After becoming the fifth state to legalize gay marriage on May 6, the State of Maine has seen its citizens rally to stop the law from going into effect. It appears that the new statewide strategy to oppose the redefined marriage law will follow California’s Proposition 8, which successfully amended California’s constitution to define marriage as being between one man and one woman.
(Take action now! Read end of blog entry to learn how you can easily help restore traditional marriage in Maine.)
At the signing of the gay marriage legislation last May, Governor John Baldacci announced that the same-sex statue would likely be challenged, adding that the people would ultimately need to decide the final outcome. “Even as I sign this important legislation into law,” said Baldacci, “I recognize that this may not be the final word…[The Maine constitution] guarantees that the ultimate political power in the State belongs to the people.”
The people of Maine have taken many cues from California’s 2008 strategy for protecting traditional marriage, even hiring Schubert Flint Public Affairs, the powerhouse public relations firm that managed the Proposition 8 campaign and helped win 52 percent of the vote in last November’s California election. The PR firm says it will play a consulting role to Maine’s citizens who seek to preserve historic marriage and family. Polling data suggest that the majority of citizens in Maine oppose same-sex marriage.
The first step in reinstating traditional marriage has been to collect more than 55,000 signatures of registered Maine voters. This so-called “people’s veto” would put the issue on the ballot and prevent same-sex marriage from going into effect in the state. Organizer Marc Mutty, who leads the petition drive, claimed that gay activists have begun bullying citizens and have even stolen signatures from the people of Maine.
Take Action Now!
To help Maine get the required number of signatures by the August 2009 deadline, contact campaign organizers at StandForMarriageMaine.com, the Maine Marriage Initiative, or the Maine Family Policy Council. Simply send off an e-mail to the Maine Marriage Initiative and ask how you can help. Or visit them at their Facebook page.
Filed under: Gay Bullying Tactics and Aggression, Gay Marriage, Marriage Debate, Prop 8, Public Policy, Same-Sex Marriage | Tagged: Maine Marriage Amendment
[...] Read more here [...]
All this hatred because of SSM and it is hatred. People say they’re “saving the institution of Marriage” but they’ve made a mockery of it already. The divorce rates are terrible, families are torn apart and some how, this is because of SSM. This was happening long before SSM ever came around.
I honestly hope this attempt to stop SSM falls on its face.
If this is any representation of Christian love, i’m glad i left Christianity. The more things like this happens, it simply will fuel the approval of SSM in spite of all the self-righteous hatred. People see through your veiled attempts make this something it isn’t.
I don’t see hatred. Instead, high divorce rates (which are caused by badly defined marriage law) gravely harm people and society. So the obvious cure is to reform marriage law so that it focuses on the needs of children and punishes partners who try to defraud the others by easy divorce.
Are you against protecting kids through marriage law?
John,
No, i am not against protecting children but how do you suggest this protection? There are so many reasons people get divorced and some are simply a no fault situation, they no longer want to be together. In this case it doesn’t do the children any good when the two parents don’t want to be with each other. Communications is important, especially to the children, if they’re old enough to understand. I’m leery of “punishing” because sometimes, not everything is revealed or is clear as we would think.
Ron, protection comes through law, and related penalties for breach of contract.
We wouldn’t let a business partner walk away from the enterprise without significant legal proceedings and payments to the other parties. So it ought to be with the marriage partnership. Marriage law must be strengthened so as to keep the union intact and protect the parties from the grave fraud of divorce.
Finally, children benefit from a stable home life in which both parents work in tandem to provide for daily and monthly needs, as well as future plans and education. All this care is lost through divorce.
And who cares if the adult partners can’t locate the romantic spark they had at the moment they pledged their life long commitment? It’s irrelevant to the well-being of children.
In short, it’s criminal to agree to provide long-range love and care for dependent spouses and children and then walk away. It’s victimization and fraud. As a result, law is required to ensure follow-through and to prevent grave personal and financial injury caused by spousal abandonment.