Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Gay-marriage supporters, opponents square off
10.29.2009 10:30am EDT
(Portland, Me.) A supporter and an opponent of same-sex marriage made their respective cases on live television Wednesday, less than a week before a statewide referendum on whether to allow gay marriage in Maine.
The referendum is about equality under the law, Mary Bonauto of Protect Maine Equality said in a debate before an audience of nearly 370 people at the University of Southern Maine.“We have people who want to make a legal commitment, take on responsibilities, who want to be a family,” Bonauto said. “Why would anyone in Maine want to stand in the way of those families and their happiness?”
Brian Souchet of Stand for Marriage Maine said the bill represents a “radical redefinition” of marriage that could lead to unexpected consequences, including gay marriage being taught in schools. The purpose of marriage, he said, is to “bring forth the next generation of society.”
“No special interest group should be able to hijack the institution of marriage to suit their own needs,” he said. “In my opinion, that’s exactly what we have going on here.”
Maine voters on Tuesday will have the final say on whether to keep the same-sex marriage law passed by the Legislature last spring and signed into law by Gov. John Baldacci on May 6. Question 1, which asks voters if they want to repeal the law, was put on the ballot after opponents collected enough valid signatures to force a referendum.
The hourlong debate, which aired on WMTW-TV, was the first live televised debate on the question held before a live audience.
Bonauto and Souchet were asked a wide range of questions about same-sex marriage touching upon schools, the economy, churches, laws in other states and federal laws.
But the recurring themes were tradition and equality.
Souchet said same-sex marriage is a social experiment that is likely to go awry. A marriage between a man and a woman is sharply different from a marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman, he said.
“They are fundamentally different relationships,” he said. “It is not discriminatory to treat things that are different differently under the law.”
Bonauto said supporters aren’t asking to redefine marriage, only to be able to join the institution.
“If (our) side wins, I’m pretty sure you’ll see an outbreak of happiness and lots of weddings that will be very, very joyful,” she said.
On Tuesday, Maine will become the first state where voters ultimately decide the fate of a gay-marriage law passed by state lawmakers.
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and Vermont now issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, and New Hampshire’s same-sex marrriage law goes into effect Jan. 1.
The debate was sponsored by WMTW, the university and MaineMedia Today, which owns the Portland Press Herald and two other daily papers in Maine.
If you would listen to the lyrics of this song, you will know what God expects from all of us. One (Univeral Theme Song) http://www.rmusic.com/unsigned/johnnie_newkirk_jr.html Listen and Learn.
Does anyone else hear how loud opponents to gay marriage are talking themselves into circles?? I love the comment about the purpose of marriage being to “bring forth the next generation of society.” So, with that argument, people should have to PROVE that they are getting married for the purpose of procreation! It’s interesting because most dictionaries have the meaning of marriage as: :”the state of being united to a person in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law.” (Merrium-Webster) I don’t know about you, but I didn’t see anything about God in there!! And then you have the Declaration of Independence that states: “…We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness…” Did anyone see where is says, “except homosexuals”??? No?! Because it doesn’t, it says ALL!! Later it was extended to include women also.
So, let’s recap: 1) the definition of marriage is a consentual contractual relationship recognized by law and 2) All men and woman, by laws, has the constitutional RIGHT to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Now…why isn’t gay marriage legal nationwide?? I’m confused! This isn’t about religious values because the whole purpose for our fore-father to create our system of government was to be free from religious persecution and to start a government that wasn’t run by religious right – hence the separation of church and state!! This is about human rights, American rights!! The Constitution of the United States! The fact that I don’t have the RIGHT to legally marry my partner of 5 years is against my civil liberties and therefore makes me a second-class citizen. If I am a second-class citizen, then why should I have to pay taxes??
so what was the perceived outcome (I wasn’t able to watch the debate in MN)? Have the polls shifted since the debate?
Did the GLBT people do a solid job of pointing out the equality issue, of reminding people that the ability to procreate shouldn’t define a marriage?
How’d it go? What’s Maine thinking/leaning towards now?
That Hate even has a chance discourages and frustrates me beyond belief.
Dave, I couldn’t have said it better! I always catch myself pussy footing around speaking the truth and my mind because I forget that I’m not in the wrong. Time and again, I’ve let ignorant people speak foolishness and I’ve kept my mouth closed and just hope they’d change the subject.
