BANGOR, Maine — Advocates for same-sex marriage were dealt a blow Tuesday when voters in North Carolina passed a constitutional amendment that not only banned gay marriage but outlawed civil unions and domestic partnerships as well.
So what does North Carolina’s 61 percent to 39 percent vote mean for Maine, which will vote on same-sex marriage later this year?
“It’s a continuation of what we’ve seen whenever voters weigh in on the marriage issue,” said Carroll Conley, head of the Christian Civic League of Maine and the Protect Marriage Maine political action committee. “We’ve seen judges and legislatures create momentum toward a change in cultural status, but voters have consistently shown a discomfort for redefining marriage.”
David Farmer, Bangor Daily News columnist and a spokesman for Mainers United for Marriage, the group leading the campaign to allow same-sex marriage in Maine, said what happened in North Carolina doesn’t change his group’s efforts.
“We were already very motivated,” he said. “We know what we need to do to be successful and that’s to continue to have one-on-one conversations with Mainers.
“It’s dangerous to draw too many parallels with North Carolina. We were hoping for them and we’re saddened by the outcome, but Maine and North Carolina are very different places.”
More relevant, Farmer said, is New Hampshire, where the Republican-controlled Legislature recently defeated an attempt to overturn a same-sex marriage law.
Conley said he expected same-sex marriage supporters in Maine to downplay any similarities with North Carolina but pointed out that voters still have not approved same-sex marriage laws in any state.
Maine could be the first this November when voters will be asked for the second time in three years to weigh in on same-sex marriage. In 2009, Mainers voted 53-47 to overturn a law passed by a Democratic-controlled Legislature allowing same-sex marriage.
Same-sex marriage supporters nationwide have made the argument that the tide is turning in favor of equality. Many polls seem to support that. A recent Gallup survey showed that about 50 percent of American believe same-sex couple should be allowed to marry, while 48 percent say such marriage should not be legal.
But that support hasn’t translated into votes.
Still, the demographic makeup of North Carolina — not quite in the conservative Deep South but on the border — is different from Maine. Of the six states that allow same-sex couples to marry, five are in the Northeast.
“We’ve seen this play out more in the Northeast and the dire consequences from opponents of same-sex marriage haven’t come true,” Farmer said.
The debate over same-sex marriage has intensified nationally in recent days, in part because of what has happened in North Carolina.
President Barack Obama said in an interview on Wednesday with ABC News that he now supports same-sex marriage, reversing a position he has held since he took office. During his 2008 presidential campaign, Obama said he supported civil unions but not necessarily marriage for same-sex couples.
Vice President Joseph Biden said in a interview on Sunday that he was “absolutely comfortable” with same-sex marriage. Education Secretary Arne Duncan also has said publicly that he supports gay marriage.
Although Obama said he supports same-sex marriage, he still thinks it should be left up to states to decide. Many already have.
North Carolina became the 31st state to pass a constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont and the District of Columbia allow same-sex marriage.
The Washington state Legislature passed a law in February that legalized same-sex marriage but opponents are hoping voters get a chance to overturn that law. Similarly, Maryland passed a law recently that allows same-sex couples there to wed, but that may go to a statewide referendum as well.
Later this year, voters in Minnesota will consider a constitutional amendment similar to the one that passed in North Carolina on Tuesday.
No, it will not and time to make the popcorn.
I hope people think for themselves, consider the simple fairness of equality, and look beyond archconservative Southern culture.
The ‘archconservative’ state of NC!? Are you serious?
NC is a blue state – vote for Obama in 2008 and is considered
a toss-up for 2012.
—–
It is ignorant people like you that elected an ignorant person like him in the first place. May God have mercy on your soul.
That’s kind of silly, considering the President is more of a Christian than the Republican nominee, according to many conservative Christians.
Hey, Tex, where did you get your degree? My mom always taught me that calling people names was the mark of a sad, weak person. I don’t know what your mom taught you, but either it was something different, or my mom was right.
