Election Day ended with the majority of voters approving Question 1 on Maine’s ballot Tuesday Nov. 3 with 52.81 percent of Mainers choosing “yes.”

“We won’t quit because we had an army of volunteers and families,” said Jesse Connolly, campaign manager of Protect Maine Equality. “We won’t quit because of the thousands of Mainers who gave us a volunteer shift or talked to their neighbor or told their brother to get off the couch and go pull the lever for No on 1.”

A few couples cried and comforted each other as the event ended.

Tuesday ended with the Yes on 1 campaign in the lead with more votes than their opponents. Stand for Marriage Maine declared victory around 12:30 a.m. Wednesday. The No on 1 campaign held its Election Day party at the Holiday Inn in Portland, where hundreds of people crowded a room to watch live updates of the election results.

Libby Mitchell, president of the state Senate, said early during the party, “We will win today, and even if we don’t, we will win tomorrow.”

Connolly said the Election Day results are not the end for the Equality Maine campaign.

“We have something to say to our opponents who would demean and attack our schools or our families: It must stop. It has to stop,” Connolly said. “We will be here. We will be fighting. We will be working. We will regroup.”

Most of the day, the crowd in Portland was upbeat and cheered whenever live updates containing more “no” votes for Question 1 appeared on the two projection screens in the room. The results from Brewer, which voted “yes” on Question 1, received a collective sigh from the crowd.

Mary Bonauto, from the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, said early in the event: “When so many can put themselves into the shoes of their gay and lesbian neighbors, as is happening here in Maine, then the future is bright.”

The No on 1 campaign event was broadcast live with national coverage, including the Rachel Maddow show.

Shenna Bellows, executive director of the Maine Civil Liberties Union, said early in the event, “We have made a difference for Maine.”

U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree said, “The state of Maine is going to do the right thing.”

Legislative Rep. Hannah Pingree, D-North Haven, said the debate concerning same-sex marriage in the Legislature during the spring was one of the most important and serious debates she has attended in the state Legislature.

“This is about Maine values. This is the most extraordinary campaign I’ve ever been a part of,” Mitchell said. “It’s right to respect your neighbors and treat them with dignity.”

“What happened in this campaign shows what committed people can do,” Mitchell said early in the event.

Mayor of Portland Jill Duson spoke to the crowd and asked Portland voters to raise their hands — and most of the hands in the room shot into the air. Then she asked everyone to turn to the person next to them and give them a hug.

“We love those public displays of affection,” Duson said.

Duson announced Portland’s voting numbers: 7,248 for yes, and 19,975 for no. The no number was greeted with a thunderous round of applause.

Darlene Huntress from Protect Maine Equality said, “I know that over the last seven years … the people got that absolutely nothing, nothing takes the place of full equality. Nothing.”

Terry Guerette and Tamiko Davies, from Portland, who became partners 10 years ago, said they were uncertain their families would accept their relationship, but they held a ceremony anyway. Davies said Guerette’s mother, though initially disapproving, eventually wrote a letter to the Lewiston Sun Journal endorsing same-sex marriage. Davies said their son asked them what would happen to their family if Question 1 passed.

“We assured him, no matter what, they can’t take away the love of our family,” Davies said.

Jim Bishop and Stephen Ryan, from Bar Mills, said they have been life partners for 34 years. Ryan said marriage was as fundamental to him as breathing or eating.

“We’ve got each other, we’ve got love and we will prevail,” Ryan said.

Mark Sullivan, spokesman for Protect Maine Equality, said the No on 1 campaign “will not stop until they have achieved their goal.”

Vice President of Wilde Stein Charles Chapin opened the ceremony to let the supporters know while the election outcome was not what the No on 1 campaign hoped for, the university community voted for same-sex marriage by more than 800 votes on Election Day.

