Maine’s strong future
The recent Senatorial Energy Debate at USM was an opportunity to gain a sense of our candidates’ abilities as leaders in a time where energy, climate change and Maine’s future are inextricably linked.
Democrat Cynthia Dill’s ability to express truth was conveyed through answers that were science-based, and did not cater to fear. She spoke up against the XL pipeline, pointing
out its environmental and economical risks. She also reminded us of the dangers of
hydrofracking. She was the only candidate who wasn’t willing to compromise her views using the idiom of a “fragile economy” to negotiate away the importance of our water, our air and our health.
Though Independent Angus King was not a proponent of the XL pipeline, he seemed more concerned with economic gain than the risks. He called natural gas ‘America’s second chance,’ without acknowledging the dangers. Natural gas hydrofracking, and tar sand extraction and transport are dangerous Band-Aids and must be labeled as such.
Republican Charlie Summers appeared out of touch and disrespectful of science. He stated that there was “no clear evidence” why we shouldn’t use nuclear energy, denied human impact on climate change, deemed the pipeline and drilling in ANWR necessary, and voiced his support for oil subsidies.
Dill won me over with her respect for truth and the courage to use a voice unfettered by
fear. In my view, she is the only candidate willing to make honest decisions today, so that
Maine will have a strong future tomorrow.
River Payne
Hollis
Yes on 1
On Nov. 6, Maine residents will vote on whether to allow the state to issue marriage licenses to same-gender couples. Jesus reached out to those on the margins of society and taught his followers to love one another. An old hymn goes, “For the love of God is broader that the
measures of our minds; and the heart of the Eternal is most wonderfully kind.” (Frederick William Faber).
In 1995, my family gathered on Southport Island to celebrate the love my sister had found; in the presence of family and friends, my sister married her female partner. Their union was blessed by clergy and the love of family and friends but does not have the legal standing of marriage. Their love has weathered the ups and downs of life and has been a blessing both to my sister and our extended family.
If a majority of Mainers vote yes on Question 1, no clergy or church will be compelled to marry same-gender couples or to recognize their marriage as sacred. If a majority of Mainers vote yes on Question 1, I will then have the religious freedom as a Christian clergy person to officiate at the marriages of all couples whose love reflects my understanding of the love of God. Join me in voting Yes on Question 1.
Nancy Duncan
Rockland
Civil union
Marriage, the union of a man and a woman, has existed well before the founding of the USA. In the debate on whether the definition of marriage can be changed, I have not yet seen a thorough answer to the following question — Who has, or which institutions have, the authority to change the definition of marriage and where does this authority come from?
State legislatures have authority to develop contractual relationships (e.g., civil unions). These legislatures have the authority to attach benefits and responsibilities to any specific contractual relationship (e.g., to declare that within a state all state benefits and responsibilities attached to a “marriage” also shall attach to a “civil union”).
The U.S. Congress also can attach benefits and responsibilities to relationships, so could, if the members wished, direct that federal benefits and responsibilities attached to “marriage” also apply to any “civil union” authorized by a state.
What is not clear to me is what authority the U.S. Congress, state legislatures, the federal or state judiciary, or the people generally have to change the definition of marriage and where that authority comes from? If such authority exists, someone should be able to explain who has that authority, what the authority is, and whence it comes.
Perhaps a team of attorneys or constitutional lawyers, who intend to “vote yes on 1”, could prepare a guest column explaining such authority for readers of this newspaper.
Michael McCabe
Whiting
Desperate party
It appears the Maine Democrat Party has disseminated nonfactual mass mailings to 19 “must-win” Maine House and Senate districts smearing Republican incumbents and also the Republican candidate for district attorney for Kennebec and Somerset counties.
If the aforementioned smear literature has graced your mailbox, please feel free to fact check the allegations prior to shredding, then vote accordingly. The ‘Party’ is desperate.
