The University of Maine student newspaper since 1875
About Us
Contact Us
Staff
E-mail Edition
home
News
Opinion
Style
Sports
Archives
Print Edition
Last updated: Thursday, Feb. 9, 1:34 a.m.
Columnists | Opinion

Columnist: A conservative’s argument for same-sex marriage

By Michael Shepherd
Posted on Sept. 28, 2009, at 2:49 a.m.

This November, Maine will have a referendum on several issues. The largest scale decision is on the future of gay marriage. A “yes” on Question 1 will preserve traditional marriage — one man, one woman. A “no” will uphold what the state legislature has already decided, and marriage between adults of the same sex will become legal.

Many viewpoints have been heard. Some people oppose gay marriage for religious reasons and some support it because of religious reasons. Some simply support it for reasons of freedom. My opinions are quite different from most that we’ve heard.

Though not a party member, I usually will support Republican candidates and policies. But I am frustrated with the GOP on social issues. Many Republicans of other generations had a more libertarian viewpoint. Barry Goldwater, a Republican senator from Arizona from 1969 to 1987, was nicknamed “Mr. Conservative.” However, Goldwater took the position that abortion was a matter of personal choice. He took a position against the “don’t-ask, don’t-tell” policy in the ’90s, saying “You don’t have to be straight to be in the military, you just have to shoot straight!”

The Republican Party has long been one of personal freedom, but I believe the infusion of hard-line religion into the party has changed it for the worse. People like Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell have been vehement opponents of any reasonable cultural standards. These people and their cronies have pushed Republicans further to the right with their loony points of view. The party has done nothing to criticize these people because they have large followings.

Gay marriage has become the latest crusade for conservative religious groups. Many cite community standards as the reason for their objections. They say marriage has been between a man and woman for eternity and to change that would lead to the moral decay of society. I have heard this, and I disagree. Community standards are not set by history. They are set by the community. About 5 percent of Maine’s adopted children have two gay parents. Is it a hard lesson for parents to educate their kids that one of their friends has two mothers or fathers in those rare cases?

Economically, I also believe this bill would help Maine. A study conducted by University of California, Los Angeles in June 2008 said that same-sex weddings and the tourism associated with those weddings could generate $60 million in additional spending in Maine over three years, creating 1,000 new jobs. Half of the state’s gay couples would likely marry in the first three years of the bill, driving the number of marriage license filings up. That would mean more marriage licensing fees would come in. Maine needs more money and more jobs. This would not hurt our state at all.

I don’t agree with all the proponents of gay marriage on some issues. I think a vote by the majority on the rights of a minority is perfectly legitimate and is the manifestation of democracy in its purest form. I believe the legislature of Maine should not have tried to rush this through without input. The vote was not representative of the public. I will, unlike many people, be surprised if gay marriage is upheld in November. There are many out there on both sides of the political aisle who disapprove. California saw this with Proposition 8, and they are usually a very liberal state.

A people’s veto on this law, in my opinion, would be too bad. I believe in the freedoms granted by gay marriage, even though it makes no difference to me personally. I’m a straight conservative. The new law won’t affect me at all. I’ve simply heard much better reasons for gay marriage than against it. I hope the Maine voters make the choice to uphold the law for reasons of liberty and economics. I just don’t know if we’ve gotten to that point yet.

Campus Currents: ,

This entry was posted on Monday, September 28th, 2009, 2:49 am. You can follow any responses to this article through the RSS feed.

«
»
  • http://www.freestudents.blogspot.com cls

    Are there any rights which don’t think the majority has a “right” to vote on?

    “The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.” –Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816.

    “The most sacred of the duties of a government [is] to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens.” –Thomas Jefferson: Note in Destutt de Tracy, “Political Economy,”

    “[The] best principles [of our republic] secure to all its citizens a perfect equality of rights.” –Thomas Jefferson: Reply to the Citizens of Wilmington, 1809.

  • Mathew

    What a perfect response. While i respect and commend the author of this article for the stand being taken, i do disagree, whole heartedly, that any one person, even if they are a part of a majority, should be able to vote on the rights of the minority.

    I say, if i don’t have the same rights, i am a second class citizen. If i am to be a second class citizen, then i should not have the same obligations as the first class citizens.

    Where do i sign up for my tax exemption?

  • Mathew

    i’m curious as to how this country would be if women were never allowed the right to vote, if blacks were still slaves, or even just legally segregated without the right to vote, or to marry outside of their own race….

    The majority has the right to decide what is best for all? Like a parent does for his/her child. Though i may be a part of a minority, i am still an american. What’s more is that i am an adult american and i don’t need to be told who i can and can’t marry.

    I can do just fine with making my own decisions.

    I agree with so much of what you said, but when i saw that one sentence, i almost lost faith in the rest of the article. It’s a shame when i am still being held to the whim of a group of people that are not affected by the way i live my life and the choices i make.

