Gay Marriage | Maine | News

Anti-Gay 'Traditional Marriage' Advocates in Maine Want All Children Watching Their New Ad to Know About Gay Sex


Stand for Marriage Maine has just released its latest false and fear-mongering ad in the "Yes on 1" campaign, warning voters that kids will learn about gay sex if marriage equality is passed in the state.

There's no doubt some Maine kids will see this ad when it is broadcast on TV. If Stand for Marriage Maine is so concerned about kids learning about gay sex, why are they inspiring curiosity about it by broadcasting this commercial? 


Here's some info on the teacher in the ad, from Good As You.

Stand for Marriage Maine also responded to Attorney General Janet Mills' letter assuring that marriage equality would have no bearing on Maine curricula, calling it a classic straw man argument.

Said Chairman Marc Mutty: "It was a foregone conclusion that the Attorney General, an ardent supporter of same-sex marriage, has taken the position that there will be no change in public school curricula if Question 1 fails and LD 1020 takes effect. Ms. Mills has long supported LD 1020, the gay marriage legislation. Nearly a week before she released her opinion, she told a local television reporter that she was 'appalled' by our ads, which do nothing more than point out the real consequences to school children and parents if a new legal definition of 'any two will do' marriage replaces the union between a man and a woman."

Read their full response here.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. hateful lying sacks of shit!

    Posted by: danielw | Oct 16, 2009 1:39:41 PM

  2. They are so desperately resorting to hysterical lies.... I do hope it backfires.

    Posted by: Lucas | Oct 16, 2009 1:41:46 PM

  3. i have absolutely no recollection of marriage ever being part of the curriculum when i was in school-gay, straight or otherwise.

    Posted by: alguien | Oct 16, 2009 1:45:32 PM

  4. Ironically, these are the same people who watch Fox News on the Fox Network which also features Glee -- the gayest show on television, which many of their children watch.

    Posted by: Gregoire | Oct 16, 2009 1:49:50 PM

  5. Who would marry that disgusting liar?

    Posted by: homer | Oct 16, 2009 2:01:53 PM

  6. I think it is good that this story is next to
    the Price bashing story. I wish the public could see the same pairing.

    Posted by: Rocco | Oct 16, 2009 2:13:55 PM

  7. Notice how one of the male symbols is smaller than the other? Is that suppose to suggest pedophilia? I'd think so...

    Posted by: Todd in NYC | Oct 16, 2009 2:17:01 PM

  8. Todd, those are actually female symbols but you are correct any way. Interestingly, the biblical injunctions against same sex only mention male same sex never female. Apparently the bible has no issue with female same sex. Also same sex relationships are not banned by commandments, just by laws. Bearing false witness, however, does violate a specific commandment. If she were to die tonight without asking forgiveness for this sin she is bound straight for hell.

    Posted by: Chris | Oct 16, 2009 2:23:03 PM

  9. @TODD IN NYC: Those are FEMALE symbols (the male symbol features an arrow), so two side by side would seem to be representing a lesbian relationship.

    Posted by: RJ | Oct 16, 2009 2:27:39 PM

  10. oops, yeah you're right! duh. :)

    Posted by: Todd in NYC | Oct 16, 2009 2:30:12 PM

  11. This ad should not be a surprise based on the polling data release two days ago ( The overwhelming number of people who support Question 1 believe that gay marriage will be taught in school regardless of what anyone else says. The Question 1 supporters need to mobilize their people to vote.

    Posted by: David in Maine | Oct 16, 2009 2:45:32 PM

  12. BTW -- the URL looks like it is about Russia but the actual link takes you to the story about the polling data in Maine :-)

    Posted by: David in Maine | Oct 16, 2009 2:48:53 PM

  13. i really like dis post
    wana met u dear

    plzz contact me at

    Posted by: Sarah Danes | Oct 16, 2009 3:00:25 PM

  14. i really like dis post
    wana met u dear

    plzz contact me at

    Posted by: Sarah Danes | Oct 16, 2009 3:00:56 PM

  15. I actually think it is hysterical that they have the female symbols in their ad -- and I am sure they don't even realize it! I am here in Maine and it is very clear that to the Yes on 1 folks, gay = male and homosexual = male. They don't give a rat's ass about lesbians. But then they don't even show the right symbol? I think that's priceless.

    Posted by: Leslie | Oct 16, 2009 3:14:14 PM

  16. THE SEX FALLBACK. Haterosexuals always use it because sex plus gay people always equals something bad to the haterosexuals. Haterosexuals know that even if the subject has nothing to do with sex the mere association of it to gay people will make haterosexuals believe them and gay people will stay silent because they know what bigoted associates sex and gay people have to haterosexuals. Don't be intimidated. Speak up.

    VOTE NO on Question 1.

    Posted by: Bill | Oct 16, 2009 3:37:11 PM

  17. It's so offensive that they would use the term "any two will do" with regards to our relationships. As if two gay men or lesbians just decide randomly to get married. As if gay couples don't love each other and haven't fought to find that love and happiness in this bigoted world. Completely insulting.

    Posted by: Devin Tait | Oct 16, 2009 3:59:20 PM

  18. I had to laugh when she was shaking her head disapprovingly at the 5-year old audio interview on her iPod.

    Now I'm off to donate more money to No on 1.

    Posted by: Casey | Oct 16, 2009 4:27:56 PM

  19. They are using this horrible add because the polls are showing that they are losing. They are willing to show gay porn if needed it to get people outrage and it's all in the name of GOD.

    Posted by: Justin | Oct 16, 2009 5:37:28 PM

  20. How many people actually did learn about marriage and relationships in school?

    Posted by: Cameron | Oct 16, 2009 5:43:13 PM

  21. This ad is a muddled mess of conflicting messages.

    If the words "Gay Sex" are on one side of the board, wouldn't the words "Straight Sex" be on the other? If this (early) grade school teacher is uncomfortable going beyond "hugging and kissing" about gay sex, does that mean she's comfortable giving detailed advice about straight sex to little kids? Does she want me to vote Yes, so she can do that? So, shouldn't I vote No? Muddled.

    Posted by: Patrick | Oct 16, 2009 5:58:27 PM

  22. bitch is FAT

    Posted by: flucht17 | Oct 16, 2009 8:27:00 PM

  23. This is so ridiculous! Hugging, Kissing? Why not pull out all the stops and just say "Dangerous Anal Sex!!!" Why isn't Straight Sex up there? Obviously if a school is going to discuss gay sex, they would be teaching straight sex wouldn't they? Or is the assumption that they are already teaching straight sex? If it weren't so hateful and bigoted it actually would be funny - it is so stupid and over the top!

    Posted by: Mike | Oct 16, 2009 10:13:40 PM

  24. Gay sex can still be talked about with or without marriage. I don't understand why this is an issue that is at all related.

    Posted by: Aiden Raccoon | Oct 16, 2009 10:17:07 PM

  25. Café du Monde called, they want their doughnuts back.

    Posted by: KJ | Oct 16, 2009 10:22:33 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Alleged NYC Gay Basher's Father Speaks Out: 'I Caused Him the Harm'« «