Comments for: Saturday, Nov. 3, 2012: Election letters

Posted Nov. 03, 2012, at 5:25 p.m.

A few things President Clinton left out Former President Bill Clinton, America’s “explainer-in-chief,” speaking at the Democratic convention, left a few important items out of his explanation: “The Republican argument against re-electing the president,” Clinton said, “is really simple. It goes something like this: We left him a total mess. …

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News encourages 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):

  • seththayer

    Dear Mr. Rundgren:  What a shame that you are trying to shove your beliefs down my throat.  What a shame that you see sex acts over love and commitment.  What a shame that you think it is your business to point out that a lesbian couple might be the last generation in a family that you don’t know.  What a shame that you dismiss others and their Christian beliefs if they are not the same as yours.  And finally, what a shame that the BDN published your letter.

  • seththayer

    Dear Ms. Weston:  So you don’t think adding a group of loving and committed couples to the institution of marriage might actually strengthen that institution?  Do you think divorce weakens the institution of marriage more than same sex marriage?  You imply in your letter that you do not condone or affirm “same sex behavior.”  What does that mean, that you can’t stomach thinking about sex? Then don’t think about it. Tell me, do you condone the behavior that has gone on with regards to visiting prostitutes in this state?  What you are essentially saying is that my 13 year relationship with my husband is not as valid as the married Portland businessman who frequents prostitutes?  REALLY?   

    Finally, I am so tired of you all playing the victim card.  Some harsh words said to you by people whose freedoms you are trying to remove should not a victim make.  Being beaten over the head with bats while having gay slurs yelled at one makes one a victim.  Being beaten and tied to a wire fence in the middle of the night and then burned, just because one is gay, makes one a victim.

    Get over yourself Ms. Weston.  We are all American citizens here just fighting for the freedom to love the person we want to love.  

  • Anonymous

    Peter Agrafiotis:

    Effin’ A

    Yessah

  • Anonymous

    Lynn, that was one of the best written and insightful letters I have read on the BDN. I was very borderline on how to vote on question 1, but had to vote  absentee already(am a ME resident  active duty military stationed out of state). Your letter convinced me that Question 1 should be voted down.

    • Anonymous

      I am unsure of how I am going to vote on 1, but was leaning toward voting yes.  I was disturbed, though, by how #1 supporters treated  that family farm that put up a No on #1 sign. If that is their reaction now, what will it be if it becomes legalized.  They tried to destroy a families livelihood because they disagreed with them.  Don’t preach tolerance of your views and then turn around and be intolerant of another’s.  Just because someone doesn’t agree with voting yes on #1, doesn’t automatically make them haters, just like if someone chooses not to vote for Obama, it doesn’t make them racists.  I am so tired of people categorizing those who disagree with them as haters and/or racists.  It is not that simple. Supporters of yes on #1 may have lost my vote because of their own intolerance. They are doing to others, what they are complaining about others doing to them- being intolerant.  Kind of ironic, isn’t it?

      • seththayer

        Hi Frankie:  Can I ask what you think Yes on 1 supporters did that was different than what the family with the farm did?  All were exercising their right to freedom of speech…no matter how out of hand it got, all of the participants were exercising their right to free speech.  Those that decided against patronizing the company because of its views is certainly no different than the National Organization for Marriage and their allies boycotting everything from Starbucks to JCPenny, for their corporate support of marriage equality and LGBT rights.  Again, another freedom all of us enjoy in this country, the right to patronize the businesses of our choosing.  I for one think it is great to know where businesses stand on issues.  I would rather go shopping at Pennys and then get a tea at Starbucks than get a bushel of apples from the Treworgies, because I am a free thinker and have the freedom to choose what businesses to patronize.  

        • Anonymous

          “All were exercising their right to freedom of speech…”

          That’s the whole problem with anti-gays, they think no one else has the right to hold a different opinion.  Isn’t that why they are voting no, to force their views onto everyone else?

      • Anonymous

        Yes, that family farm stands by its moral belief: as soon as their pocket book was hurt, they backed down.  They sold their morals. I see that as a republican thing.

      • Anonymous

        Since we have no way of knowing it was pro-equality supporters who made the comments about the family farm that foolishly put of the Hate Signs, it’s unfair to blame pro-equality supporters for the reaction to those Hate Signs.  It seems to me your mind was really made up already, since you seem to want to take any excuse to condemn pro-equality people and prop up the foolish farm with the Hate Signs.  Sorry, anti-gays always attempt to deceive.  You failed to do so here.

        • Anonymous

          You have no idea what you are talking about when you say that I am attempting to deceive anyone. Who do you think made the comments about boycotting the family farm?  Question #1 opponents?! Seriously?   I think that I was quite clear in my comments.  I was and probably still am leaning toward voting yes on #1.   My mind is not made up yet.  I was simply pointing out the irony of those who want tolerance, not extending the same courtesy to someone who holds a different view.  By your classifying all those who don’t support #1 as haters, you just underscored why I was disturbed about what was done to that family farm.  With your comment, “anti-gays always attempt to deceive”, apparently, for you, it is “support us or you are a hater and liar”.  That is so far from the truth in my case,  but  judging from your comment, you are the hater.  The supporters of #1 who attacked the farm’s views didn’t just stop patronizing the farm, they called for an all out boycott of it, trying to put it out of business unless it took down a sign. That is not tolerance!  To address another’s comment (Seth),  I also did not, nor would I support, either side boycotting or calling for others to boycott a business because of their views on this issue.  This is still America, and if someone is asking for tolerance of their views, they had better be ready to be tolerant of the views of others. I’ve seen Yes on #1 signs up on many businesses around the state, but I have not heard any calls for a boycott of those businesses by opponents of question 1, have you?   

    • Anonymous

      So, Bonny, you are on active duty in America’s military?  When you joined the military, you swore to UPHOLD the United States Constitution, but when you voted no on Question 1, you attempted to SUBVERT the Constitution’s guarantee of “Equal Protection Under the law as well as the Freedom Of Religion of the many major Christian and Jewish denominations that WANT to marry loving, committed same gender American couples:

      The Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists
      The Episcopal Church
      Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
      Metropolitan Community Church
      Conservative Judaism
      Reform Judaism
      Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
      Unitarian Universalist Church
      United Church of Christ

      Fortunately for you, your military superiors won’t see how you tried to subvert the Constitution with your hate vote, and they won’t be able to give you a dishonorable discharge for your misdeed.

      Anti-gays always seek to hide their attacks on LGBT Americans.  Where’s your real name, if you’re so “proud” of voting to subvert the Constitution, Bonny?

  • Anonymous

    Philip Rundgren:

    Before god destroyed S&G, Lot offered his virgin daughters to the mob and asked that they “know” them instead of his male guests.

    After god destroyed S&G for their alleged sins…

    God turned Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt – for disobedience.

    and Lot’s daughters got him drunk in a cave and “knew him”.

    god did not smite Lot or his daughters.

    Care to comment on the family values moral of this story?

  • Anonymous

    P. Agrafiotus, S. Dickson-Smith, H. Snyder, the Matlins:  good letters.
    R. Rundgrean:  those you denounce as “claiming to be Christians”.  Are indeed real Christians.  Besides, SSM is a civil/legal matter, not a fractious religious matter.
    D. Powers:  SSM supporters are smarter.

  • Anonymous

    Here is an example of the “tolerance” and respect for the law from the Yes on One supporters.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSfTh3SEhoA

  • Anonymous

    Dan Powers- you got all your statements 100% correct! Thank you for writing. 

Similar Articles