Looking Forward

What is the next step?

Obviously taking down DOMA is a step for us all to work towards, but is there a next step in Maine, and what is that play?  Is there a way to put it back on the ballot (not that I'm suggesting for or against that) like they are doing in CA?  Is there a way this can be fought in the legislature or did this tie their hands completely?  Is there a way in the judicial arena?

What does one do now to keep standing in Maine?

---

by: Jake Gellar-Goad @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:10:16 AM CST

Damned good questions

I think I know where this is heading, but until solid information is made available, it would be speculation at this point to say much. Hopefully next week we'll know more.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:38:51 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Hmmmmm...

I do know that Maine's anti-discrimination bill only passed on the third try, I think. It seems as if the same may happen here.

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:42:36 AM CST

[ Parent ]

what makes me a little concerned

What makes me a little concerned is there is a chunk of the population that would like to push the knife in deeper.

---

by: Herb @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:45:36 AM CST

[ Parent ]

that's my thought too

the maine legislature has shown in the past that they are not shy of revisiting laws recently overturned by referendum.  they've got some serious spine in the maine legislature!  i look forward to more good deeds to come.

Lurleen on Twitter

---

by: Lurleen @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:02:18 PM CST

[ Parent ]

How does the Supreme Judicial Court look?

I had a look at the Maine Constitution last night and saw some very interesting things:

Art. VI, sec.3 - Court is allowed to give advisory opinions upon the request of the Governor or either of the two houses of legislature. (This way, we wouldn't have to wait several years for the case to wind down through the lower courts.)

and of course, the more "traditional" route of the "equal protection" Art. I, sec. 6A.

Because if marriage equality went through the courts under Maine Constitution, it obviously would be much harder to overturn, as Maine requires 2/3 of each house for constitutional amendments.

---

by: avocado @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:31:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh, and no way

will 2/3 of each house in Maine vote for an amendment.

But I bet that "advisory opinion" portion is being studied by lawyers even now.

But this is still the same as Prop 8 right? The Court would not be ruling on marruage equality, per se, but whether this was a valid use of the People's Veto.

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:35:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

that's marriage"

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:36:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh, no

I am talking about asking the Court whether denying marriage rights, including the m-word, is ok under Maine Constitution.

Here's the relevant section:

"Section 3. To give opinion when required by Governor or either Branch of the Legislature. The Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court shall be obliged to give their opinion upon important questions of law, and upon solemn occasions, when required by the Governor, Senate or House of Representatives."

---

by: avocado @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:50:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I understand what you are saying

it's the Prop 8 saga in reverse, to an extent...

The question (or one of them it seems) is that was this a legitimate exercise of the People's Veto?  

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:55:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

well

It's nice to think that it is not (and I hold the opinion that it is not), but the problem is that we operate in a reality where it is. I mean there is Romer v. Evans argument that you can't take away someone's rights just because you don't like them, but it doesn't have the weight of 200 years by itself yet.

---

by: avocado @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:06:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

But then it never was

when the anti-discrimination ordinances were rejected via the People's Veto twice before the anti-discrimination ordinances were approved by the people in 2005.

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:14:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

oops

I am sorry, Lurleen, I pressed the wrong button. The prior question/comment was for Louise (as she is the one in Maine).

---

by: avocado @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:33:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No worries, re: wrong button

Here's the link to the MSJC- but honestly, I couldn't tell you a thing about any of these folks.

Got some homework to do, huh? ;)

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:08:05 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Not 31

The anti-gay bigots on the right keep touting that Maine is the 31st state that has banned gay marriage.

The HUGE difference between Maine and the other states is that Maine was not banning anything.  A law was passed and the majority of voters (who should never be able to vote on civil rights) vetoed the Legislature's law.  THIS WAS NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

I do not believe that Maine's residents would allow discrimination into their constitution.

There I feel better now.

---

by: BB @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:51:04 AM CST

You're right on both counts

I was in Wells on ED and me and the guy that was with me went to a house. The dog jumped out and was very friendly, first of all. (and if a dog is friendly, ALWAYS work the dog).

The husband was home and came out to talk to us. He was a working class guy; maybe a somewhat stereotypical "Maine hick". He said that he absolutely believed that marriage was between a man and a woman. He also said that he believed that he had no right to tell other people what to do and that he did think that it was discrimination.

So, yeah, the guy thinks both things. Tge best that I could do with that was to read the ballot. language to him and keep on working on the dog.

