TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 3 °C Saturday 25 May, 2013

New Hampshire quashes attempt to ban gay marriage

A large Republican majority in the state House of Representatives is not enough to overturn laws allowing full gay marriage.

State representative Tammy Sommons covers her face after lawmakers rejected a bill which would have overturned previous laws allowing gay marriage.
State representative Tammy Sommons covers her face after lawmakers rejected a bill which would have overturned previous laws allowing gay marriage.
Image: AP Photo/Jim Cole

GAY RIGHTS ADVOCATES are declaring victory after New Hampshire’s failed attempt at repealing its gay marriage law, saying it resounds in a region where opponents have concentrated efforts to reverse momentum.

The state’s House of Representatives voted yesterday to kill the measure, ending a push by its new Republican majority to rescind the state’s two-year-old law. Nevertheless, both sides are pledging to continue fighting into the November elections.

“Today is a banner day for the freedom to marry,” said Craig Stowell, co-chairman of Standing Up for New Hampshire Families. Stowell said the House, where Republicans hold a 189-seat advantage, was supposed to give conservatives their best shot at repeal.

“They blew it,” he said. “This was supposed to be the most favourable legislative climate for repeal, and they couldn’t even get a majority.”

The National Organisation for Marriage had pledged to spend $250,000 to help lawmakers running for re-election who support repealing the law. On the other side, the New Hampshire Republicans of Freedom and Equality PAC is raising money to back Republicans who vote to retain it.

The Republican-backed bill called for repealing gay marriage in March 2013, replacing it with a civil unions law that had been in place in 2008 and 2009.

Same-sex marriages occurring before the repeal took effect would have remained valid, but future gay unions would have been given the lesser status of civil unions.

Non-binding referendum

The bill also would have allowed voters to weigh in on the issue through a non-binding question in November’s ballot.

If the House had passed the repeal measure following its two hours of debate, it would have gone to the Senate; both houses are controlled by Republicans. Democratic governor John Lynch had promised to veto the bill in any case. The House vote was 211-116.

Tom Czapieo, 63, watched the House debate from the gallery with his partner, Mike Bellrose, 61. Czapieo said he was surprised and thrilled by the vote, even though he and Bellerose have no immediate plans to marry.

“I was born this way,” he said. “I should have the right to marry who I want.”

An attempt to strip out a provision for November’s non-binding referendum was rejected, helping to seal the bill’s fate – with some lawmakers believing that a 400-member House should be able to make decisions itself.

Democrats enacted both the civil unions and gay marriage laws when they controlled the Legislature, and Lynch signed both. After Republicans took control of the House and Senate in 2010, repeal legislation was introduced but was held over until this year.

Same-sex marriage is legal in New York, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maryland, Washington state and Washington, D.C.

Voters have overturned gay marriage laws in California and Maine. A federal appeals court declared California’s ban to be unconstitutional, and the matter could yet be appealed to the US Supreme Court.

- Norma Love

Read: Proposition 8 gay marriage ban struck down by US court >

Read next:

Comments (35 Comments)

  • Real life 1 – Religion 0

    Reply
    • It’s not like the two are mutually exclusive. Certain religious groups should stop trying to force their rules on all of society though. All the crap going on in the world and some Christians are more intent on stopping two people of the same sex building a life together than fixing real problems.

      Reply
  • Barry 22/03/12 #

    Leave them marry, if they want to marry its their choice and why stop them?

    Who does it hurt exactly if they marry exactly?

    Marriage is not specific to religion so why should they try control it, marriage is merely a commitment and gives rights to people.

    Reply
  • Dear anti-gay nuts,

    If the gay couple who are living together down the road decide to get married, it will have no impact on your life whatsoever.

    Sincerely,

    The sane

    Reply
  • It annoys me that the woman in the photo is so visibly upset, people with very little to be worrying about.

    Reply
  • It’s to society’s shame that this even needs to be debated. There is not a single logical reason why 2 people who want to get married should not be allowed to do so (once they are old enough of course).

    Reply
  • All of the current arguments against marriage equality were the arguments used against inter racial marriage. The arch of history bends towards the just. I can’t wait for the day were we can look back and laugh at the way the anti gay nuts think. They’ll be remembered in the same way people used to think the earth was flat. Oh it’s not natural? You can’t redefine marriage? Who are you to say who can get married and who can’t? It doesn’t effect you. Get over it.

    Reply
  • The Bible also says that a rape victim that does not cry out loudly enough must be put to death, a woman who is not a virgin on the night of her wedding must be put to death; children who curse either of their parents must be put to death ( why not a spanking first rather than straight to execution?) .

    The bible is a hateful and vindictive book that has been and still is responsible for the outbreak of many wars and the wanton murders that invariably attend warfare. As Thomas Paine succinctly put it over 200 years ago and which still resonates today.

    “Whenever we read … the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize humankind. And, for my own part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel.”

    Marriage predates Christianity. Marriage has been around probably as long as our species has been around and our predecessor species too. It’s irrelevant what the Bible says that homosexuality. Marriage is the birthright of every human being regardless of his/her sexual orientation or gender identity.

    Reply
  • Good news day there then, maybe people might stop focusing on what happens between consenting adults (yes I’m talking to you Republican presidential candidates!) and start focusing on the real issues that are going on in world at the moment.
    Oh and a it’s a losing battle because homosexuality has been around since the dawn of time and it was so ‘unnatural’ then we would have evolved passed it. Jesus or God (if you believe) didn’t say a word about homosexuality. I think they had bigger things to be thinking about than what the lads were at when they were ‘herding sheep’ out in the fields for so long.

