September 21, 2017
Contributors Latest News | Poll Questions | Orion Krause | Hurricane Jose | Stephen King

Comments for: Did Charlie Summers choose to be straight?

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):

  • tag

    If it is an “innate aspect of human biology”, how do you explain bisexuals? 

    • Anonymous

      They’re innately attracted to both genders. Why don’t you answer the author’s question instead of posing your own? If being gay is a choice, then when did you choose to be straight? When did you last choose to reject your feelings of attraction towards someone of the same sex?

      • Anonymous

        There’s nothing wrong with posing a question to answer a question.  It just shows how absorb this whole nonsense of someone being born attracted to the same sex, both sexes or animals.  I make “feel” I was born just a rotten person who likes to steal from people.  No, wolfndeer it’s a choice.

        • Anonymous

          It’s a pretty direct question and the inability to answer it proves that your theory about sexuality being a choice is a lie. Otherwise answer. When did you choose to be straight and when did you last reject a same-sex attraction?

          • Anonymous

            People are so self absorbed with their sexuality it gotten to the point of obsession.  Frankly I never gave it much thought whether I was gay, straight, bi, or attracted to animals.  I married someone of the opposite sex because that’s how the human race continues ( we need to procreate).  I have dear friends of the same sex whom I love spending time with and having fun. We don’t sit around thinking about having sex with each other.  

          • Anonymous

            Because you’re not gay. Obviously. 

          • In that same thought pattern – I am a married woman and I am friends with members of the opposite sex, but I don’t sit around thinking about having sex with all the guys I know either.  So, what does that mean?

          • Anonymous

            So the only reason you chose the spouse you married was to procreate?

          • Joseph Willingham

            It disturbs me that some people are so narrow minded that they think that THEIR way is the only other way and that anything else is just plain wrong.
            I don’t ever plan to procreate-there are plenty of people in our state, country, and world.  There is no need for another child from me.  Is that wrong?  Is it my duty to procreate?  And because I don’t want to procreate, does that mean that I can’t marry a woman if I wanted her insurance benefits?

          • Anonymous

            I was trying to figure out how to tell my grown children that they don’t exist :)
            Was also thinking about Mike Heath’s renaming of same-sex marriage and wondering if opposite-sex marriage should be called “coitus-based marriage” …. :)

          • Joseph Willingham

            That’s a very good point!  Let’s ask our pal Mike Heath!  I like that-marriage is, after all, only for the procreation of children.  “Copulation” might work, too, since, technically those gays can have coitus, and I think copulation is more for procreative purposes.
            PROTECT COITUS-BASED MARRIAGE!!!!

          • Anonymous

            Does your wife know that you are only in it for the babies?  That you have no interest in the companionship, support and partnership features of many healthy adult relationships?  

          • Anonymous

            Why do you assume I’m male?  

        •  Being wrong all the time… is that like a prerequisite to be part of the Christian Right?

          • In some circles of modern day America, it can certainly seem that in order to be a Christian you have to be wrong (in the public eye) “all the time”…. and there are plenty of us that are strong enough in our faith that we are OK with that.

            When all is said and done, if it can be said that I trusted in Jesus and made a difference in the world without having to compromise my values and my morals, then I think I lived a successful life.

          •  Faith is great, right up until it denies facts and prevents equality. Where the Conservative Christian says “No you can’t” and denies equal rights, the Liberal says, “You can if you want to, and those that don’t want to don’t have to.”  Being OK with being wrong is never a good thing. Being OK with being wrong has made Christianity one of the worlds biggest torturers and murderers. Being OK with being wrong allowed the Nazi Camps… Standing up and saying, “Our faith may not be wrong (it is, but believe what you will), but our actions are.” takes a courage that many of Christ’s “sheep” appear to lack. 

          • I never said that all actions of all Christians for all of history are correct – please do not put words in my mouth…. There are plenty of times when the church has been “in the wrong” – but there are also plenty of times the church itself has been wronged as well.  I am not saying we are perfect by any means… But, with that being said, there are times when as Christians we know that we will suffer persecution and we will be told that we are wrong and told to change our ways (or face torture or death).  

            I firmly believe that one day the courage that we appear to lack (as you like to say) will be tested beyond belief, and that is when I like to think I will have the courage to stand up, and yes “Yes, I am a believer of Christ”, if that means that it costs me my life, then so be it.  Thank God (literally) that at least as of right now we live in a free nation that allows me to proudly state what I believe and why I believe it.

          • Anonymous

            What does this have to do with this particular discussion ?    

          • Honestly – not a whole lot at this point – it is a little bit of a tangent that I chose to comment on.  It was a comment in response to another response from Dane…. And his comment didn’t have a whole lot to do with the original argument either actually.  I have noticed that over the time that I have been reading and commenting on the BDN Comment board he always has a snarky comment having to do with (as he calls it) “the Christian right”.  So, today I decided to respond to said comment and that’s how we got here!  Were you able to follow that rabbit trail?? :)

          • Anonymous

            think he is anti-religion….

          •  I would listen to more of what you said if the church had stopped being evil a hundred years ago, however, this past Father’s Day churches across Maine passed the “Hate Plate” to raise money to prevent equality. The Christian voice has been heard, and it is one of hate. Just because you believe in Christ does not make you a good person (you in the collective not the individual, you could be Mother Theresa for all I know), nor does belief make you right. I can believe with all my heart I am a Jedi Knight, but I don’t think I will ever lift a plane out of a swamp with my mind. Christian hate and lust for power has not changed in 2000 years, and I do not expect it to any time soon. Christians think if they do what their fairytale book tells them to they get to go to Heaven when they die, in other words they seek rewards. The Atheist who is genuinely a good person does so not for rewards, but because it is the decent thing to do. Who is the better person? There are somewhere around 28,000 known gods world wide. You chose one, I chose none. The difference is I would not tell you how to live your life, where Christians, Muslims, and all the other of the 28,000 do. Live your life, but do not try to prevent others from living theirs. As for the Christians suffering persecution… when you belong to a religion that has killed hundreds of millions of people, I have a real hard time feeling sorry for you because someone didn’t like it.