“Not only did we take this campus, but we took it by over 800 votes. That’s because of people like you, everybody that helped the No on 1 campaign, everybody that voted got a friend to go out and vote,” Chapin said. “It’s because of people like you why, in the end, equal rights will win, and that this fight is far from over.”

President of Wilde Stein Zachary Knox said he wants supporters who are gay or straight to know that despite their own beliefs, they are not “second-class citizens.”

“Never have I felt such contempt for people who disagreed with me. Never have I felt more like a second-class citizen, because yesterday 291,000 people in the state of Maine said I wasn’t worthy of the institute of commitment for love, because I might love a man and not a woman,” Knox said. “I can’t tell you how many times I heard people say, ‘I don’t hate gay people, dude, but I don’t agree with gay marriage.’ But the people who voted against us yesterday have just put on the biggest show of bigotry and hate since Proposition 8 in California.”

Vice President of Student Affairs Robert Dana stood to tell supporters the university does not support the election outcome and that UMaine is a place for students to feel accepted.

“It’s never the right time to do wrong, and wrong has been done,” Dana said. “Every one of us, the people who think about fairness and kindness and compassion and justice, every one of those people thought, ‘Yes, that this was going to happen,’ and we believed it. You have expressed yourselves so publicly and personally. You expressed yourself so eloquently, and you have been slapped in the face. You have been done [wrong] to in a very public way, a very personal wrong, and here at the University of Maine, you are loved. You are cared for, and you are part of this community. I support you, and the University of Maine will support you. There is no room here for hate. There is no room here for intolerance, and there is no room here for injustice. I am furious about this and I know that the pain you are feeling is pain that I share and people across the university share.”

Dana said the university plans to do everything to celebrate equality and push for equal rights.

“We will go forward with this because we will not tolerate it. I am committed to that, and I can assure you that the university is committed,” Dana said.

Coordinator of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender services on campus Danielle Steele said the election results have inspired Wilde Stein to persevere.

“I’m inspired, for one, by my students. This morning, the first thing I see on my phone is, ‘We’re having a meeting. We’re going to find out what we’re going to do now.’ Because our president of Wilde Stein said, ‘Where do we go, what do we do? What can we do now?’” Steele said.

Chapin said Wilde Stein plans to continue working closely with deans and within their group to push on for equality.

“We’re going to keep working closely with the organizers with the No on 1 campaign to see what we can do next, what our options are, what exactly we can do to get the University of Maine to help. We work closely with Dean Dana and Dean Loredo. We have a good group here that’s pretty much willing to do whatever we can to get civil rights,” Chapin said.

No matter the outcome, Dana announced the pride flag is not coming down anytime soon.

“We will fly it high until it’s shredded,” Dana said.

With 99 percent of precincts reporting, Yes on 1 had 52.81 percent of the vote and No on 1 had 47.19 percent.

Yes on 1 declared victory shortly after midnight, when it became apparent No on 1 could not overtake its lead.

“What the people of Maine had to say is that marriage matters and that it’s between a man and a woman,” said Marc Mutty, chairman of Stand for Marriage Maine, in a speech.

“It has been the little guy against the big guy in terms of resources — human resources, financial resources — and we prevailed because the people of Maine, the silent majority, the folks back home, spoke with their vote tonight,” Mutty said.

Yes on 1 gathered at the Eastland Park Hotel in Portland and at Jeff’s Catering in Brewer; supporters of No on 1 gathered at the Holiday Inn in Portland. While a few dozen supporters attended the Yes on 1 party in Portland, several hundred attended the No on 1 party, which featured a live band and a disc jockey later in the night. Some supporters danced and drank, while others watched a live feed of the results in front of two large screens.

The Yes on 1 parties were linked by live video feeds, and the two locations competed several times to see who could chant “Yes on 1” the loudest.

Early results showed No on 1 in the lead by a wide margin, but as the night wore on and rural precincts started to report results, No on 1’s lead shrank steadily. Shortly before 10:30 p.m., Yes on 1 took the lead for the first time, to cheers from its supporters.

