Maine Becomes the 5th State to Allow Same-Sex Marriage

Reader Comments
Back to article

Why all the hatred, even to the point of lying?
Churches do not have to marry gays.
Everyone knows that there are more straight pedophiles than gay pedophiles. That is a problem of humanity and not a specific orientation.
We are a country that prides itself in diversity of religious belief or non-belief. Surely one group respects our freedoms enough not to wish to impose its will on the rest.
I thought that it makes for a more stable society when people team up in family groups instead of running around with a number of people in the community.
Besides, God made people all along the sexual spectrum. I know women who say they are bi. Who cares? I wish them happiness.
I could never see a controversy about this, even when young. People are what they are. So long as they harm no one, why should I meddle?
This is so much to do over nothing.

goldengrain of TN 1:03AM May 08, 2009

Why just 2 people and why just "people?"

John Opincar of TX 2:51PM May 07, 2009

Gay marriage may not be to everyone's liking. Neither was the abolishment of slavery, the military draft (and its END), the repeal of Prohibition and racial integration of the military and the schools.
But the assertion by a legislator above that this is being done "at the expense of people of faith" is pure baloney. Faith is this: If you don't believe in same sex marriage, then don't enter into one. But smugly pretending moral superiority at church to a minority class of people is not a matter of "faith". It's something else entirely, and not something good.

Muser of NM 10:42AM May 07, 2009

More bad law against the will of the people? According to the Founding Fathers, the people were found trustworthy to have a say in an interactive constitutional republic; but no longer. Backdoor homosexual marriage laws in Maine are definitely not constitutional and certainly no constitutional scholar would try to claim original intent in the many papers and documents written by the authors of the Constitution. The new law will never stand up to judicial review, especially in lieu of the bootleg tactic that was used to make the bill law. The other travesty today is that the U.S. Congress wants to include convicted pedophiles as recipients and benefactors to hate crime protections. Yet, when it was proposed that American veterans be included in the protection, every Democrat voted “No.” Are we headed somewhere as a nation that we ought not to go? When pedophiles and homosexuals are given “special” and “enhanced” protections under the law, and veterans are not, isn’t there something wrong?

OIF_to_USC of SC 12:34AM May 07, 2009

As a straight, married 62-year old woman, I say "Bravo!". Allowing all consenting adults to partake in the marriage benefits that my husband and I enjoy in no way threatens OUR marriage. Perhaps those who feel that "traditional marriage" (a concept that has undergone many changes throughout history!) is in danger, I would suggest addressing the other issues that may indeed be in play, that is, divorce, infidelity, immaturity, financial stresses, etc. Allowing other adults to marry won't change the status or the strength of traditional unions.
Another thought: take a look at the statistics on the number of heterosexual marriages in places that have already allowed marriage equality (Spain, Massachusetts, etc.). Have the numbers gone down since equality was enacted? If not, that's one argument against same-sex marriage that needs to be thrown out!

Cathy of NY 6:08PM May 06, 2009