Maine repeals gay marriage

The_Minister · 04-11-2009 04:05PM #1

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/maine-gay-marriage-law-repealed/story?id=8992720

In a referendum held this week, Maine has repealed it's gay marriage laws.

This is a fairly large blow to the same-sex marriage movement, because if it had passed, it would have been the first time gay marriage was passed by a vote of the people, not be the courts or the legislature.

So far, not one referendum on the issue has supported gay marriage, which is a huge blow for the legitimacy of these campaigns.

It's actually weird, but I had heard nearly nothing of this vote, whereas California had its very own **** storm.

speedboatchase · 04-11-2009 04:36PM

It's sad, but every single time gay marraige has been put to a vote it's been rejected over there. The American people still aren't ready but I do think it's a case of when, rather than if it will ever be brought into law. I'd love for some of these issues to go to a vote over here

Mark200 · 04-11-2009 04:37PM

The amount of backward places left in the supposedly 'civilised' part of the world is ridiculous.

AnonoBoy · 04-11-2009 04:38PM

You used to be cool Maine.....

Long Onion · 04-11-2009 04:39PM

Maine bastards

Manic Moran · 04-11-2009 04:48PM

The_Minister wrote: »

It's actually weird, but I had heard nearly nothing of this vote, whereas California had its very own **** storm.

Utah's much closer to California, those pesky mormons could have a greater effect.

Actually, I think it's because unlike most (all?) of the other States, the issue was that the voters overruled not the California State legislature but the California Supreme Court. Generally the courts are the refuge of the minorities, Constitutional protections can only be demanded by the Courts, and are the bastion of liberty against the tyrrany of the majority. However, the California court ruled in a constructive manner, basically saying "There is nothing in the California Constitution saying gay marriage is legal or it is illegal, so in the absence of any other guidance, we'll look at it in the following manner." The court then got definitive guidance from the people afterwards, thus went on to reverse their own position, upholding the referendum.

There was also an argument made, though I am less convinced by it, that the lower the level of government that you look at, the more weight should be given to the will of the people and the less to the written law. So a Federal Constitution would be inviolable by popular vote, a State Constitution less so, a county Constitution even less, and so on. Not sure how you could parse it in legal terms though, it's more of a suggested philosophy.

And, of course, there's the popular perception that California is a liberal, progressive, hippy State which was somewhat shattered by the referendum. It's not. It's actually surprisingly conservative, just the people in San Francisco and Berkeley get all the publicity.

NTM

Kipperhell · 04-11-2009 04:49PM

I doubt it would pass here so the American bashing seems a little silly

The_Minister · 04-11-2009 10:29PM

Kipperhell wrote: »

I doubt it would pass here so the American bashing seems a little silly

It probably wouldn't - and it only failed by about 8-9% I think.

Mike 1972 · 04-11-2009 10:41PM

Does this mean Gay people who are already married are now unmarried ?

Not a great fan of this homosexual marriage idea mind you
But only in the sense that Im not a great fan of the hetrosexual marriage idea either

rainbow kirby · 04-11-2009 10:43PM

The_Minister wrote: »

It probably wouldn't - and it only failed by about 8-9% I think.

It's actually even narrower than that, more like 52:48.

ShooterSF · 04-11-2009 10:45PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Not a great fan of this homosexual marriage idea mind you
But only in the sense that Im not a great fan of the hetrosexual marriage idea either

Neither am I but would you deny a hetro couple marriage?

The_Minister · 04-11-2009 10:54PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Does this mean Gay people who are already married are now unmarried ?

My understanding is that the law had not come into effect yet, even though it had been approved by the legislature.

Mike 1972 · 04-11-2009 11:24PM

ShooterSF wrote: »

Neither am I but would you deny a hetro couple marriage?

in spite of how much I might want to

No

piby · 04-11-2009 11:39PM

Kipperhell wrote: »

I doubt it would pass here so the American bashing seems a little silly

I disagree with ya on that I think the Irish people are a bit more liberal when it comes down to it. At least I'd like to think that the average Irish person isn't that much of an ignorant twat . . .

ShooterSF · 05-11-2009 12:01AM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

in spite of how much I might want to

No

Exactly

Horses for courses eh?

Bottle_of_Smoke · 05-11-2009 12:13AM

piby wrote: »

I disagree with ya on that I think the Irish people are a bit more liberal when it comes down to it. At least I'd like to think that the average Irish person isn't that much of an ignorant twat . . .

I doubt it. A referendum to allow it here would be defeated. I think in polls 60% of people said they'd suport it. Now, take away the ones who didn't want to seem homophobic to the person conducting the survey, then remember the opposition would pull the gay adoption card, Ireland would definitely say no.

Fo Real · 05-11-2009 12:19AM

Mark200 wrote: »

The amount of backward places left in the supposedly 'civilised' part of the world is ridiculous.

So if someone doesn't agree with YOUR opinion they are backward? I find this highly offensive.