          • Anonymous

            It is laughable that you use Jesus to support your bigotry .   He would not be pleased.

          • How do you know that I am bigot?  No where in my comment did I come out distinctly for or against same-sex marriage. It seems that you are making an assumption based on the fact that I am a Christian and tend to be more conservative that I am automatically against same-sex marriage….  If that is the case, then it is laughable of you to make those assumptions about me based on a 3 sentence comment on a BDN Comment board.

          • Anonymous

            Sorry if I misstated your position…. what would your position be on the SSM issue ? You are commenting on a thread regarding SSM and using your religious beliefs to fortify your position, so please tell us all what it is.

            I am not looking to chastise anyone because of their religion… there are a great many faith based organizations, Christian among them that work tirelessly for gay and all humankind’s rights…. are you among them ?

          • Honestly – in regards to SSM, the jury is still out for me.  It seems to be so much of what I read is propaganda for one side or the other.  For me, it still comes down to the “born that way” VS “life style”.  I have been doing research on the issue from both sides of the “aisle”.

            I am all for gays having rights, civil unions, etc…. call me old fashion or wanting the best of both worlds, but I wish there was another way to assure they have all the same rights, responsibilities, and privileges with out the using the name marriage (as silly as that may sound…).  I don’t believe myself to be a bigot, trust me, I have known my fair share.  That is probably not the answer you are looking for, but unfortunately (at this time) that is the best I can give you.  Sorry!

            And, please folks, before you jump all over me and start bashing me and calling me a hater… it is still a free country last I checked and my right to state how I feel.

          • Anonymous

            I do not think that your feelings about marriage are at all silly.   Thank you for saying how you feel.
            I do think that your feelings, while respecting them , are not a reason to deny anyone else their full civil rights.   So I hope that if you cannot find it in your heart to vote for your fellow citizen’s equal rights that you will at least not vote against them.

          • Joseph Willingham

            I think most of us realize that it takes more than just not wanting us to use the word “marriage” to make someone a hateful bigot….

        • Then its a choice that 1500 mammalian species make including those without high thinking capabilities.

        • Anonymous

          No Quartz, it is not a choice …. you are wrong…. were you born wrong or did you chose to be wrong… you have a choice…. 

      •  Okay, okay, we get it already! You think it’s a birth defect, we get it!

        Who died and made you the gay police?

        • Anonymous

          wolfndeer most certainly did not say ‘defect’…….. the defect is in your reasoning and in your understanding… 

    • Anonymous

      Fear of commitment and a larger playing field.

    • That’s so easy its bizarre anyone would suggest its a issue. And I like the phrase “biological tendencies” because that much better explains the issue. Sexuality is based on genetics which produces along with environmental factors unique or nearly unique sexual development histories leading to puberty. Sexual orientation therefore while probably not a smooth range of behaviors from 100% heterosexual to 100% homosexual is likely to be a  concentrated around a number of predominate orientations like hetersosexual, homosexual, bisexual, transsexual, etc. So a person with an orientation that is 65% heterosexual, 25% bisexual, 5% homosexual, and 1% transexual, and 4% other (if its even possible to describe sexual orientation this way) is not only possible its likely based on timing, levels, and nature of hormones and other factors. In short its very complicated. No sterotypes accepted.

      • Anonymous

        It’s not complicated.  They just arn’t particular! LOL

    • Hedgeing the odds!

      LOL

  • Anonymous

    They lie and tell themselves that it’s a choice because it allows them to feel more comfortable discriminating. Talk to any gay person and they’ll tell you this isn’t a choice they’ve made. Who would choose such a thing given the hatred and bigotry in this world?

    But if you still want to believe that it’s a choice, ask yourself when was the last time you had a same-sex attraction and think about how you supposedly chose to reject that attraction. If you’re straight, it probably has never happened. I know it hasn’t happened to me.

    • Anonymous

      When conservatives say homosexuality is a choice they are obviously talking about the practice of having same-sex relationships. They are not necessarily referring to orientation or attraction. A person can be an alcoholic but chooses not to drink. The same can be said about a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same gender but chooses not to have any sexual relationships with the same gender or with no one whatsoever.

      Despite decades of and millions of dollars spent on research to find a genetic link to homosexual orientation, very little has been accomplished. In the meantime case studies of individuals point to a very strong relationship between childhood environment and homosexual orientation. Because overcoming homosexual attraction has proven to be a very difficult process for many who have tried, the idea homosexual orientation is engrained in one’s inherited genetic makeup has become widespread. Evidence has shown that this may be the case with homosexuals who have been engaging in homosexuality for many years beginning at an early age. It is also a phenomenon with other types of established learned emotional behaviors.

      • Anonymous

        Okay, don’t twist things. When they talk about it being a choice, they are not “talking about the practice of having same-sex relationships”. That’s clearly not true. Just look at the comments on here.

        But regardless, why should a person deny their own happiness because strangers don’t like the fact they’re in a relationship with someone of the same gender? It’s a harmless act. If they’re indeed born that way, why do you believe you should be able to pressure them into not acting on the same feelings that you can act on since you were born straight? Homosexuality doesn’t create harm and there is no victim, so your alcoholism analogy is not a flush one.

        • Anonymous

          I am not pressuring anyone into not having a relationship of choice. But when someone tells me I ought to support state endorsement of homosexual relationships because they are genetically based at the time of human conception when life begins, then I disagree vehemently. There is very little evidence indeed that an innate genetic link exists. And as I stated earlier, there is a lot of evidence that learned behavior plays a large part.

          • Anonymous

            You just said the opposite. You said it was fixed and should be discouraged. You haven’t articulated why one should be endorsed and not the other. I don’t even know how to have a conversation with you, because you ignore facts and changing your position frequently.

            There is not “a lot of evidence.” What’s evident is that you’ll ignore facts that are inconvenient for you. Just like you did the other day with quoting select parts of the CBO’s findings.

