting YES
I have to say that sometimes the message gets lost in the delivery from some posters here.
Deny polygamy? Very easy. You continue to promote an illogical red herring.
Who says it’s between two people? You? After all, you make disparaging references regarding “plural marriage” in the Bible without knowing what you’re talking about.
Beyond being completely arbitrary, you’ve just come off as a narrow-minded bigot yourself!
Hardly.
So you endorse welfare fraud and criminal child sexual assault too? And then you have the NERVE to attack your fellow Americans who are LGBT?
Anti-gays are immoral.
Some people practice religion that encourages polygamy. Why should this country legalize marriage for homosexuals but deny marriage for certain religious sects? As a libertarian, I agree with caprountree- legalize one, legalize all…
Get real, they don’t want LEGAL marriage.
But thanks for showing how many anti-gays ENDORSE welfare FRAUD and CRIMINAL CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT.
Figures…
thats how i see it. if you legalize one form of non-traditional marriage i don’t see how you can ignore others. i think carrotcakeman is afraid the media will pick up on the polgamy angle and it will hurt their chances in Nov.
Get real, anti-gays have been SCREAMING about “polygamy” ever since Anita Bryant, and the MEDIA just LAUGHS at anti-gays. Remember, caprountree, the media reported on Warren Jeffs, and they know the polygamists DO NOT WANT legal marriage.
Nope.
If you can’t argue against gay marriage without bringing up polygamy, you don’t have an argument against gay marriage.
If 2 guys are sitting in front of me in the movies and decide to swap a little tongue I’m going to puke up my popcorn on them … and I don’t expect to be asked to apologize.
Most people go for the movie and not to check out what other people are doing in the theatre. How long have you had this obsession with watching other people kiss?
most people go to the movies for the movie, why the kissing then carrot
Ask Vincent, he’s the one who expressed his obsession with and how much he thinks about “gay sex.”
As for me, I have NEVER seen a same gender couple kiss in public. Maybe that’s because I’m not obsessed about it.
I have, ONCE, and they weren’t even gay ! ROFL !
straight vincent brought up the kissing….
And when was the last time you saw two heterosexuals kiss at the movies?
that’s pretty much how I feel when I see two fat people. yet, you don’t see me running out and barring fat people from hooking up.
Wow, that’s just mean for no good reason.
The Maine Ethics Commission caught the anti-gay Hate Cult NOM RED-HANDED in 2009 violating our campaign finance and disclosure laws. The US Supreme Court rejected NOM’s appeal of their conviction, but they are STILL in violation of our laws.
What about this time, anti-gays? Are you getting secret, illegal contributions to your campaign from away again? Will anti-gays throw the election again?
This issue re: gays being absent from and silently in the background of advertisements was discussed during the last vote…..I did see today for the first time an advertisement showing four firefighters from York….tastefully done and addressing the issue with first hand experience and personal messages…..
So is that what it takes to get a marriage license? You have to present yourself to the public and get an up or down vote? Some posters are suggesting witnessing gays kiss and THEN deciding which to vote. Is that how we determine who gets equal rights in this country? Whether or not we find a person personally appealing? Come on.
They need to hire a better marketing company… someone who knows how to sell product to Americans.
LGBT Americans just aren’t any good at lying and cheating, maybe we should take the example of the anti-gays.
No, we won’t sink to their level.
It’s not worth it, the progress you’ve made this far has been partially by the glaring contrast.
I hope they keep talking. Every time they speak, it just compels people to support marriage equality, and makes people that already supported it even more determined to make it happen.
Their words are words of desperation, of fear, of hate. They know that they are not going to win this one in the long run. They know that even if they manage to stop marriage equality this time, next time they won’t. They know that they will go down in history the same way that people who held slaves, forbade inter racial marriage, and tried to prevent women from having the right to vote went down in history. They’re angry, they’re embarrassed, and they are the ones desperate now for acceptance they know that eventually they will not have from anyone.
If anything, I feel increasingly sorry for them. It’s a dark and ugly world they’ve chosen to trap their own minds in. I pity them.
Thanks again.
Yes, LGBT Americans will never stop working for equality in exactly the way the United States Supreme Court told us to do in its 1996 “Romer vs. Evans” decision. They stated LGBT Americans have the SAME right to use the proper Rule Of Law to seek redress for wrongs committed against us.
Equal protection under the law is not a product; it’s good citizenship.
Yes, and anti-gays are the poster children for BAD citizenship. They are SPITTING on the United States Constitution and its guarantee of “Equal Protection Under the Law. THEY expect freedom and equality but seek to DENY the same equality to those they HATE and FEAR.
