Stand for Marriage Maine—Safe Schools

In Maine, gay activists are trying to claim that homosexuality will not be taught in schools, but it already is in other states.  These activists target young children

“before they are old enough to have been convinced that there is another way of looking at life…”

Make no mistake.  Those pushing the gay agenda have put schools front and center in the battlefield over homosexual rights.

—Beetle Blogger

Questions & Answers About Question 1

What is Question 1?

A People’s Veto is a simple and straightforward voter-initiated measure that gives voters the power to decide if they accept or reject an act of the legislature. More than 100,000 Mainers signed the petition to place this People’s Veto on the November ballot as Question 1 to repeal the recent same-sex marriage proposal (LD 1020) passed by Maine’s legislature.

Passage of the Question 1 will restore the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman by asking the citizens of Maine, “Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?”

Marriage is a pillar of society and should be protected from distortion by politicians and homosexual marriage activists who want to redefine it to suit their objectives.

Question 1 will preserve the centuries-old definition of marriage.

What does a Yes Vote Mean?

Voting Yes on Question 1 does several important things:

  • It restores the definition of marriage to what Maine Law has always been and human history has understood marriage to be: between a man and a woman
  • It maintains the rights and benefits of Maine same-sex couples who are covered by our domestic partners law. A YES vote does not take anything away from homosexual couples, but protects traditional marriage.
  • It protects our children from being taught in public schools that “same-sex marriage” is the same as traditional marriage as happens in Massachusetts, where children as young as the second grade are being taught that they can grow up to marry either a boy or a girl, and either option is the same, while parents cannot opt their children out of such “instruction.”
  • And, a Yes vote on Question 1 puts the power in the hands of the voters, not politicians!

What does a NO Vote Mean?

If Question 1 is defeated, LD 1020 will take effect and the sanctity of marriage will be destroyed. Maine law will no longer promote monogamous marriages and the interests of children. Marriage’s powerful influence on the betterment of society will be lost.

The defeat of the Question 1 would result in the very meaning of marriage being transformed into nothing more than a contractual relationship between adults.

No longer will the interests of children and families even be a consideration.

Defeat of Question 1 will mean that homosexual marriage activists will have been able to redefine marriage for all of society, even for those people who have deep objections to it.

The marriage between a man and a woman has been at the heart of society since the beginning of time.

It promotes the ideal opportunity for children to be raised by a mother and father in a family held together by the legal, communal and spiritual bonds of marriage.

And while divorce and death too frequently disrupt the ideal, as a society we should put the best interests of children first, and that is traditional marriage.

Voting No on Question 1 would destroy marriage as we know it and cause profound harm to society.
Will Question 1 take away any rights for gay and lesbian domestic partners?
No.

Question 1 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits from gay or lesbian partners who are covered by Maine’s domestic partners law.

Maine law guarantees gay couples many of the rights offered to heterosexual couples.

Passage of Question 1 will not change that.

Federal law controls other rights and changing the definition of marriage in Maine similarly won’t change that.
If Question 1 does not pass, will my children be forced to learn about homosexual marriage at school?
Yes.

Without Question 1, teachers will be required to teach young children that there is no difference between homosexual marriage and traditional marriage and parents will lose control over what their kids learn in school about marriage and sexual orientation.

This is not a hypothesis.

It has already happened.

In states like Massachusetts where same-sex marriage has been legalized.

Children as young as second graders are taught that there is no difference between marriage and same-sex “marriages.”

Worse, parents who do not want their children exposed to this homosexual marriage instruction have been denied an opportunity to opt their children out. (See Parker vs. Hurley)
Why was a People’s Veto needed? Don’t we already have a law clarifying the definition of marriage?
“An Act to Promote Marriage Equality and Affirm Religious Freedom” was passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor on May 6, and is scheduled to take effect 90 days after the adjournment of the Legislature in mid-June. Without a People’s Veto, Mainers will be denied the right that voters in 30 other states have already exercised, which is to decide this critically important question for ourselves. It is wrong for politicians and homosexual marriage activists to redefine marriage for all of society without giving Maine voters an opportunity to have their say.

Who supports this initiative?