          • Anonymous

             The state is denying civil rights. The state and federal government put undo and discriminatory hardships on gay couples by not allowing them to file income taxes  jointly, or buy insurance as a couple. The rights as next-of-kin are denied, Social security payments, any kind of spousal rights. It is erroneous to say that this is about the “state endorsement of homosexual relationships because they are genetically based at the time of human conception”. This is about the government denying civil rights to individuals based on personal prejudice and ignorance. 50-60 years ago the same yahoos who are against gay marriage were fighting against inter-racial marriage being legalized. Sooner or later wisdom wins out over ignorance, I hope in this case it is November.

          • Anonymous

            Same-sexual couples say they are discriminated against because of who they are. When I say, “So what?”, they respond, “We can’t help who we are, we’re born that way”. The truth of the matter is that they are not “born that way” any more so than an alcoholic is “born that way”, that is, with a thirst for alcohol.  Even though some gays may not have been responsible at all for their initial condition, their decision to engage in homosexual acts has cemented their orientation further thus making it even more difficult for them to reverse it. That is one very good reason among other things why I don’t think the state should be endorsing or promoting homosexual relationships in any way. Granting SS couples marriage licenses can only deter adolescents with SS orientation from seeking the kind of help they need to reverse their orientation before becoming sexually active.   

          • Anonymous

             So the point of the article and whawell’s  statements, is that at any time whawell may decide that he will choose to be gay. If he does decide that that, he is fine with the state putting severe penalties on him.

          • Anonymous

            from your argument we should outlaw alcoholics from marrying since they are sick and choose to be so.  further raising children in such a household is very harmful.  yet, you are focused only on gay people.  why?

          • Anonymous

            I am “focused on gay people” because that is one of the primary issues of the day.

          • Anonymous

            It is the primary issue of  YOUR  day, which clearly is a disease that you carry and spread.
            What a small minded perspective you have.  There is so much in our world that deserves attention and help and yet you continue with your obsession.  Your church would be a good place to start, if you genuinely want to clean up the world.

          • Anonymous

            Who said I’m a man, Mr. Goodsense? Besides, I’m not the one who is chasing all the comments on this issue of SSM trying to put down those who disagree.

          • Anonymous

             Anytime someone disagrees with gay marriage, gay advocates are ready to burn that person at the stake, as evident with some of the responses to you.  It’s strange how SSM advocates stress tolerance, but they are the first to be vicious in their posts.

            The fact is that gay people are denied nothing. Everyone has the same right to marry ONE person of the OPPOSITE sex.  Everyone, gay and straight, has this right.  No one is denied.

          • Anonymous

            I appreciate your encouragement and the fact you read my posts. Thanks.

          • Anonymous

            You’re welcome. I personally find the gay advocates to be hypocrites and bullies.  They demand tolerance, but attack those with different opinions.

            They also lack honesty.  They keep saying that this issue will affect no one besides the gay couples involved.  In reality, that’s not true.  A reporter for the KJ was fired when he said he was against gay marriage.  They even fired the man’s wife who also worked for the paper. 

            A guidance counselor who appeared in a commercial for traditional marriage was sued and almost lost his position even though a woman in the same profession appeared in a commercial for gay marriage.  Apparently only one of these positions is ok to endorse.

            They promise no lawsuits, but there indeed have been lawsuits regarding this issue.

            They say the majority shouldn’t determine rights for the minority, and yet they keep bringing this issue to the ballot.  Then they complain when even the majority of voters in liberal-bastion California vote against their cause.

            They also fail to mention that thousands of polygamists out west want to re-work the meaning of marriage to include multiple partners.  The star of Sister Wives has been bringing this to court.  Gay advocates use the exact same arguments that polygamists use.

            We live in an era where people don’t want rules. 

             Here’s a video I agree with, and presents these troubles well:

             http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjTtoMQ_5ZE&feature=share

          • Anonymous

            It is not tolerance that is being demanded; it is equality. The attacks against you are simply the result of your bigotry. As American’s it is the duty of Americans to beat back those ideals that run counter to the American spirit.

          • Anonymous

            If I understand you correctly, it should be ok for the state to sanction discrimination against a person who, by a possible combination of genetics and early childhood environment, is sexually attracted to members of the same gender.   Assuming your understanding is as valid as the “genetic” camp’s:  What control does any child have over his or her genetics?  What control does any child have of his or her early childhood development?  What about the other species on this planet that engage in sex with members of their own gender?  Genetics?  Poor early life environment?

            An adult may choose to suppress his or her sexual behavior, a child not so much.  What compelling reason would require a portion of the population to suppress natural sexual behavior in order to receive the same treatment as others under the law?  How is fear of their difference from your preferred sexual behavior different than fear of their skin-color, or religious belief, or ethnicity? 

            There are ways to lighten skin color.  Should people with skin tones darker than your preferred norm be required to use skin lightening techniques to be entitled to equal treatment under the law?  

            People are  socialized into different religious beliefs, and there are articles questioning the existence of genetic factors that may trigger deep religious beliefs.  Should a Catholic be required to suppress his or her beliefs and take up atheism, or Islam, or Judaism, and take up your preferred religious norm to receive equal treatment under the law?

            Genetics and environment are both contributors to ethnic identity.  Should a person be required to forgo the language, foods and traditions in which he or she was raised and adopt the ones you believe to be the “normal” ones, to receive equal treatment under the law?  Should a person born to a Franco-American family, who learned both English and French in his or her childhood, and who loves to eat ployes, be required to speak only English, anglicize the family name, and give up the world’s best comfort food, to receive equal treatment under the law?

            That some may suppress sexual behavior, lighten their skin tone, convert to a different religion, or (horror of horrors) give up ployes, is hardly a good reason to require everyone else to do so in order to receive equal treatment under the law.  You may choose to change your skin color, repress your sexual behavior, convert to a different religion, or give up the culture of your birth, but that is your choice.  Should I be required to choose all the things that you assume to be “normal” and be just like you to be receive equal treatment under the law?  

          • Tom Brown III

             alright wrap ur mind up in this…

            regardless if it is a choice or genetics gay couples exist. They have no interest in being hetrosexual your not going to change them no matter how hard you try.

            That state isnt supporting or encouraging hetero or homosexual relationships they are supporting a tax system Marriage is more of an economic union then anything else.

