Maine's Question 1

[Holmes]

lol Spade. Thanks for your wise insight.

[Lincoln Republican]

Is anyone suprised by the result of the vote?  (I dont feel like reading 44 pages of replies.)

I must say I was surprised, pleasantly surprised.

[Umengus]

Is anyone suprised by the result of the vote?  (I dont feel like reading 44 pages of replies.)

I must say I was surprised, pleasantly surprised.

not surprised. Gay marriage is not popular, even in liberal territory. I'm curious to see if the liberal theory: "it's a question of time because young voters are more gay-friendly" will work. It's based on the fact that young people will not change their mind in future.

[Holmes]

Nah, it's pretty popular in liberal territory. Have you seen the town results map? Down in Cumberland, some parts of York and on the midcoast, No won by large margins, but up in the rural and catholic part of the state, they got blown out of the water.

Well, if you consider cities like Lewiston and Augusta to be liberal, then yeah, maybe it's not popular in liberal territory, but...

And don't make it sound like it was a large margin. A few years ago, this sort of referendum might not even have broken 40% in the state, especially on an off-off year.

[Hash]

Nah, it's pretty popular in liberal territory. Have you seen the town results map? Down in Cumberland, some parts of York and on the midcoast, No won by large margins, but up in the rural and catholic part of the state, they got blown out of the water.

Well, if you consider cities like Lewiston and Augusta to be liberal, then yeah, maybe it's not popular in liberal territory, but...

And don't make it sound like it was a large margin. A few years ago, this sort of referendum might not even have broken 40% in the state, especially on an off-off year.

U r stupid librul biash. Maine is a hippie librul tree-huggin state all around.

[Sbane]

Is anyone suprised by the result of the vote?  (I dont feel like reading 44 pages of replies.)

I must say I was surprised, pleasantly surprised.

not surprised. Gay marriage is not popular, even in liberal territory. I'm curious to see if the liberal theory: "it's a question of time because young voters are more gay-friendly" will work. It's based on the fact that young people will not change their mind in future.

Have you ever heard of prop 22? It was a gay marriage ban passed in California in 2000. Guess how much it passed by? It passed by slightly more than a 22 point margin in hippie, tree huggin, librul California. In 2008 it passed by only a 5 point margin. Why will that trend not continue?

Here is a nice little comparison between the two votes. Have fun. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-2008election-prop8prop22,0,333635.htmlstory

[Alexander Hamilton]

Is anyone suprised by the result of the vote?  (I dont feel like reading 44 pages of replies.)

I must say I was surprised, pleasantly surprised.

not surprised. Gay marriage is not popular, even in liberal territory. I'm curious to see if the liberal theory: "it's a question of time because young voters are more gay-friendly" will work. It's based on the fact that young people will not change their mind in future.

Have you ever heard of prop 22? It was a gay marriage ban passed in California in 2000. Guess how much it passed by? It passed by slightly more than a 22 point margin in hippie, tree huggin, librul California. In 2008 it passed by only a 5 point margin. Why will that trend not continue?

Here is a nice little comparison between the two votes. Have fun. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-2008election-prop8prop22,0,333635.htmlstory

I hate to say this, but the comparison is meaningless.

[Sbane]

Is anyone suprised by the result of the vote?  (I dont feel like reading 44 pages of replies.)

I must say I was surprised, pleasantly surprised.

not surprised. Gay marriage is not popular, even in liberal territory. I'm curious to see if the liberal theory: "it's a question of time because young voters are more gay-friendly" will work. It's based on the fact that young people will not change their mind in future.

Have you ever heard of prop 22? It was a gay marriage ban passed in California in 2000. Guess how much it passed by? It passed by slightly more than a 22 point margin in hippie, tree huggin, librul California. In 2008 it passed by only a 5 point margin. Why will that trend not continue?

Here is a nice little comparison between the two votes. Have fun. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-2008election-prop8prop22,0,333635.htmlstory

I hate to say this, but the comparison is meaningless.

And why would that be?

[Dan the Roman]

Is anyone suprised by the result of the vote?  (I dont feel like reading 44 pages of replies.)

I must say I was surprised, pleasantly surprised.

not surprised. Gay marriage is not popular, even in liberal territory. I'm curious to see if the liberal theory: "it's a question of time because young voters are more gay-friendly" will work. It's based on the fact that young people will not change their mind in future.

Have you ever heard of prop 22? It was a gay marriage ban passed in California in 2000. Guess how much it passed by? It passed by slightly more than a 22 point margin in hippie, tree huggin, librul California. In 2008 it passed by only a 5 point margin. Why will that trend not continue?

Here is a nice little comparison between the two votes. Have fun. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-2008election-prop8prop22,0,333635.htmlstory

I hate to say this, but the comparison is meaningless.

And why would that be?

Probably because one was a law and one an amendment. And I would agree with that argument if it wasn't for the CA Supreme Court transforming the situation. Nevertheless, one was a vote on a hypothetical, the other on a concrete concept.

[Alcon]

Why would it being a vote on a hypothetical make it a poor comparison?  If anything, that would make the comparison stronger because the differences would only serve to make the shift even greater.

[Dan the Roman]

Why would it being a vote on a hypothetical make it a poor comparison?  If anything, that would make the comparison stronger because the differences would only serve to make the shift even greater.

Because voting to ban Gay Marriage in 2000 was a free vote for people. It was something that was never going to happen, and no one was hurt by it in the view of those voting yes. Even the Gay community struggled to come up with a reason why it was bad.

Prop 8 was entirely different. You had people who were already getting married whose status would be thrown into doubt. You had people who could be married who you would be telling that they should not be able to if you voted Yes. Voting Yes was an entirely different matter.

