Same-sex marriage supporters are expressing a combination of disgust, defensiveness, and resignation when faced with the fact that their opponents are recycling untrue, fear-mongering tropes from the 2009 election cycle. Tropes -- well, let's call them what they are: lies, really -- that have been rejected not only be experts and gay-marriage supporters, but even by Marc Mutty, who led the campaign against gay marriage last time around.
The latest No On One ad, which I will embed here because I am that unafraid of its ability to change people's minds, claims that if same-sex couples are permitted to get marriage licenses, Maine children will be bombarded with teachings about homosexuality in schools.
Nevermind that such claims a) are baseless and b) imply serious intolerance.
Because aside from the fact that Yes on One will actually have very little effect on what is taught in Maine schools, I'm offended by the implication that learning about the very existence of gay people is something to vote against.
(BTW, this is my favorite of all the pro-marriage ads so far:
Meanwhile, in other marriage campaign advertising news, the Forecaster ran an ad in its October 24th issue with the heading: "Common Sense Says to Vote No on Question #1!" The all-text notice, labeled as a political advertisement, goes on to state, "Unfortunately, teaching safe, same gender sexual expression falls within the realm of teaching youth how to smoke safely...We all need to recognize our fear of not being politically correct and exercise our freedom of speech and expression to inform youth about the dangers of same gender political expression."
In fine print, it says the ad was "prepared and paid for by Concern for Children," with a North Dakota address. However, there's no online presence for said organization. (There is a non-profit called Concern for Children, but it is based in Cleveland and deals with international adoptions.) I'm trying to find out more about this group. Leads?