            If their choice does not limit your freedom (if it is a choice to be gay) then what purpose does it serve to limit their freedom to engage in a possibly economically beneficial relationship with another person.

          • Anonymous

            very good…

          • Anonymous

            Marriage is not a freedom. People however are free to endorse or not to endorse in the coming election. Are you aware that the leaders’ – representing most gays – main goal is to “normalize” homosexuality using marriage as a their principal vehicle? The benefits of SSM are only secondary to their goal. If you doubt this, check it out and you’ll find out what there plan is.

          • Joseph Willingham

            I’m still miffed that you got a copy of our agenda and I didn’t!!!

          • Anonymous

            You didn’t try hard enough, I guess. :)

      • Anonymous

        Not obvious at all that the anti-gays are making that distinction.

      • Anonymous

        Did you happen to watch PBS The Epidemic That Decimated and Defined a Community Watch We Were Here – premiering June 14? I think those interested in HIV and the gay community would find it interesting.

      • Anonymous

        1.  being gay is not an illness
        2. lack of genetic proof means nothing, particularly since sexuality is governed by many genes
        3. you should think about the gay young people who might read your words; they are harmful and are the reason many people stay in the closet or choose to hurt themselves.

        • Anonymous

          In your second point, you seem to contradict yourself. You say, “lack of genetic proof means nothing” because sexuality is governed by many genes. Are you implying as well that homosexual orientation is governed by many genes peculiar to it? If so, there is very little evidence to show that being the case, while case studies of individuals point very strongly to learned behaviors leading to homosexual orientation.

          • Anonymous

            why can’t you accept that God is great, and made people in his own image, including gay people.  Your loathing and lack of acceptance of His children is chilling.

          • Anonymous

            I agree with you….. this man has made  a crusade of his prejudice…. it is creepy 

          • Anonymous

            thank you.  seriously, how can anyone read the Bible and not be filled with compassion and acceptance (or at least the desire to be so)?

            singletrack girl out.

          • Anonymous

            usegoodsense, count the number of comments you have made compared to the number I have made. Then tell me who is on a crusade. I think you are merely trying to stop the debate with your judgmental comments. The last time I checked, this was still a free country, so I have no intention of clamping up no matter what the subject is.

          • Anonymous

            I am not the one campaigning to deny other citizens their rights..
            that would be you…. it is you who is sitting in judgement of others private lives and calling them diseased…..
            you keep trying to make this about you…. it is not about you..
            you are not the victim here …..
            since this is an opinion thread, and we live in a free country
            spew on to your hearts desire…..

          •  If we were created in God’s image, how come we aren’t all invisible?

          • Anonymous

              I can see right through Whawell…can’t you?

            ;)

      • Anonymous

        for the love of God. Religion is a choice, and we praise freedom of religion. I doubt very much that it is learned, but let’s say it is. This is a free country. Isn’t it?

        • Anonymous

          Yes, it’s a free country. That is why I don’t support outlawing homosexuality. Endorsing it by having the state grant marriage licenses to SS couples in another matter, which I oppose for many reasons. I explained one of those reasons to Poster tarheels5 in this venue. It should be easy for you to find it.

          • Anonymous

            That is really funny…. you do not support OUTLAWING homosexuality…. well, bravo to you..
            do you entertain your gay cousins with your absurdities ?

      • Anonymous

        “Despite decades of and millions of dollars spent on research to find a genetic link to homosexual orientation, very little has been accomplished.”

        Get your facts straight.

        The Human Genome Project, which identified between 20,000-25,000 human genes, lasted only 13 years (not decades) and ended in 2003. The project also sought to determine 3 BILLION “chemical base pairs” that make up human DNA. (http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml)

        It is going to take many, many years to unlock the genome combinations that are responsible for a person’s predisposition to such diseases as depression, cancers, personality traits, and sexual preference.

        At this point, evidence strongly points to sexual preference being a genetic trait. Just because we have yet to identify the genetic combination (out of millions of combinations) does not mean such a combination does not exist.

        • Anonymous

          In order to establish an innate genetic link,  genes particular to homosexual orientation do not need to be to be identified as you suggested, only their mere existence. This is can done by locating a group of twin siblings raised apart from infancy to adulthood and comparing that group to the general population. So far only a very weak correlation has been found, which might indicate that some people are more predisposed to homosexual orientation than others. But a similar disposition is found for alcohol addiction.

      • Anonymous

        There you go again….. comparing homosexuals to alcoholics…. have you no shame !!!!!!!!
        What you say is absolutely repugnant.   Your malevolence is appalling .

        • Joseph Willingham

          I liked the kitten comparison better!

    • Anonymous

      So all of the guys in prison were gay all along and prior to being in prison they just masked their homosexuality?

      • Anonymous

        So you can’t answer the question?

        • Anonymous

          Your response, thanks, made my point.

          • Anonymous

            It proves you are ignorant about the issue. There is a different between status and action. A lonely guy having sex with another man in prison simply because he’s lonely and there is no one else around doesn’t make him a homosexual. You can be a heterosexual who engaged in homosexual acts and vice versa. Before some gay people come out, they attempt to have heterosexual relationships. That doesn’t mean they’re straight.

            I answered your question. Why don’t you answer mine?

          • Anonymous

            A difference between status and action.  So performing or engaging in sex with a member of the same sex doesn’t make you gay.  Hmmm.  Walks like a gay, acts like a gay but isn’t gay. 
            What makes people “choiceless”?  Is it the mysterious “Gay Gene” that no one has identified.  Has it not been identified because it doesn’t exist?

          • Anonymous

            You just brought up an example of straight guys having gay sex to prove that it’s a choice and now you’re trying to change that, saying that if they “walk like a gay, act like a gay” they’re gay. You’re also arguing against yourself. So let’s say a woman is marrying a man and she remains a virgin until the wedding. Is she not heterosexual until she has sex with her husband?

            Like I said, action is different than status. They usually correlate, but not always.

