R.I. lags New England on same-sex marriage
Associated Press Writer
Published: May 6, 2009
AUGUSTA, Maine - Jennifer Curran could only sit in the pews of her Roman Catholic church over the years and watch as bride after bride - friends, her two sisters - walked down the aisle.
Now that her home state of Maine has approved same-sex marriage, she’s looking forward to inviting them to sit on the sidelines in a Congregational church and watch her marry Carolyn Thompson, her partner of nine years.
“It’s been such a long time in coming,“ said Curran, 41, of Falmouth. “I want to stand up in my church, surrounded by friends and family, and say, ‘I do.“‘
Maine on Wednesday became the fifth state to approve same-sex marriage in a cliffhanger that was resolved when Democratic Gov. John Baldacci, who hadn’t indicated his plans, signed the freshly passed legislation behind closed doors.
New Hampshire’s Legislature voted soon afterward to allow same-sex marriage, but Gov. John Lynch hasn’t indicated whether he would sign it. If he does or lets it become law without his signature, Rhode Island would be the region’s sole holdout.
Both bills specify that religious institutions are not compelled to recognize same-sex marriages.
The vote by the Maine Senate was 21-13, with one lawmaker absent. The bill authorizes marriage between any two people rather than between one man and one woman, as state law currently allows. The House had passed the bill Tuesday.
“In the past, I opposed gay marriage while supporting the idea of civil unions,“ Baldacci said in a statement read in his office. “I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law, and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage.“
The law is to take effect in mid-September but could be sidetracked before then. Opponents promise to challenge it through a public veto process that could suspend it while a statewide vote takes shape.
Sue Estler, of Orono, said she and her partner of 20 years, Paula Johnson, plan to get married. But she also thinks opponents might collect enough signatures to force the referendum.
A professor at the University of Maine, the 64-year-old Estler said she sent an e-mail to out-of-state friends and family members Wednesday saying “Oh, my god. The governor just signed the bill.“
“But I said, ‘Don’t make your travel plans for the wedding yet. There’s still probably a referendum to go,“‘ she said.
Legislative debate was brief.
Republican Sen. Debra Plowman of Hampden argued that the bill was being passed “at the expense of the people of faith.“
“You are making a decision that is not well-founded,“ warned Plowman.
But Senate Majority Leader Philip Bartlett II said the bill does not compel religious institutions to recognize same-sex marriage.
“We respect religious liberties. ... This is long overdue,“ said Bartlett, D-Gorham.
The activist group Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders has targeted all six New England states for passage of a same-sex marriage law by 2012, noting its porous borders, shared media markets and a largely shared culture.
Maine is now the fourth state in the region to allow same-sex marriages. Connecticut enacted a bill after being ordered to allow gay marriages by the courts, and Vermont passed a bill over the governor’s veto.
Massachusetts’ high court ordered the state to recognize same-sex marriages. In Rhode Island, a bill to legalize same-sex marriage has been introduced but is not expected to pass this year.
Outside New England, Iowa is recognizing same-sex marriages on court orders. The practice was briefly legal in California before voters banned it.
If it comes to a statewide vote in Maine, Estler is confident same-sex marriage will prevail.
“I think Maine people will support it,“ she said. “Part of the reason I say that is Maine is a state where people, regardless of party affiliation, really believe in live and let live.“
Contributing to this report were Associated Press writers David Sharp and Clarke Canfield in Portland, Maine, and Holly Ramer in Concord, N.H.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
Case closed.
Hey (B.) I’m not comparing homosexuality to bestiality, I’m using your argument about love and applying it to my dog. Perhaps a bad example. How about applying it to having more than one spouse…it’s all about LOVE right? WRONG!