_______
North Carolina, where you can marry your cousin, just not your gay cousin.
And when was the last time NC voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate before Obama? I’ll tell you, it was 1976.
Not very familiar with NC, are you ?
I hope Maine does not follow NC on this!! People should make up their own minds.
The people of NC did make up there own minds. What are you talking about?
I meant the people of MAINE!!! They should make up their own minds, not follow behind NC like a two year old, following their older brother or sister!!!
actually, this issue belongs with the SCOTUS, not the voters. clearly the voters of NC passed an unconstitutional amendment. I am confident it will be overturned, just like California’s Prop H8.
exactly, people should make up their own minds who they want to marry.
When I learned the Pledge of Allegiance, I didn’t learn it with asterisks, disclaimers, or exemptions. Neither did anyone else. What part of “liberty, and justice, for all” are people confused about?
Your church can define marriage any way it wants. But civil marriage ought to be available for everybody that is eligible within the guidelines of restrictions on age and marriage of blood relatives. Marriage isn’t being redefined. Marriage is still making the commitment to spend your life with one other person. This just opens up membership in the club.
Getting married is not a civil right, if it were you could
marry your sister or brother. So it is not discrimination to deny same sex marriages…
“Marriage is one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry… cannot be infringed by the State.” – Loving v. Virginia
There is no unequal treatment under the law. Nobody is treated any differently than anybody else. Nobody is prevented from getting married as long as they meet the qualifications for marriage. The whole thing is a canard.
The state has a vested interest in not allowing intermarriage of siblings and close relatives for reasons that should be obvious. That state also has a vested interest in not allowing polygamy, for reasons that should be obvious. Otherwise Tom Brady and and that McDreamy guy would have all the wives, and the rest of us would be very cranky.
But if the state allows gay men to marry lesbian women, with no intention of having children, and if the state allows 70-year-olds to marry, without the intent of having children, and the state allows inmates on death row to marry, then why not a lesbian lawyer and a lesbian nurse? They both have to pay for licenses to practice their profession, just like everybody else. They both have to pay taxes like everybody else. Why exclude them from going to city hall and getting a marriage license?
it goes back to my original point: Liberty and justice for all. No asterisks. If your church doesn’t like it, fine. Don’t perform gay marriages. but your church doesn’t make all the laws of the land. People get married in town halls all the time without a church’s involvement. Just open up the club.
So you’re fine with a religious exemption for performing gay marriages? I’m sure you were fine with a religious exemption for providing birth control too. What a hoot.
There always has been a religious exemption for preforming gay marriages.
Nobody has ever even suggested that anyone be forced to preform a religious ceremony they don’t want to.
Your birth control remark – you don’t get to dictate medical treatments to people.
Mind your own business.
It’s not that there is a religious exemption. One place to get married is in a church. Another place to get married is at town hall. It is not required that one gets married in a church. Heterosexual couples may legally get married in places that are not churches.
And no, I am not in favor of a religious exemption for providing birth control to employees covered by health care programs. They are 2 different issues.
Equal protection under the law.
—-
Same sex marriage will be defeated in Maine for the third time.
That’s impossible, since it’s only been up for a vote once so far.
We can only hope
So make it three. Or four. Or five. Or a hundred. Do you think people just stopped asking for equal rights the first time they were denied? Of course not! A single show of hands on a single day means nothing. We will not stop until discrimination against us under the law is removed. I don’t care if it takes a 100 votes or a 100 years, or even if I die trying. We. Will. Not. Stop.
This I have no doubt will be done. People will be blue in the face with this issue until the gay community gets what it wants. And yes, go after the young minds. They are more pliable.
—-
It actually will take money out of all of our pockets by granting pension rights and government benefits. The original intention of granting benefits to spouses was based on the prevailing one-income, one child-rearer family unit and was “fair” at that point. And violated by heterosexual coupling without the intention or history of raising children (e.g. marriage by people in their seventies). So the grabbing of privilege, screwing of society by SSM will be nothing new.