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:57:03 AM CST

[ Parent ]

oops! should say...

"the ballot language to him and keep on working on the dog."

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:58:11 AM CST

[ Parent ]

More "Man on Dog" behaviour???

Sheesh, will we never learn???

Question:  What does an atheist do when they fall to the floor and start "speaking in tongues"?

Answer: Get a CAT scan.

---

by: Snooky Ookums @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:13:36 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Hey...I was out of bright ideas

and the dog was actually very, very friendly. Oh, the things I would do for a vote for marriage equslity!

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:18:13 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I was gonna say

"you two are a couple of sick puppies"- then stopped- then said, "oh what the hell!" ;)

Kev, you are indeed a treasure...

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:26:25 AM CST

[ Parent ]

feelings on Marriage

If you're straight like I am straight people have a tendency to be more open to you as to their feelings toward gays and lesbians. There is a good percentage of the straight population that feels that the definition of marriage belongs to male/female but otherwise totally support gay rights. I wonder if a state was to call marriage by another name, lets for the sake of argument, "personal union". You would get a personal union license whether you were gay or straight. This would allow you all the trappings and rights of marriage. When you would have the ceremony it would be called a "marriage" or a "civil union" depending on your preferences. However both would be of equal value under the laws of the land and you'd both have the same "personal union" license. You would have to pass a law that stated that "personal union", 'civil union", and "marriage" would be interchangeable for all state laws.

Come to think of it why couldn't a state just pass a law making the terms "civil union" and "Marriage" interchangeable for all state laws. Automatically everyone would have all the same rights and privleges. By their last ad the Yes on One folks would probably be forced to agree. ???

I'm just thinking out load.  Now its your turn to shot my stupid idea down.

---

by: Herb @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 12:10:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

No, that's my preferred solution

or

The state only legally sanctions civil unions. Since the churches seem to want the "marriage" word so bad, let them have it.

But it has no legal standing whatever (though I could see a church conferring extra rights on a marriage within their church)...

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 12:16:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

f*ck that! Why should we let a RELIGION determine what marriage means

I am an atheist, I don't believe in your freaking sky god.

I want nothing to do with what you think a marriage is. The Government has to treat us all equally, under the constitution.

So EVERYONE gets a marriage. If they want to call their marriage a "covenant marriage" or what-ever, I really don't care. Only people who believe in their faith get one of their covenant marriages, fine. I don;t want one. I just want whate everyone else, similarly situated get.

That's why it's called a CIVIL right.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Mad Professah Lectures http://madprofessah.com
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell

---

by: Mad Professah @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 18:09:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I could go for that argument

In other words, we already have "civil unions" and they are called "marriages."

It's the equality under the law that's important to me.

---

by: kevinchi @ Sat Nov 07, 2009 at 11:03:16 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Uh, let's get this straight (such as the word applies to me)

I am quite non-religious. Who is this "you" that you are referring to?

---

by: kevinchi @ Sat Nov 07, 2009 at 11:06:59 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Let me add. I would be hesitant in calling that

particular voter that I met a bigot; a term a think our community misuses to an extent. After all, I heard those statements out of his mouth one behind the other. That's actually a pretty...conflicting and sophisticated way of thinking about the issue, with lots of areas of gray.

Or try this...and this is from one member of a gay couple (together for abot a decade or so)...

"I might marry_______and I might not. But I do not want anyone telling me that I can't marry him."

Actually, that sounds like me, now that I look at it.

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 12:22:35 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Fine with most

as long as its one term for everyone. The problem - the way I see it - is that where the issue is not "marriage", the opponents of lgbt equality oppose even "domestic partnerships" and "civil unions" as they are but "marriage by another name." And if in the end what worked were the scare tactics of "childrun will be taught there are gays and lesbians, and the government does not kill them on sight", the issue will not influence these folks; it will only change their words.

---

by: avocado @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:40:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Maine vs. Washington

and Kalamazoo and obviously the success of a number of GLBT politicians.

The sober truth is that "the people" are, by and large opposed to us having the word "marriage" at this time. Hell, if I were the fundies, I would be quaking in my boots at the election results from Tuesday (apart from Maine)

The bathroom bullshit didn't work in Kalamazoo, the DPs will lead to marriage didn't work, etc...

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:51:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

true

:0) That's what warms my heart, and gives hope that my bf won't be thrown out of the US in a couple of years.