You don’t get it do you? Convincing people to vote your way is marketing. I’m voting for your rights. I’m making a true and honest statement.. Americans need to be sold on something before they will except it.. It’s sort of like you excepting the patriot act to protect you. first they must create and enviroment for you to believe in what they are selling us.. They market everything and yes it is just like a product.. You and I are just units to them.. I’m not anti I’m a realist
gosh, i had never heard of marketing before. you must be smart.
I’d like to thank the many Mainers of good will who are speaking up for equality and fairness, and who are also answering the lies of anti-gays with facts. You are protecting YOUR OWN Freedom and Equality as well. Read the comments from anti-gays carefully, and you will see they seek to interfere in most other Americans’ lives as well. If anti-gays ever got to HURT gay and lesbian Americans as much as they would like, just WHO would they attack next?
The homosexual community is engaging in warm fuzzy language trying to make us accept their aberrant behavior . They really don’t care about marriage, to most liberal it’s just a piece of paper. Most liberal I know lived with your lovers for years without a marriage license. Now all of sudden getting married is soooo important to them. No,it is not important to them. They just want us to accept homosexuality as being normal.
Yes, I believe it is abnormal behavior and no, I am not going to bother them. But I will never accept their behavior as being ok. They will go before God someday just as I will and we will all be judge on how we treat our fellow man.
What you are going to have to learn to accept is that NO ONE ELSE CARES what you “believe,” and your hurtful, hateful “beliefs” are NO EXCUSE for the attempts of anti-gays to SUBVERT OUR CONSTITUTION’S GUARANTEE OF EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW.
“They will go before God someday”
Please stop threatening us with your powerless plaster deity. Our CONSTITUTION overrules your plaster statue.
Getting a little emotional there aren’t you? I see you had me flagged.
I didn’t flag you. You are going to have to learn to accept that MOST Americans have HAD IT with anti-gay hate speech and lies. While I agree that most of the anti-gay posts here VIOLATE the rules of this forum, I prefer that such hate speech remain here so all readers see just how hateful and hurtful anti-gays really are. 5% MORE Americans support marriage equality every YEAR because we are disgusted with anti-gays and their attempts to subvert our Constitution. Please dig your anti-gay agenda down further.
Would you like to see the “love ” e-mails I receive from the homosexual community? Wow talk about hate.
I bet you wrote them yourself.
Anti-gays are always WHINING that their intended victims are “the real haters.” That’s just another standard anti-gay lie.
I”m saving your kooky one.
You only WISH you got an email from me, and we know WHY you WISH that:
“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
Paranoia is another interesting characteristic of the anti-gay lobby.
What “aberrant behavior” are you talking about, living together ? Cohabitation isn’t a crime in Maine anymore, is that what you’re looking for, making it a jail-able offense for gay people to live together, like it was in the 60’s ?
Do you actually KNOW any gay people, or are you just saying that it’s not important to them, based on what ?
Sounds like baring false witness to me. The gay people I know want to be married, they aren’t faking it.
As for your acceptance, I’ve yet to meet any gay person that wishes to force anybody to accept them. They just want people that are judgmental of them and that are hypocritical to leave them alone, and to stop lying about them.
I’m not sure what it is that bothers you so much about gay people, why you even care, what impact they have on you. Please explain to me what exactly they’ve done to you, that you imagine they are going to do when they’re finally allowed to marry in Maine that upsets you so much that you’d lie about them and malign them so much ?
How is any of it your business ? I wasn’t married to my wife in a church, does that make my marriage not a marriage in your eyes ?
Just trying to understand what it is that you’re so afraid of, because so far, none of your comments make any sense to me at all.
Thank you for your support and kindness.
It’s so sad that normal, non-homophobic Americans must repeat the same FACTS after anti-gays LIE AGAIN.
Let’s try this again. First of all, sexual orientation, whether gay or non-gay, has been shown by science to be inborn and unchangeable, and psychologists have shown being gay or lesbian is just as healthy and “normal” as being non-gay. Here are several respected websites (and a citation from Fox News for the doubters) that document this:
http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/03/differential-brain-activation.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/sex/dn14146-gay-brains-structured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,155990,00.html
http://www.livescience.com/health/060224_gay_genes.html
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w27453600k586276/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2008/06/16/172/
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/17/science/sci-gaybrain17
http://psych.fullerton.edu/rlippa/bbc_birthorder.htm
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12465295
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2006/06/26/brothers=gay.html
http://www.medpagetoday.com/OBGYN/Pregnancy/3641
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080617151845.htm
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/local&id=6209976
http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.html
Anti-gays are still trying to claim that other Americans share their overarching hatred and fear of LGBT Americans. That’s so easy to disprove. Even right-wing publications noted last year:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/07/27/new-study-support-for-gay-marriage-grew-faster-in-past-two-years
“According to the report, polling data from sources including Gallup, CNN/ORC, ABC/Washington Post, and Pew Research Center indicate that average support for legalizing gay marriage grew at a rate of approximately 1 percent per year between 1996 and 2009, but the rate increased to 5 percent growth per year from 2009 to 2011. “That’s actually a 500 percent increase in the rate of change,” Benenson said at a press conference. “We rarely see that kind of upward spike in support around an issue.”