Please explain how accepting homosexual marriage = progress.

At the turn of the last century women were given the right to vote.
Then the blacks got their rights in the 60's.
Likewise with the Catholics of Northern Ireland in the 70's.
Then the gays were given equal rights in the 70's/80's in different parts of the world.
What's next? Will the lefties whinge until pedophiles are accepted in our society and given equal rights?
Your whole notion of "progress" seems a little twisted and sick to me.
Thankfully 90% of the world has sense and the institution of traditional marriage remains intact.

The_Minister · 05-11-2009 12:23AM

Fo Real wrote: »

So if someone doesn't agree with YOUR opinion they are backward? I find this highly offensive.

Please explain how accepting homosexual marriage = progress.

At the turn of the last century women were given the right to vote.
Then the blacks got their rights in the 60's.
Likewise with the Catholics of Northern Ireland in the 70's.
Then the gays were given equal rights in the 70's/80's in different parts of the world.
What's next? Will the lefties whinge until pedophiles are accepted in our society and given equal rights?
Your whole notion of "progress" seems a little twisted and sick to me.Thankfully 90% of the world has sense and the institution of traditional marriage remains intact.

Love the sig.

ShooterSF · 05-11-2009 12:24AM

Fo Real wrote: »

So if someone doesn't agree with YOUR opinion they are backward? I find this highly offensive.

Please explain how accepting homosexual marriage = progress.

At the turn of the last century women were given the right to vote.
Then the blacks got their rights in the 60's.
Likewise with the Catholics of Northern Ireland in the 70's.
Then the gays were given equal rights in the 70's/80's in different parts of the world.
What's next? Will the lefties whinge until pedophiles are accepted in our society and given equal rights?
Your whole notion of "progress" seems a little twisted and sick to me.
Thankfully 90% of the world has sense and the institution of traditional marriage remains intact.

Wow. They should be just as entitled to civil marriage as you or I. I doubt any want a church marriage given most religions views on homosexuality. Unlike Pedos 2 consensual adults wanting to marry each other hurts no one. Well no one but the bigots.
How is that twisted and sick?

Fo Real · 05-11-2009 12:28AM

ShooterSF wrote: »

Wow. They should be just as entitled to civil marriage as you or I. I doubt any want a church marriage given most religions views on homosexuality. Unlike Pedos 2 consensual adults wanting to marry each other hurts no one. Well no one but the bigots.
How is that twisted and sick?

I'm glad you agree with me that pedophilia is bad and morally wrong. But who is to say the Zeitgeist of the future doesn't dictate otherwise? If you grew up in the 50's would you still be in favour of homosexual marriage?

I hope you can see the point I'm making.

The_Minister · 05-11-2009 12:29AM

Fo Real wrote: »

I'm glad you agree with me that pedophilia is bad and morally wrong. But who is to say the Zeitgeist of the future doesn't dictate otherwise? If you grew up in the 50's would you still be in favour of homosexual marriage?

I hope you can see the point I'm making.

It's better if you use incest rather than paedophilia for the point you are making.

El_Dangeroso · 05-11-2009 12:32AM

Fo Real wrote: »

So if someone doesn't agree with YOUR opinion they are backward? I find this highly offensive.

Please explain how accepting homosexual marriage = progress.

At the turn of the last century women were given the right to vote.
Then the blacks got their rights in the 60's.
Likewise with the Catholics of Northern Ireland in the 70's.
Then the gays were given equal rights in the 70's/80's in different parts of the world.
What's next? Will the lefties whinge until pedophiles are accepted in our society and given equal rights?
Your whole notion of "progress" seems a little twisted and sick to me.
Thankfully 90% of the world has sense and the institution of traditional marriage remains intact.

I really cannot believe you are trying to use a syllogism based on paedophilia to make your point.:mad:

The views you've expressed have the same tone as those who tried to sound reasonable while advocating segregation in the 1960's.

05-11-2009 12:34AM

Fo Real wrote: »

If you grew up in the 50's would you still be in favour of homosexual marriage?

Thats retarded.

ShooterSF · 05-11-2009 12:37AM

Fo Real wrote: »

I'm glad you agree with me that pedophilia is bad and morally wrong. But who is to say the Zeitgeist of the future doesn't dictate otherwise? If you grew up in the 50's would you still be in favour of homosexual marriage?

I hope you can see the point I'm making.

Actually and you're not going to like me for this I have some sympathy for pedos who have never acted on their feelings. I think you should be able to admit having an attraction to kids as long as you seek help and show an ability to control your desires. After all these poor souls are born with a defect which means they are attracted to kids, an attraction they should (but still have to work to) suppress. It's not a choice anymore than being gay but unlike being gay if they act on their feelings they create a victim (and should be strung up for it).
As for the 50's thing no I probably wouldn't be but then I wouldn't be as educated either. That doesn't make it any better.