A wide range of national, state and local pro-family organizations, churches and individuals have formed a broad-based coalition to enact a People’s Veto, which more than 100,000 Mainers supported to qualify for the November ballot..

People of a variety of different faiths stand united in preserving the definition of marriage in Maine.

To view a list of supporters, visit http://www.standformarriagemaine.com
What will happen to the existing same-sex partnership laws if Question 1 passes?

Nothing.

All laws on the books regarding same-sex couples will remain intact.

Gays and lesbians in a committed relationship will continue to enjoy all the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy, under existing Maine law. Question 1 does not affect those rights and benefits.
Where can I find more information about Question 1 or get involved in the campaign?

You can visit the People’s Veto site at http://www.standformarriagemaine.com or send an email at info@standformarriagemaine.com.

There are a number of ways to get involved with the campaign, including volunteering, donating and helping to spread the word about the importance of voting YES on Question 1.

http://www.standformarriagemaine.com/?page_id=259

Related Posts:

Advertisements

31 Comments

  1. Ross said,

    October 6, 2009 at 9:30 am

    Beetle: ” It maintains the rights and benefits of Maine same-sex couples who are covered by our domestic partners law. A YES vote does not take anything away from homosexual couples, but protects traditional ”

    A lie. Domestic partnerships do not carry the same rights and benefits that a marriage license does. So in fact, yes, same sex-couples would lose something.

    Beetle: “Gays and lesbians in a committed relationship will continue to enjoy all the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy, under existing Maine law.”

    Oh look, another lie.

  2. October 6, 2009 at 10:06 am

    If Question 1 is defeated, LD 1020 will take effect and the sanctity of marriage will be destroyed. Maine law will no longer promote monogamous marriages and the interests of children. Marriage’s powerful influence on the betterment of society will be lost.

    Should I send you a dictionary, dear?

    “Monogomous” does not refer to heterosexuality at all. Any relationship is monogomous as long as it is between two people and never involves anyone else. Whether Maine allows same sex marriage or not, monogomy is not affected. To put it another way, homosexual couples are as capable of being monogomous as heterosexual couples.

  3. beetlebabee said,

    October 6, 2009 at 11:35 am

    PF and Ross, Do you dispute the content of the ad?

  4. beetlebabee said,

    October 6, 2009 at 11:37 am

    Ross, a “yes” vote does not take anything away from Maine’s domestic partnership laws, or from homosexual couples themselves since the law in question has not been put into effect.

  5. Ross said,

    October 6, 2009 at 11:39 am

    Beetle, fine..argue semantics.

    I would, however, suggest you delete the blatant lie in your story: “Gays and lesbians in a committed relationship will continue to enjoy all the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy, under existing Maine law.”

    Completely factually incorrect

  6. beetlebabee said,

    October 6, 2009 at 11:42 am

    “Whether Maine allows same sex marriage or not, monogomy is not affected. “

    PF, Homosexual activists have promoted the idea of open marriages for years. In fact many consider their relationships to be monogamous as long as their partner knows and approves of the open relationship. That fact can’t be denied, neither can the effect open relationships have on familial stability with regard to children.

    Loosening the moral moorings of society lessens the impetus behind the monogamous standard and further tears down the fabric that sustains a stable society.

  7. Ross said,

    October 6, 2009 at 11:49 am

    Beetle: “PF, Homosexual activists have promoted the idea of open marriages for years.”

    Oh look, lieing AND stereotyping

    Beetle: “In fact many consider their relationships to be monogamous as long as their partner knows and approves of the open relationship. That fact can’t be denied, neither can the effect open relationships have on familial stability with regard to children.”

    Quite a few heterosexual couples do exactly the same.

  8. beetlebabee said,

    October 6, 2009 at 11:59 am

    Ross, the key phrasing is “under existing Maine law”. The statement is correct.

  9. beetlebabee said,

    October 6, 2009 at 12:05 pm

    “Quite a few heterosexual couples do exactly the same.”

    Ross, you are correct that there are people who believe that open marriages are the way to go. I do not. In fact, I do not support that theory at all, no matter who is doing it. I believe that marriage is monogamous by definition and that when a husband and wife are dedicated to each other, their union and their family, children flourish.

