For My Friends In Maine....

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    For My Friends In Maine....

    This has been a personal issue for me, as I have many friends and family both gay and straight who live in Maine.  As the voting day draws to a close and I see record turnout for an off-year election, my heart goes out to them and others who refuse to be relegated to "second-class citizen" status.

    I believe it's ultimately ironic for equal marriage rights to be framed as a partisan issue when it should be EVERY American citizen's proposition that, indeed, all men and women are created equal and should be treated as such by the law that's duty-bound to protect them.

    I hold great hope that the people of Maine will recognize the out-of-state proselytizers for who they really are and acknowledge their own responsibility in securing the future of their great state as a place of tolerance, hardiness and righteous attrition.  I hope their message rings true all the way to D.C. - loud enough so the true federalists are woken from their slumber to undo what never should have been done in the first place.


    So, I'll be watching and praying and thinking about our mutual friends whose lives were cut short and who were unable to see this day.  I do so from the heart but also from the knowledge that it's the right thing to do.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    I am straight and cannot marry another of the same sex either. Neither can gay people. Equal.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    In Response to Re: For My Friends In Maine....:
    I am straight and cannot marry another of the same sex either. Neither can gay people. Equal.
    Posted by sk8ter2008


    Sorry, homes, but I'm taken....


    ;^))
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Charles2008. Show Charles2008's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    Matty,

    I understand that this issue may be more personal to you than to me, and that you have a different perspective on it.  But, should we not consider that maybe the country as a whole is not ready for same sex marriage.

    I think a less divisive approach would be to ensure that nationwide same sex couples have all their civil rights protected as far as all protections that marriage grants (maybe with civil unions).  What does the name matter if the resultant protection does the same?  In the process we lower the tension, and allow society the time to absorb the change.

    Personally, I am neither for or against.  But, I do not think it is worth the fight if the alternative is more palatable for all. Call me an incrementalist!


     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from kaijilly. Show kaijilly's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    As a straight person,I hope that the people of Maine do the right thing and vote to keep their nose out of other people's business.  I married the man of my dreams and firmly believe that everyone should have the right to marry the man (or woman) of their dreams, whether someone else marries a man or a woman really doesn't affect me in any way, so why should I have any say in it?  Its hard enough to decide what is the best thing for me to do without judging what is best for someone else, let  them decide for themselves.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    In Response to Re: For My Friends In Maine....:

    Matty, I understand that this issue may be more personal to you than to me, and that you have a different perspective on it.  But, should we not consider that maybe the country as a whole is not ready for same sex marriage. I think a less divisive approach would be to ensure that nationwide same sex couples have all their civil rights protected as far as all protections that marriage grants (maybe with civil unions).  What does the name matter if the resultant protection does the same?  In the process we lower the tension, and allow society the time to absorb the change. Personally, I am neither for or against.  But, I do not think it is worth the fight if the alternative is more palatable for all. Call me an incrementalist!
    Posted by Charles2008



    With respect to the "country as a whole", this particular issue is about Maine and Mainers and the state they desire for themselves.


    Any "tension" as it were is created mostly by opposition, not encouragement - by the desire to obstruct rather than the need to uplift.  There really is no alternative, if you think about it.  Why should there be when we hold freedom and equality so necessary for our survival??

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from schadenfreude98. Show schadenfreude98's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    I still remember that first time a girl put her hands down my pants back in middle school....Wow..what a feeling! 

    Hard to believe that kind of feeling can happen between people of the same sex but I guess it does....go figure  Good luck Maine gays!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from macnh1. Show macnh1's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    In Response to For My Friends In Maine....:
    This has been a personal issue for me, as I have many friends and family both gay and straight who live in Maine.  As the voting day draws to a close and I see record turnout for an off-year election, my heart goes out to them and others who refuse to be relegated to "second-class citizen" status. I believe it's ultimately ironic for equal marriage rights to be framed as a partisan issue when it should be EVERY American citizen's proposition that, indeed, all men and women are created equal and should be treated as such by the law that's duty-bound to protect them. I hold great hope that the people of Maine will recognize the out-of-state proselytizers for who they really are and acknowledge their own responsibility in securing the future of their great state as a place of tolerance, hardiness and righteous attrition.  I hope their message rings true all the way to D.C. - loud enough so the true federalists are woken from their slumber to undo what never should have been done in the first place. So, I'll be watching and praying and thinking about our mutual friends whose lives were cut short and who were unable to see this day.  I do so from the heart but also from the knowledge that it's the right thing to do.
    Posted by Mattyhorn


    Mathew,

    How do you expect to reach the masses with your heartfelt words when you use words like "proselytizers????"

    Live and let live.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from giraffe-77. Show giraffe-77's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    Matty.  I'm with you on this.  I have 2 points:

    1)  It was a very close vote - one that wouldn't have been that close 10 years ago.  They still claim it as a major victory for DOMA.

    2)  If "marriage" is such an elitist, exclusional, private club, so prejudiced and unaccepting, then WHO NEEDS IT?  Let them have their "marriage" and be miserable in the isolation they create for themselves.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from giraffe-77. Show giraffe-77's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    3)  If I go to a wedding and spray paint the bride and groom, would that be considered a hate crime?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    Gay marriage is now a whopping 0 for 31 when put to a vote of the people. Eventually you may win one..after all, even ARod came out of a worse postseason slump...

    Meanwhile, here's some free advice for gay marriage supporters, on how to win an election:
    --don't call the people you are trying to convince "bigots"
    --don't arrogantly compare yourselves to the civil rights activists of the 50s and 60s, who truly risked their lives for racial equality
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    In Response to Re: For My Friends In Maine....:
    Matty, I understand that this issue may be more personal to you than to me, and that you have a different perspective on it.  But, should we not consider that maybe the country as a whole is not ready for same sex marriage. I think a less divisive approach would be to ensure that nationwide same sex couples have all their civil rights protected as far as all protections that marriage grants (maybe with civil unions).  What does the name matter if the resultant protection does the same?  In the process we lower the tension, and allow society the time to absorb the change. Personally, I am neither for or against.  But, I do not think it is worth the fight if the alternative is more palatable for all. Call me an incrementalist!
    Posted by Charles2008


    I agree. I actually don't care if they call it marriage. It has no bearing on my marriage. I also have no understanding why it makes a difference to a gay couple what they call it (civil union or marriage) as long as the law sees them as equal.

    The first step should be to get equal protection under the law and civil unions does that. Take that victory and savor it.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ohhhhh-Bammy. Show Ohhhhh-Bammy's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    Matty,
    Sorry the vote didn't go your (their) way.. truly.

    I do pray that the legislature and/or courts don't AGAIN override the voice of the majority.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ohhhhh-Bammy. Show Ohhhhh-Bammy's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    Gay marriage supporters, who had cast the question as a classic civil rights struggle, had hoped that Maine voters would become the first in the country to sanction gay marriage.

    It is currently legal in five states, but only by virtue of politicians or judges.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    A sad day for freedom in the Pine Tree State...but the good fight continues....

    Progress is indeed slow.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    In Response to Re: For My Friends In Maine....:
    Gay marriage is now a whopping 0 for 31 when put to a vote of the people. Eventually you may win one..after all, even ARod came out of a worse postseason slump... Meanwhile, here's some free advice for gay marriage supporters, on how to win an election: --don't call the people you are trying to convince "bigots" --don't arrogantly compare yourselves to the civil rights activists of the 50s and 60s, who truly risked their lives for racial equality
    Posted by BobinVa


    Can you give a rational reason to oppose equal rights to gay couples?  Certainly there is no evidence from Massachusetts of society tearing itself apart over the situation.  Gay people marry and raise families and...  nothing happens.

    Rights of minorities should not be determined by majority vote.  Virtually every Southern state prohibited interracial marriage up through the 60's.  That was certainly a product of bigotry and also majority vote.  Draw your own conclusions on this (obviously) analagous situation.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    Jeff Jacoby:
    "a fundamental gulf separates the civil rights movement from the demand for same-sex marriage. One was a fight for genuine equality, for the right of black Americans to live on the same terms, and under the same restrictions, as whites. The other is a demand to change the terms on which marriage has always been available by giving it a meaning it has never before had. That isn't civil rights - and playing the race card doesn't change that fact."

    Reuben, can you give a rational reason to oppose equal rights to polygamous marriages? "Rights of minorities should not be determined by majority vote."
    Certainly there is no evidence of society tearing itself apart over the situation.  Polygamous people marry and raise families and...  nothing happens.

    This is not slippery slope, this is reality. Under your logic, the definition of marriage must mean every situation...so it ends up meaning nothing.....
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from giraffe-77. Show giraffe-77's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    The definition of marriage has been in constant change over the centuries.  People used to arrange marriages between young teenagers.  Some Mideastern countries still accept multiple wives (harem mentality).   Some couples just get married by the Justice of the Peace, and some do full blown marriage ceremonies in churches.  Some have "open relationships" and some consider themselves married by Common Law.

    How can anyone say that the definition of marriage is being threatened when there isn't one to begin with?  Divorce used to be a religious taboo and now it's very common.  Women used to be considered the property of their husband and now they can actually own their own property and vote, too.  There is no "definition of marriage" to threaten.  It never stops changing.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    In Response to Re: For My Friends In Maine....:
    Matty.  I'm with you on this.  I have 2 points: 1)  It was a very close vote - one that wouldn't have been that close 10 years ago.  They still claim it as a major victory for DOMA. 2)  If "marriage" is such an elitist, exclusional, private club, so prejudiced and unaccepting, then WHO NEEDS IT?  Let them have their "marriage" and be miserable in the isolation they create for themselves.
    Posted by giraffe-77


    It was close but, it was an off election year and due to low turn out it favors the supporters of gay rights.