Fo Real · 05-11-2009 12:40AM

There are groups on the internet fighting for the accptance of pedophilia. They try to pass themselves off as normal repectable people, arguing that their love of children is merely a fetish or sexual persuasion - the same way homosexuals claim their lifestyle is merely a sexual persuasion. There are direct parallels between the two groups.

The only difference is that today's media have brainwashed the vulnerable and weak-minded in our society into thinking homosexuality is "normal" and "acceptable" eg. gay kisses on daytime TV soaps for children to see. This kind of thing was not on our TVs as recent as 15 years ago. If the media decide tomorrow that it's okay to molest children will you be in favour pedophiles' rights?

Also why do the vast majority of countrys/states in the world still have bans on gay marriage? Are they all backward, leaving you as the only progresive thinking intellect in the world?

NiamhDunk · 05-11-2009 12:43AM

Thankfully it wasnt passed. People seem to have forgetten that homosexuality is a behavioural disorder

rainbow kirby · 05-11-2009 12:43AM

Fo Real wrote: »

There are groups on the internet fighting for the accptance of pedophilia. They try to pass themselves off as normal repectable people, arguing that their love of children is merely a fetish or sexual persuasion - the same way homosexuals claim their lifestyle is merely a sexual persuasion. There are direct parallels between the two groups.

The only difference is that today's media have brainwashed the vulnerable and weak-minded in our society into thinking homosexuality is "normal" and "acceptable" eg. gay kisses on daytime TV soaps for children to see. This kind of thing was not on our TVs as recent as 15 years ago. If the media decide tomorrow that it's okay to molest children will you be in favour pedophiles' rights?

Also why do the vast majority of countrys/states in the world still have bans on gay marriage? Are they all backward, leaving you as the only progresive thinking intellect in the world?

NiamhDunk wrote: »

Thankfully it wasnt passed. People seem to have forgetten that homosexuality is a behavioural disorder

*facepalm*

Fo Real · 05-11-2009 12:44AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Thats retarded.

Why is it retarded? Please back-up your claims or else they hold no water and people will ignore you. Argue your point.

ShooterSF · 05-11-2009 12:45AM

Fo Real wrote: »

There are groups on the internet fighting for the accptance of pedophilia. They try to pass themselves off as normal repectable people, arguing that their love of children is merely a fetish or sexual persuasion - the same way homosexuals claim their lifestyle is merely a sexual persuasion. There are direct parallels between the two groups.

The only difference is that today's media have brainwashed the vulnerable and weak-minded in our society into thinking homosexuality is "normal" and "acceptable" eg. gay kisses on daytime TV soaps for children to see. This kind of thing was not on our TVs as recent as 15 years ago. If the media decide tomorrow that it's okay to molest children will you be in favour pedophiles' rights?

Also why do the vast majority of countrys/states in the world still have bans on gay marriage? Are they all backward, leaving you as the only progresive thinking intellect in the world?

They are 2 different issues though.

So and I don't hold my breath on this one, what is your problem with 2 same sex people committing themselves to each for life in the eyes of the state? And please something more specific than "It's icky. Ewww."

Liam Byrne · 05-11-2009 12:46AM

I always think it's kinda weird watching discussions about this subject, because it always appears to be a simple case of wanting what you don't/can't have.

Most people that I know are perfectly happy to just live together until such point as they decide they want kids, so that it puts those kids on a legal footing....."marriage", per se, has no appeal for them.

So - given that that is most people's view on marriage - it means that there's no "need" for it for a gay couple.

Do gay people genuinely view marriage that differently to the rest of us ? That they need the "lifelong commitment" to be recognised, while hetero couples are just happy being together and feel little or no compulsion to be "hitched" ?

El_Dangeroso · 05-11-2009 12:47AM

Fo Real wrote: »

There are groups on the internet fighting for the accptance of pedophilia. They try to pass themselves off as normal repectable people, arguing that their love of children is merely a fetish or sexual persuasion - the same way homosexuals claim their lifestyle is merely a sexual persuasion. There are direct parallels between the two groups.

The only difference is that today's media have brainwashed the vulnerable and weak-minded in our society into thinking homosexuality is "normal" and "acceptable" eg. gay kisses on daytime TV soaps for children to see. This kind of thing was not on our TVs as recent as 15 years ago. If the media decide tomorrow that it's okay to molest children will you be in favour pedophiles' rights?

Also why do the vast majority of countrys/states in the world still have bans on gay marriage? Are they all backward, leaving you as the only progresive thinking intellect in the world?

The majority of people in the past thought that it is ok to treat women like possessions, does that mean it was right?

The thing that's puzzling me is I don't get why you have a problem with it. Why is it any of your business what two consenting adults do with their lives?

If you use the 'It's not natural' argument then I don't know how your posting given the usage of a computer is not natural.

What catastrophic real social impact do you predict from legalising gay marriage?

Maine repeals gay marriage

Comments