Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives
Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch
Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC
National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
I'm going to blockquote this, to me the perfect time capsule of marriage equality supporters, opponents, and press coverage, without commentary:
Predictably, experts can be found on both sides of this volatile social issue.
Boston University School of Law professor Linda McClain is an expert in family law and religion.
...[quote explaining Lynch's position and legal precedent]...
Brian Brown is executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, which helped bankroll the telephone call campaign and television ads opposing gay marriage.
...[quote criticizing Lynch for allegedly breaking his word]...
House Bill 436, the core of creating marriage equality, has passed the House and Senate. It has been "enrolled," and is on the House Speaker's desk. It cannot be recalled by the Legislature. The bill will be held by the House Speaker until "companion legislation," for want of a better term, is ready to pass on. Already, House Bill 320 310 is a bill that has passed the House and Senate that has a few sentences of technical correction in the marriage laws.
House Bill 73 is a bill that covers issues relating to marriage statutes, unrelated at the moment to marriage equality. It could be amended to include the statutory references that Governor John Lynch wants changed to provide for greater and clear religious protections. The bill has a hearing next Tuesday when we'll be offering language that will improve the statute which the Governor wants.
Then, if the Senate and House approve with House Bill 73, with the new language, it too will be ready for signature. That bill, along with House Bill 436 will go to the Governor and he has said he will sign them -- HB 436 providing marriage equalty, and HB 73 as well as HB 320 310, each dealing with small statutory changes so that HB 436 meets his requests.
All this is an open process which, really, has been eight months in the making, and which include recommendations of the House, Senate, and now the Governor's Office. The timing could be that all will be finished by the end of next week.
Please keep contacting your House and Senate members and ask them to support the completion of this process so that House Bill 436 and marriage equality will be a reality.
Once more to the phones, letters, and email. You can find your House Rep here and your Senator here.
Living without TeeVee and ignoring hate radio; it's so like living in another world you forget producers are actually willing to put such infantilizing clap-trap on the air.
The good doctor, who got the ball rolling with civil unions in 2000, offers an update:
"Sure," said Dean when asked if he would have signed the same-sex marriage bill. "Look, things have changed. There were a lot of things I didn't know. I was the first in the nation. I believe that equal right under the law is for everyone. Each state has the right to make up its mind about how they want to do equal rights under the law. We chose civil unions because we were the first state in the country. Marriage never would have passed. Even I wasn't really ready for that."
..."This is changing," said Dean. "You know, gay people are seen as people first and then as gay or lesbian later, that's the way it should be. The same as African Americans. The same as Hispanics. The same as everybody who is a member of a minority group. We have to see our humanity first and then whatever category we fall into afterward."
Let's see our humanity first in New Hampshire and sign HB436.
As some of you may have noticed (but most of you haven't) I have a web site TimothyHorrigan.com, which has Google AdSense ads on it. Basically, I give Google a few square inches of space which they auction off to advertisers and if someone clicks on the ads, I get a cut of the proceeds. Right now, many of the ads are incongruously urging Gov. Lynch to veto HB436.
Some actual information from the WhoIs database is shown below. The NOM is based at the same address as a conservative think tank known as the Witherspoon Institute, which sponsors seminars like "Natural Law and Economics."
(Meant to FP this yesterday. - promoted by Dean Barker)
This is a letter that I have sent to Governor Lynch:
Dear Governor Lynch
As a New Hampshire resident and voter, I urge you to sign HB436. All of the people of New Hampshire deserve the same protections and responsibilities of civil marriage. The people of New Hampshire have a proud tradition of cherishing an expansive vision of civil rights and now we can continue that tradition by bringing equality to the marriage laws of our state.
Civil marriage is the sanctioning of a loving relationship by the state. The laws of our state must protect all of our people equally and fairly. Same-sex couples deserve exactly the same rights as heterosexual couples. As a married man living in New Hampshire I cannot fathom how marriage equality for same-sex couples could pose any threat or concern to my marriage or to society as a whole.
