As Election Day nears, the national spotlight is on Maine, where the latest battle over same-sex marriage is under way. Campaign finance reports show that supporters of a ballot proposal to repeal the state's gay marriage law are trailing significantly in fundraising. But polls show a tight race.
Same-sex marriage opponents are telling Maine voters in television and radio ads that failure to repeal the law will have consequences for their children at school.
In ads similar to those that ran in California, a Massachusetts couple says that after Massachusetts legalized same-sex marriage, their son came home from school and said he was taught that boys could marry other boys.
"He's in second grade!" the mother says.
The couple says he was read a fairy tale called King and King, which tells the story of a prince who falls in love with another prince and marries him.
In a separate TV spot, another book called Who's in a Family? comes under fire. The children's story includes illustrations and brief descriptions of different kinds of families, including those headed by single parents, grandparents and same-sex couples.
Rallying The Base
Maine Attorney General Janet Mills said this week that she could find no connection between the same-sex marriage law and a requirement for public schools to teach kids about it. A recent poll of 401 likely Maine voters found that 61 percent of respondents did not believe same-sex marriage would be taught in school.
It also showed that there aren't many voters on the fence.
"Most people have a set opinion on this," says Mark Brewer, a political science professor at the University of Maine. "So this campaign isn't really to win hearts and minds, or to shape opinion."
Instead, Brewer says, the ads are designed to rally opponents of same-sex marriage. While the latest poll gives an edge to same-sex marriage supporters, campaign organizers from both camps are expecting a close race.
And that's why Marc Mutty, the chairman of Stand for Marriage Maine, sent out an urgent e-mail to supporters this week. In it, he said the effort to repeal Maine's same-sex marriage law was in jeopardy unless the campaign received a major cash infusion.
"We're not meeting our budget," he wrote. "We certainly had to cut back on television and radio because of the budget shortfalls, and we had planned a bus tour where we would go from city to city, and we had to cancel that because that's an expensive proposition, which we just can't afford at this point."
Campaign finance reports show same-sex marriage opponents trailing supporters by $1.6 million. Opponents have received most of their money from three organizations: the National Organization for Marriage, which is under scrutiny by the Maine Ethics Commission for the source of its donations; the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland; and Focus on the Family. Supporters, meanwhile, have raised $2.7 million and boast of having 12,000 individual donors — about half from out of state.
"It's just really astounding," says Jesse Connolly, Protect Maine Equality's campaign manager. "People have dug deep. Some have given $5, others have given $500, but I think it really shows the level of support that we have from people both here in Maine and across the country."
Connolly says he isn't taking anything for granted; and Brewer says he shouldn't. Brewer says same-sex marriage opponents may be behind in fundraising, but a lot of that money can be made up in the next two weeks. In the end, he says, it will all come down to which side does a better job galvanizing supporters and getting them to the polls on Nov. 3.
Source: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113943323
Conran
I'm always amazed at how much money is available to fund a hate campaign.
1Why is it hate? It seems like that word gets thrown around a lot lately. If you don't agree with me, you hate. It's a difference of opinions, many people who don't support gay marriage think that civil unions with the exact same rights as marriage are a great idea. How is that hate?
Anyways, I'm surprised at Maine being like this, Maine is a pretty blue state. I'm always fascinated by states that are fairly firmly red or blue yet opposite on a certain issue, like the whole California thing. It sort of doesn't compute.
2We're not talking about what color to paint Main Street.
We're talking about not allowing people to profess their love openly and have it recognized by society because other people who have no personal involvement in the relationship don't like the idea of it.
3No, if civil unions are ok and recognized.
Then we're just quibbling over the use of 1 word.
4It's still insisting that one group be allowed to determine how another group's love and relationships will be defined, based on the first group's personal prejudice.
5not prejudice, definition.
6Prejudice.
7Civil unions are never the same as marriage, I've seen lists of differences for each state. If someone could prove to me they are exactly the same then maybe I would be cool with leaving it at civil unions - but again, I'm seen nothing that supports that. What's upsetting to me about this story is people from other states contributing to funding ads for this issue. You don't live in Maine, why should you have a right to sway outcomes of a state issue? Finally, I never was 'taught' about any kind of marriage or relationship stuff in school and definitely not in 2nd grade (7 years old). What class are these nut jobs talking about?
8There have been examples of schools putting this info out, most of what I've heard has been Cali and Mass, not Maine.