          • Anonymous

            You are the one that always resorts to the strategy of feigning confusion or that someone is not addressing your posts correctly. 
            I have stayed on topic and never once mentioned straight any where in any post.  
            No one besides you is arguing with themselves. 
            Gays have a choice, prove otherwise.  Show me that gene!

          • Anonymous

            You cited straight prisoners engaging in gay sex as proof that homosexuality is a choice. Then you made a play on the saying “if it walks like a duck” which refers to something being innate and all encompassing. Then you went on to talk about genes. That’s not even how genes work. There isn’t one gene for specific things. For example, your eye color is determined by multiple genes working in a sort of symphony. You haven’t proven that sexuality as a choice is the default either because you refuse to answer the question about when you chose to be straight.

            I’m not the one all over the map. That’s you.

          • Anonymous

            Nature’s way is that humans are born straight as the primary purpose of any member of any species is to perpetuate the species.  Homosexuals deviate from that, so you are implying that if they are born gay there must be some sort of mutation.  I was born straight, unless gays have a mutated gene, then its their choice to be gay or not.  Choice or mutation; you pick

          • Anonymous

            That’s ridiculous. Any delineation from what’s most common is now a mutation? So those with blue eyes chose to have blue eyes? We’re not all born identical, so your ridiculous claim that anything other than the default is a choice is obviously false. 

          • It is also natures way that humans are born with one gender yet one in 1500 births are dual gendered.

          • Anonymous

            Did you get your “nature’s way”  information directly from Gaia, aka Mother Nature?  Or is your belief derived from the sum total of your genetics and environmental influences?  If the the former, tell Gaia the midwest could use some rain.  

            If the latter, please tell us:  where did you learn all there is to know about the genetic structures of humans.  You could save science years of research.  

            Is it possible to include, in your omniscient understanding of nature’s way,  the idea that homosexual sexual behavior might serve the very natural function of limiting population growth within a species?  

          • Anonymous

            You do not know what you are talking about.

          • Anonymous

            This is the crux of the matter and the argument that gays have held onto for a long time. Whether being gay is something you are born with, or it is an environmental cause later in life after birth. You can point to all the scientific evidence which is very little that is conclusive that is an independent source, and also the age old argue meant that other species show gay tendencies which is B.S. Humans are the only creature that uses sex for pleasure. You get very agitated when you don’t hear the answers you look for, and you do tactically confuse the issue.

          • Guest

            ….

          • Anonymous

            And how do you verify it is for pleasure? Did you ask them? How about it’s a sign of dominance.

          • Guest

            ….

          • Anonymous

            Very pathetic. You made the claim that humans are the only ones who engage in sex for pleasure, and then when someone challenges you on that fact, you ask, how do you know? You made the claim! So how do YOU know? 

            Try holding yourself up to the same standards you hold others to.

          • Anonymous

            Here is a link that explains it in plain english. About a quarter of the page down you’ll find it. Why is it you put the burden of proof on everyone else, but rarely provide factual information yourself other than agitated confused behavior.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_sexual_behaviour

          • Anonymous

            You were the one that made the claim! The burden of proof is on you. You’d tried to ridicule someone for talking about animals when you were the one that began talking about animals in the first place. You want to talk about plain English? How about your plain hypocrisy?

            Further, literally the first sentence of the source you cite states that you’re wrong. “It is a common myth that animals do not (as a rule) have sex for pleasure, or alternatively that humans, pigs (and perhaps dolphins and one or two species of primate) are the only species which do. ‘

          • Some straight people have gay sex. Some gay people have stright sex. Sometimes people get drunk and do stupid stuff sometime people get religion and repress their natural desires. Some people are just gay. They grew up in a healthy happy home. They are educated and a productive member of society but the love, i said love not sex, only those of the same gender in suck a way that they want to spend their lives with them.

          • Anonymous

            With Bonobos, it’s social interaction, bond forming, etc.  As for dominance, that aspect is no stranger to human sex (unfortunately)

          • Anonymous

            My dog humps anything.

          • Guest

            That must comfort you on a cold night.

          • Anonymous

            That must comfort you on a cold night.

          • Anonymous

            Chimps, especailly Bonobos,engage in sex for pleasure.

          • Anonymous

            It is one thing to be ignorant and quite another to ‘chose’ to remain in ignorance as you have ‘chosen’ to do.

      • Being on the receiving end in prison isn’t exactly a choice!

      • Guest

      • pbmann

        Most “gay” sex in prison is not about love, attraction or desire.  It is about control and domination  just like a heterosexual rape is about domination and control not sex.

      • Sex and consesual love are very differentt hings that come together with mutual trust and devotion.

  • Anonymous

    Some people “choose” to repress their own innate biological tendencies and believe that because they do it, that it is a “choice” that others also should make.   Of course it isn’t a choice if you are forced to make it.

  • Anonymous

    Where does the BDN get these guys?  This Busby character is just another liberal spewing the same crap the rest of them do.

    • I can Tell you where they DIDN”T come from!

      Fox News!

    • Balanced News, they have Matt Gagnon, Gammon or what ever the Righty’s name is!

    • Anonymous

      You know where he “comes from”, unlike a lot of conservative commneters.  As for spewing the c word (and don’t want to get busted as you may well be), it’s easy toobserve who has the monoply on that.

  • Anonymous

    WHY is this a news item?

    • Anonymous

      Because it isn’t a news item.  It’s an opinion column.

  • It isn’t easy being a Republican.  You have to be against gay marriage which makes you discriminatory, but you can’t be against gays because you don’t want to be discriminatory.  You have to be in favor of Romneycare but you have to be against its evil twin Obamacare.  You have to be in favor of markets helping to control health insurance costs but you have to be opposed to exchanges which, some think, would provide competition and help control health insurance costs.  You have to be in favor of repealing Obamacare and replacing it, but you can’t say how you would replace it.  You have to argue that something you called a penalty and not a tax is now indeed a tax.  Watching Mitt Romney, as the Republican’s front man, ducking and dodging and smiling all the time (a forced smile) when asked pointed questions is like watching Lucille Ball explaining to Ricky how come things got so screwed up.

