We’re polling our readers on the various initiatives and people’s vetos on the ballot, starting with Question One, which is asking Mainers to veto LD 1020, the same-sex marriage law enacted this past legislative session. We will continue with one survey each week, in the order the questions appear on the ballot, and with the same wording.
[poll id="2"]
Keep in mind this poll is open to anyone who visits our site, so the results are entirely non-scientific and for entertainment purposes only. But that doesn’t mean they’re not interesting!
Marriage is in a crisis. People don’t take it seriously. Divorce is widespread, and many see indefinite co-habitation as a viable option. I think we as a society need to prestige lifelong monogamy, and formally recognizing the accomplishment of a gay couple who have been faithful for 30 years is consistent with and conducive to that conservative goal. It’s wonderful that Maine was the first state to enact gay marriage democratically (which I support), instead of by activist judges (whom I oppose).
The wording on this question is horrible! I read it quickly and voted the opposite of what I feel. Here in NJ, we are facing a bill during lame duck that will allow gay marriage. I have sponsored legislation to let the voters define marriage as between one man and one woman. It is a question that should be before the voters, and from a process standpoint, a Constitutional change MUST go before the voters. A law cannot change the Constitution. That is why Maine voters should reject this law.
Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose
District 24, Franklin, NJ
There’s really nothing wrong with the wording. It says “Do you want to reject…” and then quotes almost verbatim the bill summary. Neither side on this issue has any problem with the wording. Maine voters are used to this kind of wording on People’s Veto questions; there’s really no other reasonable way to do it.
Really. Love should be bigger than government. Let’s just let people get married.
Exactly, Jon. Love should be bigger than government. So because this is about government, love has no role in it.
BTW, why are you in favor of punishing people who don’t want to get married by giving married couples special benefits? Aren’t you just expanding special rights instead of granting equal rights? If you wanted to get marriage out of the law altogether that would be fine with me, but continuing to oppress single people isn’t. Who’s standing up for my rights? Not the MCLU, which apparently only believes in equal rights for married people.
Expanding these special rights to another group makes you no better than the people who want to restrict them.
I don’t understand why it’s such a big deal that the courts passed it. I mean, isn’t that their job, to throw out unconstitutional laws? And they found it violated the 14th, no? So I don’t see how it’s so bad. That’s how they threw out the law against interracial marriage and none of the conservatives are saying they were wrong to do that, that they should have left it to the people.
(A) Courts don’t pass things (B) No decision involving marriage has had anything to do with the 14th amendment, since none of them were federal decisions (C) It is not the job of the courts to throw out unconstitutional laws. It is their job to decide if laws are constitutional when challenges to them arise. (D) The U.S. Supreme Court has explicitly endorsed the concept of states being able to define marriage as between a man and a woman.