Because of that growth, several national polls show a majority of Americans now support legalizing gay marriage, including Gallup (53 percent), Public Religion Research Institute (51 percent), CNN/ORC (51 percent), and ABC/Washington Post (53 percent).”
“They really don’t care about marriage”
Ignoring, for now, this absurd claim anti-gays make that they know all about LGBT Americans, it’s easy to show HOW MUCH LGBT Americans care about marriage. The 2010 US Census reported that over 2.5 years ago, there were over 131,000 legally married American same gender couples. California had marriage equality for less than 5 months in 2008, but over 18,000 California same gender couples are still legally married.
If we LGBT Americans were as small a community as anti-gays claim, then it would seen that in a very short time a major part of our community got married. This PROVES that marriage IS IMPORTANT to LGBT Americans.
“to most liberal it’s just a piece of paper.”
Not to these ladies, who would have avoided a world of pain and trouble if they had that “piece of paper”:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/washington-adventist-denied-same-sex-visitation-hospital-apologizes/2012/01/19/gIQAvngQCQ_story.html
“A Takoma Park woman has filed complaints with federal health authorities and the main hospital accreditation commission after staff at Washington Adventist Hospital denied her permission to visit her same-sex partner, who was taken there after suffering a seizure.
Such a denial would violate federal hospital visitation regulations and Maryland law. The Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights advocacy group, called on the hospital Thursday to review its visitation policies.
Last January, new federal regulations went into effect mandating that nearly all hospitals extend visitation rights to the partners of gay men and lesbians and respect patients’ choices about who may make critical health-care decisions for them. The advocacy group says it is aware of two instances since then — the Takoma Park one and another in Tennessee — when same-sex partners were denied hospital visitation.
The Maryland incident took place Nov. 13. Kathryn Wilderotter, 37, said she had an epileptic seizure, crashed her car and was taken to the hospital in Takoma Park, which considers itself to be among the country’s most progressive communities.
Wilderotter’s legal spouse and partner of 11 years, Linda Cole, arrived at the hospital and identified herself as Wilderotter’s partner but wasn’t recognized as family.
“Nobody would let her back,” Wilderotter said.”
“They just want us to accept homosexuality as being normal. ”
80% of Americans wanted and GOT DADT revoked–and the military reported last week all went well. Clearly ALL this 80% of Americans feel that LGBT Americans are normal, as do all the scientists, psychologists and psychiatrists.
However, psychologists identified homophobia as a mental illness and published their results in the Journal of the National Institutes of Health in 1953. Psychologists report that the most commonly observed symptom of the mental disorder homophobia is an inability of those so afflicted to accept documentation that contradicts their deep-seated phobia and hatred of LGBT Americans. That might be the reason one poster refuses to believe in most Americans know LGBT Americans are “normal.”
Who cares if 2 people are married or not, gay lesbian or whatever. If they are good people, that is all that should count. Period. And what they do behind closed doors is nobodys business.
Fortunately, we know the majority of Americans recognize and support marriage equality. They recognize that the United States Constitution’s guarantee of Equal Protection Under the Law means ANY US State that denies same gender couples the SAME rights of legal marriage is in violation of our Constitution.
Thank you for your support. You are protecting your own freedom and equality as well. Read on, and you will see anti-gays have an obsession about interfering in other Americans’ lives also.
SSM – in how many states is this legal? The majority of the states? The majority of Americans may recognize and support gay marriage but they’re not voting yes in the booths, eh? Just sayin’
6-7 states and which right would you like the rest of citizens to vote on?
Do you think reminding readers how anti-gays have CHEATED in EACH AND EVERY of those immoral, UNCONSTITUTIONAL anti-gay HATE VOTES will cause them to help anti-gays throw another?
It truly is a generational issue; the younger generations don’t see any reason to discriminate against gays and lesbians.
Which is a good thing, because this discrimination is unconstitutional. It would be nice if we could adopt a more caring, compassionate attitude toward treating each other equally under the law before the Supreme Court strikes down civil marriage discrimination nationwide.
The article raises some good points. Why doesn’t the pro gay marriage side feature a T.V. ad with Barney Frank putting a long lip lock on his new “wife”? Are they afraid people would find it offensive? Why the smoke and mirrors involving only heterosexuals in their ads?
Hmmm…what about the smoke and mirrors about “it will be taught in schools”. That was a lie in 2009 and is still a lie today.
What about “pastors and churches that refuse to perform a gay marriage will be sued”? That was a lie in 2009 and is still a lie today.
