The RECORD

By Michael Heath

Todd Benoit writes in favor of cleaving the sacred and the secular in his March 10 column, "Make marriage's benefits accessible to more people." He allows that churches should be free to create whatever marriage rules they want, while the state "a thoroughly secular institution" should simply create a "legally binding civil contract neutrally available for heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals and noncommitalsexuals." He says this is a conservative ideal.

He suggests that the legally binding civil contract that will replace the traditional definition of marriage in this brave new world will improve society. He suggests that the possibility of a civil contract will lead to family cohesiveness.

Benoit's argument is seductive because it envisions the possibility of a peaceful public square. Everyone will enter the public arena silent about their most deeply held beliefs as they relate to the common good, and everything will run along just fine.

Scandinavia, and much of Europe, has moved further down this road of moral relativism than the United States. It is, therefore, possible to put Benoit's ideas to the test.

In 2004, writer and researcher Stanley Kurtz observed, "Marriage is slowly dying in Scandinavia." Kurtz did extensive research on Norway and Sweden before writing his now-famous article "The End of Marriage is Scandinavia."

Kurtz reported sadly that most children are now born out of wedlock in those countries. A fair reading of the Kurtz finding does not allow one to conclude that a legally binding civil contract is going to lead to family cohesiveness. Just the opposite is what actually happens. Willful ignorance of the real definition of marriage (one man, one woman, one lifetime) destroys family, devastates children and ruins society.

While Benoit's Orwellian redefinition of terms has hurt the Scandinavian family, Kurtz believes that it will devastate America. "In the American context," he writes, "this would be a disaster. Beyond raising middle class family dissolution, a further separation of marriage from parenthood would reverse the healthy turn away from single-parenting that we have begun to see since welfare reform. And cross-class family decline would bring intense pressure for a new expansion of the American welfare state."

Ominously, Kurtz concludes his report, "By the time we see the effect of gay marriage in America, it will be too late to do anything about it."

This year Maine has another chance to begin pushing the camel's nose out of the tent to avoid reaching the point of no return. A bill to expand the reach of Maine's bizarre definition of domestic partnerships is bottled up in the Labor Committee. To avoid the ire of 47 percent of Mainers who saw through the lies of sexual orientation theorists in the 2005 vote over marriage, the Roman Catholic Chancery and Maine's most radical homosexual rights group have teamed up to promote domestic partnerships again. They created a same sex registry in 2003, and now they are promoting an expansion of the homosexual partnership definition they enacted that year.

The Chancery, and Maine, is between a rock and a hard place. The Chancery is promising to fight same-sex marriage. I'm not sure what their position is on civil unions. The radical homosexual lobby owns the Maine Democratic Party and a good chunk of the Maine Republican Party. This gives the so-called gay lobby a lock on the State House.

It appears that political forces within Maine's largest religious group, the Roman Catholic Church, and Maine's most powerful immoral group, the homosexual lobby, struck a deal. Everyone wanted to avoid a political war over same-sex marriage after 2005's brutal ordeal. To avoid the fight, the Catholic Chancery and the gay lobby decided to become domestic partners.

Don't believe me? Read the press release from the misnamed radical pro-homosexual group "EqualityMaine" (They think children should be raised without a mother in some cases, and with a father in others. That obviously has nothing to do with equality). They saved the best for last in their list of endorsements of their highest priority this year "LD 375, An Act to Amend the Family Medical Leave Act." They list the Roman Catholic Diocese last in their list of endorsees.

Maine's binding civil contract called marriage will continue to be defined as one man, one woman, one lifetime or Maine will lose family cohesiveness. Benoit wants society-wide family cohesiveness, and the opportunity for everyone to live however they want sexually. Europe shows that won't happen. I want family cohesiveness and sexual normalcy. While we can easily have both, those who want same-sex marriage will have to choose one or the other.

At least we can agree on the desirability of family cohesion.

From the March 19, 2007 edition of the Bangor Daily News.

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is reproduced for non-profit educational purposes only. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

By Michael Heath

One year before the League was formed Charles Sheldon wrote a book. "In His Steps" was written in 1896. The book inspired a popular personal motto in the 1990s, WWJD, "What Would Jesus Do."