The No on 1 campaign did not concede immediately. Mark Sullivan, spokesperson for Protect Maine Equality, said shortly after midnight the campaign intended to continue to count the vote well into the day.

But around 2 a.m., No on 1 seemed to concede. In a statement on No on 1’s Web site, Jesse Connolly, campaign manager for Protect Maine Equality, thanked supporters and vowed to continue the fight for same-sex marriage.

“We’re in this for the long haul,” the statement said. “For next week, and next month, and next year — until all Maine families are treated equally. Because in the end, this has always been about love and family and that will always be something worth fighting for.”

Reverend Bob Emrich said in Yes on 1’s victory speech that the campaign was never about hating gay couples.

“There are some bridges that need to be built, some fences that need to be mended. We need to reach out to some people who may very well have been doing what they believed in. We disagreed with them very strongly, obviously, but we need to reach out to them,” Emrich said.

“The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across this nation,” said Frank Shubert, Yes on 1’s campaign manager.

Schubert said polls had Yes on 1 up by about 6 percent going into Election Day, so he was confident throughout the day, even as early returns had No on 1 up.

Scott Fish, communications director for Stand for Marriage Maine, said Question 1 passed because voters got away from the spin and realized what was in the bill.

“I think they saw that whatever inequities there are in domestic partnerships — gay or straight — that they realized that these can be dealt with through lawmaking, that we don’t have to redefine marriage to do that, and when they realized that the pending bill would have redefined marriage they didn’t like it,” Fish said.

Supporters of Question 1 said they had no immediate plans for the future. Schubert said he did not think same-sex marriage was likely to come up again in the future.

“I think the other side will try and push it, but I don’t think the legislature or the governor is going to turn their back on what the people have decided,” Schubert said.

Maine was the 31st state to vote down same-sex marriage at polls; no states have approved gay marriage by popular vote.

Maine and Rhode Island are now the only states in New England where same-sex marriage is not legal. New Hampshire is set to start marrying same-sex couples in January.

—

Dylan Riley contributed to this report.

The discussion on Tuesday consisted of commercials from both campaigns, followed by discussion. Wednesday, gay faculty members from UMaine presented different situations and information in favor of same-sex marriage, while a few members of the luncheon offered their perspectives against same-sex marriage. Both discussions touched on each side of the campaign, with reasoning coming from sexual, religious, moral and economical standings.

To kick off the discussion on Tuesday, both “Yes on 1” and “No on 1” advertisements were presented. Three out of four of the advertisements shown were about young children wanting to learn about homosexuality. One of the advertisements included a child who approached his teacher to ask about gay sex. Many of the teachers in the advertisements became frightened by the question.

Matthew Newman, software engineer for the UMaine Biology New Media Lab, offered a perspective on the cause of anti-gay fear.

“This is a puritanically derived American society. We have issues with sex in general. Most of the people here probably would have issues with seeing someone make out publicly. It’s almost comical because you can’t even teach a biology course without seeing some animal sexually with some sort of other animal, but the idea simply is that we, as a culture, have an issue with sex. Not with homosexual sex — the culture has an issue with sexuality in general, and they don’t want to see it. It’s been an issue with the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] and it’s been an issue with every conceivable aspect of the culture,” Newman said.

At Wednesday’s event, UMaine student Emily Albee offered her personal experience from working with seventh graders. She said school and marriage do not mix.

“Marriage is not talked about in classrooms,” Albee said. “We have students coming from many different types of families, and that’s just not something we focus on. We focus on loving and respecting each other and it [gay marriage] is not an issue.”

No on 1 brought up education and the economical benefits voting No on 1 may possibly have for Maine.

“The creative economy is part of Maine, and if we welcome the people from the creative economy, all the industries will see Maine is a progressive state,” said Vicky Blanchette, a member of the UMaine engineering department. “So to talk about the economy, it is going to help tremendously because businesses will want to come here and talk to young, educated people about jobs and industry, and I definitely think the economy will be affected by that.”