  10. Ross said,

    October 6, 2009 at 12:25 pm

    Beetle: “Ross, the key phrasing is “under existing Maine law”. The statement is correct.”

    Actually its not. You have a statement saying that gays and lesbians enjoy the same rights and benefits as married couples under current Maine law…and existing Maine law says that that domestic partners do not have the same rights and benefits.

    So the statement is not correct

    I’m all for opinions, but I hate people skewing facts or blatantly lying and presenting something as fact when it really isn’t. I suggest you delete that one simple sentence if you really claim to be reporting the truth and wish to retain any integrity.

  11. Ross said,

    October 6, 2009 at 12:44 pm

    For example, if I was to take the phrase after the comma to the front of the sentence (as should be grammatically possible). The sentence would change from:

    Gays and lesbians in a committed relationship will continue to enjoy all the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy, under existing Maine law

    to

    “Under existing Maine law, Gays and lesbians in a committed relationship will continue to enjoy all the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy”

    See? Still inaccurate..If you will not delete that section, I merely suggest changing the sentence to the what you said earlier (which IS accurate), as to not mislead your readers. Your previous (accurate) sentence, says:

    “Question 1 doesn’t take away any rights or benefits from gay or lesbian partners who are covered by Maine’s domestic partners law.

    Maine law guarantees gay couples many of the rights offered to heterosexual couples.”

    “Many” of the rights. Not “all” of the rights

  12. beetlebabee said,

    October 6, 2009 at 2:04 pm

    “Gays and lesbians in a committed relationship will continue to enjoy all the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy, under existing Maine law.”

    Gays and lesbians enjoy legal rights and benefits, the ones they enjoy that are the same as the benefits married couples enjoy under Maine law, will continue.

    You can argue that domestic partnership laws don’t go far enough, but that has nothing to do with the bill in question.

  13. Ross said,

    October 6, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    It’s the word “all” that is the problem, which you cleverly tried to circumvent in your most recent attempt to yet again avoid the issue. As long as the word “all” remains in the sentence your statement is nothing more than right-wing propaganda pushing.

    Doesn’t change the fact that is it still a blatant lie.

  14. Ross said,

    October 6, 2009 at 2:25 pm

    Seriously, beetle, how hard is it to change one word in one sentence for the sake of responsible reporting of an important issue?

    It should read:

    “Gays and lesbians in a committed relationship will continue to enjoy MANY OF the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy, under existing Maine law”

    It’s pretty simple.

  15. Rene said,

    October 6, 2009 at 3:16 pm

    Ross, I don’t see where the problem is. The all is referring to existing benefits of maine law. I think it’s quite clear. You COULD take it to mean the other way, but my first reading was that same sex couples had benefits that wouldn’t change.

  16. Samantha said,

    October 6, 2009 at 5:17 pm

    It’s interesting BB that the question you posed was never addressed.

  17. Samantha said,

    October 6, 2009 at 5:19 pm

    “PF and Ross, Do you dispute the content of the ad?”

    Same sex marriage legitimizes the need to talk about homosexuality in schools. This change has affected schools in other states, and it will affect schools in Maine as well. Once Ross gets off of his benefits kick, maybe he can address the real question.

  18. Richard said,

    October 6, 2009 at 6:14 pm

    Still got crickets on that one it seems.

    They can’t dispute the validity of the claim. It’s obvious that the gay agenda has targeted children and schools. They admit it, but not in Maine apparently!

  19. Ross said,

    October 6, 2009 at 8:55 pm

    So, Rene, you read the same sentence the same way when you move the phrase after the comma…

    “Under existing Maine law, Gays and lesbians in a committed relationship will continue to enjoy all the legal rights and benefits that married couples enjoy”

    The “all” doesnt seem out of place to you? Give me a break.

    And Richard and Samantha..I dont see you addressing the obvious lie I’ve pointed out…

  20. Richard said,

    October 6, 2009 at 9:32 pm

    Oh you mean your distortion? or your dodge?

  21. Ross said,

    October 6, 2009 at 9:40 pm

    Richard, if you cant see the obvious factual lie in that sentence then you are just as dense as the rest of the right-wing propaganda pushers who comment on here.