Carol Kemmerer
Hallowell
Data testing
In reading “Testing is about data” ( BDN, 10/12), a letter from Leonard C. Harlow, it reminded me of my years teaching (1957-1995) when nationwide testing as a result of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act reared its intrusive head into my busy teaching day. Dr. Harlow zeroed in on how today’s testing data is being misused, misinterpreted and misguided by 20th-century educational leaders.
If counting student test results is important in helping to test hypotheses and verify generalizations, why hasn’t this quantification analysis become apparent in today’s institutions? It is well to remember that although quantification can often settle facts, it does not always tell us what they mean. Historians must still interpret the results of calculation. If you can’t count to form a generalization about a group or class, admit you are guessing.
Harlow observes, “Today’s public school leaders must have missed literature and history in college” because of not remembering the old adage of “Those not learning or remembering the past are condemned to repeat it.” As much as this generation exaggerates the novelty of data testing and collecting, I wonder if the rapidly changing societies of the future will chuckle at our data mania now infesting schools.
The lessons found and learned in literature, history, philosophy or art do not always provide abstract civic lesson(s), because they simply help us to understand ourselves better. If data testing is the prescription for our ailing schools, prepare the last rites and eulogy.
Elizabeth Jalbert Pecoraro
Fort Kent
Mr McCabe:
“Marriage, the union of a man and a woman, has existed well before the founding of the USA” – That is partially true. Marriage did exist before the founding of the USA, but it was not alway man and woman. For example: Certain Native American tribes practiced same sex marriages.
“Who has, or which institutions have, the authority to change the definition of marriage and where does this authority come from?” – Because we are talking about civil marriage, the state has the authority to dictate the “definition” of legal marriage. The authority that grants them this power is the Constitution.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that you are trying to insinuate that only “god” can define marriage. That is just fine in your particular church, but that is not fine in terms of the law. This debate is about civil marriage rights.
Ms. Duncan:
Great Letter!
The problem is that deviants are trying to define marriage. God has laready defined it
Which god? Besides, we are talking about civil law. Your particular brand of “god” does not have a place in law making.
We straights who are for SSM resent the insult. Governments still define marriage, religions and churches bless it.
and I guess also redefine it
So should a women marry her rapist? Thats in the bible. Marriage has been redefine as time goes on to keep up with society. That whole lets not redefine thing also came up with blacks and whites wanted to get married. Guess what, it got redefine. nothing bad happened.
Not a bible person but in the case of rape I do not beleive in abortion. Its not the unborns fault
Who does the redefining?
Um, men who wrote the Bible defined it. And it encompassed everything from one man, one woman to one man, many women — even with the requirement for a rape victim to marry her rapist. So… when is the Christian Right going to demand a law like that?
after SSM passes as that will open the floodgates for additional devaint pairings
I wasn’t aware there was a third sex other than male and female.
Well, there’s intersex, but I don’t think The_tis is smart enough to think about that.
No, he’s referring to the flood of deviant pairings we see in New Hampshire, Iowa, and British Columbia. I mean, who wants to see THAT nonsense here in Maine!?!??!?!
Whose god?
The one that controls natural laws
Appeal to nature. You are just batting a thousands for logical fallacies, aren’t you? Trying to set some sort of record?
Whew…that’s a relief. Because my God is fine with it.
Michael McCabe, the source for all legal authority within the US is called the US Constitution.
Michael,
Such authority belongs to our government, via the US constitution… that’s how they’ve changed the nature of the civil contract of marriage before.
And the world didn’t end.
It won’t end this time.
Mr McCabe
You raise a valid point but it is not only marriage that changes definitions but also wife and husband. Are there husbands and wives in SSM? If I say I’m a husband do I need to clarify a “real” husband or a gay partner?
I could care less.
If you could care less why respond?
Yes, he should want to split hairs, just like you, a tea party purist: someone who cannot cut other humans slack because you are soooo in touch with reality, while those who are actually living it are sooo out of touch. Whoa, you are sooo loving and sooo kind. We sure don’t want you be be soooo confused!