Both discussions carried on into the topic of religion, where some Yes on 1 supporters said various religions define marriage as a man and a woman, and the dictionary definition is the same.

Tuesday, political science student Samantha Hansen said the religious argument does not make sense to her.

In response to either argument, facts brought up on Tuesday stated Christianity and Islam are among the most prominent religions in the United States, and they define marriage as between a man and a woman. The group concluded it is hard to wage an argument against God and religious beliefs.

Newman disagreed.

“For one, people may say, ‘God made this and this, and it was good.’ But that doesn’t mean that something else was not good. It’s taking the idea that Adam and Eve as a heterosexual couple was something natural and good, then someone else taking it out of contexts and saying, ‘Well, something that is not that, is not good,’ which is simply flawed logic. Two, they’re historically documented same-sex literalizes in the earliest forms of the Christian church. So to say that you’re defending marriage that isn’t inclusive of same-sex marriage is simply historically false,” Newman said.

Amy Fried, a political science professor at UMaine, said despite the arguments offered, Yes on 1’s biggest argument is that allowing same-sex marriage destroys traditional marriage. This brought up the topic that Yes on 1 believes giving homosexuals equality infringes on the rights of heterosexuals’ marriage.

Fifth-year women’s studies student Melanie Rockefeller said this concept did not click for her.

“I really don’t understand,” Rockefeller said, “especially since it says right there in the law that churches don’t have to perform marriages to people that they don’t want to. I really just don’t understand how allowing gays and lesbians to get married would infringe on anybody’s religious beliefs.”

Fried went on to bring the topic back to the definition of marriage.

“The argument is that marriage exists to have children, [and] to raise children. … The children need a mother and a father,” Fried said.

Fourth-year sociology student Alyssa Radmore wonders if she did not want to have kids, where does that leave her right to marry?

“It’s a very strong possibility in my life that I won’t want to have kids. I don’t feel maternal, though I know that I would have good children because I was raised with good morals and values. I could do that for a child, but I don’t know if that’s what I want. So why am I allowed to get married when I might not be fulfilling the purpose of marriage?” Radmore said.

“What are they to tell the children in which their families are denied?” Blanchette asked.

For The Maine Campus

On Nov. 3, Maine voters will decide whether to keep or repeal L.D. 1020, the state’s same-sex marriage law.

Last May, Maine’s legislature passed the law legalizing same-sex marriage, but before the bill was put into effect, a campaign to overturn the law collected more than 100,000 signatures for a people’s veto to revisit L.D. 1020.

The law would have taken effect Sept. 12. Because of the provision in Maine’s Constitution that allows for a people’s veto, Question 1 will appear on November’s ballot.

Question 1 reads: “Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?”

Scott Fish, communications director for the Stand for Marriage campaign, believes upholding L.D. 1020 would “radically redefine traditional marriage as ‘any two will do.’” The Yes on 1 campaign considers this bill important because they feel it affects all Mainers. Fish said many people worry homosexual marriage will be taught in Maine schools.

The office of Maine’s Attorney General said Oct. 15 that the law, if it is kept on the books, would have no impact on educational curricula in the state’s public schools.

Mark Sullivan, communications director for the Equality Maine campaign, said the bill is “all about Maine values, [and] whether or not we will show equality and justice to all Maine people [and permit] them to marry the people that they love.”

Fish said this bill would do away with “thousands of years of tradition, one man and one woman — something that has proven itself to be a benefit to society for many years.”

Sullivan said voting yes would “deny fairness and equal protection under law for thousands of Maine families.”

“We all have our rights in jeopardy,” Sullivan said. “There is no such thing as separate but equal.”

Representatives for both sides stressed the importance of student votes. Fish encouraged college students to vote and read the bill prior to voting.

