Gay Marriage/Civil Unions in 10 years

[Alcon]

Ridiculous. Blow them out of the water in 2010.

It'll be 2009, if they manage.  And I'm reasonably sure that getting it on the ballot alone is enough to blow them out of the water.  There was a poll (I can't find where) where WA voters supported giving gays all the rights of marriage by over 20 points.  The question specifically said "all the rights of marriage."  Assuming they get on the ballot, that doesn't leave much for proponents to use.  People already know what the domestic partnerships are.

[Holmes]

Sure, people know what they are. But that won't stop them from pumping millions into ads saying it'll hurt children and gays are bad people. I know how they are...

Anyway, I dunno how many people saw these videos, but this is my favourite:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVp8-uaFYm8

And this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqZ1FYSP8S8

[Holmes]

http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/news/local/6231938.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Lol "people's veto".

The hearing is today in Maine, by the way!!

EDIT: Live blog from Maine! http://www.mainewomen.org/blog/

They're saying supporters are packing the place! I'll have quite a bit of reading to do tonight since I have school... why couldn't this be tomorrow when I'm off? Oh well.

Live streaming - http://files.mainecampus.com/quicktime-stream.php

SO MUCH RED!! All those supporters!

[Rowan]

50% say gay marriage should be banned nationwide.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=f975bd27-33a6-4579-8716-7bc0fe49a96b

[RI]

50% say gay marriage should be banned nationwide.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=f975bd27-33a6-4579-8716-7bc0fe49a96b

Just what I needed to brighten my day...

[Landslide Lyndon]

50% say gay marriage should be banned nationwide.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=f975bd27-33a6-4579-8716-7bc0fe49a96b

I bet a bigger percentage said the same thing about interracial marriage circa 1967.

[Brittain33]

50% say gay marriage should be banned nationwide.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=f975bd27-33a6-4579-8716-7bc0fe49a96b

I bet a bigger percentage said the same thing about interracial marriage circa 1967.

Yeah.

I thought the "controversy" over the beauty pageant's answer was overblown. She could have phrased it a little better, I'm sure, but I don't think her answer was unacceptable or bad. She was being honest about her views.

[Stranger in a strange land]

50% say gay marriage should be banned nationwide.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=f975bd27-33a6-4579-8716-7bc0fe49a96b

I bet a bigger percentage said the same thing about interracial marriage circa 1967.

You would be correct:

[Person Man]

wow...as recent as 1991..

[Sbane]

50% say gay marriage should be banned nationwide.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=f975bd27-33a6-4579-8716-7bc0fe49a96b

I bet a bigger percentage said the same thing about interracial marriage circa 1967.

You would be correct:

Wow what happened between 1994 and 1997. Its as if the racists committed mass suicide or something.

[Alcon]

Moreover why didn't they do the axis at a regular interval and then interpolate?  That makes the pattern look a lot more linear than it obviously was

[Torie]

It is probably that the f****ts have started breeding like rabbits Sbane. You know, what with modern medical advances and all ... . 

And there you have it! 

[Verily]

Moreover why didn't they do the axis at a regular interval and then interpolate?  That makes the pattern look a lot more linear than it obviously was

Actually, it looks even more linear if you plot the data by year:

[Holmes]

50% say gay marriage should be banned nationwide.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=f975bd27-33a6-4579-8716-7bc0fe49a96b

Nationwide's would definitely side with the statewide's if it came down to that. 29+19 = 48(and the poll comes to 101%...). 50 - 48 is not bad.

Time to get back to the livestream!!

edit: Supporters in red!

[Lunar]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/22/maine-gay-marriage-bill-g_n_190029.html

AUGUSTA, Maine — A public hearing on allowing gay marriage in Maine has opened with a standing ovation for the bill's sponsor.

Sen. Dennis Damon received a roar of approval at a crowded hearing Wednesday when he said the time has come to recognize same-sex marriages.

He says his proposal "recognizes the worth of every man and woman among us." It is backed by 60 co-sponsors.

Gay rights activists have set a goal of establishing same-sex marriage in all six New England states by 2012. They're already halfway there.

The bill's prospects are uncertain in Maine. Gov. John Baldacci previously opposed the bill but now says he's keeping an open mind.

[Verily]

It's worth noting that Democrats have a veto-proof majority in the Maine House (96-54-1), but not in the Senate (20-15). I'm not sure how many, if any, Republican crossover votes might be expected.

[Lunar]

Well, I don't think [well, I hope] Baldacci would pull a Douglas.  Why tank his popularity as he's retiring?  Just because he's opposed to something doesn't mean he has to veto it.

