October 24, 2017
Court News Latest News | Poll Questions | Haunted Maine | Bald Eagles | Medicaid Expansion

Comments for: Supreme Court rejects National Organization for Marriage lawsuit in Maine

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News and the Bangor Publishing Co. encourage comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    Better these out of State secret societies pay fines to State than tell more of their lies to us. 

  • Anonymous

    Scumbags hiding under their Klan robes…

    • Anonymous

      Funny thing is the KKK was started by the democratic party.

      • Anonymous

        Do yourself a favor. The next time you get the “hankering” to post something check your facts FIRST. That way you won’t look so silly when someone corrects your “facts”.

        The KKK was founded by veterans of the Confederate Army, NOT the Democrat Party.

        • Millicent

          Nathan Bedford Forrest. He was a Democrat. Clampet is correct. Though, it’s funny….the Democratic party evolved, and is now the party that fights for civil rights. We’ve moved forward. Republicans have gone backwards. 

          • Anonymous

            Saying the KKK was formed by a former Confederate soldier who also was a Democrat is very, very different than “the KKK was started by the Democratic party”

            That’s like claiming the Republicans were behind the Oklahoma City bombing because Timothy McVeigh was a Republican.

          • Anonymous

            You are 110% correct but now a certain poster is going to post some conspiracy “website” that show it was.  :)

          • Millicent

            you are absolutely correct, and clarified my statement. :)

          • Tess

            Beautiful!

          • Anonymous

            Actually no he isn’t.

            The KKK (the first one) was formed by 3-4 former Confederate Generals. There have actually been 3 different  versions of the KKK. Were the founders members of the Democrat Party? Maybe, maybe not. But the KKK was NOT “started” by the Democrat Party.

          • Millicent

            I should have said it a little differently…he is somewhat correct. Nathan Bedford Forrest was a Confederate, a Lt. General, and he was a member of the Democratic party. So, yes you are correct in saying that the Democratic party it’s self did not create the KKK, but a member of the party did, with help. Forrest was the first Grand Wizard. They targeted blacks, and republicans. Of course their hatred extended from there a little later on, and the first group of the KKK didn’t last much longer than the 1870’s later on, more groups popped up. At one point, Maine had the largest KKK membership in the country. 

          • Anonymous

            The civil war was started by the democrats of the south who would not budge on their supposed right to own slaves

            The democrat party is the party of slavery, segregation, jim crow, and the oppressive welfare state that has now enslaved millions under the guise of a ‘social safety net’

            democrats are NOT moving forward, they are regressing to a political landscape that smacks more of feudalism and a return to serfdom than anything else

          • Anonymous

            Before you post again Willie…please take a history class on the Civil War. Your simplistic response isn’t even close to the reasons and causes of the Civil War.

          • Tess

            The adjective is “Democratic.”

            Small-D if you’re talking about the ideology, large to talk about the party.

            Just in case you wanted to know.

        • fred flintstone

          Same thing.

          • Anonymous

            No, it would be like saything that all Confederate soldiers were slave owners. They weren’t.

        • In any event,

          147 Years ago,
           
          Not exactly Current Events

          • Anonymous

            the dems still love slavery and dependence

            ….it’s in your torrey blood

          • Anonymous

            Wil please for the love of all that is good and right in the world take an American History Course.

            The word is Tory….Torrey is a place in Utah

          • Bob Conti

            There’s also Torrey Pines in San Diego County.

      • Anonymous

        No it wasn’t.

      • Anonymous

        You might want to check the strange career of Gen. Nathaniel Bedford Forrest, CSA. He was the first Grand Wizard of the Invisible Empire, disbanded in 1869 only to be mimicked by one batch of violent crackpots after another right to the present. You are right about the Dixie Democrats in a way: they worked long and hard to recover and perpetuate white supremacy through apartheid right down to the day Lyndon Johnson, driven to it by the growing civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King, pushed his party to pass the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. At that point, the white supremacists found open arms awaiting them in the GOP, a manifestation of the Nixon-era “southern strategy (think Strom Thurmond).” For the most part, that deal still holds true.

      • Anonymous

        More like an irrelevant thing.

      • Southern Democrats that are now republicans…

    • Anonymous

      Funny how they’re so worried about an economic boycott when similar scum balls tried and FAILED to discredit Ellen DeGeneres a few weeks back.JCP now has my business.

  • RoostookGuy

       If people are so proud of preventing SSM couples from marrying, and are so sure that they are morally superior, why are they still hiding, and breaking state law to do it ?

