Comments on: NH Senate votes for gay marriage

By: Robert, NYC

Robert, NYC — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:35:16 +0000

Don’t be surprised if Lynch vetoes it. People like that allow their religious beliefs to get in the way where it clearly doesn’t belong. This is about civil marriage first and foremost and has NOTHING to do with religious marriage that is primarily about procreation whereas civil marriage is not. The two are different.

By: Kris

Kris — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:18:11 +0000

Well Brittany,

States like Colorado,Ohio & FLORIDA, have to wait for the old folks to die off, before we are seen as equal. Oh, and we also have to wait (here in Florida)for the Baptists to become extinct.

By: WeGonnaEatYourChildren! LOL

WeGonnaEatYourChildren! LOL — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:07:30 +0000

so, he wants to put us in the “back of the bus” and make us drink out of seperate water fountains UNTIL the federal government NH civil unions?

Ok. he AND his WIFE are both getting another letter. What makes THEIR family more important than ours?

Let me GUESS, Because the BIBLE told them so?

RELIGION is the ROOT people… Seperation of Church and State NOW, they are NOW violating my Relgious Rights granted by the FEDERAL CONSTITUTION!

My “religion” allows LGBT to get married.

Don’t wont let us in through the front door or the back door (quit laughing) then we’ll tear the damn ROOF OFF!

By: drewski

drewski — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 04:12:22 +0000

@ SAM in NYC: Sam, you’re two years my senior, and I’m asking you to stop the self pity now. I live in Ohio, and rest assured that it’ll be longer here than in New York. It is what it is. What difference is the word “marriage”? Understand that this is contract law. States with civil unions have a poor record–civil unions are NOT treated the same as marriage. Go to Jersey and see the mess the legislature created. Go to Connecticut, where it took the courts and the legislature to replace the separate-but-equal civil unions with a simple expansion of existing state marriage law. That’s it–a few words changed, mostly pronouns. Now, do you want separate but equal, or are you just as good as any other New Yorker? In case you’re wavering on the answer, you’re just as good as any other New Yorker, and taking second best is NOT good enough. You want what you want when you want it; sorry, but nobody in New York State or anywhere else in the US owes it to you to accept inferior second-class citizenship. And that’s what this is about, because we ALL deserve our EQUAL rights as stated in our Federal Constitution.

By: Robert

Robert — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 02:47:54 +0000

I sent the Governor an email, and although I am not from New Hampshire I may soon have to move there and told him so. And I told him that we all know, as he truly does, that no civil union bill has ever provided equality. And that he is a public official and we ought to be able to count on him for support. I nearly wrote, but did not, how disappointing it is to see a comment like this coming from a Democrat. It’s what I’d expect from a Republican.

By: tjr

tjr — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:53:42 +0000

This is certainly good news, I didn’t expect this to pass the senate. Now we await the governor. Something tells me he will not veto this but I won’t hold my breath.

To Sam in NY, I live in NYC and the state line with Connecticut is less than ten miles from the city. Make the trip and return home, your marriage will be recognized.

By: Will

Will — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:05:12 +0000

I totally agree Bill! This was a total surprise! Just like Vermont was too. I am sooo excited! Let’s hope the governor doesn’t pull a governator though. Here’s to hope!

By: LOrion

LOrion — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:51:28 +0000

So why is it that Sam cannot go to Conn or Mass and get married? I thought there was public transporation available back there. It will be recognized as a marriage by New York state, just not the Federal government.
Stay loud, stay proud and do every demonstration you can…
after you take that little trip.

By: ScottNH

ScottNH — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:46:50 +0000

I just read Gov. Lynch’s press release – please note: he has NOT declared that he will veto HB436. He says that he does not believe it will advance our rights. I suspect he and Deborah Reynolds are trying not to appear partisan. If you live in NH definitely call or email Lynch’s office as we do not have anywhere near the needed number of votes to override a veto!!

By: ScottNH

ScottNH — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:19:45 +0000

This is wonderful – I’d truly given up hope. Remember, though, the NH House passed it by only 1 vote and that was on reconsideration – it failed the first time around. Something like 14 Representatives changed their votes in all directions on reconsideration so we’re not nearly out of the woods on this. Keep contacting the House and Gov. Lynch. Is anyone else exhausted yet?