It's Law: Gay Marriage Is Now a Reality in New Hampshire
After months of contentious debate over gay marriage, the NH has approved same sex marriage, making it the sixth state to do so.
The House-passed legislation legalizes gay marriage with the conditions added by Governor Lynch that protected religious entities from having to perform same sex marriages if they do not want to.
Lynch had said he believes marriage is between a man and a woman, and conservative opponents to the bill played ads of his statement throughout the debate. Cornerstone Policy Research launched a strong offense against Lynch and House and Senate Democrats against the legislation but failed.
The other states having passed gay marriage are Iowa, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, and Maine.
This presents an interesting issue for Democrats on the local and national level. With Obama having stated he supports civil unions over gay marriage, the grassroots seems to be pretty far ahead of elected officials on this issue.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
@ wgsalter
I'm replying here due to indent.
No, I know that states can make different laws, BUT no state can make a law where a civil right is concerned and other states not recognize it.
That's why Roe v. Wade was a federal decision. That's why Loving v. Virginia was a federal decision. That's why Brown v. Board of Education was a federal decision. Because in ALL THREE cases there was a minority that was having it's rights trampled by the majority, and the courts took all three cases because it's not acceptable to allow a person in MA to have rights that a person in VA cannot have!
As I have argued in many, many posts, this is the RIGHT way, and the ONLY way, to achieve this social change. Persuade the people directly, or their duly elected government, to change the law. But the story is FALSE as written, as there are NOT six states that have "passed" gay marriage. Court rulings do not "pass" anything, and as California's example starkly points out, courts that take upon themselves powers they lack are at risk of being overruled by the people.
Court rulings showing that a law is Unconstitutional are JUST as valid as a law itself!! The fact of the matter is that it's been happening that way SINCE THE UNION WAS FOUNDED!!!!
You're absolutely right that court rulings can OVERTURN laws, but they may not PASS them. My argument is that you need a law saying what NH has said. What is the court overruling, a law that says a man and a woman can be married? No court has done that. And if you really want to WIN, PASS laws like that in NH.
Next up, gays qualifying for affirmative action and minority contracts.
Kudos New Hampshire! Now let's push for the inner states to sweep up and meet Iowa in the middle and take the progress across the country to meet California, which I suspect (or at least very much hope) will reverse Prop 8.
I'm glad that NH has passed such a law, but I'm still wondering the point of making "protection" for religious leaders, since that's already ensconced in the First Amendment...
This is such a great news that I am gay and joyful.
A great day for the Granite State!!
indeed!
Ho Hum...it's becoming less and less of a problem isn't it?
Obama's parents would not have been allowed to marry a couple of decades before they did. And now their child is the president of the U.S. and no one cares about his parents mixed race marriage.
Same with gay marriage. Except ironically, Obama won't support that. That's what irks me to no end. He of all people should "get it." What a hippocrite!
Bigots are such a bore. They're like mosquitoes on a great day.
I'll be glad when this issue is behind us and the bigots will have to stand for their prejudices in some other way.
Why are politicians like Obama "behind the curve" on issues like this? Because they're scared to death of being ahead of the curve!
Just politics. He wants to be re-elected. He is looking out for Number 1. I always thought he would wait for Gay issues until then anyway. I hope!
Mazel tov!
Does this mean they'll stop stocking trout in the Pemigewasset?
Obama doesn't have to do anything at this point. He has stated his opinion. He has bigger issues to work on. All he has to do is steer clear and equal rights will push state by state. By his second term when he has little to lose he can decide if he wants to push for Federal Level of recognition.
Either way, this is a losing issue for social conservatives. As the Millennium Generation has a stronger and stronger say at the voting both, Equal Marriage will happen. It is only a matter of time.
If the Republican Party is smart, they will drop gay marriage as a wedge issue entirely. They might actually start appealing to libertarians again.
You're right. It's better if Obama handles this when he has little to lose. GLBT people, on the other hand, are losing every day they don't have full equality, but who really cares about them?
It's comments like this that illustrate perfectly why Democrats, not Republicans, are the ones holding equality back.
Well... we waited this long... and, honestly, in the historical look of equal rights, not that long. We will see. The verdict is still out on this.
Obama looks very backwards and disingenuous at this point. Frankly, he does have something to lose. His appeal. In the backdrop of his flying words of equality spilling into every speech, both domestic and foreign, is the cold reality of his broken promises to forward Gay civil liberties federally, repeal DADT and DOMA.
While Obama plays it safe, average men and women, both Gay and Straight, take heroic action for equality for all Americans. Yet Obama remains silent on gay civil liberties altogether; WEAK.
What Obama has to lose is that he looks WEAK.
I don't see ANY hope for my state of GA. Georgia will be one of the "cheese stands alone" states as it rapidly spreads across these united states.
I agree, Georgia is still struggling to beat the world to the 16th century. So far they are only losing to Iraq, Afghanistan, and North Korea. :( But I have hope that one day our state will recover from this backwardness and we will move the other way towards the 21st century. But then again we probably want make it to that point till late in the 23rd century.
You're not alone....There's a reason I call Ohio The Pit of Hell because of the gay marriage ban here
The 14th ammendment challenge (Boies/Olson) is going to strike down DOMA and at least make all states honor the marriages of other states. The seeds of DOMA's downfall are in Scalia's dissent in Lawrence v Texas -- he flat out said that if you can't criminalize private consenual behavior gov't can't discriminate on the basis of it.
And that's the KEY -- or ONE of them anyway. After all, how many people read the DISSENT of a ruling?
I sure hope so. Does anyone know a time frame for this? As in, do these things move quickly? Or will it be months and months before we hear about it again.
Not to mention the fact that it violates Article 4, Section 1 of the Constitution which reads:
"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State."
In other words, a contract signed in Iowa is supposed to be valid in EVERY OTHER STATE. And since marriage is legally nothing more than a contract between three parties (the two individuals involved and the state), that means that the DOMA is Unconstitutional since it says that states don't have to honor other state's marriages!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