    Seriously cant wait for your side to lose within the next decade or so. It’s inevitable, kiddo. :)

  22. James R. said,

    October 6, 2009 at 10:41 pm

    still no response eh? You’ll play semantics all day with a phrase that is at worst possibly ambiguous, but you can’t find an answer to the charge being made. I’d say that speaks for itself.

  23. James R. said,

    October 6, 2009 at 10:43 pm

    I think that’s what Scott Fish said in the VOTN interview last week isn’t it? That the opposition has to stoop to name calling, trying to twist things into lies in order to discredit without addressing the issues.

  24. beetlebabee said,

    October 7, 2009 at 6:11 am

    “Seriously cant wait for your side to lose within the next decade or so. It’s inevitable, kiddo. :)”

    Actually I think he did respond to the question. “Do you dispute the contents of the ad?” The answer is no. He doesn’t. In fact he, like others in the gay activist movement, is actively working for homosexuality to be pushed in schools. It’s the vision he advocates on this blog and others. Total acceptance of homosexuality, bisexuality, transgenderism and so on down the list until every sexual deviancy is no longer considered deviant. He hopes that if they can continue their reach through the schools that the coming generation will believe their morality over the morality their parents taught, and that this version of morality will eventually supersede all others.

    Here is an example he cites from another blog:

    “Lastly, If you look to what is happening in Canada and England, churches, pastors, and people of faith are being villified for speaking against homosexuality.”

    Why shouldn’t they be? Anyone who speaks against a group with malice should be called on it, shouldn’t they? Do people of faith think they should be shielded from criticism for preaching hate? Maybe it’s time to review the faith you practice, if it preaches hate.

  25. beetlebabee said,

    October 7, 2009 at 6:22 am

    So now the question becomes “Is it inevitable?” or will parents stand up now and counter what is being preached in the schools to prevent the indoctrination of their children?

  26. Ross said,

    October 7, 2009 at 8:16 am

    Samantha/Beetle: ““PF and Ross, Do you dispute the content of the ad?”

    No,I dont. In my state, homosexual marriage is taught in schools because it is legal in the state. Pretty simple, right? Not teaching something is not going to make the issue magically disappear. But I think its definitely extreme paranoia to think that the number one issue on the minds of gay rights activists is getting homosexuality taught in schools..in actuality, its the rights gained from gay marriage. Most people are hardly concerned or have any control over what a few rogue teachers will do once the law passes.

    Beetle: “Total acceptance of homosexuality, bisexuality, transgenderism and so on down the list until every sexual deviancy is no longer considered deviant. ”

    Why, again, should they be seen as deviant? Any of those three are hardly deviant or malicious in nature.

    Beetle: “Here is an example he cites from another blog:

    “Lastly, If you look to what is happening in Canada and England, churches, pastors, and people of faith are being villified for speaking against homosexuality.”

    Why shouldn’t they be? Anyone who speaks against a group with malice should be called on it, shouldn’t they? Do people of faith think they should be shielded from criticism for preaching hate? Maybe it’s time to review the faith you practice, if it preaches hate.”

    –Now who is the one twisting lies and logic? I never said any of this, nor would I probably ever.

    Beetle: ”
    So now the question becomes “Is it inevitable?” or will parents stand up now and counter what is being preached in the schools to prevent the indoctrination of their children?”

    It is inevitable. Statistically gay marriage bans lose 2 percentage points a year (roughly). It’s an unbeatable tide. Do you REALLY think there is going to be some magic reawaking to stop the inevitable? Sure there may be unforseen hiccups and bumps along the road where political backlash and overexposure happens, but I’m 100 percent certain gay marriage will be legal nationwide in my life time.

  27. beetlebabee said,

    October 7, 2009 at 5:05 pm

    “Why, again, should they be seen as deviant? Any of those three are hardly deviant or malicious in nature.”

    Deviant is from the same root as deviate. If you are deviant in your behavior it is because you deviate from normal behavior in some way. Homosexual, bisexual, transgender, questioning, queer, pedophilia, bestiality, fetishism…..the list goes on. The further you get from the nuclear family, the more deviant and repulsive the options get. No amount of rhetoric can change that.