    • Anonymous

      I’m a conservative and I find it easy. It’s easy because we have the right principles, not like those Republicans you just described. Watching Barack Obama, as the Democrat’s front man, ducking and dodging and smiling all the time, etc. is like watching Lucille Ball explaining to Ricky how come things got so screwed up and blaming Bush for it all.

      • Anonymous

        “It’s easy because we have the right principles”.  I guess that answers my question:  We do need to all be just like Whawell to be treated equally under the law.  I am somewhat disappointed that the principles held by a sizeable portion of the population are “wrong”.  I expected better from all of us . . . 
        On a serious note:  Is it possible you “find it easy” because you choose to ignore the facts that disagree with your pre-conceptions?  I have many liberal acquaintances who also find it easy because they have all the right principles too. 

        • Anonymous

          You made a case against Republicans. I just merely turned the tables on you to demonstrate how ridiculous your case is. Don’t blame me for that. You started it.

        • Anonymous

          Good question.

    • Anonymous

      Lucy was intended as comedy.  George’s boy Willard is trying to be serious.

  • Chris Busby proves once again that BDN scrapes the bottom of the barrel to get contributors! 

    • Anonymous

      So why read it? You have a “choice” to stop reading their paper and to stop commenting.

  • Anonymous

    So when a conservative states their constitutionally given right to free speech that they believe marriage is between a man and a woman, they are called bigots. But really, read this garbage and all the comments being posted by the lefties, and ask yourself who the true bigots are!?

    •  Denying equality is the definition of bigotry. Is Summers personally a bigot? I don’t know. Is Candidate Summers a bigot? Yes, he is towing the party line which is to discriminate against a portion of the population. Speaking freely is fine, I wish Summers would actually do some rather than looking to the Tea Party playbook for every comment he makes.

      •  Are we bigots if we do not treat our young children as equals? 

        • Anonymous

          Two adults wanting to get married are not ‘children’ and therefore are entitled to make decisions for themselves…..such as getting married.

          • Not the point or my point to another poster whose prose you obviously failed to read.  Dane opined: “Denying equality is the definition of bigotry.”

            I asked (of that person) “Are we bigots if we do not treat our young children as equals?”

            Dane failed too reply.

            Read. Learn. Then comment.

          • Anonymous

            Judging from the responses  re: Dane and my post compared to your post….I think it fairly clear who needs to read, learn and not bother to comment.  

          • You know the people who support this cause seem to go out of their way to alienate folks who might be convinced to vote in their interest. 

            I get to comment, as is my right, and will do so again (silently) in November.

        • Anonymous

          we are judged by the questions that we ask..

    • Anonymous

      Free speech is one thing (people say numb things all the time) oppressing others due to exclusive beliefs and special rights is another…..in the recent Mississippi GOP primary 29% of voters reported they think interracial marriage should still be illegal and this is 2012…..and I’m sure some of those enlightened people happily state that they think interracial marriage is wrong (via their constitutionally given right)  but does that intern make it ok to try and ban or prevent interracial marriage for everyone in Mississippi- because some people believe marriage should be between people of the same race?  SCOTUS said no.   

      Think that if SCOTUS hadn’t ruled on this issue there wouldn’t still be states who would be happy to have interracial marriage still be illegal because that’s what the majority thinks?- of course there would.  Does that make it right?  If someone in Mississippi doesn’t want to marry someone of a different race- don’t marry someone of a different race- problem solved.  That being said- that doesn’t give those same people who don’t believe in interracial marriage the right to prevent or ban other people who do want to marry someone of a differing race from marrying.  When people try an force their beliefs on others that’s where this country has always run into problems.  No one who favors same sex marriage is telling people who don’t believe in same sex marriage they have to marry someone of the same sex….the people who do not believe in same sex marriage are the same people (who have always had the special right to marry) who are telling same sex couples they can’t get married do to their exclusive beliefs….discrimination and bigotry is wrong no matter what you want to call it.

    • Anonymous

      Speaking of garbage, much of that coming from conservatives (I hesitate to use “righties” since that implies coreectness) fits that category even better.  Your 1st ammnedment rights to preach your stand but also mine to denounce it for what it is.

    • pbmann

      You can say you believe marriage should be between a man and a woman, just like you can say any type of discrimination is OK but stopping SSM for otheres because you don’t agree with it is bigotry.

    • You can believe that Black people are all theives and liars, that white people are all predjudice, that gays area ll disfunctional and sinners but, without valid proof you cannot discriminate against them and there is NO valid proof against homosexuals. Even the Bible has been studied and those who really iunderstand it know it cannot be taken literally. It is a plethora of stories and contradictions meant for discussion. God Bless. Please dont start talking Bible to hurt me because I have readi tand theri is not way is is literal.

      • Anonymous

        You’re making my point!

        Sent from my iPad

        • Anonymous

          You don’t have a point!

          Sent from my dinning room table

  • Anonymous

    I did not choose my sexuality either.  It just is what it is.  Having the government ruling every aspect of our lives, however, should be approached with caution.  If you own a 2-family house, do you have to get permission to rent the apartment from the government?  Are you not free to rent to whomever you choose or whom you deem responsible enough to pay the rent & maintain the property?  Anyone can say they were denied a job, rental, etc based on discrimination.  Sometimes that argument goes way too far & is ripe for fraud.

    •  If you have a two family house, and you live in one side of the duplex, you may discriminate as to who lives in the other side,  If you own a two family house and do not occupy an apartment in that building, you may not discriminate.

  • I have known many gay people who were straight until a really bad relationship, or abuse… there is some of all…   but I am really tired of being judged for my opinion… people have violent tendancies they do not act on, same with alcoholism, or any other addition, or even just procrastination…  I myself, have many gay friends, and feel it is a very personal issue… but why are people being judged for every little word, yet not want to be judged for their actions?  Sexuality should be a person issue…. so someone does not understand what u do and what you like… so what?  That makes them bad?  To me, that is the same as discreminating against someone because they are gay.  I really feel like the press and political figures like to rile up hated… the last thing we need….   

  • Smiles McGee

    dude seriously – your articles are pathetic…hire me if you want comedy in politics. nobody cares about you.