       Everyone else has to disclose, and has, except for them.  It just supports the argument that they don’t care about the rules, the law, or the people they impact.

       Secret “donors” is not democracy, it’s cowardly.

    • luvGSD

       How does the saying go?  Something like, “If you have to keep it a secret, then you probably shouldn’t be doing it.”

    • Anonymous

      They want to go around wearing white sheets and cone hats…

  • Anonymous

    The law says release the list.
     

  • Anonymous

    Why is every part of this subject unconstitutional?  Where is the liberty for all?   Follow the constitution already and get on with some issues that press each and every one of us.

  • Anonymous

    Two years later and we’re voting on marriage equality a second time, and we still don’t know who funded the first anti-equality campaign. I’m not sure whether we’ll know by this November, or even the next. Eventually we’ll find out. I will be boycotting any business that supported discrimination.

    • And this is the whole reason why the donations should not be revealed.  It is exactly the type of harassment being talked about…”if someone donates to a cause that they believe it we (SSM folks) are going to come after you and hurt you!”  Such a hateful attitude!  I have friends on both sides of the issue and I can honestly say that the SSM crowd are the more hostile crowd in both words and actions.   Being a little nicer will win more votes than the present direction of the agenda!

      • Anonymous

        Boycotting a business is not the same as “coming after you and hurting you”.  I boycott Walmart because I don’t believe their business model is good for America and I don’t like their compensation structure for their employees.  That’s not harassment, it’s putting your money where your mouth (or convictions) is….

        • Anonymous

          LOL….so you buy your slave-manufactured, chinese products elsewhere?

          yeah, that’s some REAL convictions you have there…

          • Tess

            Walmart really isn’t good for local communities – it tends to drive wages down across the board and depress economies.  There’s some data on that if you’re curious – hit Google Scholar.  I boycott them too.

      • RoostookGuy

        I would imagine that the people you know on the pro-SSM side of the issue are frustrated by your contempt for the state disclosure laws, of their RIGHT to know WHO is participating in Maine politics, and of having followed the rules and fully disclosed ALL THEIR donors.

        I can see why people would want to boycott business, especially the longer the law is not followed and the anti-SSM side continues to hide it’s donors.

        It’s actually a pretty smart strategy; you get to be contemptuous, break the rules, and act like you’re all shocked that people are upset about it, while prodding them on.

        The reality is, the pro-SSM side isn’t interested in boycotts, but many of the big players on the anti-SSM side have been involved in calling for boycotts of people and organizations that support SSM.

        Even your exhortation to be a little nicer is an obvious inflammatory ploy to garner hostile reactions.

        Well, you’re not getting what you want; you’re only hurting your own cause.

      • Anonymous

        Seriously? The hateful rhetoric flows both ways on anonymous message boards like this, yet Protect Maine Equality abided by Maine law and disclosed all names of supporters.

      • Anonymous

        Well said, the hate is spread by the lest so much more then the right, and then the left always blames the right for doing the hate.  The left is always the 1st to throw insults, names, ect……. and of course the phobias that are made up.  

        Looking form the outside of both parties, easy to see who the haters really are.Veterans Party Member

        • But it is ok to be called a pedophile and pervert? I lived as a miserable heterosexual woman and drank just to try to be straight. I was never discriminated against lik I am since I came out and now live a healthy clean life with a beautiful partner. I do agree that we all need to be kind but I dont see you doing that any more than anyone else. 

          • Anonymous

            The pedophiles and perverts are in the CC.I wish you well in your new life and  will continue to work hard for ALL my sisters and brothers who suffer everyday.

          • Thank you!

        • Anonymous

          Looking from the outside of both parties, it was easy for the Supreme Court to see who was violating Maine law.

      • Then explain why those opposed have boycotted JCP and Starbucks. The economy is bad enough and people are boycotting because they are discriminating. 

        • Anonymous

          To boycott businesses who support gay rights, you would need to not buy anything, anywhere, and not use plastics in your daily life. Even DuPont supports equality.

          • Exactly. The issue is that JCP and Starbucks have been targeted because of their very open vote for gay rights. Therefore the million moms whatever are targeting them and trying to boycott. It is so dumb. 

          • Anonymous

            The million moms are more like a few dozen who need to get better hobbies,or maybe a dog.

      • Anonymous

        Haven’t you heard?
        It’s the Lavender Mafia.

