Since last May when Maine became the 11^th state to pass lesbian and gay equal rights laws, extending protections on the basis of sexual orientation, members of the Christian Coalition of Maine and the Christian Civic League, have adopted another deceptive "front" organization name—"Yes for Equal Rights"—a ploy masking their true intent which is: to repeal the Legislature's enlightened decision and to eliminate job, housing, public accommodations and credit protections for gay men and lesbians.

"Do these so-called Christian-political types truly love their enemies?" asked New Englander, Steve Yates, "Would Jesus be happy to hear that his followers were trying to make it easier to fire people, put 'em out on the streets without a prayer, forbid them to walk in public places and mess up their finances? What's going on, Lord?"

The gay and lesbian rights group, Maine Won't Discriminate, may, says spokesperson Joe Cooper, advertise—even on television. Paul Volle, of the Christian Coalition, however, says that the strategy adopted by his anti-homosexual campaigners will to be to lie low and that no television advertising is planned. Volle says that his "Christian" groups will mobilize church members to get to the polls.

Both groups are attempting to raise moneys in this struggle, however, though their accounting for such funds as have been raised will remain unknown until January 15.

Immediately after last May's passage of the anti-discrimination laws, The Christian Coalition and the Christian Civic League initiated what they call "a people's veto" of the protective laws passed by Maine's political leadership and its governing bodies. They led a petition drive that gathered 51,131 signatures, the number required to place a repeal referendum on the state's ballot.

Because of this, legal protections and are currently in force for lesbians and gay men in Maine.

Although religious organizations were exempted from compliance with the state protections Maine's government offered, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, advanced seven amendments to the protective bill in a blatant attempt to nullify their effectiveness. Maine's government disregarded this intrusion by the church into matters of the state.

1. A clear definition of what a "religious" organization is.
2. A clause stating that no person or organization should be penalized for expressing an opinion about sexual preferences or for refusing to endorse any sexual conduct or behavior.
3. A clear understanding that nothing in the bill condoned, promoted or required the teachings of homosexual behavior—as opposed to homosexual orientation—as on programs for homosexuals.
4. An understanding that no employer would be required to give employee benefits to unmarried domestic partners.
5. Letting adoption agencies consider the sexual orientation consider the sexual orientation of a prospective adoptive parent when they decide where to place a child.
6. Exempting nonprofit, private organizations that work with youth from provisions in the bill.
7. Providing others protections from lawsuits that could surface once the law took effect.

It is becoming clear to Maine residents that religious and civil powers are, once again, and in spite of constitutional protections, engaged in a bitter conflict.