Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Breaking: Maine House of Representatives votes in favour of gay marriage

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Jean-Paul 6 May 2009, 6:48am

    Let’s try to be realistic about this issue. The fact is that same-sex mmarriage will be accepted throughout the USA in 10 years.

    There is presently a debate going on concerning this subject in the States. Allow me a short quote from Beth Griffin who writes for the Catholic News Services:

    ‘Legislation in a democracy generally mirrors the public consensus, but individuals who disagree with a law on moral grounds should be allowed to claim an exemption to it when moral precepts collide with public policy.’

    Individuals indeed! It is not individuals who disagree with a law that mirrors public consensus, it is religious institutions which endoctrinate unthinking individuals to do their dirty work for them.

    When religious institutions will nurture the virtue of courage to which they so liberally give lip service, that will be the day when they will have to reform their accounting systems in terms of the taxes they will have to pay when they interfere with public consensus.

    As for moral precepts, are these not the same moral precepts that turned ‘sodomites’ over to the mob rather than waste the precious time of early and medieval judiciary systems?

    The mob had one party after another for centuries while they ‘discovered’, tortured, persecuted and burned ‘sodomites’ alive. Except in Venice, of course, where the city officials whose offices were in hearing distance of the screams of pain of the men and boys being burned on St. Marc’s Square distracted them from their paperwork so they passed a by-law to the effect that ‘sodomites’ should be decapitated before being burned in order to shut them up. Moral precepts colliding with public policy?

    As for Maine’s Marriage Alliance, when are these people going to put their ear to the ground and face the fact that 50% of heterosexual marriages end up in divorce?

    And that same-sex marriage is ‘just love’ being expressed in a different way, a way that god intended since god created lgbt persons in the first place?

    Cheeze!!!

  2. Brian Burton 6 May 2009, 7:12am

    Down East, It’s good news in any event surly? A bill in favour of Gays anyware in the world, I welcome. I have mentioned before on here the fact that I have lived half my life with one foot in prison because I’m Homosexual. Well done Maine.

  3. Eloquent post, Jean-Paul. What also irks me is that the US seems to have such a short memory with regard to the Bible dictating who can marry whom. The Bible was used as ‘proof’ in the fight against interracial marriage – but it was wrong. Now some bigots are trying to use it again to victimise another minority, and they’re wrong this time too. Who will they go for after LGBT people get equality? Are they unable to live their lives without picking on other people?
    I’m glad another state seems to be on the way to gay marriage. The balance of commonsense will win in the end as, hopefully, more and more states realise that granting rights to one group of people doesn’t remove them from another.

  4. Mihangel apYrs 6 May 2009, 11:44am

    as more US states accept gay marriage, and once it actually becomes federal policy, how long will the US accept the UK degrading such marriages to “civil partnerships” when US citizens visit or settle here? Americans are notable for being vocal in defence of their rights, and American politicians touchy about any perceived snubs from the UK: I can imagine a rapid change in the law to satisfy our allies in this special relationship!!

  5. Robert, ex-pat Brit 6 May 2009, 3:16pm

    apYrs, exactly so. I’ve been posting about that for a long time. If the U.S. gets at least 10 states allowing same-sex marriage, it could well have a snowball effect and the federal government will be hard pressed not to recognise them at the federal level, currently at the state level. That said, if the Supreme Court of the U.S. has to intervene and provided it has at least 5 democrats on the bench (it currently has 5 republicans and four democrates), then it could very well overturn state bans on marriage equality. Apparently, there are 30 states that use DOMA, Defense of Marriage Act to ban gay couples from marrying.

    I think if we do eventually see ten states getting on board with marriage equality, its going to pose problems for EU non-marriage gay unions in terms of reciprocity and full recognition. Civil Unions in the U.S. will be abandoned of course, as we’ve seen in Holland, Belgium, Norway and Sweden, as well as Canada. I’m not sure if Spain ever had them though. As more EU countries offer full marriage equality, I’m thinking of Denmark and Finland here and as more American states adopt full marriage equality for gay couples, its going to become increasingly difficult for other western countries to not get on board. I don’t see the American government standing idly by as gay American couples living and working in the UK and elsewhere are subjected to their marriages not being recognised for what they are. It could well become a diplomatic issue as well as an impediment to international trade. Its going to be interesting to see how this pans out.

  6. Jean-Paul 6 May 2009, 7:31pm

    Iris (3):
    You are so kind, and your last sentence says it all.

    Mihangel ap Yrs (4);
    Right on. Americans will do their outmost to co-operate with the UN first to decriminalize LGBT orientation and then to support same-sex marriage. Then the world will be less emcumbered in tackling real problems like food and water shortages, overpopulation, ecological crisis…etc., etc., etc.

    Pobert, ex-pat Brit (5):

    A real pleasure to agree with you, sir. First I must commend you on your research and your scholarship.

    As far as I know, only the Dalai Lama in his ‘Ethics for a New Millenium’ is preparing the world for the paradigm shifts of the 21st century. It is basicaly the application of the Golden Rule, something that I believe the LGBT population comes by instinctively.

    That will leave the Vatican with egg-foo-yung all over the dome of St. Peter’s Basilica, leaving officially excommunicated bishops having the run of the place and saying their daily masses in some kind of hokey-pokey called Latin which I am sure will render them more relevant to thinking catholics around the world.

    Brian (2):
    ‘one foot in prison’: how succinct, how poetic, how true.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all