If confronted with the question of whether to affirm homosexual partnerships in law I wonder, "What WOULD Jesus Do?" Social forces that wish to redefine familiar words like "family" and "marriage" often suggest that Jesus, and Christianity, support their vision for western man.

This belief is false. Jesus does not support the redefinition of words. Jesus, Christianity and the Bible are clear about family and marriage. This legal definition of something called "domestic partners" is not consistent with Christianity.

Is it truly compassionate and loving to affirm them, even in a secular society?

It is not either compassionate or loving to do so. If the state wanted to be truly compassionate and loving toward everyone involved in this matter then it would defeat this bill and go on to repeal the recently passed "sexual orientation" law. The government and media would uphold marriage and family, instead of allowing extreme ideas to dominate our conversation.

Successful societies define a family as a social unit that honors the place of a married mother and father as the centerpiece.

Just as we don't put a bouquet of flowers on the counter and call it the dinner table's centerpiece, civilizations don't put a "domestic partnership" in a law about families and call the partnership a family. The flowers on the counter may be pretty and smell pleasant. These pleasing qualities don't, however, make them the centerpiece.

Some people are arguing that their partnerships are decent and honorable. They suggest that their partnership should qualify them for the same rights that society has created to honor marriage and family.

While these relationships may be pretty and certainly seem to emit a sweet aroma they do not constitute a family, and they "by definition under this law" -- have nothing to do with marriage.

Betsy Smith, the leader of Maine's most radical homosexual group, told the Kennebec Journal that this law is designed by them to be same sex marriage-lite. She admitted regarding transgendered people achieving full legal rights under their definition of civilization, "The system to use is marriage." She allowed that her group's support for this law is a good substitute since, "That's not going to happen right now in Maine."

I propose a simple truth that once informed our thinking most powerfully. That idea is this: Sex outside of marriage is wrong. We should make this truth into a test and pose it as a question with respect to all our laws, practices, entertainment and policies. The question could be asked, "Does this law (program, practice, policy) encourage or discourage sex outside of marriage?" If the proposal doesn't discourage the practice, then the bill should be defeated.

Maine's legislature has the power to pass LD 375, and it probably will. It is likely that we will continue to hollow out America's culture by attempting to redefine words. Setting religion aside, this is not what Jesus would do. Jesus knows that this is nonsense.

Abraham Lincoln once famously asked, "How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg?" We could ask as we ponder this proposed law, "How many definitions of family are there if the state calls some of them a domestic partnership?"

While it may be many things, a domestic partnership is no more a family than a dog's tail is a leg.

Inviting couples into the practical institution of marriage is not hate. It is, in fact, loving to acknowledge the truth about the word marriage. Marriage is about a man and woman falling in love and building a family. Society has an appropriate interest in providing extraordinary support for it. Society has a duty to discourage other arrangements.

Catholic Diocese spokesman Marc Mutty told Maine Public Broadcasting that homosexuals are "incidental" to a bill that is the top priority of Maine's most radical homosexual rights group. " Equality Maine " spokesperson, Betsy Smith , told the Kennebec Journal that an expansion of "domestic partner" rights is needed because Maine still forbids "same sex marriage."

The bill, LD 375, "An act to Amend the Family Medical Leave Laws" is before the Labor Committee. A public hearing was held on Wednesday afternoon, February 28. Only one citizen submitted testimony in opposition to the bill. James Cyr, a social worker, did not make the drive to Augusta from his home in Caribou to personally testify before the committee. He was interviewed by Christian Civic League of Maine Executive Director, Mike Heath.

Many groups testified in support of the expansion of domestic partnership benefits. While the press reported that the Diocese favors the law, no written testimony from the Chancery was provided to the League by the clerk of the committee. The League did not attend the hearing.

"These dog and pony shows are no-win situations for the League," said the Executive Director, Michael S. Heath. "Going to the Maine Legislature is casting pearls before swine for us, especially on sexual morality issues. It is astounding, but true. I'm praying for some kind of awakening out there among the people. If they don't start expressing outrage then the battle is lost. I am very sad for future generations of Mainers."

