Should it be legal for two adult U.S. citizens to have all the rights and privileges other citizens already have?

Gay marriage. What’s the holdup? It’s against God’s law, some say.

Your God, maybe, not mine. Not the God of many, not the God of the godless. America is not a theocracy. Worship your God. Follow his laws.

Conferring legal status on a committed couple should have no impact on your faith. If same-sex marriage is against your personal moral code, don’t marry someone of the same sex.

Many quote Scripture on the “abomination” of homosexuality in an attempt to put forth the Bible as an authority to establish U.S. laws. The Good Book is teeming with passages endorsing polygamy, concubines, slavery and the subjugation of women.

In addition to the death warrant in Leviticus 20:13, the God of the Holy Bible wants dead those who plant different crops side by side or wear garments sewn with different threads. Should U.S. law align itself with these precepts?

“Marriage” is defined in dictionaries and state statutes as a union between a man and a woman. Does this justify keeping same-sex marriage illegal?

Our Declaration of Independence declares “All men are created equal.” But the “men” referred to were only white male property owners. We evolved.

Others suggest it is a slippery slope which might lead to marriage rights for children, turtles or toasters. These arguments are specious and insulting.

Felons can marry. Illegal aliens can marry. The developmentally challenged can marry.

It is un-American to deny marriage equality rights to gay and lesbian couples. This country has said out loud and on paper: Equal rights for all. Not just some. Not just those who worship a certain way or love a certain way. Marriage equality for all.

Ruth Fenton


Maine’s ban on gay and lesbian marriages is an unnecessary intrusion into the social marketplace.

It is like Maine telling its car buyers that they can have any Ford they like, as long as it’s black, under the theory of “one car, one color.”

It is like Maine telling diners that they cannot order a Filet-O-Fish or chicken burger at McDonald’s, under the theory of “one beef, one bun.”

It is like Maine telling mailers that they cannot use FedEx and UPS, under the theory of “one package, one post.”

The mission of America is freedom, and freedom isn’t free. The price of freedom is putting aside the prejudices that we hold against our fellow men and women.

Vote for gay and lesbian marriage this November.

John Henderson


According to my Webster’s dictionary, the definition of “matrimony” is the union of a man and woman as husband and wife.

On terminology: As a Catholic, I like the term “matrimony.” Will others accept the term “civil union”?

Joanne Nesteruk


I would just like to put my two cents’ worth in on the marriage question on the November ballot.

My wife and I are on opposite sides of the issue.

We haven’t changed our minds since last time.

The $1 million or $2 million that is going to be spent on this issue would be better spent helping the homeless, food banks or helping the poor and elderly with heating oil next winter, which our wonderful president cut funds for.

That’s my opinion.

Always vote.

Erwin McAllister Sr.


In his letter (Aug. 4) discussing the Bible’s ban on same-sex marriage, Marc McCutcheon did not read far enough into Leviticus. At chapter 11, verses 9 and 10, there is a ban on eating shellfish. Shouldn’t the opponents of same-sex marriage also seek a referendum on prohibiting the consumption by Mainers of lobster, clams, mussels and shrimp?

Henry Precht


Political factions trying to hijack our democracy

James Madison, one of the framers of our Constitution, wrote in The Federalist Papers that a danger to democracies were factions, which he further defined, according to Wikipedia’s paraphrase, as “a group that pushed its interests to the detriment of the national interest.”

It should be apparent by now that we are at war with narrow-worldview political factions that are trying to hijack our democracy.

The first tactic in this war is the so-called Citizens United repeal of McCain-Feingold campaign finance laws that made corporations “people, too.” This repeal allowed big-money corporations, unions and their lobbyists to contribute unlimited funds to political causes without their sponsors’ names being revealed.

The second battle tactic is the elimination of the collective bargaining rights of state unions by tea party-supported state governors, including our own. This tactic is designed to disable labor unions, a traditional base of the Democratic Party.

The third is “real voter” identification laws and more restrictive early-voter registration guidelines. This tactic is designed to reduce more of the traditional Democratic base: the elderly, college students and African American and Hispanic voters.

These three tactics, along with the remapping of state electoral districts to become more favorable to the party in power, are changing the face of politics. Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican, it is the moderate voter and the middle class who lose.

Should we allow these very rich and very powerful factions to become the dominant influence in our national politics, the balance in our democracy will be gone. And, as James Madison said so eloquently more than 200 years ago, much to the detriment of the national interest.

Steve Reiter


Using ‘America’ as music for political ad is wrong

As a senior citizen and veteran, I would like to comment on the Obama-endorsed TV ad that features the song, “America, the Beautiful.”

I always thought that this song was something special. The use of this for political advertising is disgusting.

Why don’t they just hire the fast-talking announcers who yell off the fine print that is legally required in products they are endorsing?

Their message is the same.

Steve Orach