Maine Voters Reject Gay Marriage

(AP)  Updated at 2:37 a.m. Eastern.

Voters in the northeastern state of Maine repealed a state law that would have allowed same-sex couples to wed, dealing the gay rights movement a heartbreaking defeat in the corner of the country most supportive of gay marriage.

Gay marriage has now lost in every single state - 31 in all - in which it has been put to a popular vote. Gay-rights activists had hoped to buck that trend in Maine - known for its moderate, independent-minded electorate - and mounted an energetic, well-financed campaign.

With 87 per cent of the precincts reporting, gay-marriage foes had 53 per cent of the votes.

"The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across the nation," declared Frank Schubert, chief organizer for the winning side.

Wash. Domestic Partnership Vote Still in the Air

Gay-marriage supporters refused to concede, holding out hope that that the tide might turn as the final returns came in.

"We're here for the long haul and whether it's just all night and into the morning, or it's next week or next month or next year, we will be here," said Jesse Connolly, manager of the pro-gay marriage campaign. "We'll be here fighting. We'll be working. We will regroup."

At issue was a law passed by the Maine Legislature last spring that would have legalized same-sex marriage. The law was put on hold after conservatives launched a petition drive to repeal it in a referendum.

The outcome Tuesday marked the first time voters had rejected a gay-marriage law enacted by a legislature. When Californians put a stop to same-sex marriage a year ago, it was in response to a court ruling, not legislation.

Five other states have legalized gay marriage - starting with Massachusetts in 2004, and followed by Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Iowa - but all did so through legislation or court rulings, not by popular vote. In contrast, constitutional amendments banning gay marriage have been approved in all 30 states where they have been on the ballot.

The defeat left some gay-marriage supporters bitter.

"Our relationship is between us," said Carla Hopkins, 38, of Mount Vernon, with partner Victoria Eleftherio, 38, sitting on her lap outside a hotel ballroom where gay marriage supporters had been hoping for a victory party. "How does that affect anybody else? It's a personal thing."

The contest had been viewed by both sides as certain to have national repercussions. Gay-marriage foes desperately wanted to keep their winning streak alive, while gay-rights activists sought to blunt the argument that gay marriage was being foisted on the country by courts and lawmakers over the will of the people.

Had Maine's law been upheld, the result would probably have energized efforts to get another vote on gay marriage in California, and given a boost to gay-marriage bills in New York and New Jersey.

Earlier Tuesday, before vote-counting began, gay-marriage foe Chuck Schott of Portland warned that Maine "will have its place in infamy" if the gay-rights side won.

Another Portland resident, Sarah Holman said she was "very torn" but decided - despite her conservative upbringing - to vote in favour of letting gays marry.

"They love and they have the right to love. And we can't tell somebody how to love," said Holman, 26.

In addition to reaching out to young people who flocked to the polls for President Barack Obama a year ago, gay-marriage defenders tried to appeal to Maine voters' pronounced independent streak and live-and-let-live attitude.

The other side based many of its campaign ads on claims - disputed by state officials - that the new law would mean "homosexual marriage" would be taught in public schools.

Elsewhere on Tuesday, voters in Washington state voted on whether to uphold or overturn a recently expanded domestic partnership law that entitles same-sex couples to the same state-granted rights as heterosexual married couples. With half the precincts reporting, that race was too close to call.

In Kalamazoo, Michigan, voters approved a measure that bars discrimination based on sexual orientation.

CBSNews.com Election Night Coverage:

Results
All Election Night 2009 Results
Republicans Sweep N.J., Va. Gov. Races
N.Y. Democrat Owens Wins House Seat
Maine Voters Reject Gay Marriage
Breckenridge, Colo., Votes to Legalize Pot

Analysis
What McDonnell's Win Means for the GOP, Obama
Corzine's Fall Has Been Festering for a While
What Doug Hoffman's Loss Means to Conservatives
Lessons for the White House from '09 Election Results
Why Christie Won in New Jersey
McDonnell Won Due to Turnout, Independents
Exit Polls in Va. and N.J.: The Obama (Non) Factor?

[armyoftwelve]

Of course, this article neglects to mention death threats to Mike Heath and Marc Mutty made by same-sex advocates. This is what the whole sodomocracy debate has come down to. Look, if you don't like living in a democracy and can't abide by a popular vote GET OUT OF THE FRIKKEN COUNTRY!.

[Imlistening]

Black America doubted that White America was "ready" for a black president. Remember? Surprise! It wasn't about race (and still isn't). America is not overrun with homophobes. The Obama administration is destroying years of work by the gay community. Their "in your face" combative attitude is worse than the Bush administration on "W"'s dumbest day. Gay leadership is going to have to convince America that "solving" this issue will not create exponentially greater problems down the road. Our young president lacks the moral conviction of his campaign rhetoric. Surprise!