Heath believes the only hope for Maine to turn back the so-called "gay" agenda is for members of the public to contact institution leaders and politicians. That is why the League has created the online Citizen Action Center . Click on the link to take action on this bill.

Joining the Roman Catholic Church in support of the bill was the Maine Chamber of Commerce .

The bill expands on a law enacted a few years ago that created a " domestic partnership registry ." The number of people signing up for the registry is declining each year. The high point was the first year of 2004. Approximately 200 "partners" registered last year.

The purpose of the registry is to make it possible for couples to receive the societal and legal benefits of marriage, without the solemn commitment traditionally associated with the institution.

The Corporate Resource Council (CRC) issued a white paper in 2002 entitled, " Do Domestic Partner Benefits Make Good Business Sense." The Maine Chamber of Commerce, a group that is supposed to represent the best interests of businesses and corporations in Maine supports "domestic partnership" benefits notwithstanding the assertions of the Corporate Resource Council. The CRC reports:

*
Few employees actually want, need, or -- when given opportunity -- choose benefits for their live-in partners;
*
Few employers appear to have provided domestic partner benefits simply because of employee needs;
*
Studies have shown that employers receive a benefit from a corporate culture that values stable marriages, primarily because employees in lasting marriage are generally more dependable and motivated;
*
Treating cohabitation as equal to marriage negatively affects corporate culture;
*
No state or federal law requires that employers treat cohabitation as equal to marriage

The CRC website quotes Aristotle, "Injustice arises when equals are treated unequally, and when unequals are treated equally." The CRC asks, "Are domestic partnerships just as good as marriage, in the sense of providing the same benefits to adults, children and society? The scientific evidence to date strongly indicates the answer is, no."

The Bible speaks clearly about family. The beginning of the Bible says, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." Early twentieth century Christian apologist C.S. Lewis adds, "The monstrosity of sexual intercourse outside marriage is that those who indulge in it are trying to isolate one kind of union (the sexual) from all the other kinds of union which were intended to go along with it and make up the total union."

While the Catholic Church in Maine favors this expansion of homosexual-based rights, James Cyr from Caribou, does not. Cyr wrote a strong letter to the Labor Committee in which he wrote, "LD 375 is a sham; plain and simple."

Cyr indicated the bill is part of a strategy of "incrementalism" used by homosexual activists to advance their political agenda. He holds legislators who are pretending that isn't the case in low regard. He writes, "It's not a very well-kept secret, after all." Cyr is a Licensed Master Social Worker who lives in Caribou.

The most earnest packet of testimony submitted to the committee was submitted in a green folder. Green has been the color of the "gay" rights movement since 1998 when they campaigned against marriage and family during the people's veto.

The packet contains seventeen pages of testimony brought together by the group that wants school children exposed to "transgendering." They call themselves "Equality Maine." They want sodomy to be treated the same as marriage.

All of the testimony in favor of the bill is detached from reality and rooted in a socialistic and post modern -- perhaps even Marxist/communist -- sensibility. The common good of the community, and especially children, is ignored in favor of individual pleasure and "rights."

The groups and politicians testifying in favor of the bill were:

*
Equality Maine
*
Bureau of Labor Standards, Maine Department of Labor
*
Representative Hannah Pingree
*
Maine Municipal Association
*
Legal Services for the Elderly, Inc.
*
Maine Civil Liberties Union
*
Time Warner Cable
*
Maine Womens Lobby

All of these groups should be contacted by citizens who care about the future of Maine.

Post your comments on this article.

By Michael Heath

I've been doing this job too long. I can remember when leftist activists were screaming about how there was no agenda, and there was especially no effort underway to persuade society to accept sodomy-based marriage. Those lies started to become muted when Vermont used their "sexual orientation" law to force a new concept on civilized society called "civil unions." That is another euphemism for sodomy-based marriage. Massachusetts, of course, followed soon after by discovering that the puritan Christian John Adams actually wrote sodomy-based marriage into the Commonwealth's constitution. Imagine that. No ... don't.