No on 1, which favors keeping a law allowing same-sex couples to be wed, has raised $2,699,683.33 this year and $2,556,393.33 last quarter. Stand for Marriage Maine, a group advocating the repeal of the same-sex marriage law, raised $1,137,870.12 and $794,180.62.

If passed, Question 1 would repeal L.D. 1020, An Act to End Discrimination in Civil Marriage and Affirm Religious Freedom and remove Maine’s legal status for same-sex marriage. In May, John Baldacci became the first governor in the United States to sign a law allowing same-sex marriage; other states had allowed same-sex marriage through judicial rulings.

A press release by Stand for Marriage Maine on Tuesday decried No on 1’s fundraising.

“Our opponents, while claiming to be the home-grown, locally supported campaign, have amassed from virtually every state in the nation a campaign fortune of more than $2 million to destroy traditional marriage in Maine,” the release stated.

Despite Stand for Marriage Maine’s statement, 50 percent of No on 1’s contributions have come from Maine, compared to 42.75 percent of Stand for Marriage Maine’s contributions. No on 1 has raised nearly as much from in-state contributions as Stand for Marriage Maine has nationally.

In a phone interview, Scott Fish, communications director for the Yes on 1 campaign, said the issue was not whether No on 1 received out-of-state contributions, or even how much, but rather that No on 1 had painted itself as a local organization.

“We’ve never attacked them from getting money from out of state,” Fish said. “It is they who started attacking us for getting money from out of state, and they were portraying themselves since the beginning of the campaign as a pure, strictly Maine grassroots campaign.”

“We’ve been pointing out since the beginning that both sides have received money from out of state and that both sides were likely to continue doing that,” Fish said. “The No on 1 side has been the hypocrites in that, not us.”

“We’re very pleased with the level of support we’ve received from people across the state of Maine,” said Mark Sullivan, spokesperson for No on 1. “We think it’s a demonstration that there’s a very strong level of support out there for marriage equality.”

“We greatly appreciate the national support we’ve gotten from around the country,” Sullivan said, but added, “I think the real story in our campaign is the level of support we’ve gotten from Maine people — the outpouring from thousands and thousands of Maine individuals.”

Fish said No on 1’s fundraising success stems from a number of special interest groups.

“They have a lot of special interests interested in gay marriage prevailing in Maine. It’s that simple,” Fish said.

ActBlue.com, a Web site that bills itself as “the online clearinghouse for Democratic action,” says it has raised more than $1.1 million for the No on 1 campaign as of Oct. 17, a figure that takes into account money donated after the filing period ended.

Human Rights Campaign, a Washington, D.C.-based lobby group for GLBT rights, donated $120,000 to No on 1, and Equality Maine donated $96,250.

The National Organization for Marriage (NOM), a Princeton, N.J.-based organization, has donated $500,000 to Stand for Marriage Maine, and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland has donated $345,070.85. Marc Mutty, Stand for Marriage Maine’s campaign chair, is on a leave of absence from the diocese to manage the campaign.

The Maine Ethics commission has said it will investigate a complaint against NOM filed by Californians Against Hate, alleging NOM is skirting campaign finance laws by not reporting the names of its donors.

Much of the money donated by the diocese came from other churches, such as the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, which gave $50,000, according to the Portland diocese’s campaign finance report. More than $41,000 came from a second collection taken during church service.

Fish acknowledged the Yes on 1 campaign has been supported by special interests, but defended the contributions.

“The difference is that one special interest is trying to protect traditional marriage and the other special interest is trying to destroy it,” Fish said.

Focus on the Family, a Colorado-based religious organization, donated $81,000, and the Knights of Columbus, a Catholic fraternal organization, donated $50,100, both to Yes on 1.

Donald Sussman, a Portland financier, is No on 1’s largest contributor, having given $225,000. Sussman has a history of large donations: In 2002 he gave $300,000 to a joint Democratic fundraising committee and another $303,700 to the Fund for Maine’s Future, according to the Morning Sentinel.