So you say Mr. Frank excites you? You want to see him kiss his husband? Gotcha…
“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
I’m always surprised how anti-gays want to tell us how much the thought of “gay sex” excites them.
No, Mr. Frank does not excite me. That is why I will be voting no. If he did, I would be voting yes. Pretty simple litmus test in the end.
Barney Frank does not have a wife, he has a husband.
And there have been gays and lesbians in the ads run by Mainers United for Marriage— they haven’t had speaking roles, that’s all.
And they were featured prominently in the 2009 campaign as well.
What’s wrong with them ? are they tongue tied
So Barney is the “wife”? He bakes the cookies when the grand kids come over? Oh wait, children are biologically impossible, as are grand children. Which would explain why it is impossible to pass on the elusive “gay gene”. Is it safe to assume that the two love birds had heterosexual parents? If so, who passed on the “gay gene”? Or is being gay really a life style choice and not something that is actually passed down from your parents genetically? This is all very confusing. Better vote no until all the facts are in.
What shallow, juvenile reasons to oppose treating fellow Mainers equally under the law.
Somehow I doubt your sincerity in trying to understand this issue.
I’ve read all of carrotcakeman’s posts and in one he says “Anti-gays always resort to such vicious personal attacks”, hmmmm, ok.
It’s people like carrotcakeman that keep me voting NO.
Good thing he has himself to respond to… : )
How are you doing finding DOCUMENTATION for all the lies you posted last night? Find any DOCUMENTATION that refutes the 14 websites I provided that prove you lied?
Thanks for telling readers anti-gays fear the facts I post. Please keep digging anti-gays down deeper.
Obviously, as evidenced by posts on this very thread…
You are the one having that effect…Keep typing…and
show us all what you’re really all about : )
Huh?
Better? Sorry you couldn’t comprehend.
No, I don’t “comprehend” what would make someone SPIT on our Constitution as anti-gays have.
It’s unfortunate that you let “people like” him to sway your vote. There are many reasons why voting yes is a good thing for Maine and the thousands of gay and lesbians here. Please try to look at more sides than the ones you see here.
Thanks for telling everyone how much you are afraid of my factual posts. Thanks for telling us you can’t refute the documentation I provide, complete with website addresses.
This is why psychologists call it “homoPHOBIA.”
Wonder why those same phsychologists gave into democrat pressure just to create a voting group.
What absolute nonsense! What paranoia! NO WONDER psychologists recognize that homoPHOBIA is a mental disorder!
Thank you for proving my point.
Just more anti-gay nonsense.
Fail.
And people like you that will make me grin when you lose to the courts of this great nation.
A NO vote on question ONE November 6!
That means you would also vote NO on the United States Constitution. Shame on you.
Does it get you sexually excited to harm law abiding citizens?
I’m curious why so many of you are so eager to do so.
They should show the real gay spokesperson Perez Hilton.That will get them votes.
Hmmmm…OK but only if you hold up Reverend Fred Phelps as the spokesperson for keeping marriage one man-one woman
I bet most of the anti-gay posters here are actually members of Fred Phelps’ “church.” They post their anti-gay filth all over America, just as they would fly all over to try to trash funerals of our American soldiers killed in the Mideast.
I have to say that this is getting out of hand. There are people here who would like to see us die a slow miserable death, sure, but most people here are NOT like that. Cut them some slack. The more offensive you get, the more defensive they get, and it just goes downhill even faster.
I’m looking forward to an end to all this fighting, Joe, but that can only happen when LGBT Americans have equality.
Thank you for your support.
We don’t actually have a “spokesperson.” We are as diverse a community as left-handed Americans, or any other attribute unrelated to the content of our character.
It’s really sad that every article on same sex marriage leads to name-calling and insults (on both sides!). The BDN would be wise to simply turn off the comment option for these articles until the election has passed. Please remember that the nameless people you are arguing with here may be your family members, your neighbors, your friends. If you wouldn’t say it in person, I’d consider not saying it here.
There’s a big difference between LGBT Americans defending ourselves, and the lies and filth anti-gays post here in an effort to HURT us and try to cause others to hate us.
Yes, you’re right. But fighting with people in the BDN comments section doesn’t do anything to further the cause. Don’t feed the trolls! :)
Fighting doesn’t, but I have an obligation to provide documentation that refutes the anti-gay propaganda, and to remind voters they were duped by anti-gay cheating the last time.
I’m very tired of all the acrimony myself, BGRGirl, remember, I’m one of the anti-gays’ targets. The ONLY way we can end the acrimony is with equality, so this is the only road to peace.
I’m a target, too, and I’m as frustrated and tired as you are. Reading and hearing the lies and hate is discouraging and insulting. I’d invite you to join me at a Mainers United for Marriage phone bank or canvass, where you can channel your passion into conversations with undecided voters!
