Welcome Guest - Please Login | Subscribe |FAQ's | Why Register | Privacy Statement |
| Classifieds | Jobs | Cars | Real Estate | Directories | Yellow Pages+ | My Clips | 
     
 Today is November 21, 2008 Current Temperature: 19° in Lewiston, Maine 
Take our survey


Printer Friendly Version      Email Story     Increase Text    Decrease Text
iPod Friendly
  Comments
Effort against gay rights dropped

,
Friday, June 20, 2008

AUGUSTA - An initiative campaign to repeal Maine's gay rights law and put in place roadblocks to gay marriages and adoptions is being abandoned, leaders of the campaign said Thursday.

"We're pulling the plug," said Michael Heath, executive director of the Christian Civic League of Maine. Heath said the evangelical group failed to attract voter, volunteer and financial support it needed to continue its campaign.

The group collected only a third of the 15,000 voters' signatures it had set as a goal for primary election day June 10, said Heath. He said that potential volunteers "don't want to be aligned with bigotry and homophobia and hatred," tags their opponents had applied to the initiative backers.

EqualityMaine, which had placed volunteers at the polls June 10 to discourage voters to sign the initiative ballots, welcomed Thursday's decision.

"This was a really broad attack on gays and lesbians and their families," said Betsy Smith, executive director of EqualityMaine. "Mainers are generally fair-minded and I think they sent a strong message on primary day."

The civic league would have needed at least 55,087 valid voter signatures by next January to send their proposal to the Legislature next year. With the Legislature's likely rejection of the proposal, the question would have gone to Maine's voters no sooner than November 2009.

The proposed law had several components, including repealing Maine's law protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodation, credit and education. It would have barred the use of state funds by the attorney general's office for its civil rights teams and civil rights programs in public schools.

It would have reaffirmed Maine's existing law that restricts marriages to one man and one woman, and ensured that only one unmarried person or one married couple jointly could adopt a person.

It would have prohibited clerks from issuing marriage licenses to persons of the same sex, and prohibited municipalities from licensing civil unions.

Two separate and unrelated efforts to prevent newly enacted state laws from taking effect are still in progress, with a July 17 deadline to collect signatures approaching. The targeted laws include one raising taxes on beer, wine, soda and insurance premiums to finance the state's Dirigo Health insurance program, and one to undo driver's license security measures.

CLICK HERE To Show/Hide Discussion Thread - (29 Comments)
Comments
Posted By:Joe at June 20, 2008 6:15 AM (Suggest Removal)
Finally the Civic League gets it! Maine voters spoke with an overwhelming majority in 2005: we don't want hate-mongering in this state. If all of us re to survive the coming elections and Maine winter, we need to focus on the real problems. Mr. Heath, do something Christian for a change.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Jay Bee at June 20, 2008 6:39 AM (Suggest Removal)
How about the CCL tries to work on a issue for true Christians, such as getting people enough food and heat this winter? Nobody is going to care who is married if half of us are starving and cold.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Morning Man at June 20, 2008 6:49 AM (Suggest Removal)
The Civic League should spend its time and efforts fighting discrimination, poverty, lack of health care, and other areas there there Christian faith would serve appropriately.

| Add your comments
Posted By:gil at June 20, 2008 7:30 AM (Suggest Removal)
The Civic League failed because they went about this in the wrong way. Instead of making it religious in nature, they should have reminded the people how the elitists in Augusta undermined the will of the people by passing the bill after it had been voted down more than once by the public. I personally could care less who you marry, but to pretend that you are a special group with special needs based on sexuality is just duplicitous and wrong. New England, and especially Maine has a very strong history of tolerance and for the most part people don't care what your orientation is as long as you do your job and pull your curtains. This bill was designed as nothing more than to garner attention for the homosexual community, another flag, another parade, and on the other hand, to garner a new political voting bloc. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

| Add your comments
Posted By:helga at June 20, 2008 7:45 AM (Suggest Removal)
gil, you hit it on the head, we voted this down twice and Baldassi did what he wanted. That is really back handed to side with the minority of voters instead of the MAJORITY, isnt that the purpose of voting, the MAJORITY wins?

| Add your comments
Posted By:ojhuig at June 20, 2008 7:59 AM (Suggest Removal)
Well if that's the will of the people, then I'm glad this is not a majority-rule country. This is about doing the right thing. Civil rights are not to be decided by your neighbors. They're RIGHTS.

| Add your comments
Posted By:MATTHEW at June 20, 2008 8:03 AM (Suggest Removal)
This is great news.

| Add your comments
Posted By:BRUCE at June 20, 2008 9:50 AM (Suggest Removal)
Just exactly what Maine Needs, "More Taxes", geez Mainers used to call Massachusettes "TAXACHUSETTES", well here's a new name Maine can go by, "TAX ME".

