BANGOR – Demonstrating a divide among religious leaders, a Christian think tank on Thursday released a paper opposing a Nov. 8 ballot question that seeks repeal of the state’s new gay rights law.

“It’s about following the example of Jesus to reach out to people with compassion,” said the Rev. David Paul Henry of the Lamoine Baptist Church, who co-authored the paper titled “Question One: Can Christians Just Say No?”

Question 1 on the Nov. 8 ballot will read: “Do you want to reject the new law that would protect people from discrimination in employment, housing, education, public accommodations and credit based on their sexual orientation?”

A “Yes” vote is to repeal the law. A “No” vote is to keep the law on the books.

Henry presented his arguments for a “No” vote at a Bangor news conference of the Christian Policy Institute of Maine, a group headed by his fellow Baptist minister, state Rep. Stan Moody of Manchester.

Moody on Thursday acknowledged that some Christians believe homosexuality is a sin, but said that did not justify denying the group basic protections under the Maine Human Rights Act.

“Let anyone among you who has not sinned cast the first ‘Yes’ vote,” Moody said when ending the Bangor news conference.

The institute’s position on the repeal effort is in stark contrast to that of the Christian Civic League of Maine, which spearheaded the effort to put the repeal measure on the ballot.

League officials did not immediately return calls seeking comment. But, in the Thursday edition of its newsletter, league president Dallas Henry addressed the issue and the arguments presented within the Christian Policy Institute’s paper.

“Some have said that it isn’t love to deny rights to homosexuals,” Dallas Henry wrote in response to criticism from religious groups such as Moody’s. “It is love, however, to protect Maine from going down the path of moral bankruptcy that leads to the destruction of the traditional family, and society as we know it.”

The Nov. 8 vote will mark the fourth time in 10 years Maine voters have considered the issue. During that time, they have been difficult to predict.

In 1995, voters soundly defeated an attempt to repeal local gay rights ordinances.

In 1998 and 2000, however, voters narrowly rejected attempts to add sexual orientation to the list of protected classes under the state law, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, sex, disability, religion, ancestry and national origin.