According to a Washington Post report, Maine may achieve a historic first:
Gay rights activists in Maine, the only New England state that doesn’t allow gay marriage or civil unions, moved Thursday toward forcing a second statewide vote on the marriage question, and their opponents say they’ll be ready for a fight.
Polling data indicates that the tide may have shifted against the forces of discrimination.
One of those eager to vote again is the Rev. Michael Gray, a Methodist pastor in Old Orchard Beach.
Gray said he was a longtime conservative who changed his mind “after study, prayer and patience.”
If the referendum succeeds in overturning the anti-gay measures, they will be the first state to approve gay marriage by popular vote.
The Roman Catholic Church, meanwhile, is staunchly opposed to letting the people have their say.
“After the bitterly divisive campaign of 2009, in which Maine people clearly and decisively voted against changing the meaning of marriage, we’re dismayed that they would bring this issue back for yet another vote,” Brian Souchet, a spokesman for the diocese, said in a statement.
When people are allowed to learn and grow, it’s not uncommon for them to change their minds, and some might find it telling that the Catholic Church doesn’t like that. But there’s still room for compromise: how about if, instead of changing the definition of marriage, we simply allow multiple definitions, and give each person the liberty to elect the definition most suited to their personality and/or religious background? That way you can have you’re religion, and we’ll respect your religion, and you can do the same for us. Can’t get more fair than that, eh?
Remember, we’re talking here about people who happen to fall in love differently than heterosexuals do, and that’s not an evil difference. It’s just different. All homosexuals want is the freedom to enjoy the same relationships and intimacies and sexual fulfilment that heteros enjoy, with the ones they fall in love with and who love them back. It does no harm to give homosexuals equal access to the same things heteros do. There is no moral basis for categorizing homosexuality as evil or perverted or wrong. (Indeed, if you’re looking for perversion, ask yourself why Christians are so obsessed with the sexual behavior of strangers, and with punishing those whose sexual performance is unsatisfactory.)
So like I said, Go Maine! Set us all a good example.