  • Andrew

    Interesting you comment on Thomas Jefferson – isn’t this the same man who authored or help author Virginia’s crimes against nature laws? Obviously, he (just like we) should draw the line when referring to blatantly immoral behavior like homosexuality.

  • Andrew

    This is NOT a question of civil rights or anything. You like to refer to ‘Mr. Conservative’ Barry Goldwater who was soft on the issue of homosexuality. Clearly, he doesn’t speak for a majority of conservatives in America today.
    For those who keep whining about the majority deciding the rights of the minority, they have absolutely no recourse until they amend the US Constitution to specifically make sexual orientation as a protected class. Clearly, that’s not going to happen any time soon, so they whine on and on.
    When it comes to issues of morality, how can we possibly call it a democracy (i.e., rule BY the people) if the people aren’t allowed to weigh in on issues of morality and the definition of marriage? Because if the will of the majority is ignored, then the will of the minority prevails and really isn’t different from when the minority (like royalty/the king of England) ruled over the earth in past years. Get real, people.

  • http://www.freestudents.blogspot.com cls

    Andrew: He also owned slaves. Are you recommending we take away the rights of black people as well, based on that? The ideals he talked about are good and right. That some people who pushed those ideals failed to follow them consistently does not invalidate the ideals, as you seem to imply. Some air planes crash, that doesn’t invalidate the theory of flight.

  • http://www.freestudents.blogspot.com cls

    The one thing I appreciate about Andrew’s statements is that he shows just how bad conservatism has become because it has been infected by religious intolerance. It has been all downhill since Goldwater and Reagan, as the worst kind of people have taken over the Republican Party.

  • Michael Shepherd

    Hi, Mathew. I appreciate the response and don’t like to make a habit of responding to my own articles.

    I do think it is too bad that this law has come to this regarding gay marriage. However, when a matter of law comes up, it is traditional political process for a majority vote to decide it. We must look at this as a law change because it is one. Although we think marriage is a civil liberty, by law right now it isn’t. The only way we have to keep this law is to vote it through. It stinks, but it works like that. I agree with everything you said. But this is a change in law and there is sadly no inherent right to this in any constitution of ours. This is how it has to be solved. We have no better mechanism. Let’s hope and work for a “no” in November.

  • Lynn

    Constitutional amendment? I believe you are mistaken, I have never heard the equality movement speak about about any constitutional changes, but I have heard President Bush.

    “I will support a constitutional amendment which, would honor marriage between a man and a woman..”

    The will of the LBGT movement, is like royalty that ruled the Earth? Oh sweetheart, relax, you don’t have to be scared of a few Queens.

  • http://www.dirigoblue.com Gerald Weinand

    WHile it is heartening to read that Mr. Shepherd will be voting NO on 1 in November, LD 1020 was hardly rushed through “without input.” The public hearing held at the Civic Center in Augusta was the first of its kind, and lasted more than three hours. This, after months of coverage by the media in Maine. Self-government, in its purest form, requires the input of those to be governed – but they have to make some effort to make sure their representatives understand their point of view.

  • Lynn

    As an independent who was raised by a self described “pre-Reagan Republican”, I agree with the spirit of this article, that being a conservative has become less about keeping government influence out of individual lives and more about pushing a religious and often ignorant agenda. Bush did far more to expand the power of the central government then many other presidents, an example being No Child Left Behind, in which the federal government began pushing into education, an area previously left up to the individual states.

  • ninjeera

    you dont think it affects you. down the road you may find that it actually does. no one can predict the sexual orientation or inclination of their own children. it happens. its not terrible. but if you are one of the many many parents of a lesbian or homosexual you will find that it does indeed affect you personally. or perhaps your cousin, your friend, your……. im sure you get the picture. this affects us all. and for some of us, it hurts tremendously.

    i applaud your position on this issue, especially considering that you do not feel it affects you personally. and i applaud you writing about it.

    as one who it does affect so directly, i hope that logic and compassion wins out somewhere, somehow. perhaps it is time now, here, in Maine. we can only work for it, hope for it……. and pray.

  • Bob Briggs

    Michael, we need to talk.

  • zippo

    change the definition of woman and man.

    Webster Dictionary (Marriage is between a man and woman)

    Incest (incestuous)=sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that marriage is illegal.
    Girl,
    a female child, a young unmarried woman of any age.
    Woman
    /n.pl women. woman, wife+man= human being. :an adult female person.
    Boy
    a male child
    Man
    an adult male, Husband.

    Same sex is so closely related that it falls into the category of incest, that Marriage is illegal?
    __________________
    We are men ,distinctly related by manhood, Brothers of mankind.

    homo- sexual should not be raising any family that is not biologically their own. the right to adopted child that would have no say so, whether he/she want two men or two women raising them. now they talk about nature like its a law, in the animal kingdom where they live is there any animals that two males raise their cubs?
    __________________

  • Mathew

    Um… your formula for what is considered incest is convoluted and ignorant. You are one of many people that perpetuate blind ignorance just by saying some random nonsensical crap.

    Please, if you are going to say something, make sure it’s intelligent.