I thought evaluating it’s value and validity by ignoring it, but I couldn’t resist.
Well, he said that he could care less, meaning that he cared at least a little bit, probably just enough to comment. Yay grammar!
Spouses are spouses, your argument isn’t really an argument.
My only point is that not only is marriage being redefined but the meanings of wife and husband. If I say I’m a husband does that mean I’m straight because if I was in a SSM I would only be a spouse? Spouses are spouses but not husbands or wives???
Yes, yes, this makes all the difference in the world! We should never allow same sex marriage because you will not know what word to use in defining another human.
This is your argument against same sex marriage? You won’t know which word to use? Why do you need to “define” human beings? How about “defining” them as human beings? When you introduce a gay couple to your friends, you can use the words, “This is Jerry and Richard.” You don’t have to use the words spouse, husband, partner, married, significant other. Stop trying to define people. Just get to know them on a human level.
i have not one thing against gay marriage. I was making a sarcastic response to ex_ungue_leonem.
Ah, Sorry letterreader. Since arguments just as specious as your faux one are being floated, I couldn’t discern the sarcasm.
ex is wrong SSM should be stopped as it is promoting deviant unnatural behavior. Until a few years ago meidical pros wanted to treat it.
Not sure what your definition of “few” is, but the DSM dropped homosexuality as a disorder in its 1974 Revision; 38 years ago.
If it’s unnatural to be gay, then people who are gay must be making a choice to be gay. Why would anyone choose to live a lifestyle so many oppose?
And just how is same-sex marriage going to “promote” homosexuality? Heterosexuals will remain heterosexuals, and homosexuals will remain homosexuals.
The point is that a husband is the male person who is married and a wife is the female person who is married.
If you want to introduce yourself as a “real” husband to everyone you meet, go at it. But most people don’t introduce themselves as even a husband. It sounds so self-centered.
Exactly. Sounds like too many husbands I’ve encoutnered.
Are you concerned that if you say, “I’m a husband,” without following up that you are straight, that a gay man will hit on you?
Previously, I should said why should you care if you don’t have a SSM? This brings to mind the Gospel passage where the Pharisees try to trick Christ on who is married to a multiple widow in heaven. Christ rightly said, irrelevant. Same answer to you.
Most people don’t state “I’m a husband.” They usually make a reference to the person they married.
When I marry my boyfriend, I will refer to him as my husband and I will be his husband.
People who are so concerned about “real” husbands and “counterfeit” marriages need to worry no longer. If you don’t think that my marriage to the man I plan to spend the rest of my life with as a real marriage, then why do you care? It’s can’t be bothering you in the least if it’s not “real.”
Say “I’m a toaster.” What the hell difference does it make to you what word gay couples use to refer to their spouses?
your right there is no meaning in words, imbecile
Husband means married man. Legalizing same sex marriage won’t change this. If two men are married to each other, they both are each other’s husbands.
On Election Day, what will Mainers do?
Will they support the incumbent President in hopes that he will continue to send this nation over the economic cliff while blindly holding their hands out for government freebies that will eventually run out as long as we’re on the present path to our own destruction?
Will they vote to further corrupt the family structure by allowing the traditional man/woman marriage to be taken over by a minority that chose their lifestyle and also chose to scream for unearned “equality” rather than accept a logical compromise of civil unions?
Or will Mainers break their recent history of leaning to the left and stand up for morals and for America?
I guess we’ll see on Election Day.
“Will they vote to recognize the rights of ALL citizens, regardless of sexual orientation?”
FTFY
Since sexual orientation is a choice, no.
Really? Because I didn’t choose anything. Also, if thats the case, then I must also assume that you want religion removed from the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as religion is a choice.
Cite a study appearing in a peer-reviewed scientific journal that argues (with supporting evidence) that sexual orientation is a choice.
Got any scientific evidence that suggests genetic predispostion to orientation?
