Leave a Comment Sagesse
Misleading Anti-Gay Ads In Maine
October 9, 2012
By Matt Baume
Two new anti-gay ads just started running in Maine this week. And as usual, they’re full of misleading, hurtful statements.
We can break down the claims in these commercials by using the testimony from AFER’s Prop 8 trial. That case was like a marriage equality “truth commission” that, for the first time, examined our opponents’ claims in a federal court of law. And we found that in court, where there’s no room to hide behind misleading statements and vague threats, the arguments of our opponents simply have no basis in fact. They melt away.
Here’s the first one:
“If Question 1 passes, redefining marriage, we can expect consequences for Mainers.”
Let’s stop right there. Question 1 is the ballot measure that would allow the state to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. If it doesn’t pass, the consequences for Mainers is clear: no marriage for gays and lesbians. That is immediately harmful to those couples and their kids.
So, what are they claiming are the consequences if it does pass? Well, that’s a lot less clear.
“I was a successful school counselor in Maine for over 20 years. Once nominated as teacher of the year. Yet when I supported traditional marriage, they tried to get me fired.”
This is Don Mendell. And what he’s not telling you is that he didn’t just support an anti-gay law. He went on television and attacked gay and lesbian Mainers, despite being a school counselor at a public high school. Here he is back in 2009:
“Prevent Question 1 from being pushed on Maine students.”
Mendell wrote that LGBT couples “use children’s trusting nature to turn them against the natural law.”
Words like these do profound harm to young gay and lesbian people, especially when they come from a school counselor. That’s why he was investigated.
“When gay marriage has become law elsewhere, people who disagree with it have been fired, sued, fined, and punished.”
There are a lot of problems with this statement. Don wasn’t fired, sued, fined, or punished. The complaints against him were dismissed.
And marriage equality wasn’t even law during that time. So, whether or not gay and lesbian couples could get married, the complaints against him would have been exactly the same. In other words, marriage equality didn’t cause his problems. He caused them by speaking out against the very kids in his care.
The fact is, nobody gets punished just for having an opinion. There are only consequences for harassing people, or attacking them, or using public resources to discriminate, or using your position of authority to cause harm.
And that’s just what these marriage bans do. During the Prop 8 trial, Professor Lee Badgett testified that laws like Prop 8 have “inflicted substantial economic harm on same sex couples and their children.”
And Professor Gary Segura pointed out “There is no group in American society who has been targeted by ballot initiatives more than gays and lesbians.”
Now let’s take a look at the second ad.
“Marriage as a man and a woman has served Maine for hundreds of years.”
Well, it’s served some people for hundreds of years. Others, like gay and lesbian Mainers, have been out of luck.
“Marriage is more than what adults want for themselves. It’s also about the next generation.”
That’s true. And it’s why it’s so important that gay and lesbian parents be allowed to get married. Not just for themselves, for the children that they’re raising. One of the Prop 8 proponents’ own witnesses admitted as much on the stand during the trial. David Blankenhorn testified, “same-sex marriage would likely contribute to more stability and to longer-lasting relationships for same-sex couples.”
He added that the freedom to marry “would extend a wide range of the natural and practical benefits of marriage to many lesbian and gay couples and their children,” and that it would be “a victory for the worthy ideas of tolerance and inclusion.”
Blankenhorn’s admissions are persuasive. So persuasive, in fact, that he eventually changed his mind, and he’s now a supporter of marriage equality.
Straight couples do a great job of raising the next generation. But they’re not the only ones doing it.
“Maine law prohibits discrimination against gay men and lesbians…”
That’s true. And the reason that we prohibit discrimination is that it hurts all of society, and helps no one. As the Ninth Circuit ruled, “Prop 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California … The Constitution simply does not allow for ‘laws of this sort.’”
“And same-sex couples already have the legal protections of marriage in virtually all matters.”
Did you catch that? Virtually all matters. They’re admitting that domestic partnerships are unequal, but trying to make it okay by saying, in essence, “close enough.”
