NH Assembly Committee To Vote On Repealing Same-Sex Marriage | Lez Get Real

Oct 23, 2011 | Posted by: Sei | Full story: lezgetreal.com

It should not be surprising that the Republicans of the New Hampshire Assembly are willing to ignore the will of the People and are set to vote on repealing New Hampshire's same-sex marriage law and reverting the state back to civil unions.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of53
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Oct 23, 2011
 

Judged:

4

2

1

Can the republicans get enough support to overcome the gov's promised veto?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Oct 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

Here's the numbers on the GOP controlled House & Senate in NH:

House- 297R & 103D
Senate- 19R & 5D

It's a given the GOP will pass the bill to repeal marriage rights, but can they get the 265 House members & 16 Senate to override Gov Lynch's promised veto?

Where's our resident NH experts to give us some insight?

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Oct 23, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

The senate will,absolutely vote to override on strict party lines. And, as Your post points out, the could afford a couple of defections. But there won't be any. The house is a tougher call. It will be close. A few Democrats will probably vote to override. There should be more Republicans defecting from the party line than Democrats, but it's difficult for me to see the override failing. About the only good news: there've been three special elections since this general assembly convened. Two were won by equality-minded Democrats and the other by a progressive Republican. [yes, New Hampshire's politics are different enough for such an oxymoron to exist.]. This should give them pause. Indeed, the state Republicans are busy fighting among themselves and just forced the state party chairman to resign. The upshot, though, is that the Speaker of the House is now also the Republican Party chairman, giving himself even more power to pressure the representatives. I guarantee: there will be no free vote on the matter. The party will seek revenge on defecting representatives.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Oct 23, 2011
 

Judged:

3

2

2

nhjeff wrote:
The senate will,absolutely vote to override on strict party lines. And, as Your post points out, the could afford a couple of defections. But there won't be any. The house is a tougher call. It will be close. A few Democrats will probably vote to override. There should be more Republicans defecting from the party line than Democrats, but it's difficult for me to see the override failing. About the only good news: there've been three special elections since this general assembly convened. Two were won by equality-minded Democrats and the other by a progressive Republican.[yes, New Hampshire's politics are different enough for such an oxymoron to exist.]. This should give them pause. Indeed, the state Republicans are busy fighting among themselves and just forced the state party chairman to resign. The upshot, though, is that the Speaker of the House is now also the Republican Party chairman, giving himself even more power to pressure the representatives. I guarantee: there will be no free vote on the matter. The party will seek revenge on defecting representatives.
Then we can kiss marriage rights good-bye in NH. The GOP has nearly a 200 member edge in the House. The Dems would have to get roughly 30 Republicans to go against the party line.

This couldn't be worse timing, especially if we fail in Maine, Washington, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oregon, and elsewhere next year.
Michael

Pekin, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Oct 23, 2011
 

Judged:

4

4

4

NH should return to the mainstream and get rid of homomarriage.

Homosexual 'marriage' is a cruel lie with no real basis in how homosexuals live.

Homosexuals themselves have OVERWHELMINGLY REJECTED homomarriage as an actual practice in EVERY country that allows it.

The government has no legitimate reason to be involved in any legal homosexual relationship!
SirAndrew

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Oct 23, 2011
 

Judged:

3

1

1

So it's 'Michael' today, eh? Dude, you must realize that we all are laughing at every one of your posts, no matter what is the name du jour. you are an idiot and your statements and arguments would embarrass a third grader.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Oct 23, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Michael wrote:
... Homosexual 'marriage' is a cruel lie with no real basis in how homosexuals live.
Homosexuals themselves have OVERWHELMINGLY REJECTED homomarriage as an actual practice in EVERY country that allows it...
\

Still posting this same falsehood?

Well then, here's the best stock answer ...

309,000,000 Americans X 3% Gay Americans = 9,270,000.

9,270,000 Gay Americans / 50 States = 185,400 Gay Americans per State

185,400 Gay Americans per State X 6 States that allow Gay Marriage = 1,112,400

131,729 Reported Gay Marriages X 2 = 262,458 Gay Americans in a Marriage

(262,458 Gay Americans in a Marriage / 1,112,400 X 100)= 23.6%

So proportionally, 23.6% of gay people are in a gay marriage. This rate would go up if you included civil unions and domestic partnerships. That means that about 1/4 of gay people are in a committed monogamous relationship.