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/06/14/499483/study-male-genetic-homosexuality/
Are you a geneticist? Or a psychologist? You can’t be saying that all human behavior boils down to simply a gene, can you?
I think the point is that it comes down to a choice on if someone CHOOSES to be gay.
Just like you chose one day in the past to become heterosexual?
Geez, we just finished mapping all genes. It’s going to take awhile to find the combination. We still don’t even know exactly which genes cause depression to run in families.
So does that mean that this will be temporary then? Once we find the defective gene that causes things like depression, addiction, alcoholism, etc. we can cure them and do away with funding the rehab centers then?
And then, once we locate the defective gene that causes homosexuality we can make those people normal? Could we find the whiny gene first so we don’t have to listen to them?
We’re having a hard enough time trying to get rid of HIV. What makes you think we can necessarily cure a genetic defect? In some cases, a predisposition to depression or anxiety can actually be a good thing. It’s when the circumstances create a full-blown case of such diseases we run into trouble.
As for homosexuality, that’s not a disease. Nor is it a genetic defect — not any more than being left-handed is.
If the goal is to create “normal” people, we are going to be in big trouble as a species.
If you “do away with” any gene, you will have much larger problems on your hands.
EJ, I’ve said this to you before and I’ll say it again…I’m gay and didn’t choose my sexual orientation. What part of that don’t you understand? Are you that arrogant to think you know what makes gay people have same-gender attractions?
Lifestyle is a choice. Orientation isn’t. You would be smart to learn the difference.
so inmates who were never demonstrated gay until in prison became gay because they didn’t have a choice? Rats subjected to loud rock and roll during the first days of their lives became homo while other infants rats raised in a normal environment didn’t turn out gay. Keep deluding yourself that you didn’t have a choice
Your post is bordering on the ridiculous. Prison rape? Rats subjected to extreme conditions?
Puh-leez…
I don’t know what causes homosexuality…I wouldn’t pretend to know. But from my personal experience, choice isn’t it.
I’ve been attracted to persons of the same gender all of my life. My brother, raised in the same home under the same conditions, is straight.
I have many gay friends and there’s not one among them who thinks he or she had any choice in who they are attracted to. Did you make a choice as to who you find attractive or is it simply a natural reaction?
If you’re not gay, don’t pretend to know what it’s like. You’re not qualified.
I doubt he or she is qualified to talk about any type of sexuality, let alone homosexuality. It just sounds like The_tis is just jealous of all the awesome same sex couples.
I’m not qualified b/c I disagree with deviant behavior. What makes you qualfied, because your atteractede by naked men?
You’re not qualified because you have thoroghly proven that you have no idea what you are talking about. And yes, being gay makes me qualied to talk about what it is like being gay.
No one said rape I put someone in a prison for 20 years with a cell mate and I’m sure gay behavior will develop out of lonliness
Once gay always gay….BS
Behavior =/= orientation.
Opinions are always welcome, but you’re so far out of your depth on this topic that you’re embarrassing yourself. Unless of course you’re a self-loathing gay person who can’t get a date and is just bitter. Is that the case?
That, or he just feels guilty about wanting a date.
Use your brain. There is a different between status and behavior. That’s why we don’t call someone who occasionally takes a photo on their phone an artist for example.
“Use your brain. ” – Well, there’s the problem. You can’t use what you don’t have…
I know how to use my anatomy as nature intended
As do I. Just look where the prostate is located.
Ohhhh….. its the rock in roll that cause the gays! Thanks!
Point is that the rats weren’t born gay
People who commit homosexual rape in prison are not usually gay. You know this, right?
Homosexuality has been present in cave drawings. How were they exposed?
Inmates are not (necessarily) gay. Being gay is about who you are attracted to, much more than just a sex act. Gays can have sex with the opposite gender, that doesn’t mean that is their preference. The act of sex has little to nothing to do with orientation.