---

by: avocado @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:08:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Been there, did that ...

in Vermont. It was civil union, and when it first passed that way in response to a state supreme court ruling that the rights and benefits had to be equal, I was all for it: much less baggage than 'marriage' and we could basically invent our own rituals and rites, except for the part where the Justice of the Peace says, "By the power invested in me by the State of Vermont, I now pronounce you joined in civil union."

But over the nine years since then, I became convinced that state by state is only one piece of the strategy (the US Supreme Court almost never leads public opinion: it only struck down laws banning interracial marriages when there were just 16, maybe 17 states left with laws on the books that they were enforcing), and that the Fed govt would use the lack of the word "marriage" to deny us even a seat in the courtroom to challenge DOMA.

As it is, my civil union would have been recognized only recently in neighboring NH, and not at all in most other states, including neighboring New York, which does recognize marriages that were legally performed elsewhere.

So, the two major drawbacks to the "civil union" or "everything but marriage" solution on a state level are that it shuts the door on access to federal marriage law, and it's neither routinely understandable on street level (I have stories about friends trying to explain "civil union" to an emergency room administrator in Portland, OR, and getting absolutely nowhere) nor legally recognized nor portable to other jurisdictions -- even Canada, which was way ahead of us in getting marriage equality.

I'm not so much in love with marriage as a concept; for me and my wife (a month ago, a lifetime ago) it's more about being in love with equality, and marriage is our way toward equality, to be able to care for and legally and medically protect each other in good and bad times.

---

by: Astra Borealis @ Sat Nov 07, 2009 at 20:52:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yup

A law was passed and our own governor agreed that all Mainers, under our constitution, deserved equal treatment and rights.

In my non-legally educated mind, the veto of this law was unconstitutional and discriminatory. I'm hoping the silence locally means that others are hard at work on this issue...

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:01:12 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I disagree..there's a huge difference between a veto and an amendment

Prop 8 is clearly unconstitutional under the STATE and Federal Constitution, it's just our Cal Sup Ct didn;t have the cojones to say so.

But there's a big difference between passing a constitutional amendment explicitly denying a federally bestowed federal right to a specific minority group (this is what Prop 8 did) and the people exercising their referendum power on an act of the Legislature.

I think you all should immediately pass strong civil union legislation in Maine and see if the catholic Church has the gall to oppose that. Then after it has been in place and people realize that there is some significant difference between civil unions and "marriage" try for another marriage bill through the legislature.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Mad Professah Lectures http://madprofessah.com
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell

---

by: Mad Professah @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 18:14:29 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I read a veiled threat in some piece about the haters gloating

Which said they are holding back on a constitutional amendment to see what we do next. The threat is being left hanging over Maine.

I want those donor's names...any news when they will be forced to be released?

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:40:22 AM CST

[ Parent ]

We have a lot of ground to cover

since our community seems to be too squeamish to take on the "gay marriage in school" argument (and I never learned about marriage in school; sex, yes, marriage, no) then the credibility of these people needs to be destroyed and we need to stop preaching to the choir about.

If we can't top the message, then destroy the messenger.

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:45:54 AM CST

[ Parent ]

There is a difference

There is a difference between "acknowledge" and "teach". What those cretins Wirtlin and Camenker were fighting in Lexington was the schools acknowledging the existance of gay "parents". Anyway the whole thing was one big set up from the outset. I have argued with some success that schools have to acknowledge the existance of gay parents otherwise it is being cruel to the children of gay couples and that this acknowledgement will happen whether or not gay marriage is passed because gay couples with children will not disappear if gay marriage is voted down and their children will still be going to school.

---

by: Herb @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 12:58:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What do you think?

Since I am against advocating violence, how about this method (which I suggested earlier this year).

We, LGBTs, take their fears directly to the opponents and their churches. BUT we do not yell, we do not block, we do not confront them orally or physically.

What do we do?

They are afraid that their children will learn in school about "the gays" because of gay marriage? Well, who said their children have to wait that long?

We have dates by making the meeting place for each date in front of a church at the time that the Sunday services are over. And what do we do? At the time that they are leaving the churches, we greet our dates, maybe give a bouquet or a single rose and kiss. No Frenching, let's keep it innocent for now.

And this can be a single act or it can be an organized demonstration - as long as it's quiet. I call it kiss-outs, because we won't be running into churches, we'd be just kissing outside of them. If someone wants a sign, I'd suggest something positive like "God is love". The sight of our kissing in front of their churches will be confrontational enough.