Let's do heterosexuals now.

309,000,000 Americans X .97 Straight Americans = 299,730,000

According to the Census, a total of 114,567,419 households were reported.

Of those, 48.6% were reported as married couples.

114,567,419 X .486 = 55,679,765 married couples.

55,679,765 married couples X 2 = 111,359,539 married people.

299,730,000 Straight Americans / 111,359,539 married people X 100 = 37.1%.

So 23.1% of gay and lesbian Americans are reported to be in a marriage, and 37.1% of straight Americans are reported to be in a marriage.

That discrepency has a lot of factors involved, but it does reveal that gays and lesbians are entering committed, monogamous relationships at steadily increasing rates, and the more accepting the society is for GLBT people, the more quickly you will see the two percentages become closer.

Isn't math fun?
Math is fun, isn't it?

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Oct 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

More putting minority's civil rights up to a popular vote.

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Oct 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

No matter what happens they had marriage once and they can't take that moment of triumph away from them no matter what they pass.

“God made in the image of man”

Since: May 07

Sausalito, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Oct 24, 2011
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Just like California, they'll have to keep recognizing the marriages of the thousands who have already married there -- a thorn in their flesh, no doubt, but there's not a thing they can do about it. And it's just a matter of time until DOMA is repealed on a federal level, then any NH resident will be able to simply walk across the border to get married in another state and NH will have to recognize that marriage.

So those NH Republicans and their ilk are farting against thunder. Like Gaddafi, they've already lost the battle but refuse to surrender.
mainelygay

Woolwich, ME

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Oct 24, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

2

There go those Republicans working on jobs, again!
Actually this will likely cost the state revenue and jobs since many people may choose to vacation in a state perceived as more liberal and accepting.
Will this mean they will have to change the state motto? This action seems to be contrary to the idea set forth in it.
Live extreme right or you won't have any!
Their god must be so embarressed.
GoG

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Oct 24, 2011
 

Judged:

4

4

4

snyper wrote:
<quoted text>\
Still posting this same falsehood?
Well then, here's the best stock answer ...
309,000,000 Americans X 3% Gay Americans = 9,270,000.
9,270,000 Gay Americans / 50 States = 185,400 Gay Americans per State
185,400 Gay Americans per State X 6 States that allow Gay Marriage = 1,112,400
131,729 Reported Gay Marriages X 2 = 262,458 Gay Americans in a Marriage
(262,458 Gay Americans in a Marriage / 1,112,400 X 100)= 23.6%
So proportionally, 23.6% of gay people are in a gay marriage. This rate would go up if you included civil unions and domestic partnerships. That means that about 1/4 of gay people are in a committed monogamous relationship.
Let's do heterosexuals now.
309,000,000 Americans X .97 Straight Americans = 299,730,000
According to the Census, a total of 114,567,419 households were reported.
Of those, 48.6% were reported as married couples.
114,567,419 X .486 = 55,679,765 married couples.
55,679,765 married couples X 2 = 111,359,539 married people.
299,730,000 Straight Americans / 111,359,539 married people X 100 = 37.1%.
So 23.1% of gay and lesbian Americans are reported to be in a marriage, and 37.1% of straight Americans are reported to be in a marriage.
That discrepency has a lot of factors involved, but it does reveal that gays and lesbians are entering committed, monogamous relationships at steadily increasing rates, and the more accepting the society is for GLBT people, the more quickly you will see the two percentages become closer.
Isn't math fun?
Math is fun, isn't it?
You're inflating the number of homosexuals by a factor of about 150%.
Also, a significant portion of the 309mil US population are children.
Are you admitting that homosexuals have, or at least pursue sexual relationships with every age cohort, including children?
It sure looks that way, but that's hardly a surprise to anyone.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Oct 24, 2011
 

Judged:

2

Umninimuzi wrote:
Just like California, they'll have to keep recognizing the marriages of the thousands who have already married there -- a thorn in their flesh, no doubt, but there's not a thing they can do about it. And it's just a matter of time until DOMA is repealed on a federal level, then any NH resident will be able to simply walk across the border to get married in another state and NH will have to recognize that marriage.
So those NH Republicans and their ilk are farting against thunder. Like Gaddafi, they've already lost the battle but refuse to surrender.
Unfortunately simply repealing DOMA won't force every state to recognize married same-sex couples; that's going to take another series of lawsuits.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Oct 24, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

And before someone says gay couples in NH will be able to sue just like in California, that is a completely different set of circumstances. Marriage for same-sex couples was declared a right under the California constitution; that never happened in NH.