That said, I have my own view on Prop 8, and they mainly relate to the fact that the Gay community has to separate social equality from legal equality. One is guaranteed, the other earned, and even in the best of cases never total. Gay rights groups have to realize that if they are going to use these laws as fronts to force their views on others, then people will vote on that basis, rather than on the basis of legal rights. They did not learn that lesson in California, nor evidently are they learning the correct lesson from Maine.

[Sbane]

Is anyone suprised by the result of the vote?  (I dont feel like reading 44 pages of replies.)

I must say I was surprised, pleasantly surprised.

not surprised. Gay marriage is not popular, even in liberal territory. I'm curious to see if the liberal theory: "it's a question of time because young voters are more gay-friendly" will work. It's based on the fact that young people will not change their mind in future.

Have you ever heard of prop 22? It was a gay marriage ban passed in California in 2000. Guess how much it passed by? It passed by slightly more than a 22 point margin in hippie, tree huggin, librul California. In 2008 it passed by only a 5 point margin. Why will that trend not continue?

Here is a nice little comparison between the two votes. Have fun. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-2008election-prop8prop22,0,333635.htmlstory

I hate to say this, but the comparison is meaningless.

And why would that be?

Probably because one was a law and one an amendment. And I would agree with that argument if it wasn't for the CA Supreme Court transforming the situation. Nevertheless, one was a vote on a hypothetical, the other on a concrete concept.

And you think people saw a difference? LOL

[Dan the Roman]

Is anyone suprised by the result of the vote?  (I dont feel like reading 44 pages of replies.)

I must say I was surprised, pleasantly surprised.

not surprised. Gay marriage is not popular, even in liberal territory. I'm curious to see if the liberal theory: "it's a question of time because young voters are more gay-friendly" will work. It's based on the fact that young people will not change their mind in future.

Have you ever heard of prop 22? It was a gay marriage ban passed in California in 2000. Guess how much it passed by? It passed by slightly more than a 22 point margin in hippie, tree huggin, librul California. In 2008 it passed by only a 5 point margin. Why will that trend not continue?

Here is a nice little comparison between the two votes. Have fun. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-2008election-prop8prop22,0,333635.htmlstory

I hate to say this, but the comparison is meaningless.

And why would that be?

Probably because one was a law and one an amendment. And I would agree with that argument if it wasn't for the CA Supreme Court transforming the situation. Nevertheless, one was a vote on a hypothetical, the other on a concrete concept.

And you think people saw a difference? LOL

Probably not if the CA Supreme Court had not bothered to point it out to them fairly clearly.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Is anyone suprised by the result of the vote?  (I dont feel like reading 44 pages of replies.)

I must say I was surprised, pleasantly surprised.

not surprised. Gay marriage is not popular, even in liberal territory. I'm curious to see if the liberal theory: "it's a question of time because young voters are more gay-friendly" will work. It's based on the fact that young people will not change their mind in future.

Have you ever heard of prop 22? It was a gay marriage ban passed in California in 2000. Guess how much it passed by? It passed by slightly more than a 22 point margin in hippie, tree huggin, librul California. In 2008 it passed by only a 5 point margin. Why will that trend not continue?

Here is a nice little comparison between the two votes. Have fun. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-2008election-prop8prop22,0,333635.htmlstory

I hate to say this, but the comparison is meaningless.

And why would that be?

Probably because one was a law and one an amendment. And I would agree with that argument if it wasn't for the CA Supreme Court transforming the situation. Nevertheless, one was a vote on a hypothetical, the other on a concrete concept.

And you think people saw a difference? LOL

Probably not if the CA Supreme Court had not bothered to point it out to them fairly clearly.

Or if it wasn't titled on the ballot "eliminate the right"...

For some reason, I think people much a much harder time "eliminating rights" than simply banning gay marriage outright.

[Alcon]

And you think that completely eliminates a 20-point gap?

[Sbane]

And you think that completely eliminates a 20-point gap?

Exactly. Even if it did have some impact at the margins, it was not much. Worst case scenario would have been a 8-10 point margin yes vote if the supreme court had not interfered. Which would still mean that in 8 years, the pro-gay marriage side had gained a 12-14 point margin advantage.

[Badger]

Why would it being a vote on a hypothetical make it a poor comparison?  If anything, that would make the comparison stronger because the differences would only serve to make the shift even greater.

Because voting to ban Gay Marriage in 2000 was a free vote for people. It was something that was never going to happen, and no one was hurt by it in the view of those voting yes. Even the Gay community struggled to come up with a reason why it was bad.

Prop 8 was entirely different. You had people who were already getting married whose status would be thrown into doubt. You had people who could be married who you would be telling that they should not be able to if you voted Yes. Voting Yes was an entirely different matter.

That said, I have my own view on Prop 8, and they mainly relate to the fact that the Gay community has to separate social equality from legal equality. One is guaranteed, the other earned, and even in the best of cases never total. Gay rights groups have to realize that if they are going to use these laws as fronts to force their views on others, then people will vote on that basis, rather than on the basis of legal rights. They did not learn that lesson in California, nor evidently are they learning the correct lesson from Maine.

But legal equality strongly affects social equality. The same way immeidiately after desegregation was instituted by "federal overreaching" southern support for segregation plummeted in opinion polls. The legalization of interracial marriage didn't make it universally accepted of course, but went a long way towards removing the taboo and allowing people to rely on "well, it's the law" as a reflexive shelter.

[Marston]

http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/c6bfec2a92b2424e945ad2c5f5892484/ME--Gay-Marriage-Maine/

Looks like we may be going to round-two on this next year if the marriage equality activists choose to do so. The article says they'll make they're decision in January.