“Anything remaining can be addressed without redefining marriage.”
No. It can’t. We’ve tried. You need an army of lawyers and thousands of dollars to try to close the gap between a domestic partnership and a marriage. Not to mention, California’s had domestic partnerships since 1999, and every single year they have to pass new laws to try to close loopholes that prevent gay and lesbian couples from being treated equally.
At this point in our country’s history, we can say with confidence that separate is not equal. And it never will be.
We’re now less than a month away from the election. And the polling in Maine is encouraging, but it could still go either way, since surveys generally overstate support for the freedom to marry.
Now is a crucial time to get involved in Maine, as well as in Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington. Visit afer.org/election2012 for ways that you can support the freedom to marry in those states. Together, we can push back against these misleading, dangerous messages.
7 Comments Leave a Comment
1.
Seth from Maryland | October 9, 2012 at 8:46 pm
[youtube -SYSVSQnTnA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SYSVSQnTnA youtube]
Just saw on it my on tv just a min ago , Marylanders for Marriage Equality First AD, Very Nice Start
2.
Mason | October 10, 2012 at 1:00 am
why don't the marriage equality camps break down all the myths and lies about the anti gay marriage commercials in our ads? Literally, have an ad that calls out each lie. That would be far more effective than just ignoring them.
3.
grod | October 10, 2012 at 5:51 am
Mason, do you not best take on myths and lies through the voices of everyday people and where possible one to one contact with the influencable middle? Check out these vidoes. http://www.mainersunited.org/videos . The Portland [Maine] Press Herald reports that yesterday saw aired a new TV ad sponsored by Mainers United for Marriage featured a Republican state representative who voted against same-sex civil marriage in the 2009 ballot initiative but has since changed his opinion. And today Mainers United is launching another ad that features Biddeford parents of a lesbian daughter, who talk about their support for legalizing marriage equality. Elsewhere, yesterday NPR featured Maine canvasser Rion Tuckers’ efforts in Dexter to influence opinion and to get supporters out to vote http://www.npr.org/2012/10/09/162112334/getting-t…
4.
Stefan in CA | October 10, 2012 at 7:52 am
I agree with what you say, but also strongly agree with Mason. If Prop 8 wasn't a lesson, I don't know what is. NOM and the like will not stop. The ads will get even more toxic and misleading. Just look at the ones on their site. The ads Grod references are good, but if you expect to win any of these battles, you need to let people know that what they're being told is simply not true. To not do that is in itself sending a message.
5.
Martin Pal | October 10, 2012 at 9:20 am
Here we go again. I agree that the NOM ads need to be rebutted. They need to be called out on their lies. It seems every time these ads appear we cry foul–to one another. If we don't respond to them directly people on the fence must have some kind of belief that they must be true on some level if no one is rebutting them. It's called playing to the fears. NOM is good at it. Grod, I think the ads you describe are namby-pamby and don't move anyone to change their opinion at this date. We've had discussions on this topic for years. We know the ads NOM uses were coming because they have worked for them before. Not to have prepared to rebut them is simply inexcusable. Anyone ever hear of the old saw "It hurts when I do that. THEN DON'T DO THAT." The losing scenario feels like it has started again.
6.
davep | October 10, 2012 at 10:29 am
Our rebuttal ads should have already been on the air BEFORE the anti-gay lies were aired. We knew what was coming and we should have already had ads saying "You are going to be lied to". WE should have been telling the public what the lies were, and then debunking them, all in the same ad.
The anti-gay lies have now started airing in all four states. We could have taken the power out of them before they were seen, but we blew it. Again. In all four states. Even now, when it's too late to head off the attack, our ads STILL don't address their lies and our ads leave people wondering how much truth there might be in them. When are all of our campaigns going to learn this lesson?
7.
Stefan in CA | October 11, 2012 at 7:40 am
Well said and spot on. Couldn't agree more.
Leave a Comment
XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.