This will be the legislature simply changing existing law, just like they do hundreds of times every year on all sorts of issues.

“Created Equal”

Since: Feb 08

USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Oct 24, 2011
 

Judged:

2

1

1

GoG wrote:
<quoted text>You're inflating the number of homosexuals by a factor of about 150%.
Also, a significant portion of the 309mil US population are children.
Are you admitting that homosexuals have, or at least pursue sexual relationships with every age cohort, including children?
It sure looks that way, but that's hardly a surprise to anyone.
A three percent estimate is FAR from inflating the numbers. In fact, it's about 70% below some estimates.

And there you go again, trying to equate LGBT people with child molestors. That old nonsense has been utterly diproven, you clueless dolt... but it sure does show the world your puny-brained bigotry, doesn't it?

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Oct 24, 2011
 

Judged:

1

Oh hum, and they got voted in for what?.....JOBS! and to change the economy. ROTFL! maybe they better start worrying about their OWN job.

“Love thy neighbor!”

Since: Dec 06

Westland , MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Oct 24, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

This makes me absolutely sick. I just can not understand the injustice. It is so ridiculous!!!! Will I see equlaity in my lifetime??? It's looking dimmer and dimmer. Sorry....I'm feeling might down about this.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Oct 24, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

Imprtnrd wrote:
Oh hum, and they got voted in for what?.....JOBS! and to change the economy. ROTFL! maybe they better start worrying about their OWN job.
Unfortunately I doubt very many of them will be voted out because they repeal marriage equality. We'll have to hope the Dems get their crap together in 2012 and flip the NH House & Senate back AND get the Gov (Lynch isn't running for reelection). Then they can try to repass a marriage equality bill.

This could keep going back & forth until the courts (either NH or federal) step in.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Oct 24, 2011
 
Gay Mom wrote:
This makes me absolutely sick. I just can not understand the injustice. It is so ridiculous!!!! Will I see equlaity in my lifetime??? It's looking dimmer and dimmer. Sorry....I'm feeling might down about this.
Take heart, in the grand scheme of things this would be a minor setback, unless you really had your heart set on marrying in New Hampshire. If that's the case you better do it while you still can.

Of course the anti-gays will try to make the most of this, but look at is this way- we may lose NH in 2012 but we're likely to gain California and possibly our first win by popular referendum (Maine or Washington).

And don't forget that any current marriages will remain valid.

Much more significant will be getting Section 3 of DOMA overturned so all legal marriages will get federal recognition regardless of where you live; even in Michigan.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Oct 24, 2011
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
And before someone says gay couples in NH will be able to sue just like in California, that is a completely different set of circumstances. Marriage for same-sex couples was declared a right under the California constitution; that never happened in NH.
This will be the legislature simply changing existing law, just like they do hundreds of times every year on all sorts of issues.
Taking away a privilege that we once had should be viewed much more critically than continuing a bad tradition. Even given the conservative nature of New Hampshire's courts, I suspect they would invalidate the law under New Hampshire'srather strong equality clause. But I"m sure they would wait to rule at least until after the likely vote on a constitutional amendment.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of53
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent New Hampshire Government Discussions

Search the New Hampshire Government Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Brown gets back in his truck for first NH ad Jun '14 GOTP 3
Fish And Game: As Ice Melts, Dead Fish Appear Apr '14 Meet Ed and Elaine Brown 1
Sen. Odell won't seek re-election Apr '14 Meet Ed and Elaine Brown 1
Scott Brown's comeback? Apr '14 Meet Ed and Elaine Brown 1
N.H. pair seeks property tax relief (Dec '07) Apr '14 Meet Ed and Elaine Brown 2
Cruz: Sebelius departure doesn't end O-Care fight Apr '14 conservative crapola 38
MPP - Marijuana Bill Moves Forward in New Hamps... Mar '14 Anne 1
•••
•••