Other large contributors to No on 1 include Esmond Harmsworth of Boston and Paul Singer, an investor from New York City, with $100,000 each.

Stand for Marriage Maine’s press release also painted Question 1 as too close to call based on fundraising alone.

“We have been outspent approximately $2.6 million to $1.1 million, yet the fate of Question 1 is too close to call. That goes to show that even with millions of dollars pouring in from well-heeled political elite, gay activists in Hollywood, New York, Massachusetts, or the democratic political machine Act Blue, our messages of truthful consequences of erasing the definition of traditional marriage is resonating with Mainers,” the release stated.

A poll released Wednesday by Pan Atlantic SMS Group showed No on 1 with a nine-point lead. Of the 401 registered Maine voters, 51.8 percent said they would vote or were likely to vote “no” on Question 1, 42.9 percent said they would or were likely to vote “yes” and 5.2 percent were undecided.

A September poll by Research 2000 found Yes on 1 to have a two-point lead.

Question 1 seeks to repeal L.D. 1020, An Act To End Discrimination in Civil Marriage and Affirm Religious Freedom, which the Maine Legislature passed in May and Gov. John Baldacci signed. A yes on Question 1 would eliminate same-sex marriage in Maine.

Organizations on both sides of the issue have diverse operations that include phone banks and canvassing. Perhaps the biggest difference between the operation of the campaigns is that while the No on 1 campaign, led by Protect Maine Equality, has actively courted college students, the Yes on 1 campaign has not.

At a gathering on Oct. 8, community organizers from No on 1 talked about ways to get UMaine students to vote. The organizers asked students to talk to their peers about voting.

According to organizers, the strategies focus on getting college students to vote instead of persuading people to change their position on same-sex marriage. The organizers said 270,000 people need to vote “no” on Question 1 for it to fail.

Rachel Rier, a fourth-year math student at UMaine, spoke of her experience approaching students on the mall. Rier said she “was really nervous at first,” but got over her initial apprehension. “You’re just starting conversations. You’re not trying to persuade people,” Rier said. “You’re just talking to people who already care.”

Another method, which the No on 1 campaign calls “class raps,” involves students talking to classes about Question 1. Aimee Martin, an organizer for No on 1, told attendees that class raps are one of the most effective ways of getting the message out, because the students are a captive audience.

“They have to sit and listen,” Martin said.

Martin and her fellow organizers refused to talk to the press, saying they were not allowed to do so. Some refused to provide their names.

Mark Sullivan, communications director for No on 1, said every college campus in Maine has an active student base opposing Question 1.

“Young people get this issue. It’s something I think many young people feel very passionately about,” Sullivan said.

Paul Hogarth traveled to Maine from California to volunteer for No on 1 as part of its Volunteer Vacation program, under which people take time off from work to volunteer for the campaign. He’s worked on political campaigns for 13 years and thinks college students could be the demographic that gives No on 1 the votes it needs.

“This is going to be an incredibly close election that’s going to come down to a very small handful of voters, and if students at the University of Maine turn out and vote — and we expect most students to be against Question 1 — that they could be the margin of victory for defending marriage equality in Maine,” Hogarth said.

Scott Fish, communications director for Yes on 1, seemed to agree. Unlike No on 1’s network of college organizers, Yes on 1 has not worked to woo college voters, and Fish did not know if any of Maine’s college campuses had a student group working for Yes on 1.

Representatives from both sides of Question 1 were scheduled to debate on the UMaine campus Oct. 8, but Yes on 1 decided Oct. 6 not to attend.

“Statistically, going in front of college students doesn’t make the most sense,” Fish said. He said in a truncated campaign such as with Question 1,  “Do we appear on a television debate, do we appear on MPBN — all of which we’re doing — or do we appear in smaller forums, especially where the audience is statistically not going to be voting yes on 1? I think common sense just gives you the answer to that question.”