---

by: avocado @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:01:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

We need to keep showing the links

of leaders and whole organizations to white supremacist and other organizations in the past.

It's called opposition research. And we do a horrible job of it (though not the blog world).

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:48:21 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Error

What the gay rights ads should do is throw back the shit that Porno Pete throws out.  Say "this is what these people really want to do to us - pound us back into the closet and take our children away from us. Now do you still want to vote with them?" Identify the scum for what they are. I'm getting pissed this afternoon and when I get that way I say stupid things so bare with me.

---

by: Herb @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:04:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I also don't spell all that well when I'm upset

---

by: Herb @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:05:39 PM CST

[ Parent ]

oh, no

This is not stupid, Herb. I agree with this statement of yours 100%. I have been saying this forever about Maggie G. She has never publicly spoken about her thoughts about children born to or adopted by the LGBT families. And NO ONE HAS CONFRONTED HER ABOUT THIS ISSUE EFFECTIVELY, whenever she appeared in public. NO ONE.

---

by: avocado @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:11:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

A 2/3 majority for a constitutional amendment

That's impossible in a state like Maine. Period.

---

by: Kokas @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:54:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yep.

If 2/3rds of both houses of the Maine State Legislature vote to do so, a proposed constitutional amendment to the Maine Constitution can be placed on the statewide ballot. If a proposed amendment is approved by a simple majority of those voting in a particular election, it becomes part of the constitution.

A simple 50%+1 majority of the people must come after 2/3 of both legislative houses (which voted for marriage equality)

That's an appropriately high standard for amending a constitution.

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:01:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Well, here's the thing

We got LD 1020 easily through the Judicial Committee, the House, the Senate and signed into law by the Governor.

So at this point, I don't see how repeating the same process (if that's even allowable under Maine law) would gain us a damned thing.

BUT- a few people (who are a helluva lot more knowledgeable than me!) recently have mentioned Maine's constitution, in regards to the marriage equality law.

Will this go to court, as a discrimination case/ violation of Maine's constitution under Article 6A, or otherwise?

I thoroughly hope so.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:57:36 AM CST

And a court decision can't be overturned

by a People's Veto, right?

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 10:59:44 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Bingo

I think... right now, I'm armchair analyzing without knowing the legal statutes etc.

Without going into any details, let me say I saw ONE solo reaction Tuesday night that showed me this is NOT done... difficult, challenging and not easy- but this is not over.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:04:27 AM CST

[ Parent ]

ahh!

That's where my comment from above was supposed to go. The one seemingly addressed to Lurleen.

---

by: avocado @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:13:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'm going to pay much more attention

now to the Ted Olsen/David Boies case... that's for sure.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:31:27 AM CST

I think we need to go pro-active in school curiculum

At the same time ridicule and shame Bishop Malone. Get teachers to teach the dangers of trusted adults in their young student's lives, the face shown of that danger will be a Catholic Priest, and Mark Foley. Let the repigs and Catholics fear what we can do in classes, not what they hint we might do.

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 11:50:03 AM CST

Bishop Malone...you want to F*CK WITH SOMEONE

   http://s810.photobucket.com/al...

pick on someone your own size

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 12:33:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Maine

Where is the Maine Supreme Court in all of this? The legislative & Excutive branches passed and signed a bill to grant marriage equality to a protected minority. A law which was invalidated by a tyrannical majority of Maine voters. Doesn't the Judicial branch of state government have any role or responsibility in reviewing the legality of this vote? Frankly I hope the State Attorney General files a lawsuit contesting the vote outcome on the grounds that it violates the Equal Protection clause of the constitution. Let the Robes earn their paycheck by having to review this outrage of injustice.    

---

by: LaoTongZhi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 12:36:36 PM CST

How are Maine judges put on the bench?

Are they elected? Appointed?

Frankly, wouldn't that have come up before, as it did in California.

remember, they are not changing a Constitution in Maine...

---

by: kevinchi @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 12:52:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

There's always the possibility

The downside of a court case is that it always triggers a desire on the part of the opposition to run an anti-marriage constitutional amendment in the state.  If I were a Mainer I'm not sure that's the preferred route just now -- although court cases do take a while to wend their way up to the top giving our side time to work the people.

---

by: BobbiCW @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:03:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

As a Mainer, I can say

that I'm not particularly concerned about a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Constitutional amendments require 2/3 majority of the House and Senate to pass ; gay marriage opponents flat out aren't going to be able to get those numbers from a legislature that passed a marriage equality bill.