        • Anonymous

          LOL. I love how mentally you have to twist yourself in this logic…

          “Maine will never pass gay marriage because our side outnumbers your side so much”

          “Our side should not have to reveal our identities because your side would financially cripple us if you knew who we are”

          So which is it? Are we an unpopular minority who can’t affect change in Maine, or are we an unstoppable majority that would trample your rights if we knew who you were?

          • Anonymous

            The arguments are NEVER consistent. It’s the mark of desperation, they’ll say anything that sticks.

          • Anonymous

            Definitely an unpopular group…who wishes with all their little hearts to be classified as a minority. 

          • Anonymous

            So you agree it’s unethical that NOM refuses to disclose their donor list?

          • Anonymous

            BRAVO!!!!!! One Shot!!!!!! BRAVO!!!!!! I never thought I would see the day that you would say that NOM is a “unpopular group”.

          • Anonymous

            LOL…apparently JD, one of us didn’t understand the comment. Don’t get so excited, you know very well that I will never change sides on this issue.

      • Anonymous

        That’s not harassment. If you want the freedom of speech to donate to a cause you support, you should be able to do that. But you can’t criticize someone for wanting their own freedom in choosing not to do business with someone that is actively working against them and their rights. You want to talk about harassment? Gays were subjected to television ads saying they would ruin marriage and infultrate schools. Don’t be a hypocrite. Your argument is pretty ridiculous.

      • Wouldnt you be hostile i people called you the horrible names we are called. I am not condoning hostile behavior but it is frustrating when you are a good, honest , hardworking citizen and you are compared to molesters and criminals. 

        • Anonymous

          Thanks and good luck.The reason good people like you are subjected to such filth is that the scum on the other end know their day is almost over-and they’ve FAILED.They’ll have a great time in Hell.

    • Anonymous

      shelly pingrees husband to be donated money to your side of this issue,nature rules “round peg in a round hole” i dont hold it against him. your idea of a boycott is purely in your head just like the fact that being gay is ok. Look the voters have said no several times you people and your cause are like the little kid who keeps asking if he can come out of his room yet THE ANSWER WAS NO AND HOPEFULLY WILL REMAIN THAT WAY!!!!!

      • Anonymous

        So your side should be above the law because…?

      • Anonymous

        The mere fact that you know  “shelly pingrees husband” donated (if he did) money shows which side is playing by the rules set down in Maine law.

        And when have the “voters” of Maine “said no several times you people and your cause”?

      • And when you open your mind and get an education you will research and realize that nature has very few fully heterosexual animals. Nature is more Bi sexual than anything. And, BTW, I fit just fine. 

        • Anonymous

          oh i see monkey see monkey do and you think i’ll jump rope too WRONG !!

          • Anonymous

            I see you believe in evolution.

          • God Bless you. Please read your Bible and follow your Christian teaches. You would have to be Christian because it is the only thing that speaks against homosexuality. It does however condone pedophilia and slavery. 

      • Anonymous

        Maine has only voted once on this issue, not ‘several times’.

        And please share why your side should not have to abide by Maine law, while our side does?

        • Anonymous

          oh lets split hairs

          • Anonymous

            Obeying the laws is not about splitting hairs. NOM has lost every appeal they have filed so far. LOST EVERY ONE.

      • Anonymous

         Your comments remind me of the anti-civil rights movement; insecure, misguided and DESPERATE!!!!!  Why are you so threatened by people who I’m assuming, based on your comments, you have absolutely no contact with?  Are you afraid they might invite you to their wedding?  To use your own “little kid” analogy, I think you should go to your room and let your friend out of the closet.

        • Anonymous

          misguided is excactly what the gays are why then do you need the right legaly,because its wrong,the only thing in my closet are cloths unlike yours which is full of embarrasments to man kind and slowly with the help of hollywood the gay cause is brain washing people into doing what feels right instead of the right thing,you needed your mouth washed out along time ago.dont get me wrong i dont care what you do in you home its none of my bussiness but dont bring it in the street thinking its cute it not and your sick

          • Anonymous

            You certainly are full of hate wrenches. Do you think that voting down same sex marriage will keep homosexuals from walking down the “street” or from displays of public affection?

            Oh, and one think about closets. If you don’t clean them out once in a while you never know what skeletons will be found. And EVERYBODY has skeletons that they don’t want people to know about.

          • Anonymous

            Doing the right thing is fighting injustice in my treatment under our government, to protect the life I have built with my man over the last few decades. 