Religious marriage is a matter for religious institutions and their parishioners. HB436 protects the rights of religions to solemnize and recognize only the relationships that they accept. But it is the laws of Man, not God that define civil marriage and those laws must protect us all.
Please sir, sign this bill. I urge you carry out the will of the people of our state and the will of their representatives. Please sir, do not be swayed by an extreme minority whose fear and hatred for homosexuality blinds their eyes to justice.
We will one day be able to look back and see that New Hampshire was at the vanguard of a new era of civil rights, or we will look back and say that at this time and in this place our Governor turned his back on marriage equality for his citizens.
To Nadine Peterson, 42, of Concord, it doesn't matter if Gov. John Lynch signs the same-sex marriage bill that passed the final stage in the Legislature last week. It only matters that the bill becomes law and her gay neighbors and friends in New Hampshire are granted the same rights that she has to marry.
"It definitely is about equality," she said. "I just think it makes for stronger families to have more inclusion."
Rest of the article is definitely worth a read. One gets the sense that New Hampshire is ready for the freedom to marry.
And have you contacted the Governor in support of marriage equality yet?
On the day of the second vote on HB436 in the House, I was fortunate to have an occasional update, via text message, from JonnyBBad. We chatted briefly once the roll call was complete. He knows that I am friends with Rep.Kris Roberts from back when NH Veterans For Obama was doing its thing, so JBB mentioned Roberts speech in support of HB436. Later, he blogged:
Rep. Roberts (4.00 / 5)
I was inspired by the Keene area's Representative and his reasons for voting to concur. He made a case for it being not what he considers right personally, but rather what is lawful and fair under the Constitution.
-snip
I was not surprised by Kris' support. He had voted NAY in the ealier roll call, but I had talked with him briefly since that vote and I could tell from his words that his mind was not closed on the matter. He had, like some others, concerns about possible legal mandates on recognized religious organizations. What I knew of the Senate Amendment was that those concerns were likely resolved.
If I was surprised at all, it was from part of Kris' rationale. He made a very intimate disclosure, one suited for a subject that touches so close to our hearts. He said, For the people who believe that HB436 will destroy the American family I will tell I have been married almost 32 years, have three daughters and eight grandchildren, I can't see any way that two people who truly love each other, regardless of gender could weaken my family. I grew up in a very harsh and brutal family, I still bear the physical, emotionally and physiological scars. I am a productive member of society because I meet people most heterosexual, other gay, other lesbian that had loving relationships, I told myself I want someone to love me, that I deserved to have someone to love me. Families are strengthened by love, destroyed by indifferent and abuse.
Lennon wrote "All You Need Is Love." Clearly, he got his inspiration from the teachings of ALL the major religions. One proof of a Divine is a consistent insistance that we treat our brothers and sisters, as best we can. Rep. Kris Roberts, a man who is a skilled Marine, knows this in his bones. He knows that our strength as people, as a community, as a nation is revitalized and reinforced by something as pure as love. How is it that any of us should have any doubts?
The full text of Rep. Kris Roberts' speech is below the fold.
_
If you're still looking for a reason to support marriage equality, I've got a rock-solid one: Judd Gregg is against it.
(As a general guide to life, I have found that by tacking to the opposite view of our Senior Senator, I have done well by my conscience.)
But the man himself:
"The basic idea is marriage is between a man and a woman, that's what it means. Gay marriage makes no sense from a standpoint of the purpose of marriage."
t is by no means a fast and easy path, but the cause of same-sex marriage is moving forward - proof that justice can triumph over wedge politics and prejudice. It happened this week in Maine and New Hampshire, where both states' legislatures voted to legalize same-sex marriage and promptly put the final say to their governors.
In New Hampshire, Gov. John Lynch - who previously defined marriage as strictly between a man and a woman - promised his "best decision" after consulting lawmakers and constituents. Mr. Lynch would be wise also to consult his neighbor in Maine, Gov. John Baldacci, who signed his state's same-sex marriage bill. He previously had opposed the idea, with the familiar hedge of supporting the half-step of civil unions.