Civil unions CAN be the same as marriage and I really think this would have been solved by now if that was good enough. But it's not, it's all about the word "marriage" if you don't get the word marriage, everything else is meaningless. I say, take what you can get to help you out now and keep fighting for the rest.
9Separate but equal didn't really prove to work in civil rights, not sure it will work for marriage.
And the school thing is just odd, I'd rather my kids would learn math and science than lifestyle options whether they be gay, straight, or whatever.
10That why I didn't suggest they give up.
But can you imagine if black people were like, "either we're slaves or we want to be 100% equal starting tomorrow! all or nothing!" How much longer would that have gone on?
Why deny yourself some advancement when you can get it and then keep working towards the ideal?
11Why should a group be allowed to dictate how much of a right other people should have? Slaves knew they had to take it in small steps or people might kill them.
12Tax paying, American Citizens are being denied the right to marry based on other peoples prejudices. Who is it harming if the two guys down the street get married?
13Everyone has taken small steps, not just black people but women too... Every rights movement happens in small steps. Again, why deny yourself anything you can get when you can get it? It doesn't make any sense.
Roar - They are being denied based on their own choices, if they would accept civil unions and compromise for now they wouldn't be being denied anything.
14why should they settle for anything less than what they want?
15Why should they have to justify themselves to anyone and wait for approval? It was wrong that blacks and women had to fight for equal treatment, it's wrong for gays to have to.
16why should they deny themselves everything because it's not everything they wanted?
if it were me, i would take what i could get and keep working. some others might not see it that way, but if i were in those shoes thats what i would do.
17steph - it's not about equal treatment. it's about one word.
thats why this is so muddy, but it's not about equal treatment, it's only about 1 word.
why should they have justify the changing of a definition of a word to suit them? because that's how it works, you can't just decide one day that everyone else needs to live in catering to you and everything that's been accepted for years has to change to suit your needs.
18i do see your point haus, but i think settling is a bad thing at this stage. they get civil unions, but still want to be able to marry. i think many opponents will say "you have civil unions, isn't that enough?"
19same-sex couples are already included in some "definitions"
marriage |ˈmarij|
noun
1 the formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife.
• a similar long-term relationship between partners of the same sex.
• a relationship between married people or the period for which it lasts : a happy marriage | the children from his first marriage.
• figurative a combination or mixture of two or more elements : a marriage of jazz, pop, blues, and gospel.
that's from the oxford dictionary
20Haus I can see your argument, but I think it only stands if a Civil Union has ALL the same rights as a marriage. As of now they do not.
21snarky - thats what they said about civil rights and yet we still got rid of segregation. rights movements are always a process.
and i think the difference in that definition is the word "similiar"
personally, i think if we did the civil union thing right and made sure it was truly 100% the same rights as married couples, people who are really against gay marriage will live with it for a few years, see that its all ok, and then the marriage part will be a natural progression with little resistance. and in the meantime gay people would have had the rights they wanted all along.
22i'm ok with civil unions if, like harm and haus said, ALL THE SAME RIGHTS
23I sometimes wonder if the parents who protest "this is what families look like" lessons that show gay parenting would have been protesting the display of single-parent households a few decades ago.
24I believe they would have Mich. I think some of them are opposed to single parent households but fortunately that isn't something they can control through legislature.
I too see where Haus is coming from, however, civil unions while they supposedly can have all the rights as a marriage, they do not.
Also, the majority of information I have seen about MA schools supposedly teaching gay marriage has been put out by massresistance.org which is a "pro-family" organization.
There has been one lawsuit from Mormon parents whose child was read a picture book where in a prince married another prince. A picture book. Nothing integrated into the curriculum, just a story. And that case was thrown out by the US Supreme Court. Reports have been exaggerated and manipulated by those who oppose same-sex marriage.
Maine has already seemed to determine that their school curriculum won't be effected by same-sex marriage legislation. http://www.mpbn.net/News/MaineNews/tabid/181/ctl/ViewItem/mid/3475/ItemI...
25Most schools don't teach marriage in general so I don't know why they would teach same-sex marriage.
Why should they accept civil unions when its not what the rest of us get?
26Guess I should have read through all of the comments before posting.
I would
have no problem with civil unions if they came with the same rights as marriage.
27I really wish we could have civil unions for everybody. Maybe if the government was handing out contracts that sounded a little less 'romantic', then we'd have less people rushing to sign them. And more people who couldn't protest when two complete strangers wanted to enter into that contract.
28Post A Comment
To post comments, please log in or register.