            Civil marriage for same sex couples is the right thing here. Sharing your life with another is not sick.

          • Anonymous

            i agree same sex NO THANKS

          • Anonymous

            I’m glad you agree, and can see that you don’t have to want a same sex relationship to support our right to have a same sex civil marriage.

      • Anonymous

        Look, if you want to shout from the rooftops about having freedom of speech and the right to have an opinion, then it’s pretty idiotic to tell someone where to spend their money. Maybe Maine_seashore doesn’t want to give his/her hard earned money to bigots, isn’t that a freedom we have? The right to choose who we do business with? Don’t be a hypocrite.

        • Anonymous

          i think if you want to donate money to a cause in a perticular state you should be a citizen of that state,that means live there registered to vote there and have done so otherwise you are an outsider trying to change some one else way of life,or is it so great that thier money can change the lives of people they will never stand along side of.thats a hypocrie lady,freedom is to be who you want to be not to have some one push thier agenda on the people they dont live with thats why i dont have any worries the people of maine they have seen thru it before and will AGAIN!!!

          • Anonymous

            Well considering that the Catholic and Mormon Churches cannot register to vote in the state of Maine that would eliminate the monies they donated the last time. Hmmmm….sounds like a plan to me.

      • “Heterosexuality is not normal.  It is just common.”  ~ Dorothy Parker

        • Anonymous

          Homosexuality has been verified in over 1500 animal species, and observed occasionally in more. 

      • Anonymous

        The voters have said “no” once. That is one, 1, a single time. Get it?

        • Anonymous

          no for the last ten years we have been saying NO,How about a civil union and leave the word marrige as a slang term like fags and i do get it why dont you get it peg in a round hole!! not the square one DUH!!

          • Anonymous

            wrenches we have voted once about same sex marriage. Not twice in the past, not three times in the past, not four times in the past. Once, one time and that one time was to repeal a law.

          • Anonymous

            oh, you mean in dog years…?

    • Anonymous

      Go to gayfriendlycompanies.com

  • Anonymous

    Here in Maine it is a pick and choose, which law to harrass, and which laws to pass..

    • Anonymous

      Apparently that is how it is in NOM’s eyes, at least.

      Why are more Mainers not outraged that this out-of-state special interest funneled millions of dollars into Maine to influence a vote, but are fighting to keep secret who is behind it?

      Protect Maine Equality didn’t do that, to this day you can go onto Maine.gov and see full lists of everyone who donated money to the gay marriage cause on their side.

  • Anonymous

    No  disclosure, no question on the ballot. And make the names on the petitions public. They are public documents are they not?

    • Anonymous

      I think you misunderstand, it is the side against gay marriage who has been violating state law. Those of us who gathered signatures and got the question on this year’s ballot have been abiding byMaine law, disclosing names as required, all along.

      • Anonymous

        Not only do you play nice but you are on the correct side of history and humanity.I’m with EQ 1000%

    • And when you realize that they are on your team your words will change. 

  • Anonymous

    Back when I first heard heard the name “National Organization For Marriage”, I thought that it was an organization to encourage same sex couples to get married.  LOL! — People can have their opinions and disagreements as much as they want, but when they try to take away other peoples’ rights, then that’s wrong, and in my humble opinion – dare I say – unChristian, unAmerican. …  Everyone else has to disclose where their money comes from, and has to deal with the possibility that some people may disagree with them.

  • Anonymous

    This is about the laws of Maine– Protect Maine Equality played by the rules and disclosed all names of donors. Stand for Marriage Maine did not, because NOM insists on violating our laws.

    If you feel it is small brained to abide by our laws, that says a lot about your ethics.

  • Anonymous

    No wonder NOM opposes gay marriage– they have a hard time understanding the right thing to do on a regular basis.

  • poormaniac

    People commenting on this article are criticizing those who don’t want their identity revealed.  Perhaps the donors don’t want to be flooded with calls for donations from other organizations , who knows !  I do get a kick out of those posters , like myself , who post under a fictious name to avoid being identified ! 

    • Anonymous

      NOM knew the rules in Maine when they accepted donations from both in state and out of state people and groups.

      NOM violated one Maine law while it actively campaigned against another law.

      NOM has lost its challenge of the Maine law at every turn.

      NOM has lost its lawsuit against the state at every turn.

      How much money has NOM cost the state by challenging the law and suing the state?