Thank you, I will! I am speaking to neighbors and friends.
really? seriously? are you saying that we ( anti gay marriage) haven’t been called names? come on.
Documenting that anti-gays lied is not name-calling.
Here is my concern….who is going to decide who is allowed to marry? I’ve read many comments on here about who cares what goes on behind closed doors, laws shouldn’t be changed to include the wording of same sex marriage, etc. What if a man wants to marry his daughter, or a mother wants to marry her daughter, or a brother and a sister?? Who’s to say that isn’t protected under their rights in the constitution? I am voting Yes this fall however I think we have to be very careful about how laws get worded and statements that say anyone should be allowed the right to marry is dangerous.
There are legitimate medical & genetic reasons to limit close blood relatives from marrying each other. In Maine first cousins may marry each other but only after receiving genetic counseling.
That’s right, jd2008jd.
Relzx, lovehunting, that routine you mentioned is nothing more than anti-gay lies.
Ant-gays always lie, as I’m sure you saw when you read on, lovehunting. Thank you for your support.
If you cannot argue against gay marriage without bringing up incest, you don’t have an argument against gay marriage.
You obviously did not read my post….I am voting for it, I’m only pointing out my concerns about what’s considered a “right” and how the laws are worded.
You are correct that I did not read your entire post to see you were voting yes :)
So my amended response is:
If you are worried about legalizing incest, fight against that. Rest easy though, because nowhere on this planet has same-sex marriage led to legalized incest, polygamy, bestiality, or pedophilia.
I’m not arguing against it – just pointing out my concerns about what would be considered someone’s “right”.
I don’t play golf. never have, never will. I think it’s the plaid pants and polo shirts that throws me.. To much bonding for me.
Okay, we know you are afraid of LGBT Americans, you’re also afraid of polo shirts? No wonder most Americans just LAUGH and LAUGH and LAUGH at anti-gays! I’m laughing right now!
Don’t forget the “plaid pants”.
They are being smart- seeing 2 men on TV holding hands and talking about marriage is disgusting- and would simply turn more people away.
And what about two woman? Would you find two woman holding hands and talking about marriage equally “disgusting”?
of course I would, what a silly question
Not silly. There are some people out there who are disgusted by two men but have quite an opposite reaction when it’s two women.
Most ‘straight’ men love to see 2 women together.
yesihaveanopinion, yes-you-have-a-problem.
No, actually mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging miscreants like you waiting to evolve thumbs is disgusting.
They are missing because they know they are wrong!
Not missing, we’re all over Maine— we are your neighbors, your coworkers, your friends and your family. And we deserve to be treated equally by our government, including the important protections civil marriage provides families.
The timing of this article is odd, because Mainers United For Marriage just launched a new ad featuring a gay volunteer firefighter… and an earlier ad absolutely showed the lesbian daughter in a family, though she did not have a speaking role— her father was sharing his sincere wish that his daughter can marry the love of her life.
I am voting YES on question 1 in November, because ALL Maine families deserve the important protections of civil marriage.
How so?
Detail how we’re wrong without using personal moral supposition and religion.
I don’t think you can.
What would this vote look like if it wasn’t in secret? what if anti-gays actually had to tell members of their community that they came to SPIT on the United States Constitution? What if anti-gays couldn’t sneak around and hide their efforts to SUBVERT our Constitution?
But we know anti-gays CHEATED and THREW the 2009 Hate Vote. We know the Maine Ethics Commission caught the anti-gay Hate Cult NOM red-handed violating our laws. We know the United States Supreme Court rejected NOM’s appeal of their conviction,but that NOM is STILL in VIOLATION of our laws.
Anti-gays operate in secret, just like the fifth column activities anti-gays learned all that from. Ultimately, we all have to realize that anti-gays are not loyal Americans. They want to TRASH the Constitution and force their peculiar, minority “beliefs” that science rejects and condemns on all Americans, taking away EVERYONE’s Freedom and Equality and setting themselves up as–what?
Take a look at the overarching obsession anti-gays exhibit for everyone else’s private bedroom activity. Do you really want someone who wants to peek in your bedroom windows as the dictators? All it takes to push back the anti-gays and their efforts to hurt America is just to vote “YES” for EQUALITY.
All this “quoting” from the Bible” isnicer butt the truth is definitions have
change over the course of 2012 years. Jonathan and David did not have a sexual
love affair. Where a wife / woman may not put up with misbehavior
and childish acts , a friend will, that’s all that means.
People misquote and misunderstand and use things out of context from the
Bible all the time. One needs to know how they talked and defined words
2000+ years ago or have a good relationship with God and Bible
to understand
Really? Nothing but religious rhetoric? Is that all you bigots have?
You do realize it can’t be entered into court to help you don’t you? You do realize that because of that, you will lose?
