Maine votes against gay marriage law
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
AP
Friends console one another after learning about the unofficial defeat on Question 1 at election night headquarters in Portland, Maine.
enlarge
Cecelia Burnett and Ann Swanson had already set their wedding date. When they joined about 1,000 other gay marriage supporters for an election night party in a Holiday Inn ballroom, they hoped to celebrate the vote that would make it possible.
Instead, they went home at midnight, dejected and near tears after a failed bid to make Maine the first state to approve same-sex marriage at the ballot box.
"I'm ready to start crying," said Burnett, a 58-year-old massage therapist, walking out of the ballroom with Swanson at her side. "I don't understand what the fear is, why people are so afraid of this change.
"It hurts. It hurts personally," she said. "It's a personal rejection of us and our relationship, and I don't understand what the fear is."
With 87 per cent of precincts reporting, gay-marriage foes had 53 per cent of the vote in a referendum that asked Maine voters whether they wanted to repeal a law allowing same-sex marriage that had passed the Legislature and was signed by Democratic Gov. John Baldacci.
"The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across the nation," said Frank Schubert, the chief organizer for Stand for Marriage Maine, which lobbied for the repeal.
For the gay rights movement, which has gained a foothold in New England, it was a stinging defeat. Gay marriage has now lost in every state - 31 in all - in which it has been put to a popular vote. Gay-rights activists had hoped to buck that trend in Maine, framing same-sex marriage as a matter of equality for all families in a campaign that used 8,000 volunteers to get out the message.
Five states have legalized gay marriage - Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Connecticut - but all did so through legislation or court rulings, not by popular vote.
Portland resident Sarah Holman said she was torn, but decided - despite her conservative upbringing - to vote in favor of letting gays marry.
"They love and they have the right to love. And we can't tell somebody how to love," said Holman, 26.
While the gay marriage opponents claimed victory, Jesse Connolly, campaign manager for No on 1/Protect Maine Equality, held off conceding until early Wednesday, when he issued a statement vowing to continue to press the issue.
The fight for marriage equality will continue, he told supporters at the Holiday Inn ballroom, where a buffet table included a three-tiered wedding cake - with two grooms standing side by side, two brides standing side by side and the inscription: "We all do!"
"We're not short-timers. We're here for the long haul and whether it's just all night and into the morning, or it's next week or next month or next year. We will be here. We'll be here fighting. We'll be working. We will regroup."
For Burnett and Swanson, the July 10 wedding date, and a reception cruise on Casco Bay, is off.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
it's well-known that socially contentious issues often go through three distinct phases: 1. ridicule ("women voting? what do they know of politics?!") 2. fervent opposition ("there's no way that blacks are equal to me!") 3. acceptance of a self-evident truth ("of course gay people should be able to marry their partners"). we may not be there yet, but we will get there eventually...in Britain as well as the States.
However it is a step in the right direction, and as many people say, we will get there eventually.
I do not agree and I do not believe that this acceptance will happen. Homosexuals and Lesbians are different, most accept that this is the way that it is but some will not. Most Heterosexuals tolerate difference and a majority, IMHO, accept difference. A few cannot even tolerate difference (that is their difference).
As an ordinary person, my belief is that the institution of marriage between man and woman is to bond the couple for life and to give stability to the family. Love, respect and trust being some of the essential ingredients.
A relationship between two people of the same sex is based on sexual gratification.
I don't criticise or sit in judgement of their way of life. But I don't agree that marriage (in the true sense of the word) be hijacked for erroneous reasons.
Ok see lets turn the page....two people of oppsite sex get married...but wait! One of them is infertile. What do you do? As in YOU oldgriper. This is my question, the partner you love and want to love you for the rest of your life is infertile...but you want to be together beacuse YOU LOVE EACHOTHER. And if you do, are you not going to do what is natural to you both, making love i.e sexual gratification? Lets just say that you don't and that love alone without physical attraction and action is enough....surely that is PERSONAL CHOICE.
So. Why in your 'ordinary' eyes are gay people making a furore?? It is down to the couple wether they want to have sex of not. You do realize that there are gay people out there who may not want to have sex at all for whatever reason? The furore is not about sexual gratification its about people being able to share love openly and honestly. Trust me, gay people have been doing sexual gratification (or not) for as long as man has had curiosity, emotions and feelings. Surely the maturity, seriousness behind such 'furore' shows that gay people are capable of reaching beyond just gratification??????
And there you see!? In one fell swoop I have shown you that gay marriage is not erroneous, it is not hijacking anything but your fear of change. Gay people can love, respect and trust too. And much much more.
SO whats the difference ?
And to say that people of the same sex only want to get married for sexual gratification is an assumption by you, it is not a fact (sexual gratification is achieved without the need to be 'married').
The gay community can be in it for the long haul as they state, but we will still vote against it. What they could do is change the civil union to include all the rights they wish and more than likely we would vote for it. However, that would mean they would have to do the research on what rights to include and have a referendum written up. This just might include more work than just saying they want to be "married". Oh well, if you're in it for the long haul, put your noses to the grind stone and work for it.
This vote was not fueled by fear. It was fueled by the moral right. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman under God. Why would a gay couple want that anyway? They don't. What they want is all the rights handed to them without having to do anything but pay the notary public a few dollars and say I do.
I for one am tired of working to help fuel the liberal agenda. Get off your ass and do something for your country and community instead of trying to take from everyone else. They say they deserve this right. You have your rights. They are called human rights.
"Marriage is a union between a man and a woman under God. Why would a gay couple want that anyway?"
You are clearly blinded by scripture.
And why should gay people have to fight for something that feels as natural to them as it does for a man and woman. In fact I struggle to recognise gender and I look at people. And guess what? I am not gay. I have had encounters with the same sex and have fallen in love with people of the same sex. I am now with a man who is wonderful, 13 years older than me and claims to sometimes feel more like a woman than a man and has expressed an interest in wearing women's clothing!
Life isn't as clear as all that. I do not agree with the stagnant laws that swep this world, this empiricism where we all talk about measuring human rights. It is vile.
Furthermore, you seem to paint gay people as lazy, moaners who want 'all the rights handed to them'! Truly, you must be aware that many many gay communities all over the world fight for all sorts of things! They wouldn't be behind it in Main so passionately if they weren't dedicated. And if they have to realize that they need to get deeper into the law then that is what they will do. Do you think black people in the 50s onward stopped pushing beacuse of some written law, put down by ghost authorities from the past? Hell no, beacuse many of them were born into a world where they were treated differently for something that is apart of their genetic makeup. They cannot rip that away. So whats a person going to do but stand up for themselves? I guess you could say its the same with being gay.
Have you even hung out with any other gay communities in your area? I take it as a Christian (if that is what you are) you will not lie to me and say you have if you haven't If you have then I would say you need to go back and really talk to people. Your words sound like they are formed from spoon fed, screened information with no real grip on the matters at the heart...which is if you missed it by now is that PEOPLE love. No God should stop two consenting adults to decide to be together. Even if they are of the same sex.