---

by: Lexie @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 15:45:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Exactly

No way- but that's also why we have to really pay attention to what happens in next year's local elections.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 15:49:11 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'd litter the steps of the Portland Catholic churches with underoos drenched in blood

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 12:54:28 PM CST

or print this and nail to everything wooden all around his church

   http://s810.photobucket.com/al...

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:23:15 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Nonono...

I understand where this is coming from, but no vandalism.

We gotta stick to the lawful stuff here and not the emotional- and gawds know, as a Gemini that goes UTTERLY against my nature! ;)

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:31:25 PM CST

[ Parent ]

only against ONE of your natures...send in the EVIL TWIN

I'm Aries...us rams don't give a flyin' f*ck who tries to get in our way.

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:49:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

My next image uses the protest sign STOP ABORTIONS

use the top of one of their stop sign images very large with Bishop Malone prominently featured.

small letters at the bottom say, "Mount an altar boy for Jesus"

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:53:38 PM CST

[ Parent ]

STOP ABORTION......mount an altar boy

   http://s810.photobucket.com/al...

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Sat Nov 07, 2009 at 01:44:09 AM CST

[ Parent ]

the Knights of Columbus with their silly hats are coming soon on a pedofile sign

maybe send in the clowns....will be the caption.

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:55:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Knights of Columbus.....send in the CLOWNS

   http://s810.photobucket.com/al...

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Sat Nov 07, 2009 at 01:01:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

No kidding

Honestly, the "evil twin" got the stuffing and the wind knocked outta her the other night. Because of the incredible effectiveness of the CIL we had sent up here on the Blend and the constant updates, Kev, JohnVisser and I knew what was going on with the returns before anyone else in the entire room; I was filling in the rest of the bloggers around us.

We had been told previously by the campaign that Bangor Daily was the site to watch (and that even THEY wouldn't know before BDN), then that site kept crashing...

So when the count hit 12k down, I knew I had to make a phone call to some friends- I didn't want them to find out from anyone else. When I was done and came back into the room, Kev and JV said it was at 30k- and it was time for me and my beer to go for a walk through the crowds.

No one else in the room knew. And I watched them slowly find out; it was heartbreaking, raw, and the sheer rage and guilt I felt- beyond description.

The next day was about simply coming home, where things make sense and everything is almost sane. And sleeping- gawds, I was exhausted, as I suspect everyone was. I wish I had stayed for the 11am on the steps of City Hall, but I needed to be home. All of those pressers I put up? That was done in a blur; I was on auto-pilot.

Yesterday- I collected signs from 4 towns. Had the house to myself; did chores and watched it snow. And started to feel more like me. Some focus and clarity returned; ideas started forming.

Today? Better. Much better. "ET" is back.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 15:11:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I'd love a commercial

With dozens of nice hetero families saying I'll hire my gay neighbor to babysit before I'd ask a Catholic priest.

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:42:51 PM CST

Lambda Lawyers

I want you at the Maine courthouse petioning the judge that NOM isn't complying with the court order to release their donors, and slap a $50K daily fine every day they don't comply.
Letters to the Attorney General might speed it up too.

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 13:50:50 PM CST

There hasn't been a court order to release the donor names yet

All that has happened was that a judge slapped down NOM's request for a restraining order to delay/throw out the investigation. The investigation may result in an order to release donor names. Til then, though, we can't force NOM to do a thing, which is a damn shame.

---

by: Lexie @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 15:48:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Here we go... re: ME Suprme Court Justices

Understand, both Angus King and John Baldacci are supportive of the marriage equality law...

I do not know about Jock McKernan (who btw is married to Olympia Snowe).

Governor Joe Brennan was a Democrat.

http://www.courts.state.me.us/...

Supreme Court Justice Biographies

Hon. Leigh Ingalls Saufley
Chief Justice, Maine Supreme Judicial Court

Chief Justice Saufley graduated from the University of Maine at Orono, Phi Beta Kappa, in 1976. She is a 1980 graduate of the University of Maine School of Law. She was with Maine's Attorney General's Office for approximately ten years, becoming one of Maine's first female deputy attorneys general. In April of 1990, she was appointed to the District Court by Governor John R. McKernan. Governor McKernan appointed her to the Superior Court in 1993, and in 1997 Governor Angus S. King appointed her to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. On December 6, 2001, she was sworn in as Maine's first female Chief Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court by Governor King. Chief Justice Saufley was sworn in for a second term as Chief Justice on February 27, 2009, by Governor John E. Baldacci.