    • Anonymous

      I have a hard time taking anyone who uses the word ‘dude’ seriously…..

      • Guest

        ====

        • Anonymous


          Smiles McGee” sounds like a hair dresser or maybe an interior decorator.

    • Anonymous

      Homophobia – the fear that gay men are going to treat you the way you treat woman.

      • Anonymous

        Way too true!

    • Anonymous

      Oh yeah?  Even this small sample show that his opinions areright onand liked.

  • { He reiterated his belief that marriage should be limited to unions of heterosexual couples, but added, “I think someone’s private life should remain their private life.” }

    Whoaaaaaa! Charlie!

    If you think that their private life should be private how would or should anyone know if they where Heterosexual or not in the first place?

  • Guest

    ////\\

    • Joseph Willingham

      But he CAN choose to use correct grammar!

  • Anonymous

    between you and I.”   Did he really say,”between you and I” instead of the grammatically correct “between you and me.”  Guess he missed sixth grade.

  • Anonymous

    This column looks to make a mountain over a molehill.

    More importantly, it’s talking about an issue that’s been settled for quite some time– in 2005 we added sexual orientation to the anti-discrimination laws, the laws which already protected people for their choice of religion.

    That said, Summers is disingenuous when he says “I think someone’s private life should remain their private life” in regards to marriage.

    A couple cannot simply decide they are married, keep that news private to themselves, and expect to receive the important protections civil marriage conveys. It requires a visit to a state-authorized notary public or other official who can sign and validate a civil marriage certificate. And there are currently no allowances in those laws for same-sex couples to get civil marriage benefits.

    So as private as we might want to be about this, same sex couples in Maine can spend a lifetime together yet never get the same level of benefits that their friends with civil marriage have.

    I hope we rectify this issue in November, where we have an opportunity to allow ALL Maine families to protect the lives they build together, and the children they raise together.

    •  “More importantly” is incorrect.  an adjective “more” can not modify an adverb “importantly.”  Hard to take anyone seriously if they fail to abide by the rules.

      • Anonymous

        Attacking grammar errors is usually a good sign that you’ve run out of intelligent rebuttal. 

        Just throwin’ that out there…

        •  There’s an “intelligent rebuttal”?  If so it has not appeared here yet. 

          • Anonymous

            Since my reference was to a post of yours, I guess I’ll have to agree with you on this one!  Thanks…that was easy!

          • My post on grammar (intelligent or not) was in no way meant as “rebuttal.” only a paranoid would suggest otherwise. 

          • Anonymous

            Not a rebuttal?  You essentially dismissed his entire post on the basis of poor grammar usage. What was the point of your reply otherwise? Just to snipe?

            Also, you might want to look up “paranoid” to avoid using it incorrectly.

          •  …and the point of your post is? 

            I find it difficult to keep a straight face.  My junior High students do a far better job of debating than is exhibited here.

          • Anonymous

            Straight face? That’s kinda funny, given the topic at hand :)

          •  The pun was intended.

      • Anonymous

        Do you disagree with my point, or just how I made it?

        • Anonymous

          They do anything to derail the conversation.

          •  Who are “they”? 

            If I wanted to “derail” a conversation I would not be a part of it.

          • Anonymous

            Right. You wanted to have a conversation and that’s why you chose to ignore all the substantial points of both the comment you replied to and the article itself in order to speak about grammar.

            You’re full of it.

        •  What I believe:
          Civil marriage and the benefits connected to it, should be eliminated for all.  As a single person I already pay for schools, juvenile crime,  medical care for those under 19 and a host of other goodies.  I do not think I should be further discriminated against by being forced to pay additional taxes. 

          I have no illusion that this will happen.

          • Anonymous

            That would be constitutional, at least. Thank you for clarifying your position on this issue!

          • Anonymous

            and since as you say, your ideas about preferential tax treatments are not about to happen, I hope that you will vote to extend marital rights to our gay citizens…. or at the very least, not vote against them….

      • Anonymous

        There is an unwritten rule that we do not correct people’s grammar on comment blogs. If you do, then that makes you a grammar granny.

        • Joseph Willingham

          There are cases in which a commenter can be corrected.  

  • Anonymous

    More mindless mudslinging from the Left. The Bollard is a cesspool of cultural garbage, so what should one expect from its editor/publisher.

    • Are you proud of this nonsensical statement, Does this in any way contribute to an intelligent  conversation? 

      • Anonymous

        Just read one issue of The Bollard – you’ll see what I mean.

        It is truly pathetic that the reactionary BDN responds to the constant complaints about its hard leftist tilt by tilting even further left with the addion of this clown. “Oooo, Busby is from Portland, he’s sooo cool!”

        Sickening.

        • Anonymous

          You’re manufacturing it in your head. No one on here is saying “Oooo, Busby is from Portland, he’s sooo cool!”

          • Joseph Willingham

            I suspect that if he were from Jackman, there’d be an issue with that.

    • Anonymous


      More mindless mudslinging from the Left. The Bollard is a cesspool of cultural garbage, so what should one expect from its editor/publisher.”

      Umm, technically what you have written here is mindless mudslinging.

      • Anonymous

        Read The Bollard. If you enjoy it, you are part of the problem – go get another tattoo and penis piercing on your way back from visiting your neighborhood drug pusher, and don’t forget to slap your girlfriend around.

        If you see it as the garbage it is, speak up about it, or at the very least, ignore it.

        The BDN is reacting to the constant criticism of its hard leftist tilt by tilting even further left by adding Busby. Bangor is generally a class town, but it is very poorly represented by its once-classy paper.

        • Joseph Willingham

          Why are you on here then, making ridiculous generalizing statements and complaining about it? Why not just ignore it?

  • Anonymous

    i’m so sick of this topic.  

    • Anonymous

      The opposition is getting tiresome, redundant, non-factual, etc.  Part of the solution may be to pass the referendum.

    • Joseph Willingham

      Why do people read these pieces and articles and then talk about how tiresome this topic is? 

      Why not just ignore it?  Read something else?  