—
Actually, it won’t be defeated because most people don’t get that 1) it’s not “equal” and 2) marriage grants privileges, not rights. If they were rights, then each person should be able to bestow the benefits to another person even if they had no interest in marriage.
David Farmer is a crook. For or against gay marriage, this guy is the wrong frontman for the group.
Just curious what was he found guilty of? I don’t remember reading anything about him being arrested. Please let me know..
Opponents of marriage equality in North Carolina weren’t just satisfied with stopping gay people from getting married. Amendment One also bans the state or any of its cities from recognizing any “domestic legal union” other than one between a man and woman. In other words: no civil unions, no domestic partnerships, no health benefits for your same-sex partner (or their children) if you’re a state employee, and no hospital-visitation rights. Some opponents of marriage equality like to pretend that they’re not anti-gay; they simply want to preserve the “traditional definition of marriage.” But the broad sweep of the amendment shows that the motivation extends far beyond “protecting marriage.” The law rolls back existing protections for gay people and their families in a way that can only be interpreted as mean-spirited and discriminatory.
Let’s hope Maine does not follow suit.
Let’s hope they do…
You can try it; we won’t let you get away with it.
we should all have health benefits, not have it based on a sexual relationship.
…
You could already do that with a woman.
A vote against same- sex marriage is a vote for the traditional values of Maine people.
Some Maine people, not all, hopefully not even a majority.
Live and let live is a traditional Maine value. How does denying others the ability to protect their families with civil marriage fit that ideal?
No it isn’t. One traditional Maine value is to mind your own business, keep out of your neighbors affairs, and be kind and friendly to others, regardless of where you’re from, what you’re wearing, or anything else that makes you different. At least that’s the Maine I’ve been living in for nigh on 50 years now. It’s better then yours.
And what kind of hypocrite takes a user name of ‘4lifeandfreedom’ and then desires to restrict the freedom of others? That, sir or madam, is not an example of ‘traditional Maine values.’
Plenty of Mainers would agree that the in-your-face “I’m here, I’m queer”, “get over it” approach more closely matches the level of acerbity you condemn in others.
Might it not be that if left alone without bizarre demonstrations of bedroom choices these Mainers would rather have just minded their own business?
Well, first off “bizarre demonstrations of bedroom choices” are not the exclusive province of homosexuals. Nor is the “in-your-face” stuff, unless you’re referring to gay pride marches, which we don’t have very many of here. And personally, I imagine I feel the same as you do about graphic public displays of affection…I don’t particularly want to watch either same-sex or hetero couples making out while I’m, say, watching a movie at a local theater or something. Fortunately I practically never do.
And you still can’t say why it has any impact on your life whatsoever.
Intentionally harming people is not a “traditional value”.
It is a vote for discimination of over 3000 tax paying citizens. per census data.
I wrote this for the other NC Amendment story, but it goes well here, too:
Since our country’s inception there have been groups that have seen the promise of our Constitution, and petitioned our society for equal rights, access to government, and legal protections. And all along the way there have been people predicting doom and gloom and national destruction if we extend these things to one more group, race, sex, or other minority. This North Carolina vote is just another effort by folks threatened by people they don’t even know to stave off change.
Every time they fail in the end, and every time our nation has failed to self-destruct. This Constitutional Amendment in North Carolina will be undone eventually, that is certain.
I was never involved in these discussions prior to 2009. I’ve lived in Maine many years and never made it a secret that I was gay, and no one ever made me feel uncomfortable here. Not my neighbors, not my coworkers, and not even the people I interacted with in neighboring towns. I never saw any need to be vocal about my need for equal treatment, because I saw no one visibly wanting to treat me differently due to my sexual orientation or the gender of my soul mate.