Chief Justice Saufley is the recipient of several awards, including: L. Kinvin Wroth, Alumna of the Year Award, 1998; YWCA Women of Achievement Award, 2002; University of Maine School of Law Distinguished Alumna Award, 2002; Honorary Doctor of Laws, University of New England, 2004; University of Maine Maryann Hartman Award Maine Woman of Achievement, 2004; Caroline Duby Glassman Award, 2005; Portland Regional Chamber Neal W. Allen Award, 2005; Honorary Doctor of Humane Letters, University of Maine at Presque Isle, 2008; and University of New England Deborah Morton Award, 2008.

============================================================

Hon. Donald G. Alexander

Donald G. Alexander was appointed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court in 1998 by Governor Angus S. King. He previously served on the Maine Superior Court and the Maine District Court and as a Deputy Attorney General for the State of Maine. He served in Washington, D.C. as an assistant to Maine Senator Edmund S. Muskie and as Legislative Counsel for the National League of Cities. Justice Alexander is a graduate of Bowdoin College and the University of Chicago Law School. He is the author of The Maine Jury Instruction Manual (4th. ed. 2008); and Maine Appellate Practice (3rd. ed. 2008), and a principal editor of The Maine Rules of Civil Procedure with Advisory Committee Notes and Practice Commentary (2008). He has been an adjunct faculty member at the University of Maine School of Law and has been on the faculty of the Harvard Law School Trial Advocacy Workshop since 1980. He is the Court's liaison to the Advisory Committees on the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure and Probate Procedure, the State Court Library Committee, and the Maine State Bar Association Continuing Legal Education Committee.

========================================================

Hon. Jon D. Levy

Justice Levy is a graduate of Syracuse University, and the West Virginia University College of Law where he was Lead Article Editor of the Law Review and was made a member of Order of the Coif. Following law school, Justice Levy served as a law clerk to U.S. District Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr., in the Southern District of West Virginia. In 1981 Justice Levy was appointed by U.S. District Judge William Justice to serve in the position of court monitor in the Texas prison conditions class action, Ruiz v. Estelle. In 1982, Justice Levy and his wife Miriam moved to Maine and he commenced a private law practice in York. He authored the book Maine Family Law (Lexis Law Publishing), which was first published in 1988. He served as President of the York County Bar Association from 1991-1992.

Justice Levy was nominated by Governor Angus King to serve as a Judge of the Maine District Court in 1995. As a District Court Judge, Justice Levy was one of the presiding judges in the Juvenile Drug Treatment Court. From 1996 to 2000, Justice Levy served as the chairperson of the Maine Family Law Advisory Commission. Justice Levy was appointed to serve as Deputy Chief Judge of the District Court in 2000, and as Chief Judge of the District Court in 2001. As Chief Judge, Justice Levy initiated the development of Maine's domestic violence courts. He received the Maine State Bar Association's Family Law Achievement Award in 2001 and the York County Bar Association's Outstanding Member Award in 2006.

In 2002, Justice Levy was nominated by Governor Angus King to serve as an Associate Justice of the Maine Supreme Judicial Court. Justice Levy is the Supreme Judicial Court's liaison to the Committee on Judicial Responsibility and Disability, the Maine Family Law Advisory Commission, the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee, and the Maine Civil Legal Services Fund Commission. He is also a member of the Court's Sentence Review Panel. Justice Levy is the Chair of the Maine Justice Action Group, and is a member of the executive committees of the New England Appellate Judges Conference and the Maine State/Federal Judicial Council.

============================================================

Hon. Warren M. Silver

Warren M. Silver was appointed to the Court by Governor John E. Baldacci in 2005.  Justice Silver is a graduate of Presque Isle High School and Tufts University.  He received his law degree from the Washington College of Law at American University in 1973 and has been in private practice in Bangor since 1977. In addition to an active trial practice, Justice Silver served on the Board of Governors and as President of the Maine Trial Lawyers Association and as Chairman of the Court's Civil Rules Committee and the Governor's Judicial Selection Committee. He was also active in many community activities. Since arriving on the Court, Justice Silver has been Chair of the Planning Committee for the new Bangor Courthouse. He is also the court liaison to the Board of Bar Examiners, Board of Overseers of the Bar, and the Lawyer's Fund for Client Protection. Justice Silver is also the Chair of the Judicial Education Committee that oversees judicial education. In July 2008, he was appointed Chair of the Court Finance Committee.