Sounds like confused deviants
Why do you get special rights for following your mythology?
It’s just a choice.
Nothing more.
The country wasnt founded on gay values but Christian values which gives parsons the rights
Treaty of Tripoli 1797 “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion”. Seems like you are, yet again, wrong.
That’s an obvious lie.
Even if that were true, your religion is just a choice.
Here’s what a founder of our nation has to say about such absurd, overt, and outright lying :
Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782
Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787
Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus Christ,” so that it would read “A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.
-Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, in reference to the Virginia Act for Religious Freedom
I concur with you strictly in your opinion of the comparative merits of atheism and demonism, and really see nothing but the latter in the being worshipped by many who think themselves Christians.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Richard Price, Jan. 8, 1789 (Richard Price had written to TJ on Oct. 26. about the harm done by religion and wrote “Would not Society be better without Such religions? Is Atheism less pernicious than Demonism?”)
I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Hopkinson, March 13, 1789
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between church and State.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802
The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814
Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus.”
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816
I can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshipped a false god, he did.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it [the Apocalypse], and I then considered it merely the ravings of a maniac, no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to General Alexander Smyth, Jan. 17, 1825
Well Thomas Jefferson founded it on adulterer and rape values when he fathered children from his underage slaves.
Abe Lincoln ? Thought it was, Tom Jefferson.
Correct your post to Thomas Jefferson
LOL sorry I started with a quote from one and a fact from the other and mixed the two.
When did you choose not to be gay ?
Natural biology cdreates heterosexual drives and not deviant gay drives
Tell that to the bonobo monkeys…
As before, your lack of biology creds draws notice.
Prove it.
I was not asking you, I asked EJ.
But I’ll ask you the same thing.
How old were you when you chose not to be gay ?
1500 natural species practice bi sexual and homosexuality. It has been around since cave drawings. Gay marriage was the norm in many societies.
He’ll never answer that question, because you’d know the truth.
False. Makeup exam tomorrow.
Prove it.
Please tell us when you decided to be straight, and how you went about coming to that decision.
When did you choose not to be gay ?
PLease cite documentation of this and documentation of a heterosexual gene. While you are at it, please find the genes that cause all cancers and birth defects because they havent been found either.
From your other recent posts, I know your current “high horse” is the Presidential election, but that’s not really under discussion here. If you insist on inserting it, I’ll ask what’s your opinion on the Mourdoch (Indiana Senate cand.) outrageous statements?
I don’t live in Indiana and haven’t read the story. Don’t you think the people in Indiana can take care of things themselves?
I did, however, grow up in Maine and am concerned about the direction the state is leaning. Therefore I comment.
Unfortunately, Mr. Romney has strongly endorsed Moudoch and said he must be the next senator in Washington. The fact the Mr. Romney is closely tied to this man, who thinks it’s “god’s plan” for women to be raped, is very telling about the Republican candidate’s views on women’s rights. This is why people in Maine are concerned about candidates in other states. They affect us on a national level.
I think what he said is dopey, but he did not say it’s God’s plan for women to be raped. He said if a woman gets pregnant as a result of rape, the pregnancy is God’s plan. I don’t think he should have said that either, but read the story, his words, not just inflammatory headlines.
Much more than inflammatory headlines. Reread yourself. He tried to duck it later, unsuccessfully I might add.
I actually watched him and that is my interpretation of his disturbing diatribe. Men across the Republican platform are working hard to put government in charge of women’s health decisions. This is extremely concerning. I hope other women are understanding that our Mormon candidate and his running mate will set women back 40 years.
But she wouldn’t be pregnant if she weren’t raped.
Your arguing semantics over a rape? What you stated makes no sense at all. If a diety plans a pregnancy, than that diety would have to plan the form of insemination, right.
I’m not defending what this guy said or what his intent was or what God’s plan may or may not have been. My point was that the spin was inferring he said the rape was God’s plan as opposed to the creation of life. I was addressing the media coverage not his remarks.