      I’ll tell you, though, that *I* am so sick of people telling me that I am deviant, that I should die, that I should leave the state, leave the country, that I’m lucky my government doesn’t kill me, that I should go back in the closet, that I should marry a woman-ANY woman, that my love for my boyfriend is sick, etc.  

      YOU can turn the page and read something else, but we have to hear this all the time.  

  • Did Chris  busby choose to be stupid?

    Well after reading that drivel, you probably asked yourself the same thing!

    • Anonymous

      Bigotry, ignorance and being apathetic are all choices….. being LGBTQ is not a choice.

    • Guest

      looks like you got a busby fan upset… :-)

  •  In my view, believing that businesses and business owners should be free to hire and serve whom they choose to hire and serve is not bigotry. I think it is foolish to refuse service to anyone if your interest is in profit, but bars are permitted (even mandated) to refuse service to citizens age 18 to 21.  Those young folks can vote, sign contracts, fight and die for their country, but can’t have a beer in Maine before they deploy.

    ANYONE (again in my opinion) who thinks discrimination on basis of age is OK, but feels the same discrimination based on skin color, or sexual orientation is bigotry is a hypocrite. Then again, I support people’s right to be hypocritical, discriminatory, and stupid.

  • If being gay was a choice, I would have never chosen it. But it is not a choice, I am gay, I love my partner and our beautiful family. We area a happy, healthy family. God bless those who will say bad things about us here. I will pray for you all.

  • Anonymous

    Being gay is simply an irresistible urge to have sex with someone of the same sex,nothing more. I could live with my friend,share expenses ,deeply love them,agree to let them make decisions for me should I not be able to,and leave all my belongings to them when I die. The only difference is I CAN resist having deviant,unnatural sex with that person.

    • Anonymous

      Well dirt clod it’s good you’re living up to your moniker…..

    • Anonymous

      Saying you can resist having sex with a person suggests that you are turned on by that person, but opt not to go there.  Is that true?  Persons of the same gender as yourself DO turn you on?   You WANT to have sex with them, but don’t do it?

      If that’s not the case, don’t pretend you have a clue about being gay.

      • Anonymous

        I rest my case.

        • Anonymous

          Meaning, you admit that you don’t have a clue about being gay?  Fine.  But it nullifies your opening line, thus your entire post.

          Case dismissed.

          • Joseph Willingham

            I think he means that he is turned on by people of the same gender but that he has issues with it.

    • Joseph Willingham

      How about regular natural sex with that person?  You don’t HAVE to use the whips and chains.

  • Anonymous

    So it’s bad that I don’t think business owners should have to hire people they don’t want to hire? It’s bad that I feel as though the government should have ZERO to do with someone’s life unless someone else is harming their LIFE.  Does this make me a bigot? Does it make me a bad person when I say that I believe that a MARRIAGE, should be between a man and a women? I don’t care if they have something that means the exact same thing, just do not call it marriage.  Isn’t it also bigotry to call a straight person a bigot? hmm….

    • Anonymous

      Spoken like a white male who has never had any of his civil rights or privileges denied or voted on by others…. pathetic.

    • Anonymous

      No, that’s not what the word bigot means. 

    • If you think business owners should hire whomever they wish then how can you think people should not be able to marry whomever they wish to.  If you think government should have ZERO to do with someone’s life, then you should think the government should have ZERO to do with marriage.  Your last question is interesting.  Grasshopper, “Is it bigotry to call a bigot a bigot?”

  • Joseph Willingham

    Mr. Summers should have a better handle on his grammar.  “I” is so misused these days that people think that proper use of “I” and “me” is wrong.  Tut tut!

  • Anonymous

    Has Charlie, AKA Ken Doll, run this by his campaign manager, Lance Dutson?  Oh, wait, that was a dumb question.

  • Anonymous

    Same Sex Relationships, yeah, that would be considered a choice.  Bi Sexual relationships as well.  Bi Sexual activity is also a choice..but being gay, nope, not a choice….sorry religious zaggots, your born that way, and no, you cannot PRAY the Gay away…but by all means, go ahead and keep trying to convince yourselves that you can.

  • Anonymous

    Ah… still in search of the elusive homosexual gene (aka Homo sapiens sodomitius), liberals and like-minded libertines will even employ reverse sophistry to buttress the argument for perversion as a civil rights issue. Really, Busby! Most people just don’t buy this kind of crap anymore. You might have better luck peddling your soiled laundry in Provincetown or Key West.

  • Thank you Chris for this explanation of Mr. Summers “thoughts” on this issue, sad as they are in this day and age.

  • Anonymous

    I read with interest Chris Busby’s article about Charlie Summers’ opposition to Maine’s law banning discrimination against people on the basis of their perceived sexual orientation (BDN 7/6/2012). I was especially interested in this since I had the opportunity to speak to Charlie at the Bangor 4th of July parade about the process for receiving comments about the proposed wording of the same-sex marriage referendum coming up this November. My question to him was not how to send comments regarding that wording (Go to http://www.maine.gov/sos/news/2012/samesexmarriageini.html by July 16th to send your comments about how you feel the ballot should be worded.) Rather, I wanted to know how he would be using these comments to finalize the wording. Would it actually make a difference to send your comments in, I asked Charlie. His reply was that if they seemed “canned” or sent in mass numbers and all seemed the same, that would not make a difference, but if they were “personalized,” he’d pay attention to them. While I find it hard to understand why Charlie, as our Secretary of State, would not pay attention to every single comment coming from Maine voters on this important voting issue, I do hope he holds true to his word that anyone who takes the time to send their “personalized” comments on the wording of the same-sex ballot initiative will be heard and their comments will direct his thinking as he determines whether there is clarity and fairness in this dialogue or whether it is simply driven by his own personal agenda in regards to same-sex marriage.

  • Joseph Willingham

    Yes, this is an interesting theory he has.

    But I wonder, so what if it IS a choice?  If it is a choice, then isn’t there then some aspect of homosexuality within us all?

    • Anonymous

      of course there is…. sexuality is a spectrum..not a choice…. but do not expect simple minds to understand that…
      way to threatening…..

You may also like