Maine has several initiatives/referenda on the ballot today, including a perennial tax cut proposal.
My fingers are crossed for Question, and I remain hopeful and optimistic. Early turnout numbers seem to suggest a high turnout, which would be good for No on 1.
Update (sorta): If you want to see a great video, from an 87 year old lifelong Republican, against Question 1:
If only other Republicans would stand up against this bigotry.
My favorite line: “What do you think our boys died for on Omaha Beach.”
Please share widely!
with 65% of the vote in. 52-48. http://www.bangordailynews.com…
<
p>Not unflippable, but it’s looking bad at this point.
Who better to decide than plebiscites, or at least representatives elected by some of them? God? And who will speak for her, or him.
Down the damned tyranny of the majority. Civil rights shouldn’t be decided by a majority vote.
it was pretty a pro-slavery Constitution.
<
p>I think in the 1960s and 1970s when Federal legislation and courts gave protections to the rights of African Americans (and other racial minorities), most Southern states would have voted away those protections. We can be pretty sure of this given the popularity of segregationists like George Wallace, Lester Maddox, Senator Stennis (whoever decided to name a ship after him really dishonored the Navy).
<
p>Given that they won this, the Republicans will be more and more in the “hate the gays” mode. But they’ve only won it narrowly in a special election. This political stance is wearing thin and time is not on their side.
The point is: if civil rights shouldn’t be decided by a vote (or to take Lynne’s event more extreme position, shouldn’t even be decided by a majority vote … I wonder what minority she thinks should have this authority) then who should decide them.
<
p>I agree the original Constitution had many flaws. My point is that whatever rights it did, or does, contain, were put there as a result of votes. They weren’t revealed by God or any other supernatural power. Therefore, suggestions like “rights shouldn’t be voted on” beg the question: who should get to choose them.
Tomorrow night the WGBH show “Basic Black” will be addressing this question, as well as the local election results, LIVE at 7:30 p.m. on channel 2 and at http://www.basicblack.org. There will also be a live chat component, so please send in your questions and comments!
No on 1 (which is “yes” to legalizing same sex marriage)
<
p>Call me crazy, but I think this line/theme/whatever played a big role in the defeat. Just like when this was all over the news in MA – many people outside (and for that matter inside) the state didn’t realize that a no was to keep it and a yes was to get rid of it. Many folks got it backwards (even those that were following the issue.) I wouldn’t be surprised if this comes back again in a clearer form and passes (I believe I heard that prior to the election the numbers were running in favor of legalizing gay marriage.)
<
p>I also think it’s interesting that there was a recent flap about a JP not marrying inter-racial couples and just resigned over the uproar. It wasn’t that long ago that inter-racial couples weren’t allowed to marry (wasn’t it MA that first allowed that too?)
No, here we cannot claim the credit.
<
p>For starters, New Hampshire, New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey never had anti-miscegenation laws at all. And Pennsylvania was the first state to repeal an existing law, in 1780. But we were still pretty early to repeal our law, in 1843.