That doesn’t make it better….
A women is the victim of a violent act and gets pregnant and the pregnancy is gods plan?
If god existed and cared about his ‘child’ he would have protected her from the act in the first place and not burdened her with nine months of pregnancy and a life long reminder of that terrible moment .
The story is elsewhere in today’s BDN. Drew a lot of comments, I was surprised not to see yours among them.
You’re only interested in read the your fringe right sources, that’s why ;)
You dont live here EJ. If you really cared you would love here and vote here. You really need to spend more time praying and less time being angry sir. God bless.
I pray constantly. And I’m rarely angry. As far as living in Maine, if there were job opportunities, no state taxes, and an Air Force Base, I would probably live there. But, since Loring closed due to our weak Senators and fudged maintenance numbers, and the high taxes and miserable job opportunities, I’m enjoying life in the Panhandle.
And God has and does bless me every minute I’m living.
I live here. I have a professional job. I have an education, My child just joined the Air National Guard and will be stationed in Bangor. I can afford my taxes. This applies to my sister and brother who are also professionals and are employed in Maine. Stop dissing us and Maine. There is an AF base in NH. Why go all the way to Fla?
If God truly blessed you , you would be kind not mean. Know that I prayed for you today.
You always comment in sweeping generalities. I’m a Mainer. I’m left leaning. I’m a very moral person. Just because someone has different beliefs than you does not make them immoral. I’m sure there are many right learning Mainers who are immoral.
“Let me always seek the truth, but spare me the company of those who have found it.”
Hah,
just check out the Zumba john list!
“unearned equality” — what a disgusting remark. We are all equal and we all deserve equal protection under the law.
Have fun voting in Florida.
Christians have done a fine job damaging the institution of marriage quite well, with divorce, out-of-wedlock children, domestic abuse, etc.
Oh, and it was under President Bush’s watch that the financial structure of this nation almost collapsed. If it takes eight years to damage the system, you can’t realistically expect it to take only four years to repair it, just like a building can burn down in one night but take more than a year to be rebuilt.
So 2008 never happened?
Yes I would rather vote for a billionaire who has been investigated for a ponsey scheme and has lied repeatedly on tape.
The congress is responsible for the economic cliff. Only congress can introduce economic legislation. They created this mess, it is up to them to fix it.
What is incredible is that so many evangelicals are willing to vote for a Mormon.
Nancy Duncan, E. J. Pecoraro: good letters.
R. Payne: I agree with some but not all of your letter.
M. McCabe: as pointed out by others, Civil Unions arenot valid everywher including Maine. If you men a government issued marriage license, yes they are available (to hetero couples only) and are the only legal document involved. The church wedding/blessing is the only thing they confer, which makes them more like a “redefinition”.
Elizabeth Jalbert Pecoraro, I’m not sure what means you would approve that a teacher or institution can evaluate the quality or knowledge of it’s students.
Testing is a method used for almost everything. If a child goes through their education experience and are never tested, how are we to know if they absorbed any or all of the information that they were supposed to be getting?
They will be tested in real life. Many job applicants today are tested as part of their application process. I’m quite sure that you wouldn’t take a medication if it were untested.
Exactly. If you are doing something to produce a particular outcome, you have to have a way to measure whether you’ve accomplished it or not. Kids learn–and demonstrate their knowledge–differently, so I believe there ought to be a variety of testing methods. That is, unless people want to concede that school is simply for exposure to information and experiences, the results of which are immaterial.
River Payne, I would vote for Cynthia Dill if the choice was between her and Charlie Summers. However there is the Angus King factor. King seems to have more support than either Dill or Summers. Since Summers has declared himself to be a puppet to Grover Norquist, I’ll vote for Angus King in self defense.
I’m with you, no way in hell would I want Charlie Summers representing us in Washington. and anyone who signs Grover Norquist pledge will never be voted for by me. Mittens has signed that pledge and he should be banned from running as he is not representing the full country, or even the 53% after he dismissed the 47%.