      Time to come clean NOM. Time to provide the state with what you are legally required to provide under the laws of Maine.

      • Anonymous

        And let’s not forget that NOM and its ilk has PLENTY of support in Paulie’s admin and the Koches.BITTER defeat for them-great day for all Mainers!Go Betsy Smith Go!

      • luvGSD

         What really sux is that they flaunted the law and were able to get what they wanted anyway.

      • poormaniac

        WAIT A SECOND HERE , you say NOM is challenging the law at every turn, yet that is exactly what is happening with the new gay marriage petition that will be on the ballot in November. Can we have it both ways ? Just exactly where do you get off ?

        • Anonymous

          “WAIT A SECOND HERE , you say NOM is challenging the law at every turn, yet that is exactly what is happening with the new gay marriage petition that will be on the ballot in November. Can we have it both ways ? Just exactly where do you get off ?”

          Niced try poor but go back and look at the history.

          Same Sex Marriage was propossed, debated, public hearings were held, the legislature voted on and passed it, the Governor signed the law and Maine joined several other states.

          So we had a law on the books and petitions were started, signatures gathered, groups formed, money came in, the No side complied with state law and made there list of donors public, NOM (and the Yes side) never did, the “people’s veto” passed and the law which was legally propossed and passed was repealed.

          Follow me so far?

          So another group of people started a  petition, signatures gathered, the Secretary of State certified the signatures and the question will now be on the ballot in November.

          Still with me?

          So, NOM knew the law before they joined the fight. Correct? Correct. Did they file the names as required? No. Have they fought the rulings in the state and federal court system? Yes. Have any of the arguments overturned the Maine law? No.

          One Group has played by the existing rules and have used the existing laws of Maine to move a question forward. They haven’t filed suit against the state. They haven’t fought the law in the court system. They have played by the existing rules since the get go.

          Another group played by the rules in the beginning but when the state said file you donor list they said “No” and have been fighting it at every turn.

          That poormaniac is the difference between playing within the rules and playing out side them.

          • poormaniac

            My comment was and still is directed at ” challenging the law ” and not the method , nice try.

        • Anonymous

          Um, I don’t see anyone in Maine getting gay married in violation of existing law.

          Yet NOM has absolutely violated existing Maine law, and that’s what the US Supreme Court just affirmed.

          If NOM got signatures to force a citizens referendum to end the disclosure requirements, you might have a valid argument here. But they aren’t, so you don’t.

        • Anonymous

          The first time we voted, a veto was sought. It was essentially NOM’s side that was bringing up the issue. They wanted to change our law and now they’re refusing to follow our campaign laws. Your little can’t “have it both ways” thing is kinda silly and irrelevant.

    • Anonymous

      No, we are criticizing people who flaunted Maine law, and fought against being held to the same standards as the pro-gay marriage side.

      The Supreme Court has ruled previously that your vote in an election is private, but funding a political issue is not.

      NOM is simply acting corruptly and unethically.

    • Anonymous

      I signed the petition to place gay marriage on the ballot.  I gave my real name, my real address.  Not anonymous.

  • Anonymous

    At a time when banks are stealing from us all, we pay way too much for food and fuel, and there is not enough jobs, is what consenting adults do in their own home really that important?

    • Anonymous

      It is to Taliban like Santorum/Palin since they have no answers for anything foreign or domestic..Remember the quote”Being conservative means worrying that someone somewhere is having fun and it must be stopped.”

      • Anonymous

        If you Google the quote you will discover that no one really said it.

        • Anonymous

          I’ve seen it in different forms.”A conservative is terrified that someone,somewhere is having more fun than they are.”

          • Anonymous

            Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy. H. L. MenckenUS editor (1880 – 1956)

          • Anonymous

            Thanks!

    • Anonymous

      Nope not to me.Just leave me out of it.

  • Anonymous

    Wonderful news!The more these creepy lying thieves are exposed,the better America becomes.

  • Anonymous

    I see the article makes reference to the “first of two” appeals.  Anybody know what the second appeal is and what stage it is at?

    • Anonymous

      Good question, here’s the answer.

      The US Supreme Court refused to hear NOM’s appeal on the fight it has lost against Maine’s political action committee laws. This fight was NOM seeking to overturn Maine’s requirement of disclosure for donations.

      The appeal that is still making its way to the Supreme Court is NOM’s requirement to disclose the names of people who donated to the 2009 veto referendum.

      It is certain that NOM will lose that 2nd one too, since the Supreme Court is even less likely to defend a violation of a law they agreed was valid.