When the Catholic church of Maine and NOM organized to take away rights our state legislature had granted me in early 2009, I suddenly became aware of an entire subset of Mainers who saw me and my life as some threat to them. I decided I needed to become engaged in these discussions to put my point of view in front of them.
Most of the time, I realize I’m not changing their minds. But along the way I have found so many others here who support my rights, even if they aren’t affected by my lack of them.
I do hope we can bring marriage equality to Maine this November, but regardless I rest easy knowing that so many have come before us on this path to equal rights, and although the path is long, it does end with our government granting us equal treatment under the law.
So thank you— thanks to everyone here who stands up for the gays and lesbians who are fighting for equal treatment under Maine law, who are willing to take time to counter these baseless accusations and hurtful attacks that these trolls put forth.
You and I have exactly the same story. I live in California and was quite content to be left alone until out of state groups mandated discrimination in our state constitution. Now I am working every single day to undo that discrimination, not only in California but everywhere this comes up. All they have done is awaken a beast, and will knock on every door in America if I have to to see that discrimination against me is removed from the law!
Very well said! NC is a whole different ball game. There is blatant, open racism and the people are not ashamed of it. That is not how I grew up in my home state of Maine and am glad that I do not subscribe to that train of thought. I have lots of family in NC and it is a HUGE hot button issue there and it is fueled on by the churches. There are churches on every corner and they all claim to be welcoming but they are the driving force behind this discrimination that truly has little to do with same-sex marriage that is already illegal there. There was a comment above about how else it will affect opposite sex couples should one get sick. A couple could be together for 50 years and not be able to make medical decisions for each other. 2 people could raise a child together, one parent could pass and the other not have rights to the child they have raised because biologically, that child does not belong to them. It is just plain wrong and NC should be ashamed!
The sweeping ban on civil unions and benefits is particularly Draconian. Even some of the more adamant SSM deniers in these posts seem to favor civil unions (and benefits, I hope).
God Bless North Carolina and Maine will follow…I wish there was a bug spray to
get rid of this disease of gay marriage…
Wow, thank you for opening my eyes. I thought that type of bigoted ignorance went out with the Civil Rights movement of the 60’s. Please do a Bob Barker and have yourself spayed or neutered so your disease of hatred and bigotry doesn’t spread. You will be doing humanity a faovor
Bigotry has been around for thousands of years.
Not a disease, just getting “their share” and trying to get an endorsement from society.
Homophobia is the only disease here.
Not “equal”. Not the same. No – it’s not the same. Same=Equal. Gay marriage is not the same as heterosexual marriage and never will be until eggs and sperm are taken out of the equation. Take the word “equal” out of the discussion. Blacks=humans=whites true, but what we are talking about here is not civil rights, gay marriage not equal to heterosexual marriage.
Not a “right”. It a “privileged status” and therefore people should be voting based on whether gays need a “privileged status” to gain government benefits. IF you think they do, then vote for it.
If you think it is a matter of fairness, then you have to then think of those among us who are single and would like to bestow a set of government benefits on a special friend but don’t want to have sex with them. Is that relationship the “same”? Shouldn’t they have that “right”. Or someone who doesn’t have a special someone at all who would just like the “right” of bestowing that on some deserving person? Does it have to be sexual in order to gain these benefits?
I’m not religious. I am not conservative politically. Just don’t like the way this issue is being construed as discrimination/hate/intolerance by the advocates for gay marriage. I have been called “ignorant” by someone very close to me because I don’t see it her way. so go ahead , bring on the “hater” comments – and for those of you who “feel sorry” for me that I don’t see this issue the same as you do, don’t.
====
Not chauvinistic. Just a statistic. but hey, let’s get in every opportunity to obscure.
Completely agree. Thank you.
You’re completely off base here, the relationships homosexuals form are as valid as relationships heterosexuals form. Some are lifelong, others are not. Homosexuality is an attribute, like left-handedness.
You wouldn’t say that a marriage between left handed people is different than a marriage of right handed people, would you?