Hey Mike,
Spot on. Even in England where gays can have all legal rights of a married couple they want to get “married” It’s not about rights for gays but they want to feel vindicated as normal and not deviant.
Think about a plug and an outlet, when the plug goes into the outlet they are married. Two plugs or two outlets doesnt make a marriage but something thats wrong and unnatural
Huh? Now you’re really over the top. Maybe sex is the only factor in your definition of “traditional” marriage. If so, I have nothing but pity for you (and any spouse you may have or acquire).
Well, now that’s just odd, seeing as my boyfriend and I “fit” just fine…
Yeah and God put us on separate continents so we wouldn’t mix too, right?
Actually, no, there are court cases in the UK where the judge has actually stated that people legally married elsewhere that had moved to the UK, where their legal marriages are automatically converted into civil partnerships, were in fact being discriminated against.
Look it up.
So, no, the argument that they have the same rights as married couples is obviously not true.
Try again with a more compelling lie.
I’m not disagreeing with you or doubting you, but could you provide a link to that court case? I’d like to read more about it.
You watched that on youtube. NOt all heterosexuals want to get married either but some of us want to and that should be legal.
So when two heterosexuals have anal sex it is ok? What about lesbians? Stop shooting for the sex part. It is about love and companionship. God Bless you and know that someone prayed for you today.
If you don’t want to enter into a gay marriage, don’t. Does this actually affect you in some way?
It does, because apparently The_tis can’t stop thinking about the gay sex they have.
It makes sense. Why should I get to have all the guilt free gay sex that I want, but when The_tis does it, he feels guilty? If The_tis can’t be happy, then no one gets to be happy.
Apparently. Does he know what a lot of heterosexual, God-fearing people do behind closed doors? Why are we so worried what genders they all are?
The state has the authority to use the word “marriage” to refer to legally recognized civil unions and has done so. Religious organizations do not have a copyright on the word or exclusive control on how the word will be used. And the state can redefine it. Abraham Lincoln, the 15th and 19th Amendments, and more redefined “human being” and “citizen.”
Tell that to the thousands of animals that engage in same sex behavior.
How many of those animals mate for life? and raise families? NONE There is no example in nature of gay mating or marriage. Will you also look to change the meaning of mating?
http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/12/07/gay-penguin-pair-adopts-a-baby-chick-in-china/
Penguins seem to do it with some frequency. Besides, most animals do not mate for life.
But several do, contradicting his argeument.
I know that some animals mate for life, including same sex pairings. I was just commenting on how most animals, in either opposite sex or same sex pairings do not mate for life. Instead, they do their “business” and move on.
Then acknowledge it instead of being so absolute. Thanks for acknowledging.
I didn’t think I was being “absolute” about anything.
Show me one pair of same sex critters that regularly mate for life and raise young.
Are you really that stupid? I did post one pair of same sex animals that mate for life and raise young. See the article I posted about penguins.
What a stupid argument. Give me examples of animals that practice religion. Oh? None? Guess religion is unnatural according to your own rubric.
Point is: mating of same sex animals for life doesn’t exist naturally.
Point is, I’ve provided examples that prove you wrong.
And my point is that worshiping God doesn’t exist naturally. I’m just using the rubric you came up with. You’re just as unnatural as a gay people.
At least you admit gay people are unnatural and here I thought you were just another i diot
Next, they will want to redefine the meaning of adult.
Well, you are right — wild animals don’t have marriage ceremonies.
nor do they maintain lifetime same sex relationships
Nor do they maintain lifetime opposite sex relationships. What’s your point?
SSM doesn’t exist anywhere else. If SSM is what you gays really need to feel as a normal member of society okay but you are deluding yourself because your behavior, despite odd obscure references in history and nature is abnormal.