Maine might get gay marriage before New York.

[Verily]

Well, I don't think [well, I hope] Baldacci would pull a Douglas.  Why tank his popularity as he's retiring?  Just because he's opposed to something doesn't mean he has to veto it.

Maine might get gay marriage before New York.

Baldacci is already unpopular. He only won reelection in 2006 because his opponent was a fundy kook (and then only barely because the moderates voted for Barbara Merrill). But he did probably oppose gay marriage strictly for electoral purposes; Baldacci is that kind of politician, just a hack who only supports things which will get him elected.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2006&fips=23&f=0&off=5&elect=0

[Rowan]

If they pass it, he shouldn't veto it.

[Lunar]

http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/blog/blogs/on-maine-politics/should-legislators-send-the-gay-marriage-bill-to-voters

It’s safe to say House Speaker Hannah Pingree, D-North Haven, and Rep. Paul Davis, R-Sangerville, don’t agree on much.

But they did agree on one thing Tuesday at the gay marriage hearing.

Lawmakers should take an up or down vote on the bill and not send it out to voters, both of them said during the hearing. There’s been hallway chatter that some legislators might want to skip a legislative vote and put the bill on a ballot for Mainers to decide.

If it’s passed by lawmakers, it may end up there anyway via a people’s veto. But Pingree and Davis made it clear legislators need to have enough backbone to vote on the issue, one way or another.

Here’s what Pingree had to say:

“Lastly, we want to remind you that as the people’s representatives, it is our job to listen to all the evidence presented before us, discuss the issues thoughtfully, argue respectfully, and come to a decision.  It is our responsibility to take a stand.  We have signed onto this important legislation because we believe sending this issue out to referendum is an abdication of our responsibility as participants in representative government.  We should have the courage to vote our conscience on behalf of the people of Maine.”

And Davis made this statement: “I believe if you sent this out to a public vote, it’s a way for squeamish legislators to let themselves off the hook.”

[Ban my account ffs!]

Well, I don't think [well, I hope] Baldacci would pull a Douglas.  Why tank his popularity as he's retiring?  Just because he's opposed to something doesn't mean he has to veto it.

Maine might get gay marriage before New York.

Baldacci is already unpopular. He only won reelection in 2006 because his opponent was a fundy kook (and then only barely because the moderates voted for Barbara Merrill). But he did probably oppose gay marriage strictly for electoral purposes; Baldacci is that kind of politician, just a hack who only supports things which will get him elected.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2006&fips=23&f=0&off=5&elect=0

That sounds like Norm Coleman.  

[Lunar]

Well, I don't think [well, I hope] Baldacci would pull a Douglas.  Why tank his popularity as he's retiring?  Just because he's opposed to something doesn't mean he has to veto it.

Maine might get gay marriage before New York.

Baldacci is already unpopular. He only won reelection in 2006 because his opponent was a fundy kook (and then only barely because the moderates voted for Barbara Merrill). But he did probably oppose gay marriage strictly for electoral purposes; Baldacci is that kind of politician, just a hack who only supports things which will get him elected.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2006&fips=23&f=0&off=5&elect=0

That sounds like Norm Coleman.  

Not really.  Coleman wasn't very good at drifting to the idealogical center

[Ban my account ffs!]

Well, I don't think [well, I hope] Baldacci would pull a Douglas.  Why tank his popularity as he's retiring?  Just because he's opposed to something doesn't mean he has to veto it.

Maine might get gay marriage before New York.

Baldacci is already unpopular. He only won reelection in 2006 because his opponent was a fundy kook (and then only barely because the moderates voted for Barbara Merrill). But he did probably oppose gay marriage strictly for electoral purposes; Baldacci is that kind of politician, just a hack who only supports things which will get him elected.

https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2006&fips=23&f=0&off=5&elect=0

That sounds like Norm Coleman.  

Not really.  Coleman wasn't very good at drifting to the idealogical center

You're right... he didn't drift so much as jump around in fits and starts

[Holmes]

AUGUSTA, Maine — A public hearing on allowing gay marriage in Maine has opened with a standing ovation for the bill's sponsor.

Yess, it was a great speech.

I don't know much about what Baldacci has done prior to this, but I've been watching him a lot in the past few months whenever he says stuff on this issue. Everytime he says he did oppose it in the past, but he'll listen a lot to the people and during hearings like yesterday's and keep an open mind. It sounds to me that he'll side with whatever side wins. He'll sign it.

btw - New Jersey supports marriage equality.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1299.xml?ReleaseID=1289

[Verily]

Oh, David. You can't do anything right, can you?

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stgay2312683138apr22,0,7338900.story