| Add your comments
Posted By:Bill R. at June 20, 2008 10:04 AM (Suggest Removal)
This IS a majority rule country OJ! Our civil rights are protected and guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

| Add your comments
Posted By:JC at June 20, 2008 10:39 AM (Suggest Removal)
gil is right. Gays already had the same rights as every other citizen before the bill was signed into law (against the will of the voters). Remember the mantra "Maine will not Discriminate!"? Well the "special" gay rights bill discriminates against all heterosexual people in this state by giving the Gays more rights that we have. It was bad legislation then and it's unconstitutional law now!

| Add your comments
Posted By:Joseph at June 20, 2008 10:56 AM (Suggest Removal)
Wrong JC "Gays" do NOT already have the same rights as everybody else. Gay rights are not special rights. But more to the point. With the addition of "sexual orientation" to the Maine Civil Rights bill, provides Maine's homosexual citizens equal access to the law. It does not jump them to the front of the line. Before you say "special rights" in the future, just be sure to distinguish what those special rights are. Then therefore does every other minority have special rights? I'm sure you don't think they do. People say that annoying line over and over again because they're afraid gay people are going to take something away from them. That is the farthest thing from the truth. Maine's homosexual citizen's merely want equal access to the law and that's the way it should be. I'm glad the "League" has abandoned this latest effort. I hope they focus their energies into what they do best, rather than causing religious and political strife. What they do best is ministering their faith and the message of Christ.

| Add your comments
Posted By:gil at June 20, 2008 11:02 AM (Suggest Removal)
Posted By:ojhuig at June 20, 2008 7:59 AM (Suggest Removal) Well if that's the will of the people, then I'm glad this is not a majority-rule country. This is about doing the right thing. Civil rights are not to be decided by your neighbors. They're RIGHTS. Your ignorance is showing. Referendums ARE majority rule, that's why they are placed on a ballot. Thinking before typing usually works best. And these are not rights. Where are you afforded the right to not be discriminated against because of sexual orientation? My version of the Constitution must be missing that part. I can't get a job at hooters as a waitress, is that discrimination? No one wants o see me in a pair of orange tight shorts and a tank top. Homosexuals have every right that I do. I am not married and yet I co-own property. A friend of mine who flips houses co-owns property with his business partner. Legal documents make it so, the same way that any homosexual couple could.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Garrett at June 20, 2008 11:13 AM (Suggest Removal)
It was only a matter of time before all the reasonable people gave in and the indoctrinated people got their way. The bill was a travesty to begin with, still is, and apparently voting it down twice didn't matter. The homosexual community will continue to badger people to get special rights. Lifestyle is wrong, and it is too bad that Mike Heath could not garner enough support to repeal this bad legislation. Let the ignorant cries of 'hater' and 'bigot' fly, because clearly....you can't disagree with someone without hating them. HAHA. Peace

| Add your comments
Posted By:PR at June 20, 2008 12:09 PM (Suggest Removal)
Not only did Heath have trouble getting enough signatures, he couldn't get enough people to COLLECT the signatures. I think that's very telling and it makes me proud to live in Maine. Voting on civil rights should not be left to the "neighbors;" if that was the case, Blacks would still be sitting in the backs of the buses in NC, VA, AL, etc. And you know what? The Bible was used for HUNDREDS of years to justify slavery and Heath is doing the same thing regarding civil rights for gays. My take on it is that gays want to be treated like heterosexuals. They are not being treated the same--they are being discrimated against, and the only way to legally prevent it is through legislation. Those who have not felt the sting of discrimination on a REGULAR BASIS will never truly understand what it's like. Instead they get resentful and say somebody's got "special rights." There's no getting them to understand any differently. Pathetic.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Garrett at June 20, 2008 12:58 PM (Suggest Removal)
Stay tuned for legislation preventing employers from firing obese people, old people, single parents, and virtually every other group that is "discriminated" against. Maybe, just maybe, when you get fired its due to economic shortfalls or low productivity, not because of your orientation. Maybe, just maybe, you aren't always being discriminated against. You don't have a right to a job, house, or to adopt. Those are called blessings. Peace

| Add your comments
Posted By:JulieL at June 20, 2008 2:55 PM (Suggest Removal)
PR.....the Bible was used to oppress black people and women and more recently, homosexuality. Please JC, give me just one "right" gay people have that hetereosexuals don't. My guess is Michael Heath will now be free to do God's real work; helping the poor, the weak, the disenfranchised...go Mike!

| Add your comments
Posted By:Garrett at June 20, 2008 3:31 PM (Suggest Removal)
Julie, Mike already does all of that. He was one of the many people who helped with the flooding in Northern Maine. Stop being so close-minded.

| Add your comments
Posted By:kate at June 20, 2008 4:02 PM (Suggest Removal)
What is the threat to your heterosexual relationship if two men or two women want to spend their lives together, and have the same next-of-kin, inheritance, and taxation rights?

| Add your comments
Posted By:Garrett at June 20, 2008 4:48 PM (Suggest Removal)
I am "threatened" when someone calls me a hater for simply standing up for what the Bible says is right or wrong. Give them the same legal rights in our secular society sure, but don't tell me I have to accept that their lifestyle is right, because it isn't. Peace

| Add your comments
Posted By:Joseph at June 20, 2008 5:06 PM (Suggest Removal)
Mike, I've sent a complaint to the SJ for your harrassing and crass comments. Knock it off, mind your manners and act like a grown-up.

