Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Not that the fight is overFollow

#1 May 06 2009 at 9:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
but I'm taking today to enjoy a small victory anyway.

Quote:
Governor Signs LD 1020, An Act to End Discrimination in Civil Marriage and Affirm Religious Freedom

May 6, 2009
Governor's Office

AUGUSTA – Governor John E. Baldacci today signed into law LD 1020, An Act to End Discrimination in Civil Marriage and Affirm Religious Freedom.

“I have followed closely the debate on this issue. I have listened to both sides, as they have presented their arguments during the public hearing and on the floor of the Maine Senate and the House of Representatives. I have read many of the notes and letters sent to my office, and I have weighed my decision carefully,” Governor Baldacci said. “I did not come to this decision lightly or in haste.”

“I appreciate the tone brought to this debate by both sides of the issue,” Governor Baldacci said. “This is an emotional issue that touches deeply many of our most important ideals and traditions. There are good, earnest and honest people on both sides of the question.”

“In the past, I opposed gay marriage while supporting the idea of civil unions,” Governor Baldacci said. “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.”

“Article I in the Maine Constitution states that ‘no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor be denied the equal protection of the laws, nor be denied the enjoyment of that person’s civil rights or be discriminated against.’”

“This new law does not force any religion to recognize a marriage that falls outside of its beliefs. It does not require the church to perform any ceremony with which it disagrees. Instead, it reaffirms the separation of Church and State,” Governor Baldacci said.

“It guarantees that Maine citizens will be treated equally under Maine’s civil marriage laws, and that is the responsibility of government.”

“Even as I sign this important legislation into law, I recognize that this may not be the final word,” Governor Baldacci said. “Just as the Maine Constitution demands that all people are treated equally under the law, it also guarantees that the ultimate political power in the State belongs to the people.”

“While the good and just people of Maine may determine this issue, my responsibility is to uphold the Constitution and do, as best as possible, what is right. I believe that signing this legislation is the right thing to do,” Governor Baldacci said.


Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#2 May 06 2009 at 10:05 AM Rating: Good
****
6,858 posts
“This new law does not force any religion to recognize a marriage that falls outside of its beliefs. It does not require the church to perform any ceremony with which it disagrees. Instead, it reaffirms the separation of Church and State,” Governor Baldacci said.

I really like this bit. The debate about gay marriage shouldn't be about gay marriage at all, but separation of church and state, as well as equal protection, fundamental principles for this country.
#3 May 06 2009 at 10:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
This is the actual section of the bill he was addressing there:

Quote:
Sec. 5. 19-A MRSA §655, sub-§3 is enacted to read:
3. Affirmation of religious freedom. This Part does not authorize any court or other state
or local governmental body, entity, agency or commission to compel, prevent or interfere in any way
with any religious institution's religious doctrine, policy, teaching or solemnization of marriage within
that particular religious faith's tradition as guaranteed by the Maine Constitution, Article 1, Section 3 or the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. A person authorized to join persons in marriage and who fails or refuses to join persons in marriage is not subject to any fine or other penalty for such failure or refusal.


Nexa

____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#4 May 06 2009 at 10:17 AM Rating: Good
***
1,701 posts
Nexa wrote:
This is the actual section of the bill he was addressing there:

Quote:
Sec. 5. 19-A MRSA §655, sub-§3 is enacted to read:
3. Affirmation of religious freedom. This Part does not authorize any court or other state
or local governmental body, entity, agency or commission to compel, prevent or interfere in any way
with any religious institution's religious doctrine, policy, teaching or solemnization of marriage within
that particular religious faith's tradition as guaranteed by the Maine Constitution, Article 1, Section 3 or the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. A person authorized to join persons in marriage and who fails or refuses to join persons in marriage is not subject to any fine or other penalty for such failure or refusal.


Nexa




Does this will extend to government officials or is it just meant for religious figures?
____________________________
If life gives you lemons, make lemonade. Then find someone that life has given vodka and have party.


This establishment does not serve women. You must bring your own.
#5 May 06 2009 at 10:18 AM Rating: Decent
Sweet way to go Maine! I would really like to see Texas follow suit but I highly doubt that will happen in my life time.
#6 May 06 2009 at 10:18 AM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
KingJohn wrote:
Nexa wrote:
This is the actual section of the bill he was addressing there:

Quote:
Sec. 5. 19-A MRSA §655, sub-§3 is enacted to read:
3. Affirmation of religious freedom. This Part does not authorize any court or other state
or local governmental body, entity, agency or commission to compel, prevent or interfere in any way
with any religious institution's religious doctrine, policy, teaching or solemnization of marriage within
that particular religious faith's tradition as guaranteed by the Maine Constitution, Article 1, Section 3 or the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. A person authorized to join persons in marriage and who fails or refuses to join persons in marriage is not subject to any fine or other penalty for such failure or refusal.


Nexa




Does this will extend to government officials or is it just meant for religious figures?


No, everyone. If I'm notarized, I don't have to marry anyone I don't want to, no penalties, the reasoning doesn't matter.