NO LONGER! Change comes one conversation/heart ata time. I’ve been on both sides. At one time I was the closeted bigot quoting my pastor, but now i’m a rainbow flag waving flamer. Since I’ve been both, I can now EASILY know which side is abosulutely RIGHT.
The truth never lies! Stillness is the language God speaks. Anything else is a bad translation.
i think i have just as much right to be as misrebal as my parents were in there marege. and then divorce the bastard
I’m commenting and reading on my local paper in Maine and there is a huge push by the hate groups to have their opposition to the new marriage equality law labelled a “moral position”.
This is b.s. and we know it. they mean that their cult has defined morality and they want it enshrined in our laws.
The only morality related issue there is the fact they want a theocracy, like the Taliban or the islamists in Iran. It is truly immoral to force your delusional beliefs on others.
I am loudly and vehemently protesting this. I try to respond to everyone that says they are voting for morality that they are wrong, they are behaving immorally and that if they value their belief system and their right to believe in it, they should honor our constitution, for their right to worship could be next.
I see so much squabbling here and I’m guilty too but lets not forget we have the moral high ground. The moral question is that about taking or not taking away rights. The sex thing has nothing to do with morality.
We also have to use the words we know to be true. bigotry, prejudice, irrational fear, being led like a sheep, being used to do the church’s dirty work, hate, joining a cult that sends you out into the world to get their restrictive rules enshrined in law to help ensure the cults future existence.
DO NOT allow “difference of opinion” “sexuality is a choice” “I’m morally against gay sex or gay marriage” to enter the discussion unchallenged.
Every time someone tells me they are uncomfortable, jesus didn’t want this, their god says just say know, why don’t I pray away the gay no matter who it is I come back with “bigoted hate filled irrationally driven to fear prejudiced pig”.
then after they stop drooling and/or trying to hit me, when they disagree I slowly and systematically point out why their position is what I described and not just a “difference of opinion”.
You can have a difference of opinion: I think blacks should be equal in all ways, you disagree. But you cannot leave it at that: you have to follow through: your difference of opinion is due to your being a bigot.
They HATE it. They cry foul. they do all the things a child does when backed into a corner knowing he is absolutely wrong.
Let’s not back down, we are in the right and have the moral high ground!
The purpose of marriage, he said, is to “bring forth the next generation of society.”
Say Huh? Excuse me, but I thought that sex and the co-mingling of two single celled bits of secretion was what brought forth the next generation. Marriage of a post-menapausal woman and an impotent old man have a snow ball’s chance of fulfilling their biological roles as parents.
Marriage is ALL about controlling wealth — who gets to share the financial benefits of tax laws, the protection of property inheritance and probate laws, and the building of economic prosperity through shared incomes within a family unit. This BS about marriage preserving traditonal families values I hear from the the radical Christian conservatives, the right-wing hate mongers, and hypocritical Republicans is a vaudville joke: Big on delivery, dependent on sexual inuendo, but weak on content and serious merit. Unfortunately, it gets a big applause and roaring laugh, but only from the shallow minded with the cheapest tickets and at the lowest common denominator of American society…the sexually frustrated.
I am SO BORED of this shit! It is mesmerizing and makes my eyes bleed as I watch this debate of true and utter idiocy continue- on and on and on.. So glad Canada settled this already.
Equal marriage proponents should take a more direct approach:
“It’s coming, it’s going to be legalized and if you don’t like it, STFU and GTFO! No more arguing, no more mindless debates. DO WHAT I SAY OR DIE”
I havent watched the debate… but I hope as we move forward we begin to call out these people who oppose equality for what they are, drawing direct comparisons between their argument and the argument sexists used in attempting to block the right of women to vote, the argument racists used to try to block cvil rights and freedom itself for african americans… the same tired arguments have been used over and over, the last major battle was interracial marriage… “tradition”, “the redefinition and hijacking of a social institution” “this isnt normal”… we’ve heard it all before, its just the hate that attempted to keep women and black people from equality, now reincarnated to keep homosexuals from being equal. These people like to feel superior, and in order to feel superior someone has to remain inferior…
I think the special interest group hijacking marriage is RELIGION. As far as I’m concerned, I don’t want my wedding in their church. I want the government benefits given with marriage, the civil rights and responsibilities. I pay my taxes. not like everyone else, since certain deductions and incomes are not shared with me.