Like I said, opposite sex marrige doesn’t exist anywhere else. I get it, he broke your heart and you’re bitter. But just because you can’t find a man to love you right now, doesn’t mean you should just give up hope. Your prince charming is out there somewhere.
animals engage in a myriad of behaviors. They do not wear clothing, they eat with their hands. They leave fecal matter on peoples’ property, they run out in the street when a vehicle is coming. I do not believe in evolution, however it appears you do, so I believe you can reach the conclusion that we have evolved.
First of all, I don’t “believe” in evolution. I have a basic understanding of evolution. Second of all, what is the rest of your comment supposed to imply? That humans have “evolved” beyond homosexuality? Guess what? There are evolutionary reasons for homosexuality, so of course it would stay.
I just think that if you want to truly punish gays you should let us have legal marriage. That way we could be just as miserable as you The_Tis.
ha! if it is the actual gay sex they are concerned about, they should be endorsing gay marriage. everyone knows that sex ends after marriage!
You wanted evidence that homosexuality is natural, then, when I give it, you complain. Jesus H. Christ on a cracker, there is no pleasing people like you. Maybe that’s why you are so against same sex marriage, you’re just jealous…
“Ignorance is bliss”. There was a study done recently which showed those who were ignorant only read or listened to a source of information which confirmed their already narrow view. It seems you have been conversing with one such.
I figured as much.
And it applies to you too.
Actually I read extensively, which is how I know no right wing pundits have ever mentioned that the Libyans kicked the militia out of Bengahzi and have held parades in support of Obama and the US. Off topic, I know, but just one example.
Was Jesus’ middle name Hussein? if it was he might been a Muslim! (;0p !
Well, considering the “whitening” of Jesus, it probably stands for Henry. It’s funny, I have had people get mad at me for telling them Jesus wasn’t white.
So have I.
It’s a pretty safe bet to say Jesus had a very dark complexion.
Just admit that animals do in fact engage in same sex pairings. I’m sorry that “reality” is so inconvenient for your bigotry…
LOL and yet you’re the one obsessing about what they do in bed.
Not obsessed but just pointing out that it is deviant behavior for a man to covet another mans anatomy
You seem awfully dedicated to thinking about hot, steamy, man sex. Projecting much?
predfer lesbian sex
Yet obsessed with the gay sex…
u c right thru me lol
I’m glad that you admit it.
Well there is something wrong with you if you believe that any marriage or union is about coveting another’s genitals.
Mr. McCabe, you will find that the government’s definitions of words differs quite a bit from the dictionary’s. This is because laws need to be precise, to give fair notice to all what is expected. A dictionary, on the other hand, usually relies on general definitions that creep their way into popular usage.
So with that in mind, you may want to re-check the definition of “marriage” found in Merriam-Webster: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage.
Find some obscure reference? Your whole belief is formed from a couple of passages from one book.
Atheist
So what?
Nancy Duncan, Thank you.
Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814Thank you Thomas Jefferson
Carol Kemmerer~
My mailbox has been littered by the GOP and their smear campaign with all their nonfactual stuff.
I don’t have a shredder, my wood stove appreciates the fire starter.
NO on Question 1 is the way the vote should be done!
The agenda of the homosexual lobby is far more sinister than many are willing to acknowledge.
4lifeandfreedom*
*Offer only valid if heterosexual and christian
Actually, I have answered that question several times. I chose to accept the way God made me and not swim against the tide. God makes us all the same. We make the choices that shape our lives. The homosexual lifestyle is a choice, whether made consciously or through the deceptive powers of Satan. At least that’s what I believe, and since this is America, and for now America is still free, I have the freedom to believe that way.
By the way, I spent over 20 years in uniform defending the rights of others to live the lives the way they choose to live them as long as their choices don’t infringe on others. I believe that SSM infringes on the moral majority in this nation. I also believe that civil unions should suffice as a viable compromise. However, the gay community is not willing to compromise as long as they think they can force others to accept their chosen lifestyle.
Civil unions do not convey all of the legal rights that marriage does.