It's not only bad campaign practice: It's bad humanity!
This comes directly from the "walking script" (download pdf) that Stand For Marriage Maine is giving to their door-to-door canvassers:
Question 1 repeals and locks from ever taking effect a bill passed by the legislature and signed by the governor that allows homosexual marriage. The legislature went out of their way to avoid allowing you to vote on this important issue. The new bill, if we don’t pass Question 1, will change Maine’s law on marriage which has existed since Maine became a state. The current law defines marriage as being the union of one man and one woman joined in traditional monogamous marriage and an institution of very strong value to society. The new proposal for gay marriage would also eliminate the law that says Maine has a compelling interest to nurture and promote the unique institution of traditional monogamous marriage in the support of harmonious families and the physical and mental health of children and that the State has the compelling interest in promoting the moral values inherent in traditional monogamous marriage.”
Regardless of what you think about homosexual marriage, we wonder why they would eliminate the law that says marriage is good for children.
And after processing it, you really have to wonder: Why are these supposed "marriage protectors" such deceptive decepticons? Because honestly, the above nonsense is about as misleading as Stand For Marriage Maine could possibly be without falling firmly into the abject liar category.
In truth, the marriage equality bill (LD1020) repeals Sec. 1. 19-A MRSA §650 in full. You might remember that this particular statute was only enacted in 1997, as a pointed way to send a negative message to LGBT families. In this campaign we've seen Stand For Marriage Maine act like this particular language is the sacred, long-standing gospel, but in reality it is twelve-year-old dogma that was enacted by the legislature during a mid-90's DOMA scare. And the marriage equality bill removes it because this homo-hostile language cannot coexist with civil fairness! LD1020 doesn't pick and choose, deliberately seeking to remove the part that speaks about children. It removes the whole indigestion-inducing enchilada, because the entire thing is hurtful and discriminatory to any state seeking civil fairness!
Now, let's look back at the above claim from the "yes on 1" campaign: Stand For Marriage Maine is instructing their supporters to ask locals "why [Protect Maine Equality] would eliminate the law that says marriage is good for children." But the actual language of Title 19-A does not say that marriage in general is good for children -- it says that "traditional monogamous marriage" is good for children. Therefore the implication is that gay and lesbian unions are harmful to the little tykes. So what message does this send to tykes who happen to be dykes? What does it say to the wee ones who happen to be gay? And what about the countless young Mainers who have queer parents, family members, friends, loved ones, teachers, bosses, etc? Well, Title 19-A tells them that they are wrong for supporting themselves/their families/their friends/etc. And that is exactly why LD1020 takes away the unfair statute: Because it itself is quite cruel to many of Maine's children (both current and grown)!
But Stand For Marriage doesn't care about all that. Facts (and gays) be damned. They, the self-appointed moral authoritarians, want Mainers to believe that we on the pro-equality side hate children and are seeking what is worst for them. So they take their feigned outrage door-to-door, hoping to shock those voters who are not aware of the actual language (most) and/or who are not going to investigate these nuances further (again, most) and/or who will blindly swallow what they are selling (unfortunately more than a few). How they do so and still retain the ability to sleep at night, we will truly never know.
Posted by: Mykelb | Oct 5, 2009 1:46:16 PM
Some straight talk: The "yes on 1" campaign:
* Exploits children by promoting irrational fear about what their own kids will learn in school
* Jeopardizes children whose parents would be denied marriage
* Threatens youth who happen to be questioning their own orientation
LD 1020, by contrast:
* Strengthens families
* Protects children
* Affirms religious liberty
Posted by: Bose | Oct 5, 2009 10:01:20 PMcomments powered by Disqus