The words of “activist” Justice Antonin Scalia (in dissent of the case resolution in Lawrence v. Texas, the case that threw out all sodomy laws in the US of A)
“Today’s opinion dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permitted a distinction to be made between heterosexual and homosexual unions, insofar as formal recognition in marriage is concerned. If moral disapprobation of homosexual conduct is “no legitimate state interest” for purposes of proscribing that conduct, ante, at 18; and if, as the Court coos (casting aside all pretense of neutrality), “[w]hen sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring,” ante, at 6; what justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples exercising “[t]he liberty protected by the Constitution,” ibid.? Surely not the encouragement of procreation, since the sterile and the elderly are allowed to marry.”
Bigots standing on personal moral opinion and religious dogma WILL LOSE. Scalia saw this with the death of sodomy laws… you’ll all see it with the deaths of DOMA, and then of each state prohibition against gay marriage.
It’ll be an honor and a privilege to watch the bigots lose.
Calm down son.
Love the sinner- hate the sin.
Sin, shcmin… a concept that exists only if one commits the voluntary choice to follow a religion.
Your “sin” is a concept not found in our civil law… and the overwhelming majority of your “sins” are perfectly legal.
Keep your “sin” if you wish… as Scalia so eloquently points out above “moral disapprobation of homosexual conduct is “no legitimate state interest” for purposes of proscribing that conduct.”
All your religion is is “moral disapprobation” which has no place in our civil law.
You fail.
Sorry, NO, we will NOT “calm down” and allow anti-gays to SUBVERT our CONSTITUTION.
There is nothing sinful about two people blessed enough to find each other in this life, to build a lifelong committed relationship in honesty and truth.
We know the United States Supreme Court will make the final decision on this matter. The anti-gays in California appealed the revocation of their 2008 anti-gay H8te Vote to the Supreme Court. Anti-gays think Scalia will vote to violate “Equal Protection Under the Law,” but there are many problems with that. Just as Justice O’Connor thought about her legacy after voting to appoint Bush president, and subsequently stood up for what’s right in “Lawrence vs. Texas,” Scalia, who is in his mid 70s, may well not want to be remembered for voting to subvert “Equal Protection.” What’s more, Scalia, as much as he apparently hates and fears his fellow Americans who are LGBT, loves himself and would probably enjoy “proving himself correct” as above.
Thanks for providing that meaningful quote, Mr. Badkey.
Sure more people are closer to his thinking than perez.That is why this mess has not passed anywhere.
The reason these Hate Votes have all been thrown is anti-gays CHEAT. The Maine Ethics Commission caught anti-gays RED-HANDED in 2009. One of the anti-gay Hate Cults is STILL in VIOLATION of Maine law.
Maybe they could show some “happy couples” attending
gay pride events. That would leave a lasting impression.
But why?
There’s that sick stereotyping of yours again. I’ve never been to a gay pride event in my life.
However, from what I’ve seen online and read, they’re no worse than Mardis Gras or biker rallies, neither associated with gay folks.
That’s just how you choose to view things through your bigoted lenses.
Your narrow view of the world is one of the things that makes you such a bad person.
I HAVE been to gay pride parades. 99.9% of the participants are fully dressed. The mayors and governors as well as city council members, Members of Congress, and other politicians attend. In many cities, the Gay Pride Parade is the best attended of all parades. Many non-gays enjoy our parades and are not there hoping to see “gay sex.”
How’s it feel to be lumped all together as one…? Just sayin.
Why don’t you tell us how you feel about having outed yourself as enjoying those faked pictures of “gay sex,” HRH?
Used to it. Your kind always do it.
And no, that’s not to say all people of faith. You’re a minority in that group.
Correct again! The major 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 1870.
We can safely assume this poster has viewed the fake pictures of simulated “gay sex” at anti-gay Hate Cult websites.
The gay pride events I have seen in Maine aren’t offensive in any way.
The truth here is that the more people get to know gays and lesbians, and the more they understand about this issue, the less likely they are to oppose our equal treatment under the law.
This is documented by the annual 5% increase in support for marriage equality. LGBT Americans have been out of the closet for over 40 years, and MOST Americans know the nasty image anti-gays try to create is just a bunch of anti-gay lies.
Readers who would like to see what Gay Pride Parades are REALLY like could go see for themselves at the website for the San Francisco Chronicle and see the facts:
http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Thousands-march-for-gay-pride-in-San-Francisco-3659018.php
that the parade is far milder than any Mardi Gras parade.
Or readers could go to the anti-gay Hate Cult websites and see the fake pictures they post. These fake pictures of simulations of “gay sex” are created by the anti-gays, and anti-gays happily pose in these simulations of “gay sex.” Why? Scientists have already documented why anti-gays have this overarching obsession with “gay sex”:
“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
While they’re not fakes, many are misrepresentations of the Folsom street parade, which is not a gay pride parade.