=========================================================

Hon. Andrew M. Mead

Andrew M. Mead attended the University of Maine and New York Law School. He has been a member of the Bangor law firms of Paine, Lynch & Weatherbee and Mitchell & Stearns. He is a past President of the Maine State Bar Association. He was appointed to the Maine District Court in 1990 and the Maine Superior Court in 1992. He served as Chief Justice of the Maine Superior Court from 1999 to 2001. He was appointed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court in 2007. He has served as judicial liaison to the Maine Rules of Evidence Advisory Committee and chaired the Task Force on Electronic Court Records. He has been active in a number of court technology and jury reform initiatives. He is a member of the University of Maine adjunct faculty.

========================================================

Hon. Ellen A. Gorman

Ellen A. Gorman is a 1977 graduate of Trinity College, Washington, D.C., and a 1982 graduate of the Cornell Law School. Justice Gorman practiced law as an associate with the firm of Richardson, Tyler and Troubh from 1982 until she was appointed to the Workers' Compensation Commission by then-Governor Brennan in 1986. In 1989 then-Governor McKernan appointed her to the Maine District Court, where she worked for eleven years. In 2000, then-Governor King appointed her to the Maine Superior Court, and she served as a Justice on that court until Governor Baldacci appointed her to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court on October 1, 2007.

============================================================

Hon. Joseph M. Jabar

Jospeh M. Jabar is a graduate of Colby College and the University of Maine School of Law. Following graduation Justice Jabar served as a federal prosecutor for the Justice Department in Washington, DC. He returned to Maine and served four years as District Attorney for Kennebec-Somerset Counties. For twenty-five years he was a member of the law firm of Jabar, Batten Ringer and Murphy of Waterville.

During these years he served two Governors as Chair of the Executive Clemency Board, he served as a Workers' Compensation Commissioner, and served two terms as a State Representative. He was Chairman of the Juvenile Code Revision Commission in 1977 and 1978. He has also served on the Board of Governors for the Maine Trial Lawyers Association.

He was appointed to the Superior Court in 2001 by Governor Angus King, and he was re-appointed by Governor John Baldacci in 2008. While on the Superior Court he served on the Family Law Advisory Commission, Criminal Law Advisory Commission, Media and the Courts Committee, and the State Sentencing and Corrections Council. He was appointed to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court by Governor John Baldacci on September 1, 2009.

"It goes on one at a time, it starts when you care to act, it starts when you do it again after they said no, it starts when you say We and know who you mean, and each day you mean one more."

---

by: Louise @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:29:29 PM CST

Thought of a good parody of the Kalamazoo restroom ad

Use the man presumed gay following her in the restroom.
The girl comes out of the restroom with a much cuter haircut and cooler clothes. The Fab Five are sitting with the girl's parents saying.....MUCH BETTER.

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:39:34 PM CST

What makes me sad overall

is that after being attacked for so long under Bush, I was naive enough to think a new more inclusive era was underway now. But today I feel more threatened and hated than ever.

And while I celebrate our win in Washington State, it's definitely just an intermediate step.

Words matter. Aside from the civil rights attendant to "marriage". Our society places full validation on married people. Trying to visit a hospitalized partner in any state by saying you are his or her's "civil union or domestic partner" does not carry equal weight. Doctors and nurses don't discriminate against husband and wives. They do and have discriminated against "partners".  The same case in countless other mundane interactions straights take for granted : insurance,air travel,schools,taxes,gym memberships and on and on and on. We should not be forced and don't deserve to have the extra burden of having our "papers" 24/7 to get access to issues married heteros have no problem handling.

By keeping the word marriage out of our reach, our opponents are able to perpetuate the myth that we are wrong and sick and undeserving, because marriage in America is right up there with apple pie and the white picket fence.

---

by: DilworthDem @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 14:58:11 PM CST

They were called JIM CROW laws before...

OBAMA and all of them want us to accept it. We and our friends are second-class.

Do we need a new name for them?  How about Cudie Pie  as in CU/DP laws. Imagine telling a Doctor or Sherriff you need to see your Cudie Pie.

We'll figure it. Just remember all... Separate is NOT Equal. 

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.

---

by: Orion45 @ Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 15:38:47 PM CST

[ Parent ]