Snappy newsletters. Simple Facebook sharing. Spirited comments. Sweet features are waiting… GET THEM NOW!

Gay Marriage Backers Say Fight Not Over in Maine

Defeated advocates say they'll find new strategy

By Kevin Spak,  Newser Staff

Posted Nov 4, 2009 2:16 PM CST
Email

(Newser) – Gay rights activists in Maine vowed to continue fighting today, after voters repealed a law making same-sex marriage legal in the state. “Here we are in a civil rights struggle,” said the executive director of Equality Maine. “What do we do in a civil rights struggle? We pick ourselves up and we stay the course.” For now, however that course is murky. Activists said they would come up with a new strategy, reports the Boston Globe.

“Are we disappointed? Yes, we’re disappointed,” the top "No on 1" organizer told a crowd of about 100 supporters outside Portland's city hall. “This is personal.” One woman showed up with a sign to protest the gathering, saying the gay community should drop its efforts. “I feel very strongly about redefining the institution of marriage,” she said. “We can be equal without being the same.”

Two people argue their differences regarding same-sex marriage in front of City Hall, in Portland, Maine, on Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2009, a day after voters rejected the gay marriage law.
Two people argue their differences regarding same-sex marriage in front of City Hall, in Portland, Maine, on Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2009, a day after voters rejected the gay marriage law.   (AP Photo/Pat Wellenbach)
Friends console one another after learning about the unofficial defeat on Question 1 at election night headquarters in Portland, Maine, early Wednesday morning, Nov. 4, 2009.
Friends console one another after learning about the unofficial defeat on Question 1 at election night headquarters in Portland, Maine, early Wednesday morning, Nov. 4, 2009.   (AP Photo/Pat Wellenbach)
Jesse Connolly gives a grim yet unofficial announcement regarding the defeat on Question 1 at election night headquarters in Portland, Maine, early Wednesday morning, Nov. 4, 2009.
Jesse Connolly gives a grim yet unofficial announcement regarding the defeat on Question 1 at election night headquarters in Portland, Maine, early Wednesday morning, Nov. 4, 2009.   (AP Photo/Pat Wellenbach)
Supporters of same-sex marriage Suzanne Blackburn, left, and Ann DiMella, of Portland, prepare to set up a NO on 1 sign in Deering Oaks Park, Tuesday, Nov. 3, 2009, in Portland, Maine.
Supporters of same-sex marriage Suzanne Blackburn, left, and Ann DiMella, of Portland, prepare to set up a NO on 1 sign in Deering Oaks Park, Tuesday, Nov. 3, 2009, in Portland, Maine.   (AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty)
Kt Crossman joins same-sex marriage supporters for a rally on the steps of City Hall, in Portland, Maine, on Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2009, a day after voters rejected the gay marriage law.
Kt Crossman joins same-sex marriage supporters for a rally on the steps of City Hall, in Portland, Maine, on Wednesday, Nov. 4, 2009, a day after voters rejected the gay marriage law.   (AP Photo/Pat Wellenbach)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
To report an error on this story, notify our editors.
A snapshot of the day's best news stories.
 
COMMENTS
Showing 3 of 86 comments
newsrmandan
Nov 5, 2009 12:49 PM CST
@ Gallileo... I said not one thing about my faith as upholding my position on gay marriage you did. Also am arguing from a strictly natural-historical position. I stated that way before governments existed people had marriages and for this I suppose I interject my religeous beliefs? Maybe so, but until you or anyone else can prove to me how children came to be outside the relationships had by a man with a woman, then I will stand with my argument like some of my favorite heroes did " contra Mundo" As far as a "legal rights" go, states present laws for the people to vote on, and I vote my conscience so I break no laws . You bring up a good point though regarding legal status and tax benifits and probably inheritance laws. My position on all that is, great!! present me a legistlative law that gives gays all these rights and I might be persuaded that would be a good thing.That gay people can pass down an inheritance, I have zero problem with that. But why do we need to get into this silliness over whether or not two guys are "married" its silliness and I think you know it.
thejoint00
Nov 5, 2009 12:35 PM CST
@galileo- yet you are contradicting yourself. the legislative process is the process of citizens deciding if certain behavior is good or @Galileo- yet you are contradicting yourself. The legislative process is the process of citizens deciding if certain behavior is good or bad and it has now illegalized gay marriage. How about this idea- tax corporate and personal wealth to the point that they cannot undermine the will of the people. The people of Maine (and California) have spoken.
TheInterested
Nov 5, 2009 12:32 PM CST
Could someone with a religious background explain to me how gay marriage is detrimental to the moral sanctity of society? I just don't understand. Hypothetically, let's say it was. I wasn't under the impression god judges nations or societies as a whole, he judges people. I could see religious people making a big stink if they thought that calling gay marriage, "marriage" would somehow invalidate their ticket to heaven, but I haven't heard anyone argue that. What gives? Someone please explain.
Politics • US

 
gay rights • gay marriage • Maine • Election 09 • Question 1

More Newser Stories

Washington State Legalizing Gay Marriage

Supreme Court's Move on Gay Marriage? Maybe Not

Why Supporting Gay Marriage Is Smart Business

Court Blocks California's Ban on Gay Marriage

Washington Steps Closer to Legalizing Gay Marriage
NEWS FROM OUR PARTNERS
Other Sites We Like:   24/7 Wall St.   |   Betty Confidential   |   BuzzFeed   |   Cracked   |   Fark   |   Timelines   |   The Frisky   |   Geek Sugar   |   NewsOne