Hogarth said Yes on 1’s strategy could stem from not wanting to raise awareness of the election in young adults.

“It is really not in the interest of the Yes on 1 campaign to have young people vote,” Hogarth said. “The more exposure, the more outreach there is on campus from ideally both sides the more awareness there is that there’s an election, and the more likely students are to vote. And so, I would guess that what Yes on 1 is doing is that they’re trying to avoid engaging the campus, because that will just get more awareness that there’s an election.”

The UMaine chapter of College Democrats has been active against Question 1, according to its president, Joseph Nabozny. Although referendum questions are nonpartisan, Maine’s College Democrats voted to condemn Questions 1, 2 and 4, according to the President of Maine College Democrats and UMaine student Benjamin Goodman. If passed, Question 2 would reduce the excise tax, and Question 4 would force the state to get approval by referendum for increases in state spending and state taxes.

Nabozny said the College Democrats have distributed No on 1 materials and worked to educate the student body about the other questions. Representatives for the College Republicans were unable to be reached, but Nabozny said he was not aware of any work on the part of College Republicans in support of Question 1.

Hogarth said he’s seen a large difference in the way Maine’s Yes on 1 and California’s No on Proposition 8 campaigns have been conducted.

“I’m incredibly critical about how the No on 8 campaign in California screwed up that election,” Hogarth said. “I think it was theirs to lose, and they blew it.”

“I have volunteered on political campaigns for 13 years, and I would tell you that the two campaigns that have impressed me the most are Barack Obama and No on 1 here in Maine,” Hogarth said. “It’s been a very heartening experience for me to be here, because I see them learning from a lot of the mistakes we made in California.”

Hogarth said college students are often disenfranchised in states such as California, which don’t allow people to register to vote on Election Day as Maine does. Maine allows in-person absentee voting as well, which lets voters cast their ballots before Election Day.

Hogarth said voters in Portland, where he initially volunteered, seemed more willing to vote early than voters in Bangor.

“A lot of voters, especially older people, were basically telling me ‘No, no, no, I don’t want to do that. I don’t want to wait. I like going into the polling place on Election Day,’ and they’re kind of a little bit more stubborn, I’d say,” Hogarth said.

Stand for Marriage Maine decided not to attend the debate because they felt they “needed to do more outreach to voters,” and didn’t have time for public forums, according to Associate Dean of Students Angel Loredo.

Proponents of Yes on 1 have built their message on deception and skipped out on the debate for fear of the outcome of a real, rational debate. Instead, they focus on methods that facilitate playing on people’s fears such as the TV ads Mainers have seen for the last few weeks.

The UMaine community would benefit from a debate about the same-sex marriage referendum. It would enlighten the unaware and let people know how Question 1 affects them, the campus and the state of Maine. Students, faculty, campus employees and visitors would all have been given a chance to see what each side brings to the table and then made a more educated decision Nov. 3. Instead, the campus is left without that benefit.

If members of Stand for Marriage Maine had any desire to benefit Mainers and students, they would have agreed to attend the debate and offer a rational argument for their position. Their actions do nothing but cast a shadow of doubt over their ability to defend their convictions against criticism.

Public forums are a place for truth, the conspicuous absence of which in the Yes on 1 TV ads casts even more doubt on the merits of Stand for Marriage Maine’s argument.

Both sides have accused the other of skirting the issue, and Stand for Marriage Maine — a group advocating for elimination of Maine’s same-sex marriage law — has come under heavy fire for its advertisements.

Mark Sullivan, spokesperson for Protect Maine Equality, said his organization wants to ensure same-sex couples are not discriminated against, and that allowing all couples to marry is the only way to prevent such discrimination.

Stand for Marriage Maine has released two radio advertisements and two television advertisements. One advertisement features a Boston College law professor who says “legal experts predict a flood of lawsuits against individuals, small businesses and religious groups” if the bill passes and that “homosexual marriage [will be] taught in public schools, whether parents like it or not.”