| Add your comments
Posted By:kate at June 20, 2008 6:30 PM (Suggest Removal)
Is that the best you can do Matt? For the record, I have a good man....for almost 28 years now. Garrett, what is wrong with gay marriage?....it's a simple question. Forget your "bible"....if it walks like a marriage and talks like a marriage, why the problem with calling it a 'marriage'?

| Add your comments
Posted By:Garrett at June 20, 2008 6:58 PM (Suggest Removal)
I am going to just pretend you didn't just ignorantly ask a Christian to forget his beliefs.....hahaha

| Add your comments
Posted By:Bill R. at June 20, 2008 7:11 PM (Suggest Removal)
Hey, if a homosexual man kills a straight man, can he be charged with a hate crime? Just wondering.

| Add your comments
Posted By:joe at June 20, 2008 7:21 PM (Suggest Removal)
I have a friend whose partner of 9 years passed away from leukemia. Before he passed away, they had discussed the details of his funeral, what flowers he wanted, they type of music, etc. After he died, the family stepped in and changed everything to the way "they" wanted it. Then to add insult to injury, they told my friend "Well, you can come to the funeral if you want to". Legally, my friend had no "rights" to have a say as to what happened. So much for already having the rights everyone else has....

| Add your comments
Posted By:kate at June 20, 2008 7:22 PM (Suggest Removal)
I didn't ask you to forget your Christianity Garrett; I asked you to keep it of of this SECULAR debate, but if you're not willing to answer my question, I'll understand. Obviously, you're oversensitive about your religion. HAHAHAHAHA! Shannon, I would think that if the gay man kills a straight man because of his sexual orientation, then I would consider it a hate crime.

| Add your comments
Posted By:gil at June 20, 2008 11:18 PM (Suggest Removal)
The whole point, which is lost when the right and left start making it a religion issue, is the way in which the bill was passed. Twice Mainers turned down this bill. The legislature, in their conceit, knowing what you need whether you want it or not, passed this bill with out a referendum, over the will of the people. Would this be ok if it was a bill for something you disagreed with. Wat if the bill instead gave protected status to illegal immigrants, or child molesters, and you voted it down, only to have the legislature pass it behind your back? What if the bill cut off any aid to the poor, the elderly, and the handicapped? Would you still support it or would you recognize it for what it is? The lawmakers in Augusta sent the voters of this state a message. They don't care how you vote, they will pass anything they want whether you like it or not. The agenda driven left has shown time and again that they are not above telling you to take a flying leap and getting the legislature and the courts to pass what you will not. That being said, this is about special rights due to the fact that it gives a certain class of people a protected status for one reason or another. And people like Joe's friend whose partner passed away obviously never heard of a lawyer.

| Add your comments
Posted By:kate at June 21, 2008 1:37 AM (Suggest Removal)
Your point is well taken Gil, but consider the realm of public opinion. Protecting child molesters is not socially acceptable, nor will it ever be. Children are protected by law, and as I'm sure you know, this law will not protect a gay person who has molested a child, nor should it. Protected class is given to those who have for any number of reasons been and ARE discriminated against: women, African-Americans, Jews, etc. And if, as many against gay rights opponents state, homosexuality is a CHOICE, then let us be able to discriminate against other 'choices' as well, such as religion. Would we be willing to allow THAT? No, and I don't believe that we should. As for Joe's friend, perhaps he could not afford a lawyer. Pine Tree Legal serves the poor; nothing is available to the middle class, who do not qualify for free services, nor can they afford $150.00/hour for attorneys' fees.

| Add your comments
Posted By:Garrett at June 21, 2008 2:44 AM (Suggest Removal)
Only Kate would ask someone to keep their morals out of a debate that includes morality issues, silly =P

| Add your comments
Posted By:kate at June 21, 2008 3:56 AM (Suggest Removal)
Bravo, Alan!

| Add your comments
Advertisement
“Paint Your Heart Out: Embracing Art and Healing”
a collection of watercolor paintings, will be exhibited at the Central Maine Medical Center Rotating Art Gallery from November 7 through December 1.
read more >>
Central Maine Obstetrics-Gynecology
is the first Midwifery Service in Maine and only the second in New England to be recognized by the American College of Nurse-Midwives with its Golden “With Women for a Lifetime” Commendation.
read more >>
Deborah Taylor
associate director of the Central Maine Medical Center Family Medicine Residency Program, has been elected to the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine (STFM) Board of Directors.
read more >>
Erwey A. Teng, M.D.
a pulmonologist and intensivist, has been elected to the Central Maine Medical Center Medical Staff. He is practicing with Pulmonary and Critical Care Associates in Lewiston.
read more >>
Medicare Program
Central Maine Medical Center and SeniorsPlus will offer individual counseling for seniors who want to review their Medicare drug coverage for 2009.
read more >>
Contents of this site © 2008 Sun Journal
| Forgot Password |Blog Policy | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Advertise With Us | Contact Us | About Us | Faq's | Help |