Mr. Baldacci described his change of heart - and what we hope is the changing sentiment of many other American politicians. "I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law, and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage," he said. Precisely.
Me, I'd be just as happy to have him let it become law without his signature. But it's great to see the national press paying close attention to this watershed moment.
[Gov. Lynch] said yesterday, "I have a responsibility as governor to do what I think is best for the people of New Hampshire. I will continue to talk with the Legislature and with the people of New Hampshire about that bill."
I think these are very encouraging words.
Please politely contact Governor Lynch at (603)271-2121 in support of the basic civil right and freedom of marriage equality. And do not be deterred that Mr. Lynch's personal opposition to same-sex marriage stands in contrast to the thrice expressed will of the legislature, and (non-bogus) statewide polling. Our founders foresaw that dilemma, and provided a path for it.
As of this writing, committed straight and gay couples have the freedom to marry in the eyes of the law to our west in Vermont with a Republican Governor, to our east in Maine with a Democratic governor, north of us in Canada, and south of us in Massachusetts.
The New Hampshire House passed a bill granting marriage equality. The New Hampshire Senate made the bill stronger. The New Hampshire House passed it again.
I understand you are personally opposed to same-sex marriage.
However, I believe that our Granite State founders had an ideal solution for just such a situation:
If any bill shall not be returned by the governor within five days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a law in like manner as if he had signed it unless the legislature, by their adjournment, prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a law.
I think this is a marvelous executive power that you have been granted, as it cherishes the orderly will of the democratic process while at the same time recognizing the value of your own feelings, to which you are as entitled as the rest of us. I believe there is honor in this path of action.
Thank you for your service to the Live Free or Die state,
Today the House takes up the Senate's amended version of marriage for concurrence (heh - Latin for "running together"; sounds like "marriage" to me!). Says Jim:
House Bill 436 will be on the House floor this Wednesday, May 6th. We will ask the House to "concur" with the excellent amendments put onto the bill by the Senate. If we are able to earn concurrence, the bill then will be on its way to Governor John Lynch, who we hope will continue to listen to the growing support that marriage equality has received during all these months.
I'm pretty much sending every positive thought I can muster to Terie Norelli and Jim Splaine and all those Democrats, Republicans, and libertarians who voted for it the first time around (and those thinking about it now with the amended version). Helps to calm my nerves!
My "real life" obligations will keep me from following this closely today, so consider this a marriage equality House concurrence open thread. Please add what you hear and observe in the comments section.
Oh, Maggie. The soothing comfort of the echo chamber must really feel nice after a loss:
How did gay-marriage advocates persuade New Hampshire Dems in the state senate to narrowly support gay marriage? They got the national Democratic party to threaten state senators with retaliation if they didn't tow the line, such as primary opponents, or even moving the presidential primary date out of NH. That's how.
This is what passes snuff at the National Review these days? A known anti-marriage activist getting her reasons for HB436's passage from a fake news article filled with made-up stuff?
(Sure, after the judiciary vote, we made some noises about looking around for candidates here on BH, but getting "the national Democratic party to threaten state senators with retaliation"? Please. That's just laughable on its face.)
Part of me wonders, though, if an echo chamber fueled myth such as this isn't the best outcome? After all, won't that make the right even less attuned to the electorate than they already are, and give marriage equality a better chance of passage in other states?
Adding: Please, please, please, Joe the Plumber, run for president. You can start right here in the first-in-the-nation primary state!
Here come the Google Ads. Saw one when I was reading a news article about something else in NH, and clicked:
Dear Concerned New Hampshire Voter,
The Homosexual Lobby and their liberal allies in the New Hampshire House of Representatives and Senate have already passed HB 436, which legalizes Homosexual Marriage.
...Marriage between one man and one woman is the bedrock of American society. The traditional family instills children with our most basic and important values.
But now, the Homosexual lobby and their liberal allies in the New Hampshire legislature want to change all that forever.
They think the people of New Hampshire no longer care about the family. Please tell them they are wrong.