Its second advertisement features Charla Bansley, a teacher at Calvary Chapel Christian School in Orrington and Maine director of Concerned Women for America, an organization dedicated to bringing biblical principles to all levels of public policy, according to its Web site. In the advertisement, Bansley says the new law would result in “homosexual marriage being taught in Maine schools,” and a Massachusetts couple talks about their 7-year-old boy reading “King & King” — a book about a prince who marries another man — in school.

David Connerty-Marin, a spokesperson for the Maine Department of Education, said L.D. 1020 would not affect Maine’s education system. Connerty-Marin said the state does not require ‘family life’ classes, and such classes generally do not include discussion about marriage. Schools that do discuss marriage do so on a school-by-school basis, so the decision whether or not to discuss same-sex marriage would be the school’s.

“The fact of the matter is that Maine law makes no reference whatsoever to the teaching of marriage in schools. And so, any changes to the marriage laws would have no effect whatsoever on if or how it’s taught in Maine schools,” Connerty-Marin said.

The No on 1 campaign, run by Protect Maine Equality, has released four advertisements thus far — two standalone advertisements and two responding to those made by Stand for Marriage Maine. Its first advertisements feature a young man with two mothers who says he wants his parents to be seen the same as a heterosexual couple, and Bill Whitten, a Yarmouth resident and UMaine alum who has two daughters, one straight and one gay. Whitten, who played football in college and later joined the Marine Corps, said he’s “been through a transition” and is “much more accepting of everybody. Everyone should be allowed to live the way they live.”

Scott Fish, communications director for Stand for Marriage Maine, said, “The issue isn’t whether someone is talking about gay marriage in the classroom,” but defended the advertisement.

“For now, for example, when marriage comes up, it’s generally taught in what they call family life classes,” Fish said. “[Right now] they talk about the legal definition of marriage, between one man and one woman. If the new law says, ‘No, that’s no longer the definition of marriage in Maine,’ then marriage becomes almost ‘any two will do.’ And that’s what will be taught in classrooms. And I think — our side thinks — that that’s a big change, and will have a big impact.”

Fish said the No on 1’s advertisements don’t talk about why marriage should be redefined in Maine. “At issue, what the vote is about, is the redefining of marriage in Maine, and I don’t see that any of those TV ads talk about that,” Fish said. “They talk about all different kinds of things, but they don’t tell redefining marriage and law is a good thing. They don’t tell Mainers why it’s in Maine’s best interest to have a legal redefining of marriage, and yet that’s what the vote is about on Nov. 3.”

Sullivan said Yes on 1’s advertisements miss the bill’s point.

“If any ads are skirting the issues, it’s the ads that are coming from our opponents, because our ads deal directly with the issues that are at stake in Question 1, which is fairness and equality for all Maine people,” Sullivan said. “Marriage equality means that all Mainers will be recognized to have the same rights under the law. That’s what’s at stake on Nov. 3. The issues that Scott [Fish] raises and have been raised in their ads have nothing to do with what’s on the ballot on Nov. 3.”

“The marriage law does not reference education in any way, shape or form, so to raise this as an issue is strictly to distract away from the real issues of the campaign and to try and evoke negative passions which are not in the best interest of making good public policy,” Sullivan said.

While it is heartening to read that Mr. Shepherd will be voting No on One in November, L.D. 1020 [Maine’s same-sex marriage law] 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.

- Gerald Weinand

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

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 U.S. 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., ruled 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.

- Andrew

RE: Paulus, Orange deny Bears’ upset bid

To the Maine Black Bears football team and fans: I’m a Syracuse alum and fan. This is to wish Trevor Coston a full and speedy recovery.

-C. Clark

Editor’s Note: Coston has been given a clean bill of health and will be playing in UMaine’s next game against Delaware.