The NC vote will have no effect whatsoever in Maine. We are a different and rather unique electorate here. North Carolina may be fairly well educated but they are still bible belt.
Maine was close in 2008 and will be close in 2012 and verdict will likely flip this time. If not, it will the next time. Every day some of those raised in our intolerant past die. Young people cannot even fathom why this is a question. The inevitability of expanding liberty should be obvious after 200 years of gradual but sustained progress.
Promoting this issue is promoting economic and social benefits for our people. The fear mongers draw on silly arguments and pointless comparisons. They have already been shown wrong by the experiences of other states and nations that have settled this matter without any of the ramifications or harm they suggest.
We will get this done here, either in 2012, 2014, 2016, as soon as the old guard have sufficiently died off and the young reach the age of majority.
Economic and social benefits? Do you mean gay tourism because of honeymoons? Isn’t that rather limited?
Every year more old stuffy consevatives die and teens turn 18 and are able to vote. Hopefully this will be the year Maine relizes love is love. Mainers will stop worrying about other couples lives and let us do what they have been allowed to do since the dawn of time. Ive been with my boyfriend 2 years now. One day I want to get married just like everyone else can. You dont see us stepping in and telling the breeders what to do. I know over40 people in my area from the ages 18-21 who have had atleast 1 kid in the past 2 years. why dont we put a ban on that? They state pays for all of them to live. Wake up Maine! Theres more to worry about then two adults wanting to get married.
and why should your “spouse” receive your SS pension after you die, or vice versa, putting a financial burden on the rest of us? He didn’t earn it. How is that different than the “breeders” making us support them?
You are making an argument against anyone having civil marriage benefits, not just gays and lesbians.
and why don’t you stop by the Unitarian church and arrange for a wedding? That’ll be a “marriage”, only I won’t have to enrich your “spouse” by paying your pension to him or paying for his health benefits because you had some.
A very clear reason why civil marriage for same sex couples is warranted and justified, for we all should be treated equally by our government.
breeders? That’s not the first time I’ve heard that. Should I go get some help with this heterosexuality problem?
Is it a heterosexual lifestyle choice, or were you born that way?
I was born a breeder.
Mr. Conley, the people should not be voting on the civil rights of their fellow citizens. President Jefferson himself said the Constitution was a protection from the tyranny of the majority. Sounds to me like your side is un-American.
Should the US constitution be amended to forbid states from amending their constitutions by popular vote? In that case the majority can accomplish the same thing by electing a legislature and governor that will make the amendment they want. So we might as well give the courts full control of our US and state constitutions. They can amend it as they see fit. We might as well eliminate voting entirely in that case.
Well, the US Constitution trumps any state constitution. The challenge must be put before our US Supreme Court for that to happen, though.
When the people are allowed to control the issue, this issue never survives. The only places where this sort of social engineering is successful are places where the people have lost their right to voice their views.
Thankfully, ours is not a mob rule democracy; we have a US Constitution to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority. One day our US Supreme Court will rule on marriage equality, and that will be a good day for everyone in our nation as more families are offered the opportunity to protect their lives with civil marriage.
To reply to the writer below, the reason why marriage is fundamental to our very existence and survival…is because of the unique nature of the marital union between a man and a woman. The complimentary parts of a man and woman alone lends itselve to the continuation and survival of our societies. Throughout the history of the world – even in cultures – such as ancient Greece & Rome where homosexuality was embraced – homosexual unions were never recognized as marriages. No matter how loving and committed a homosexual couple is, their relationship simply cannot lend itself to the existence and survival of humanity.
Homosexual couples already have the same right as heterosexual couples do – to live together in a lifelong, loving relationship. Defining marriage as one man one woman merely recognizes the fact that the world has always recognized. It is the unique, complimentary union between one man and one women keeps the existence of the human race going. This fact has been recognized by all peoples of the past – people of faith, pagans and atheist.