    Is it inevitable that these deviant activities will someday be seen as normal? No way. That is why those promoting the gay agenda have to stoop to lies, trick sophistry and base child indoctrination to win points. Have you ever wondered why courts and rogue legislatures IMPOSE same sex marriage? People don’t choose it.

    “political backlash and overexposure”??? You’re exactly right. There is political backlash because people don’t like to have homosexuality imposed on them, and over exposure to the true nature of homosexuality turns people off to the sophistry. Reality can’t be hidden forever.

    Have you noticed a leveling off in public opinion surrounding the normalization of homosexuality in society? After great growth in the 90’s public opinion has stagnated regarding homosexuality. Why? Because the more ground gay activists win, the bolder they become and the carefully crafted mask of normality drops. The chaos after proposition 8 was eye opening to the nation. No more Mr. Nice Gay. That was the mantra. The mask is off.

  28. Ross said,

    October 7, 2009 at 7:13 pm

    Beetle: “he further you get from the nuclear family, the more deviant and repulsive the options get”

    Who says nuclear family is normal? What we “strive to be”? Give me a break…are you saying that we are all supposed to procreate? That is our mission in life? Please, I hope as a woman you believe more than that. There is so much more to life than procreating, and if you believe that is what you were put on this earth to do that and only that..then wow, I feel sorry for you. We might as well all be lawyers. Or all be teachers. Or all be doctors. Let’s see how far society gets with 6 billion doctors.

    Beetle: Have you noticed a leveling off in public opinion surrounding the normalization of homosexuality in society?

    Yes, Ive ALSO noticed a leveling off in the stock market. Doesn’t mean its screwed forever. Its a minor bump in the road. The trajectory is clear, and it will rebound as all things do in the ebbs and flows of society. Or have you completely lost all faith in the stock market because of the past year? I just feel bad that you are wasting so much time/money/energy fighting something that cant be stopped in your lifetime.. :)

  29. beetlebabee said,

    October 7, 2009 at 8:06 pm

    I think the stock market would be a bad analogy for homosexuality, since it’s never, ever, been normal. Normalizing homosexuality would be like a stock market that never rebounds, negative interest rates and stagflation. The normalization of homosexuality is a fad like global warming, zero population myth, and Jimmy Carter’s sweaters. They all have a season of fascination and then fade out.

    Nice straw man there by the way on the motherhood rant. Your hatred for women and despite for children has already been established and supports my earlier statements on the deviancy of your ideas completely.

  30. Ross said,

    October 8, 2009 at 4:33 am

    And if you interpret that as a motherhood “rant” you are obviously projecting. The rant was about a person’s life purpose. Sounds like youve got some pent up issues regarding motherhood that you havent dealt with so that you read into every broad statement as such.
    Nice strawman of your own there, once again avoiding the issue at hand.
    Let me guess, you’re a stay at home mom, gave up your career to raise kids, and took up blogging on the side to peddle some of the right-wing’s “ambiguous” lies such as the entire Yes on 1 Campaign because hey, at least it kills a few hrs of the day.. Am I close?

  31. Dewy said,

    October 15, 2009 at 5:49 am

    I support everyone’s right to choose their own lifestyle no matter what I believe, as long as it does not interfere or affect the manner in which “I” choose to raise my children and what I teach them. Once my right is taken away or threatened, I have “every” right to defend my children’s and my way of life and beliefs. Where do the gays get the right to claim what others have held (Marriage) sacred for centuries? Marriage, as it always has been, will never be theirs. Maybe in the eyes of the law, but never in the eyes of God. If you must try and push yourselves in to feel less insecure, please do so in a more dignified manner that shows courage to be what you have chosen to be. Find another way that does not offend the believers of “Marriage.” And confuse our children. Accept a civil union as a couple. You achieve a greater advance by creating a new recognized way of life. “DO NOT” push your religion, your beliefs, your lifestyle or anything else on my family or any other family. Leave us alone, and we will leave you alone. I won’t bring the “God” or “Religion” factor into this, but I do believe in the Christian teachings and I will defend them as I would, and did my country.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: