October 22, 2009
Journal Tribune editorial
The debate over gay marriage is exposing some irreconcilable differences in our communities, between people who take a more secular view of marriage and those who believe that the word connotes a religious sacrament.
Question 1, as many now know, is an effort to repeal the gay marriage law that was approved this spring by the Maine legislature and signed into law by Gov. John Baldacci.
As the vote nears, it seems clear that the way citizens will decide on Question 1 will be based on their deepest held values, not just their beliefs or opinions, so the efforts of the Yes on 1 and No on 1 campaigns seem largely in vain. Psychology holds that values are the one thing that just do not sway, under any form of persuasion.
The conservatives who tie orthodox religion, procreation and tradition into their definition of marriage will not be convinced into thinking that it’s just fine for two men or two women to be defined as “married.”
Just the same, those who take a more liberal view of marriage don’t see any reason to deny two people who love each other the ultimate expression of that love.
We at the Journal Tribune fall into that latter category and publicly state our support of the same-sex marriage legislation. We do not believe that any harm can come from allowing gay couples the same definition that heterosexuals have for a life-long commitment to another human being.
October 21, 2009
Rachel Maddow talks with Jesse Connolly of No on 1/Protect Maine Equality about the fight in Maine for marriage equality.
October 20, 2009
by Bob Drogin | Los Angeles Times
Jesse Connolly of No on 1/Protect Maine Equality. Photo by Pat Wellenbach for AP
Reporting from Portland, Maine – Brandon Brawner spent a year training Los Angeles groups that opposed Proposition 8. Now the West Hollywood activist runs a phone bank here to block a repeal of Maine’s new same-sex marriage law on election day.
“The tactics they use are fear and lies,” Brawner, 29, said of his opponents.
October 19, 2009
Portland Press Herald editorial
Sometimes the law has to move quickly to keep up with a reality that has developed over time.
Maine voters will be faced with that kind of change on Nov. 3, when they are asked in Question 1 to reject a law that would extend civil marriage status to same-sex couples.
While this change in the law could seem abrupt to some Maine voters, it reflects the way people are really living now in cities and towns all over our state. That’s why we urge people to vote “no,” to allow this reasonable law to go into effect.
October 9, 2009
Even before penning her official response [to questions regarding claims made by the Yes on 1 ads], State Attorney General Janet Mills said today, she’s aware of the [Yes on 1] ads, and pretty sure she knows what her answer will be.
“I’m appalled at those ads as well. I have no reason to believe that a vote on Question One allowing the law to stand would dictate any change in the curriculum in Maine schools.”
October 9, 2009
by Jason Horowitz | Washington Post
Canvassers are knocking on the doors of saltbox houses and slogans are pinned to yellow slickers. But outside the Pine Tree State, next month’s referendum on gay marriage is the vote that dare not speak its name.
Even as President Obama delivers a high-profile speech about gay rights on Saturday — the eve of a national march for equality on the Mall — Maine’s landmark gay marriage legislation remains practically a secret. With low-volume murmurs of support from the institutional advocates and opponents of gay marriage, Maine’s operatives, on both sides of the issue, are curious to find themselves nearly alone as they contest an election that will determine the national gay-rights agenda.