You’re incorrect here. Homosexual couples do not have the right to civil marriage, and that legal contract is associated with thousands of benefits and privileges by our state and federal governments.
To say that allowing gays and lesbians to marry would threaten our very existence and survival is absurd. Homosexuals will always be a minority population, and allowing gay marriage will never, ever threaten the formation of families to reproduce and carry our civilization forward.
If anything, offering these important legal protections to same sex couples strengthens our society, encouraging more monogamous relationships regardless of sexual orientation.
I never said that homosexual couples threaten our very existence or survival. I was responding to the other letter saying marriage is important to our existence and survival. Homosexual couples do not threaten the formation of families, etc. I merely stated that the unique physical relationship of a man and women is what does carry on civilization…..and it does….whether you have faith or not………no matter what your belief system is. You need a man and women to carry on the human race. That is a necessary part to marriage.
So you agree that homosexual couples DO NOT already have the same rights as heterosexual couples do?
Any person has the potential to marry someone else of the opposite sex. It is impossible to marry someone of the same sex. To be totally honest about “rights”….it makes me wonder what exactly a “right” is. This may seem silly but I do wonder. Is there any such thing as a “right” that involves two people……For example I have a right to free speech, religion, life……….but that all involves ME. Someone wanted to marry me once. I didn’t love him so said NO. Now if marriage is a “right” that he has………….doesn’t that make it just that a right – he had the right to marry – but I said NO so there was no marriage for him. So heterosexuals can marry because it is possible to; however, is it a right??? even to them?????? I am not so sure.
Yes, there are privileges given to married couples. These same privileges are not given to unmarried people……..but they are just that privileges……..not rights. These privileges are privileges and at any time can be taken away from heterosexual couples at the judgement of the state or federal government.
That is a disengenuous argument, you must agree that telling people to marry someone they have no attraction to is a ridiculous idea of “equal access to civil marriage”
I never said any human being should marry another human being that they are not married to. Marriage is an important topic to all people – whether they have faith or no faith, whether they are pagan or atheist – all cultures marry.
Throughout history cultures have recognized that marriage is more than just two people being faithful, loving, and supporting to each other. Marriage has always involved the possibility of children coming from that specific sexual union between one man and one woman. Because of the importance of raising children to the benefit of the culture/civilization certain privileges have been given to married couples in order to help the family.
Every homosexual person has exactly the same human dignity and integrity as every heterosexual person. The sexual difference in the two type of relationships have never been ignored in the past and should not be ignored now.
I accept homosexuals as they are. I accept there sexual relationships. However, I do the same to heterosexual relations, also. I accept them for what they are. The difference is that the union of a man and a woman can result in a child; if that couple is married the state can give them certain privileges to help raise them.
The GOP powers could care less about whether anyone is gay, or if they should marry. It’s all about bringing ultra conservative voters to the polls, and this kind of legislation targets homophobes and bible thumpers in equal numbers.
North Carolina, Back to the Future, circa The Reconstruction Era.
http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal05/2012/5/8/22/enhanced-buzz-20967-1336528998-1.jpg
One of the worst sins in the Bible is divorce, another is adultery. Emrich has both. Whether he cheated which he denies or he remarried after divorce, which is public knowledge, he has committed Biblical adultery. Another big one is lying. Look up Marc Mutty hyperbole on youtube. That is all I have to say. Beware of false preachers for they do not speak the word of the Lord nor do they follow in His righteousness.
There are people born with both sexes; there are people who are born with two sets of DNA; people are all different. People shouldn’t have to have a sex change operation to marry the person they love.
Love being the reason for marriage is a fantasy created by media and greeting card companies. Marriage is a contract that any qualified person can enter into.
I see my comment has been removed. Lets try again. It is public knowledge that Emrich is divorced and remarried thus breaking the commandment of adultery according to Biblical law. It is also common knowledge that Marc Mutty admitted to using ‘hyperbole’ (lying) in the last vote. Look it up on youtube. Emrich does not like his past revealed.