Sad to say, I have been told that anti-gays sneak around at that event, which is NOT an LGBT event, it is for all who enjoy those activities. The fact that anti-gays are lurking there taking photos reinforces what scientists say about their overarching obsession with “gay sex.” Apparently, the anti-gays DO NOT take pictures of the mixed-sex activities there.
Here is the latest installment of lies brought to you by Bob Emrich and Protect Marriage Maine
“Dear Marriage Supporter,We must VOTE NO on Question One to protect our children and grandchildren.
Proponents of so-called “same-sex” marriage constantly say that redefining marriage will not lead to any unexpected consequences and flatly reject the idea that it will result in polygamous or polyamorous arrangements where more than two people join together. Well, they are promoting a much different message just to the north of us in Canada.
The Toronto District School Board has a new poster called “Love Has No Gender”, full of happy couples but also happy triples. This poster is in every Toronto grade school and promotes polygamy and group sex to children.
Toronto isn’t alone in pushing for unions between more than two people. In Brazil, the government recently sanctioned a civil union between three separate partners. This has shocked religious groups and every day folks alike throughout the country, but it shouldn’t. When you redefine marriage to make it an institution that is about providing public recognition of “committed” adult emotional relationships, why would such recognition be limited to relationships only between two people? Why not relationships with three or four people? Or more? If “same-sex” marriage activists are successful in redefining marriage in Maine, it’s only a matter of time before we’re experiencing further pushing of the boundaries for legal unions between three or more partners.
Marisa Lobo, an evangelical Christian and one of Brazil’s most prominent psychologists, was shocked by the erosion of traditional values in her country.
“My question is: what are these law holders driving at? What is the media driving at? What are these groups driving at by confronting the society with totally distorted values?”
As you talk to your family and friends, please let them know that the initiative being advanced by “same-sex” marriage advocates isn’t about equality. It is about radical activists redefining marriage for all of society, stripping from our marriage law the rights and interests of children and replacing it with the singular focus of what two adults decide they want for themselves.We must VOTE NO on Question One to protect our children and grandchildren.
Sincerely,
Bob Emrich, Chairman
Protect Marriage Maine”
Ah Mr. Emrich in case you didn’t realize it this is Maine and not Toronto, Canada or Brazil.
Thanks for warning readers of the dangerous hate speech anti-gays are spreading. If this wild claim about Toronto was true, the anti-gays could have documented it. But anti-gays NEVER document their wild claims, do they?
Mr. “Kill them in Africa cuz we can” Emrich…
Skumm.
Thanks for the heads up jd…I’m going to contact Mr. Emrich today.
They need to get one of theses posters out there in ads. If it can happen
there, it can and will happen here. I will also mention that they need to do
an ad about gay couples attending gay pride events. Perhaps that would
open the eyes of those who have doubts about what’s to come if this is passed.
They may change their minds when confronted with what their children and
grandchildren will be subjected to. Can’t thank you enough for the ideas.
As much as I dislike Emrich, I am sure he knows that not all gay men and women are like the ones we see in some of the gay pride parades just as he, you, and I know not all straight men and women are like the ones we see on the Jerry Springer show or at Mardi Gras.
Then again, he seems to embrace such hyperbole and misleading statements, so maybe he WILL go for it. Who knows? But I am sure the people who will believe that such a small number of wild and crazy gays represent ALL of us will already be voting “no,” so it would just be preaching to the choir.
But it is funny that you are trying to show the world that we, as an entire group, are not worthy of marriage, while we see reports all the time of straight people showing themselves as less worthy of such a status.
Joe, I appreciate you and your level headed comments. I, as you are, am fully aware
that you can’t group every one together. But, look at those like Tedlick, Carrotcakeman,
ConvivialVisits…the public needs to see all sides and really consider what the possibilities
are. I am tired of the vile, hatefulness that they put out there every day with personal
attacks that they fully intend to hurt or harm. They are wasting precious time here. I’m
so glad they do it…It shows their true colors and intent to the public. You, with the way you
handle the issue will be a benefit to your cause. They do you no favors. In the end it will
be decided at the polls in Nov. People just really need to consider the whole picture. By the
way, I’ve never stated you’re not worthy…I don’t judge you. I hope you get the legal union
you hope for, but not by forcing society to conform to suit you.
No one you’re talking against is trying to harm people.
You are.
No one’s forcing you to do squat… that’s a lie.
Why would you lie?
“the public needs to see all sides and really consider what the possibilities are.”
The possibilites are that gays and lesbians will be afforded the 1,100+ benefits and privileges extended by our government for civil marriage!
If you are worried about anti-discrimination lawsuits, that’s an entirely separate issue, which we resolved in 2005— it’s already illegal to discriminate against Mainers based on sexual orientation, using the same laws which protect your choice of religious views.
