|
Remember that question 1 is different from prop 8 in that it does not even remotely touch the state's constitution. The question is a people's veto, a striking down of a specific piece of legislation, and that piece of legislation only. The same-sex marriage law passed in May of 2009 was vetoed and no longer holds; Maine law reverts to what it was in April of 2009 on all other points. There is no untangling of a constitution to deal with, no repeals to worry about. The legislature can indeed keep passing laws until the population finally gives up, and I expect that this will happen. Unfortunately, it will be over the course of years, not months, and you can bet that those who proposed this legislation will wait for a new political climate before trying again (I personally think the political climate here will swing back to the right before it comes left again, so we may be waiting on the order of many years, not just one or two, but that's more instinct than anything I've seen in hard numbers). Also, I don't think Maine citizens can amend their own constitution like they can in CA anyway; all constitutional changes are done via the legislature, which is currently more liberal by far than the average Mainer (as this election shows).
To give context, there IS a precedent for just this sort of thing happening in this state. In 1998 (I believe; not entirely sure of years) the Maine legislature made sexual orientation a protected class, and a people's veto killed that piece of legislation. It took several rounds of passing and vetoing, passing and vetoing, before the legislation finally "stuck," so to speak, in 2005, when another No on 1 campaign (interestingly enough) was victorious over the people's veto and sexual orientation became a protected class, just like race, gender, etc.
I know several people (young people like myself, tragically) who supported question 1. Their reasoning was that marriage to them is sacred (I'm merely reporting what they say--their arguments are, of course, patently ABSURD). They are not anti-gay, particularly, as I can personally vouch, in the sense that they actively hate homosexuals; there ARE indeed people in this state, mostly in the north and all other rural areas, who would probably shoot any homosexuals they came upon, and these people I know are not those people. They're not even outwardly religious (we have relatively few evangelicals here). But they just can't untangle religion from civics, religious marriage from the concept of civil marriage. I think this tangling has to end for a real breakthrough to happen in terms of popular opinion on marriage, specifically, not domestic partnerships or any other legal relationships, to change. How we should change it, I don't know. I do think that this sort of thing should not even be up for a vote in the first place; it's patently ridiculous to vote on civil rights. The problem of course is that the other side does not see it as a matter of civil rights, just a matter of terminology (specifically the use of "marriage") and a base misunderstanding of what it really means to be gay (the whole choice v. genetics thing) and how important marriage is and how domestic partnerships do NOT suffice.
Sorry for the rambling...just opinions from a highly frustrated no on 1 voter. Hopefully it will give some insight into Maine law and the election process, and if it's erroneous, please let me know so I can correct it.
|