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#7 May 06 2009 at 10:18 AM Rating: Good
***
3,829 posts
Well that definitely puts a pin in the panic-mongers who claim that legalizing gay marriage will force churches to perform ceremonies contrary to their doctrine.
#8 May 06 2009 at 10:24 AM Rating: Excellent
Nexa
*****
12,065 posts
Ambrya wrote:
Well that definitely puts a pin in the panic-mongers who claim that legalizing gay marriage will force churches to perform ceremonies contrary to their doctrine.


You'd think so, but you'd be wrong, haha.

Nexa
____________________________
“It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes. But a half-wit remains a half-wit, and the emperor remains an emperor.”
― Neil Gaiman, The Sandman, Vol. 9: The Kindly Ones
#9 May 06 2009 at 10:29 AM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
:D! Maine has come a long way in 20 years. I wonder how this'll play out in Aroostook.

Edited, May 6th 2009 2:29pm by Annabella
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#10 May 06 2009 at 10:29 AM Rating: Good
****
6,858 posts
Quote:
This is the actual section of the bill he was addressing there:


Quote:
Sec. 5. 19-A MRSA §655, sub-§3 is enacted to read:
3. Affirmation of religious freedom. This Part does not authorize any court or other state
or local governmental body, entity, agency or commission to compel, prevent or interfere in any way
with any religious institution's religious doctrine, policy, teaching or solemnization of marriage within
that particular religious faith's tradition as guaranteed by the Maine Constitution, Article 1, Section 3 or the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. A person authorized to join persons in marriage and who fails or refuses to join persons in marriage is not subject to any fine or other penalty for such failure or refusal.


Nexa


The bill in it's entirety reinforces the two way street of separation of church and state, just as it was intended. Government, no hand in religion, and archaic religious "morality", no hand in government (in theory).
#11 May 06 2009 at 11:01 AM Rating: Decent
I love how he focused on the separation of church and state, rather than "the rights of homosexuals to be married". Attack it for what it is. Not once when reading that did I think he was arguing on the side of homosexuals, which seems to me to be one of the major road blocks in getting this type of law passed.
#12 May 06 2009 at 11:15 AM Rating: Good
*****
12,049 posts
I'm really happy for this, and I really enjoyed his wording. Kudos!
#13 May 06 2009 at 2:04 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

I wonder how this'll play out in Aroostook.


They'll be really upset when the news reaches them in '23
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#14 May 06 2009 at 3:38 PM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Happy day:D
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#15 May 08 2009 at 5:14 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Nexa wrote:
Not that the fight is over


Indeed

Just as a follow up, there has been an application filed, here in Maine, by a coalition of opponents to this new law for a Peoples Veto. The biggies in this coalition are the Catholic diocese of Portland and the Maine Jeremiah Project. If they can collect 55,000 signatures by early fall it will go on the ballot and be voted on.

I'm not real worried (but, a little worried). If they do get the signatures (55,000 is nearly 5% of Maine's population) I don't think they can win the vote.

/fingers crossed






Edited, May 8th 2009 3:14pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#16 May 08 2009 at 6:33 AM Rating: Good
***
3,829 posts
Elinda wrote:
Nexa wrote:
Not that the fight is over


Indeed

Just as a follow up, there has been an application filed, here in Maine, by a coalition of opponents to this new law for a Peoples Veto. The biggies in this coalition are the Catholic diocese of Portland and the Maine Jeremiah Project. If they can collect 55,000 signatures by early fall it will go on the ballot and be voted on.

I'm not real worried (but, a little worried). If they do get the signatures (55,000 is nearly 5% of Maine's population) I don't think they can win the vote.

/fingers crossed


Wonder if they'll hire Arno?

While the 2004 DOMA Amendment passed in Oregon, there's been some question about it's validity due to the fact that the citizen's initiative which got it on the ballot in the first place had a great many fraudulent signatures (it wasn't Arno in that case but a different firm or firms.) Seems these upright people who are so concerned with decency and morality have no problem with cheating in the name of the cause.
#17 May 13 2009 at 5:35 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
New York is trying to follow suit.

Quote:
NEW YORK (CNN) -- The New York State Assembly passed a same-sex marriage bill Tuesday evening, bringing New York one step closer to legalizing such marriages.

The bill, which passed 89-52, will now go on to the state Senate for a vote. If it is passed there, it will go to Gov. David Paterson, who has made it clear he will sign the bill.

"I applaud ... members of both parties for moving this historic legislation forward," New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement released by the mayor's office.

"I hope New York will soon become the latest state to adopt a law whose time has come."

State Sen. Thomas K. Duane, a Democrat, said in a statement, "I am confident that this year my Senate will uphold this fundamental legal principle and vote for my right, our right, to be married this year."

This is the second time New York's Marriage Equality Legislation has been approved by the State Assembly -- it passed in 2007, but subsequently stalled in the then Republican-controlled Senate.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 308 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (308)