      • Anonymous

        Thanks for your post.

  • ReasonWillTriumph

    Campaign disclosure laws are necessary and vital.

    If NOM doesn’t want to play by the rules, as those in favor of gay marriage did, they can stay away from Maine.

    Pretty simple really.

  • Anonymous

    Free speech mean having the freedom to be heard, not anonymity. Also money does not equal speech. Every person has equal freedom of speech under the constitution, but not everyone has equal money. Saying money is the same as speech give the rich more speech, which would not be equal under the law.

  • Anonymous

    Amazing news! You want to come to our state and play, well you gotta play by our rules.

  • Anonymous

    Turn on the kitchen light and watch the  cockroaches scurry.

    The anonymous donors that funded the lie campaign in 2009  cannot stand up for their convictions.

    They are afraid to be identified.

    Cowards.

    Yessah

  • this list of ”donors” needs to come out WELL before the next election.  ASAP, this way all the voters can make an enlightened decision about this.  Again.  So many lies were spread last time (how homosexuality was going to be taught in school, how churches would have no choice about preforming same-sex wedding).  This time around, the truth needs to be told.  This will not bother your marriage.  This will not ruin the sanctity of marriage (divorce has done a really good job of that already), this law will not turn your children gay, this law effects same sex couples and no one else.  Live and let live.

    • Anonymous

      I don’t care who donated, I just want everyone to play by the same rules.

      Currently those who oppose gay marriage act unethically and deceptively, as shown by NOM.

      • Proof please.

        • Anonymous

          Proof?

          Deceptive ads run in 2009 claiming gay marriage would be taught in our schools— Mark Mutty of Stand for Marriage Maine is on camera admitting that they knew those ads were lies, yet they ran them anyway.

          Unethical? How about NOM funneling millions of dollars into Maine to repeal gay marriage, without disclosing the source of those funds? That is a clear violation of Maine law, as this very article we are commenting on details.

          In contrast, Protect Maine Equality abided by Maine law, disclosing all donors— you can find the lists yourself on maine.gov, to this day. They also did not lie in ads, portraying real Mainers who truly need the benefits and protections of civil marriage for their families.

  • Anonymous

    What NOM did to poison Maine’s political process in 2009 was reprehensible, but anti-gays were much more openly contemptuous of California campaign finance and disclosure laws in 2008.  The federal judge who revoked the California anti-gay H8te Vote had in his possession a letter written by Catholic bishops to Mormon leaders in which they both agreed to violate California campaign finance laws to throw the H8te Vote by making secret, illegal cash and in-kind contributions to the H8te Vote.  The letter serves as proof positive they knew they were breaking the law; the letter itself is an act of criminal collusion.  We know the Mormons made the Hate Videos shown on TV, but they refused to report these in-kind contributions as required by law.  We know Mormons operated secret, illegal call centers in Idaho and Utah from which they made deceptive calls, because a million Californians reported these deceptive calls where anti-gays claimed a “yes” vote would support marriage equality. We know Mormons were told by their leaders to make large, secret contributions to the H8te Vote under pain of excommunication, and we know Mormons sent their church members from out of state.  Mormon leaders were required by California law to report these contributions, but they refused.  We must make sure Maine isn’t subjected to anti-gay criminal activity again.

    • Dakotahgeo

      I think you can safely refer to the Catholic and Morman religions constitute the new American christian Taliban today, with not a few Baptists and Evangelicals thrown in for good measure.  Fortunately, the loud ones are small minority who deserve to be quarantined from the general public.

  •  Today’s ‘Democratic Party’ is a far cry from the DP of 150 years ago (or even 50 years ago!).  Up until the 1960s, the Dems could count on the ‘Solid South’; but, after Truman, the South became less solidly Democratic because of his integrating the armed forces.  LBJ sounded the death knell for the Dems’ hold on the South.  LBJ admitted as much when he signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

    In the 1964 election the erstwhile Solid South abandoned the Dems almost entirely, in order to support Barry Goldwater–a Republican who had opposed the Civil Rights legislation.  Since that time, the erstwhile “Party of Lincoln” has done a total 180-degree turn.  The South have now become all-but-solid in their support of the Republican.

    Anyone with any sense–or knowledge–of History KNOWS that comparing the political parties of 150 years ago to today’s parties is an absurd exercise in political analysis.  You might want to check out Hegel for an explanation of how History ‘works’.

You may also like