This out-of-state hate is brought to you by Virginia's Public Advocate of the United States, a "non-profit 501(c)4 organization". In their About page, you can learn that they support "Equality under the law, regardless of one's sexual orientation," and oppose "Same sex marriage" and "The passage of hate crimes."
Argument via that kind of logical pretzelism must be so much more frustrating for them than the good old days of Teh Gays are Evil.
But what do I know? I'm just a Liberal Ally who no longer cares about the family.
So the Jebster, freshly sworn into his downgrade, apparently is the point man for the boss, That Garbage Man, on HB436 (boldface mine):
Going into the debate on same-sex marriage, all 10 Republicans, myself included, committed to oppose passage as did two Democrats. Twelve "No" votes means a tie and failure of legislation.
But a last-minute amendment was secretly circulated by Democrats and, according to observers, was intensely lobbied for by the chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party. Suddenly this secret amendment was cast as a compromise, even though it unilaterally allows same sex-marriage. As a result, one of the two Democrats committed to oppose same-sex marriage recanted, and the 13th vote for passage materialized.
Opponents of same-sex marriage were stunned and angered as promises made turned into promises betrayed.
...If Gov. Lynch vetoes same-sex marriage he will unambiguously tell fellow Democrats: Enough is enough and that it is time to start focusing on voters' primary concern - the economy. Governor Lynch can deliver that message - or voters will continue to do so in elections, special or not.
This tells me four things about Bush League:
1) Jeb and his Republicans pals go into a "debate" with a pre-determined position. Ah, that independent Yankee spirit!
2) Jeb, though being in the senate, doesn't qualify as an "observer" to the process and has to rely on right-wing faux "news" for his information.
3) Somebody made "promises" to the anti-equality crowd. Care to elaborate, State Senator Bradley?
4) Jeb is sooo running for Governor.
And as a side note: does it feel like GOPer Groundhog Day to you all too? Charlie, Two Sununus, Jeb. Throw in Benson and it'll be like 2002 all over again.
I know one day I'm going to eat these words when he gets righteous on the Dems, but boy is it good to see Dante Scala back in print:
Dante Scala of the University of New Hampshire says gay marriage is historic legislation, but also is a matter of the Legislature catching up with the public.
But state GOP Chairman John H. Sununu believes the opposite. He says neither gay marriage nor legalizing marijuana reflects New Hampshire's values.
Over these past few weeks some have wondered why I did not loudly proclaim my position on certain controversial pieces of legislation in advance of the Senate vote.
Yet those who know me best know that before making a decision on an important vote I try first to listen to all sides. This approach reflects a deeply held respect for the process of discussion and debate.
...The marriage equality bill passed by the Senate this week is an example of the benefit of listening to one another. I believe the Senate version of House Bill 436 respects the desire for equality for all New Hampshire citizens and honors the need of religious groups to live by their beliefs and principles. For some churches, it is an affirmation of the uniqueness of the human spirit to marry committed same-sex couples. Others say this violates the core of their beliefs. By making the distinction between a "religious marriage" and "civil marriage", the Senate has affirmed the right of our religious denominations to make faith-based decisions when it comes to blessing a marriage.
There is more on the transgender bill that is worth reading, imo.
Speaking for myself, I wasn't looking for a loud proclamation so much as a yes, no, or still deciding, thank you, and here's why.
From the Valley News (print only this time, transcription errors mine):
Saying he did not want to influence the legislative debate in Concord, U.S. Rep. Paul Hodes, D-N.H., yesterday sidestepped questions about his stance on gay marriage but gave a slight hint that he would favor allowing same-sex couples to wed.
"I think it's an important issue for the state Legislature to grapple with. I think they are working through this very responsibly, and I want to see a result that makes sure all citizens of New Hampshire enjoy equal rights without discrimination, because in my view we all come from the same place," Hodes said in a phone interview from Washington.
..."I think DOMA should be repealed," Hodes said again yesterday. "It would leave the issue where it belongs, with the states, and it would be up to each of the states to define marriage and leave it to the state legislative process, which is where I think it properly belongs."
In a short amount of time the entire region of New England, save Rhode Island, will have, with our continued support, the freedom to marry.