Nobody is surprised now when "gays" use euphemisms. I think people stopped being surprised by anything these folks say years ago. They are master manipulators, bobbing and weaving with their words and phrases. It's amazing to most of us that the Harvards and Yales have fallen for this tripe hook, line and sinker.

Get ready for another year or two of euphemism-laden media barrages from our leftist press here in Maine. Al Gore finally helped the "gays" here with the internet that he invented. They put out a ten minute youtube video last week announcing their plans to .... drum roll please .... bring sodomy-based marriage to Maine. Yawn.

Part of me says, "Oh please, get it over with" and pass your silly law. I know that's the "majority-of-Maine-people" part of me speaking cause I know that Mainers are sick-to-death of hearing about all things gay. I'm with my sons. When they were teens they started calling odd things "gay." Can you remember when the word "gay" meant gleeful and happy? If you can you're probably a bigot in the new dictionary that the Attorney General's office is cooking up with the help of his latest transgendering hero/scholar.

Oh, I'm sorry for sounding so cynical. I've got to tell you, however, that there is nothing standing in their way now. I honestly don't understand why they can't just get it over with and pass their silly law so they can accelerate the decline of the traditional family here in Maine. Maybe that will speed us to the time when it won't be just folks who read their Bibles who see through the nonsense and take a bit of time to do something about it.

Maybe the Nascar crowd will wake up and we can be done with the homosexualization of Maine, especially of our kids and grandkids. I'm not holding my breath.

Christians will never buy into the sodomy-based marriage mantra. My sense is, however, that most pastors already have given into the idea of the state defining civil marriage however it wants. Otherwise we would have seen more courage in 2005 when we fought the last statewide homosexual rights battle.

You may remember that the Catholic Chancery once again supported homosexual rights in 2005 (they also supported it in 1998, but were neutral in 2000). They were like America is all too often. They knowingly sold arms to an enemy who is only too willing to use those arms against the nation from whom they were purchased. While they were conceding the moral high ground to sexual orientation theorists the Chancery was saying that they will defend the concept of civil marriage to the death. It will be fascinating to watch the elephants of Roman Catholicism and homosexuality dance here in Maine ... fight I mean. You know what they say about elephants dancing. It's best to stay out of their way, otherwise you might get trampled underfoot.

Nope, I think it's all over but the shouting here in the liberal northeast. Bring it on.

I'll keep polishing my stones and looking for the right time and place to unleash them on this pink Goliath. I know the people are with me in their hearts because if they weren't then they wouldn't be reasonable, happy and full of common sense. Maine people really are gay!

"The Way Life Should Be: Homosexual Marriage in Maine" Three Same-Sex Couples Tell Their Stories in New Video

To receive a copy of the video for review, please contact Carisa Cunningham at ccunningham@glad.org or (800) 455-4523.

Melissa and Angela have been together 11 years and are raising a young son. Steve and Jim, together for 30 years, run a small business. Rita and Sara Jane have eight grandchildren between them, and have been together for 25 years. All three Maine couples would like to get married - but they can't.

In the new video, "The Way Life Should Be: Homosexual Marriage in Maine," all six born-and-bred Mainers tell the stories of their lives and relationships, and why they want to marry in Maine. They discuss everything from parenting to aging, and how their exclusion from marriage affects their lives legally, emotionally, and socially.

In the United States, same-sex couples can currently marry only in Massachusetts.

In Steve's words, "I don't think there's anything I'd rather do than get married to Jim."

The video can be viewed on YouTube and will be shown at house parties across the state. In conjunction with national Freedom to Marry Week (February 11-17), "The Way Life Should Be: Homosexual Marriage in Maine" is also being sent to cable access stations.

The video is a production of EqualityMaine, the Maine Civil Liberties Union (MCLU), and Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD), who worked with filmmaker Molly O'Neill of Moped Productions on the 12-minute video.

EqualityMaine works to secure full equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in Maine through political action, education, and collaboration. We envision a Maine where LGBT persons and their families have full equality in the hearts and minds of Maine people and in all areas of the law.

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders is New England's leading legal rights organization dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and HIV status. GLAD is active in all six New England states.