    Reply
    • Aidan. The Bible – New and Old Testaments – have a lot to say about homosexuality, both the subject and those who practice it. In all cases it is clearly and unreservedly against. It is described in an old-fashioned way. It’s described as “sin”

      Reply
    • Well, Kieran, there you have it. All 3rd party word of mouth reports on what Jesus “said”…. Can’t wait for the Grimms brothers fairy tales to become an organised religion in a millennium or two.

      Reply
    • Well Keiran, it says lots of things are sins. In fact so many so many things are sins that we would be barely able to leave the house without committing several…although as the bible has a lot to say on the amount of wives we could have, why we would want to leave the house would be a different matter altogether. Oh and I think its sodomy and not homosexuality you’re on about and more heterosexuals are guilty of that than homosexuals. But then,with your more vast experience of Bible studies than any I claim to, I’ll go off and have some pork products whilst awaiting a response. Oh but that’s another sin right there. Oops.

      Reply
    • Aidan
      Pork is a sin? What are you on about? And sodomy? What’s that got to do with anything? The Bible mentions the act of buggery/sodomy exactly zero times.

      Do you actually know how to respond to points raised or do you always invent a position for those you disagree with and then expect brownie points for attacking that position?

      Reply
    • Actually it doesn’t say that being a homosexual is a sin, it explicity says the “act of laying with another man” is a sin. According to the bible, there’s nothing wrong with being a homosexual, its the act of sex with another man that is the sin.

      Reply
    • You might want to take the time to have a quick glance at the book itself or google bits of it.
      Pork is a no no and sodom is more than touched on.
      The point and yes, I do have one!
      Is that the Bible has some sins that are just totally off the wall and have be casually forgotten about along the way. So, to turn around and start bandying them about to deny civil equality is absurd. Are we not all created equal?
      Marriage equality is not about a two-fingers to any religious institution or book, it is simply a matter of equality between us. In a modern world is it not wholly unjust to deny someone a right to something by nature of how they were born?
      Are you proposing to live in an unequal society? You seem to find yourself and those of your ilk in the minority of the majority. Times are moving along and this issue will become an non issue. And sooner than you think.

      Reply
    • Aidan.

      Pork was forbidden to religious Jews in the Old Testament. All meats (foods) are good for Christians, according to the book of Acts, Chapter 10.

      Sodom in the Bible is a place, and the act of “sodomy,” aka “buggery”, is not mentioned in the book.

      The sinfulness associated with homosexuality is described in the laws in The Old Testament. In the New Testament, Romans Chapter 1 specifically condemns homosexual acts, as does 1Corinthians chapter 6. As it is impossible for 2 people of the same gender to be married to each other, all sexual relations between 2 such people is frequently described in the Book as “fornication” – a sin by Biblical standards. The Bible talks about a lot more than that issue, of course – it’s a book full of hope and good news, well worth perusing.

      Whether you love the Bible, or hate it, it’s still there and won’t go away. We (you and I) have the luxury of choice and free will in this life, but choices have consequences; in the short term it may just be an STD, if even that, but in the hereafter…belief or non belief will not be an issue, only what is true. The Bible has never been disproved, only scoffed at. It’s worth a read. I wish you well with it. .

      Reply
    • Yes those are all interesting points Kieran but I think what you’re missing there is the fact that the Bible is as factually accurate as a copy of Hello magazine and as moral as Mein Kampf.
      Watch out for those evil gay shellfish who are hell bent on sodomising your three wives to the point where they have no option but to call down an avenging angel to murder all of the children who don’t have goat’s blood on their doors! To borrow a phrase from our English neighbours – POPPYCOCK!

      Reply
    • So Kieran if you’re so fond of the Old Testament, I suppose you’re ok with the idea of executing non-virgin brides, or that rape is ok if you buy the girl off her father and marry her if you’re caught? (Deuteronomy if you’re wondering.)

      And Jesus said nothing about homosexuality. Not in the Gospels anyway. At best there were 3 passages in the letters to Romans Corinthians and Timothy, and these were written by preachers. preachers like the ones today, like you, who use religion to legitimise their homophobic prejudice. And they were of the same group that wrote the Gospels so if Jesus had said something about homosexuality they would have latched on to it and written it down. but he didnt. Except for the fact that those Old Testament laws that outlaw homosexuality are null and void, just like curcumcision and not eating pork.

      If you don’t like homosexuality fine, just don’t claim it’s because of your religion.

      Reply
  • The bible ….written by bigoted men to suit their own personal, political, social purposes! Whilst Im not a practicing catholic, i see the value of the teachings of christianity. Whether you believe Jesus was just a man with a political agenda or indeed the saviour, he said treat others as you’d like to be treated – that’ll do me as a life mantra! Im sure no heterosexual would want to be persecuted for their sexual preference but all it would have to take is a few influential people to collaborate on a book condemning it!! What if the shoe was on the other foot? Life is too short for hating, especially someone you don’t know, all because an old book tells you too! get on with your business and let others do the same! You will only have to worry about your own soul if judgement day ever comes!

    Reply
  • At least normal marriage is the only type allowed in this country. Good to see some things are still sacred.

    Reply

Add New Comment