    They could have got some help also but, didn't! Go figure.

    !http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33626383/ns/politics-more_politics/


     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ohhhhh-Bammy. Show Ohhhhh-Bammy's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    SAN FRANCISCO - Stunned and angry, national gay rights leaders Wednesday blamed scare-mongering ads — and President Barack Obama's lack of engagement — for a bitter election setback in Maine that could alter the dynamics for both sides in the gay-marriage debate.

    Conservatives, in contrast, celebrated Maine voters' rejection of a law that would have allowed gay couples to wed, depicting it as a warning shot that should deter politicians in other states from pushing for same-sex marriage.

    "Every time the citizens have voted on marriage, they have always sided with natural marriage," said Mathew Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel, a Florida-based Christian legal group. "Maine dramatically illustrates the will of the people, and politicians should wake up and listen."

    Gay activists were frustrated that Obama, who insists he staunchly supports their overall civil rights agenda, didn't speak out forcefully in defense of Maine's marriage law before Tuesday's referendum. The law was repealed in a vote of 53 percent to 47 percent.

    "President Obama missed an opportunity to state his position against these discriminatory attacks with the clarity and moral imperative that would have helped in this close fight," said Evan Wolfson of the national advocacy group Freedom to Marry. "The anti-gay forces are throwing millions of dollars into various unsubtle ads aimed at scaring people, so subtle statements from the White House are not enough."

    The White House, asked about the criticism, had no immediate comment.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mattyhorn. Show Mattyhorn's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    In Response to Re: For My Friends In Maine....:
    Jeff Jacoby: "a fundamental gulf separates the civil rights movement from the demand for same-sex marriage. One was a fight for genuine equality, for the right of black Americans to live on the same terms, and under the same restrictions, as whites. The other is a demand to change the terms on which marriage has always been available by giving it a meaning it has never before had. That isn't civil rights - and playing the race card doesn't change that fact."
    Posted by BobinVa


    That's a faulty conclusion (and conveniently ignores "all men are created equal" as a logical principle).

    There is no "separate meaning" of marriage inherent in allowing same-sex couples to marry.  In both cases, the term refers to a civil bond built on love, friendship and trust which also happens to include legal protections and rights.  This is why no couple can be "more married" than another couple - either your married or not.

    It's almost as if Jacoby's argument is that gay couples can't love each other or support each other as much as hetero couples.  Either marriage is a right, or it isn't, and if it is, then it's by all accounts a "civil right" if denied to one group of people through no fault of their own.  That notion is absurd and plays right into the "separate but equal" canard.

    I think the term "traditional marriage" as used by the opposition is most accurate, because this debate centers on what people consider to the "traditional" definition of marriage contrary to any and all "alternative" definition(s).  In any case, there are real-life legal implications to the term "marriage" which should be the basis for consideration with regards to changing the law.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    Michelle Malkin:
    "the left-wing mafioso in Maine are targeting Americans who oppose gay marriage.

    Where are all the civility police to decry the climate of hate?

    Voters on Tuesday repealed the state’s same sex marriage law after an emotionally charged campaign that drew large numbers to the polls and focused national attention on Maine.

    …"In a defiant speech to several hundred lingering supporters, No on 1 campaign manager Jesse Connolly pledged that his side “will not quit until we know where every single one of these votes lives.”

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BilltheKat. Show BilltheKat's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    I love beautiful Maine, inland and coastal. Grew up there until I was 15. I go back there now and the people who live there freak me out. Hicks and rednecks. Call me an elitist all you want, but there are some very backward-asssed folks up there.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    Re: For My Friends In Maine....

    In Response to Re: For My Friends In Maine....:
    Jeff Jacoby: "a fundamental gulf separates the civil rights movement from the demand for same-sex marriage. One was a fight for genuine equality, for the right of black Americans to live on the same terms, and under the same restrictions, as whites. The other is a demand to change the terms on which marriage has always been available by giving it a meaning it has never before had. That isn't civil rights - and playing the race card doesn't change that fact." Reuben, can you give a rational reason to oppose equal rights to polygamous marriages? "Rights of minorities should not be determined by majority vote." Certainly there is no evidence of society tearing itself apart over the situation.  Polygamous people marry and raise families and...  nothing happens. This is not slippery slope, this is reality. Under your logic, the definition of marriage must mean every situation...so it ends up meaning nothing.....
    Posted by BobinVa


    Don't change the subject.  Slippery slopes can be imagined everywhere.  I am sure the people who supported criminalizing interracial marriage thought there was a slippery slope there too.

    Come on: it is basic constitutional law that there has to be a rational basis for a legal prohibition.  Can you come up with one?  How does gay marriage harm anyone?  Stick to the topic at hand.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share