If you are worried that churches will be forced to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies, that’s absolutely not going to happen, because churches can already discriminate against anyone for that, for any reason— excommunicated Catholics are denied marriage ceremonies in Catholic churches, non-Muslims are denied marriage ceremonies in mosques… Even blacks are denied marriage ceremonies in churches, which happened this year! And those churches are protected by the First Amendment which doesn’t exist in these other nations Emrich uses for his scare tactics.
Truly, if you are worried about what might come after we treat gays and lesbians equally under the law for civil marriage, that is a poor excuse to deny couples civil rights.
And those same “oh what will come next” scare tactics were used during the interracial marriage debate, and we look back on that with disgust, because it’s so obvious that those arguments were only a shield for repulsive opinions of how we should treat our fellow man.
Ideas that will not help you… but will probably make you giddy at the thought of harming more law abiding citizens.
If you wish to perpetuate the lies HRH feel free. But understand this they are still lies and don’t you think if they could have found examples in the U.S. they would have used those instead of finding examples from Canada & Brazil?
And ask yourself this question. Why haven’t they already done that? Could it be the backlash of using examples from other countries? Brazil? Canada?
jd, sometimes you don’t read very carfully…”If it can happen there…
it can and will happen here”. Slow down. And, if the posters are out there…
it isn’t a lie.
HRH to link what is happening in Canada or Brazil to what might happen here is a lie.
In 2009 Yes on 1 linked that if SSM stood in Maine “it” would be taught in schools. Ignoring the fact that Maine law allows the local school boards determine curriculum at the local level. Examples were used from Massachusetts to support that contention. It was a lie and after the vote Yes on 1 said they knew it wasn’t true.
Posters have posted links to “ministers” in Canada & EnglAnd being “arrested” for speaking out against homosexuality. But those very posters never give the outcome. They also ignore how different the U.S. is from those countries when it comes to Free Speech and thee gal doctrine called “separation of church and state”.
In a previous letter from Mr. Emrich he stated that passing this law would force churches and ministers (interesting that he leaves out Priests, Rabbi’s, etc…) to perform SSM if this law passes. That is a flat out, bold faces lie.
In that same letter Mr. Enrich stated that small business would be forced to provide services to gay couples even if they believe homosexuality is wrong. Well in this case that is a half truth, see Maine already makes discrimination in “public accommodations” based on sexual orientation illegal. This law does not change that fact or increase the penalty so to link it to SSM. Is fear lingering when it is already illegal.
If the pro-traditional marriage side has to resort to examples from Canada, Brazil, Masschusetts, etc…or lie and bend the truth to prevail in this election do the really deserve to win?
HRH to link what “is” happening in Canada or Brazil to what “might” happen here is a lie.
lie:1 /laɪ/ Show Spelled [lahy] Show IPA noun, verb, lied, ly·ing.
noun 1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.
It very well might happen here jd…A complete picture of the possibilities
is not a lie. It’s information to consider and form your own opinion.
Yep, a lie.
Our First Amendment religious protections guarantee such things will not come to pass, because churches to this day can do despicable things like refuse to marry a black couple even though they attend the church.
Is it a lie to say “it” will be taught in schools when you know and later admit you knew that school curriculum is developed and implemented at the local school unit level?
Is it a lie to continue to write and post that clergy and churches will be forced to marry Same sex couples when the law we are voting on (and the one repealed in 2009) specifically states otherwise?
Is it a lie to say small business will be forced to provide services to gay couples when it goes against their religious beliefs if this law passes when it has been illegal to deny services for years based on sexual orientation?
You know these are lies HRH. You know it but can you actually admit it?
Holy cow jd…You’re completely going off the deep end here. The letter
from Mr Emich that you posted was about “posters” that “are” posted.
My post talks about the “posters”… If they are posted…It’s not spreading
a falsehood about the “posters”…Honestly, I can have a more on track
conversation with my 5 year old grandson…I give up. Have a good one.
HRH I have posted two letters from Mr. Enrich. Maybe you missed the first one I don’t know and truthfully I do t care if you did or not.
Your inability to admit that lies are coming for the No on 1 camp speaks volumes about your character.
As you said have a good one.
I couldn’t possibly comment on that which isn’t “here”…”posted above.”
OK HRH the No on 1 side (aka Yes on 1 in 2009) only speaks the truth. They have never, ever lied. Yup “Christians” never lie.
That’s not what I said jd, and you know it. But, it’s ok, I forgive you.
You don’t have to say anything further HRH. Your inability to admit the lies that No on 1 are bringing forth (many are just recycled lies from 2009) speaks for you.
Just how many personalities do you have? I’ve never seen anyone have a conversation with oneself quite like this!
LOL… you’re talking to yourself now.