[Imlistening]

Intelligent voters are not rejecting gay marraige. If this were about simply recognizing the legality of same sex unions, gays would be allowed to marry in all fifty states. These referendums are about the agenda behind the issue. Gay rights proponents will not be happy until every first grade primer has gay/homosexual/lesbian/bisexual/transgender/ "diversity" section with a cute story about two guys who fall in love at the North American Man Boy Love Society convention. This issue will continue to frustrate the gay community until their leadership realizes that tolerance is a two way street. I'm retired military and yes, it is time to end "don't ask don't tell". America doesn't have a problem with your "gayness". It has a problem with you politics.

[bearkaz]

skyk if it were true that YOUR SIDE is not interested in pushing its "morality" on anyone, then how come you go into our schools to teach OUR kids that we are evil people because your views on sexuality are good and mine are wrong, evil, bad, blah blah blah?

If you are so free of the desire to inflict your morality on all of us, so that the entire nation is living according to YOUR moral code, then what is this whole gay marriage thing all about? Why don't you just work out a deal whereby gays marry lesbians for the benefits, then have open relationships? the answer appears to be, because you can't stand living in a world where the group you call "the American Taliban" is allowed to get away with beliefs that offend you. You think you are the one entitled to decide on behalf of all of us what's right and what's wrong.

[gayboy43]

Why is a civil rights matter put to a popular vote? Issues involving women or blacks or hispanics for example are not put up for a vote. Civil marriage is a civil right.

[armyoftwelve]

Why that's mighty undemocratic of you.

A marriage is between ONE man and ONE woman. We can talk about accomodating alternative lifestyles, but that doesn't include redefining a basic social relationship to make some people feel better about themselves.

[bearkaz]

Civil marriage is a civil right. You can get married, unless there is some reason you can't or shouldn't be having babies with the person you want to marry.

you can't marry your sibling, for instance.

If gays married, the law would automatically assume that if either got pregnant, the baby would be the child of the other. Since the gay couple is by definition not a couple capable of sexual reproduction, it is safe to assume that any such scenario would involve fraud.

[gayboy43]

Why is a civil rights matter put to a popular vote? Issues involving women or blacks or hispanics for example are not put up for a vote. Civil marriage is a civil right.

[molly767]

It makes me sad,to think people in this day and age are still bais.this isnt about, what goes on behind closed doors. this is about equal rights.

[armyoftwelve]

Gee. I'm sorry you don't have any common sense and don't know what a marriage is. It's a crying shame. I even prayed for people like you and it just didn't take.....

A marriage is between ONE man and ONE woman. Just ask Marc Mutty.
We can talk about accomodating alternative lifestyles, but that doesn't include redefining a basic social relationship just to make some people feel better about themselves.

[Unconcerned]

Open minded people will never take you seriously if you link Bin Laden and Jesus together. And to throw the T-word around so casually does not help either.

[hockeymom441]

People who oppose the union of 2 people (gay or not)in love will face a judgement of their own some day.

Shame on all of you haters in Maine.

Since when should we put blatent discrimination on a voting ballot. I don't care if only one person voted in favor of gay marriage, that one person should be allowed it.

Can we vote all the fat people out of their rights too! Sloth is a sin that no one seems to mind. So is hating and judging - that's god's job.

[armyoftwelve]

Take a look at the horse you're riding and realize that you aren't as high as you think you are. You think folks are "haters," well maybe those people think you're kinda stupid....

A marraige is between ONE man and ONE woman. We can talk about accomodating alternative lifestyles, but that doesn't include redefining a basic social relationship just to make some people feel better about themselves.

[AlwaysSmiling]

My favorite line of the entire article has got to be this:

"The other side based many of its campaign ads on claims - disputed by state officials - that the new law would mean "homosexual marriage" would be taught in public schools."

Ummmmm... Pull your heads our of your Bibles for a minute and take a good look around. Even if "homosexual marriage" is not being officially taught in schools, EVERY SINGLE CHILD knows what it is and has an opinion on it.

If you survey all of the kids who are 17 to 24, and ask them if they have 1) ever made out with someone of the same sex and 2) how they feel about homosexual relationships, the majority will answer "Yes" and "I don't think it's bad". Now, if you ask their parents those questions in relation to their kids (Do you think that your kid has ever 1) made out with someone of the same sex and 2) How your kid feels about homosexual relationships), you will get "No" from the majority (if not the entire panel) and "They are against it." from the majority.

Would you rather it be taught in schools, where there can be influence and control over what is said, or would you rather they learn about it on the Internet? Oh wait. You probably don't allow your children anywhere near computers...

[bearkaz]

I don't believe that you have earned the right to teach my children that my views on sexuality are inferior, or that yours are right and natural and proper.

You want that right? Then persuade me.

Incidentally I don't care if you make out with members of the other sex. I know kids today have done lots of things, including kinky stuff, and stuff that involves underaged kids, and all sorts of things that happen when kids are told that sex is for recreation. But when a third of those kids end up with a child, they'll learn the truth - about just what "harmless fun" recreational sex is, and they'll learn what marriage is really for when they see how much fun it really is trying to force some young man to pay child support, when that young man thought he was indulging in something recreational and harmless.