Defeat in Maine a harsh blow to gay-marriage drive

AP via Google ^ | 5 hours ago Nov 4 2009 | DAVID CRARY

[GonzoII]

The stars seemed aligned for supporters of gay marriage. They had Maine's governor, legislative leaders and major newspapers on their side, plus a huge edge in campaign funding. So losing a landmark referendum was a devastating blow, for activists in Maine and nationwide.

In an election that had been billed for weeks as too close to call, Maine's often unpredictable voters repealed a state law Tuesday that would have allowed same-sex couples to wed. Gay marriage has now lost in all 31 states in which it has been put to a popular vote — a trend that the gay-rights movement had believed it could end in Maine.

"Today's heartbreaking defeat unfortunately shows that lies and fear can still win at the ballot box," said Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force.

With 87 percent of the precincts reporting, gay-marriage foes had 53 percent of the vote. They prevailed in many of Maine's far-flung small towns and lost by a less-than-expected margin in the state's biggest city, Portland.

"The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across the nation," declared Frank Schubert, chief organizer for the winning side.

Attention will now turn to other states, including California — where Schubert was an instrumental strategist a year ago in the successful campaign to overturn cost-ordered same-sex marriage.

Gay-rights activists have been planning to go back to the ballot in California, either in 2010 or 2012, in another attempt to legalize gay marriage. But the Maine result was not the victory they had been hoping for to fire up their troops.

Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative group that steered substantial funds to fight gay marriage in both California and Maine, was

[CSM]

“Today’s heartbreaking defeat unfortunately shows that lies and fear can still win at the ballot box,” said Rea Carey.....

Ah, so anyone who disagrees with government sponsored lifestyle choices are liars and fear mongers. OK, got it.

[xzins]

Stand for Marriage based many of its campaign ads on claims — disputed by state officials — that the new law would mean "homosexual marriage" would be taught in public schools. That was the same theme used to persuade Californians to reject gay marriage.

Perhaps that's true that they used such an argument, because it's clear they could not say anything negative about homosexual marriage.

I think the state has a real interest in supporting the potentially procreative unit that intends to bond with and raise their own children. They will call that "institution" by SOME name. They use the word "marriage" now, so why not keep it that way to avoid having to change a gazillion records?

The state has no interest whatsoever in how someone gets their jollies whether human or inanimate object. Nor does the state have an interest in whether or not one party is affectionate toward his jolly partner.

Let marriage remain marriage.

Call the other "union" or "uniting." I don't really care. FWIW, there are also reasons why "unitings" are not in society's interest, but they have to do with morality, health, wellness, and actual compassion for misguided souls.