Looks like the ‘wrong person’ who replied to my comment needs to do a cranium anal extraction - perhaps a little research would do you well. Focus…you’re getting off track with your diatribe saying “THEY ARE NOT FREAKS…“ I never said gay people were. In fact I have a couple of gay friends who I can openly debate this topic with. Your reply, however is typical to the folks on the gay marriage bandwagon spreading lies and propaganda - and politics is corrupt vehicle moving this bandwagon. First of all, most people will agree that truly UNCONDITIONAL love is between a parent and a child. All love being unconditional is, unfortunately, simply not the case. Someday you will realize your naivete. Should I assume you wouldn’t know this from the parent standpoint? Second of all, if you do your research you’ll find that the concept of marriage initially started as an economic transaction to carry on society. In many parts of the world it is still this way. Children were promised to the children of others by arrangement, not love. Dowries, debt payments and family status were common considerations for these arrangements. This is sad but true. Only during the past 100 years did love start to become the main driver. If you want to go back to the ‘caveman’ times, ‘God’ gave man instinct to carry on which ever way possible which manifested itself in an urge to do whatever necessary to plant his seed…today this is considered rape and thankfully most of us have evolved. Yes, many marriages, and increasing number in fact are victims of infidelity. As we continue to make light of what marriage is really about, this rate will increase. Personally I think love should continue to be the main driver in marriage, but the sanctity of marriage needs to be impressed upon the population, perhaps again through some of the ‘blue laws’ that have been repealed by selfish liberal types and ignorant types who spread their lies and false accusations…focus.
People who compare homosexuality to beastiality are most deranged and rediculous!!! Gay people aren’t making love to dogs. Although, I can identify more people as being less than dogs! This is so rediculous!
To the idiot who responded to a comment…you sent your ignorant comment to the wrong person. It’s obvious that YOU are the FOOL or KID, who doesn’t know what their talking about. Politics is only a VERY SMALL portion of the problem. Love is unconditional. God made everyone, and made us all individual and unique. As far as disrespecting the sanctity of marriage. Just look at how many men cheat on their wives! Or wives cheating on husbands. No marriage is perfect. Marriage is the soul commitment and promise to a person in which one is sharing their life, and SHOULD have the same civil rights and legalities as any other person, no matter the gender. Gender doesn’t matter. There will always be diagreement, and we will never get some or all of the people to change their minds, or to accept a different way of life. What is good for one is not necassarily good for others. However,people need to learn to agree to disagree. Once again, I stress thay gay people are regular, ordinary people. THEY ARE NOT FREAKS. The freaks are those who can’t accept diversity!
There seem to be people who confuse the issues by passing judgment on people who love dogs yet can’t except that others can’t understand their twisted points. The same people who jump on a bandwagon because it gets a lot of attention in the media which is something politicians use to propel their careers. If my child came home and confessed he/she was gay I would support him/her completely and get to welcome their significant other. I would also support a civil union if they were convinced that they were destined to be together. Perhaps before we continue to disrespect the sanctity of marriage we should change the laws so that folks in a civil union are considered next of kin to each other. And perhaps if you stay focused on the issue and stop calling everyone a bigot you should use your head. Two of the negatives of marriage are filing joint returns and in many cases, sharing credit history. So what’s your point again? Only a kid or a fool would try to use those points.
There seem to be people who liken human beings to dogs. Are these the same people who think (looking at the history of predjudice: Jews, blacks or other colors, Irish, Italians,Portuguese, or any other nationality or race that doesn’t match their’s) is somehow less of a human than they are.
I wonder, if one of their children came to them and confessed they she/he was gay would they build a second or third doghouse, or more appropriately say they love him/her unconditionally and enjoy life with him or her.
With respect to human rights, did you know that should one partner wish to visit his or her partner in the hospital ECU (in a state not recognising the marraige), the visit could be denied as the person is not a next of kin.
In these states, none of the legal privileges of marraige, such as filing joint tax returns or the sharing of credit history, are extended.
GOD CREATED ADAM & EVE NOT ADAM & STEVE
i love my dog too, you know i have two male dogs that hump , would you like to go to there reception? They’re raw dogs for life…
Same sex marriage has a negative effect on marriage and in doing so society. Something that was sacred is now a joke. Simple-minded people only see the gay or straight issues. It’s about more than that. Gay people have the same rights rights as other people, in fact they are a “protected class”. I truly love my dog. When will I be able to marry HIM. Let us live in peace…so he can have my pension if I die first. Marriage has been assaulted on many fronts, not by a protected class of people who get special treatment. It’s truly a shame.
Advertisement