NH Assembly Committee To Vote On Repe...

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

There are 53 comments on the lezgetreal.com story from Oct 23, 2011, titled NH Assembly Committee To Vote On Repealing Same-Sex Marriage | Lez Get Real. In it, lezgetreal.com reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“God made in the image of man”

Since: May 07

Sausalito, CA

#42 Oct 29, 2011
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, you still got it wrong.
Repealing or overturning DOMA will NOT force states to recognize marriages from other states. The feds will have to recognize all marriage regardless of where the couple currently lives, but states will STILL be free to refuse to recognize whatever marriages they want, just like today. There are states which currently refuse to recognize hetero marriages between 1st cousins performed in other states.
It will take another series of lawsuits to force Alabama or Kansas etc to recognize same-sex married couples from other states.
I stand corrected.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#43 Oct 29, 2011
Umninimuzi wrote:
<quoted text>
I stand corrected.
No problem. Unfortunately I'd wager the majority of the American people are under the same false assumption that getting rid of the federal DOMA will automatically force all states to recognize all marriages. That's been the number one scare tactic the anti-gays have used to keep DOMA in place this long.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#44 Oct 30, 2011
You can take the following small-talk for what it's worth:
Union Leader wrote:
Bates is also one of the driving forces behind the repeal of gay marriage.

O'Brien lost two Republicans on the committee who oppose the repeal bill — Reps. Barry Palmer and Brian Murphy. A bigger split is brewing.

“There's a bunch of us who will not vote for repeal,'' Rep. Seth Cohn said.“If it's to get government out of marriage, that's another thing, but a straight repeal? No way.''

He said that if the repeal should pass both the House and the Senate, it would not have enough votes to survive Lynch's promised veto. But that's getting ahead of things.

“I really think that it's close to not even passing, but we know the pressure will be on,'' Cohn said.

Lilith_SatansWho re

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#45 Oct 30, 2011
If this occurs,,, I hope the LGBT community riot so bad that the state capital is torched and the it costs the gov't in the millions to repair the physical damage

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#46 Oct 30, 2011
nhjeff wrote:
You can take the following small-talk for what it's worth:
<quoted text>
Well that's encouraging. Let's hope it plays out that way.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#47 Oct 30, 2011
Lilith_SatansWhore wrote:
If this occurs,...
Nobody wants that.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#48 Oct 31, 2011
Lilith_SatansWhore wrote:
If this occurs,
I understand the feeling, but it would only galvanize opposition into a crushing force.

“God made in the image of man”

Since: May 07

Sausalito, CA

#49 Oct 31, 2011
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
No problem. Unfortunately I'd wager the majority of the American people are under the same false assumption that getting rid of the federal DOMA will automatically force all states to recognize all marriages. That's been the number one scare tactic the anti-gays have used to keep DOMA in place this long.
Would it be correct to say that the repeal of DOMA will BY DEFAULT require all states to recognize other states' same-sex marriages UNLESS individual states have specifically enacted legislation or altered their constitutions to preclude that?

Another question: Were there ever states that legislated against interracial marriage, and where did that get them?

Either way, it's obvious that it's going to be a long, bumpy road ahead, and ultimately only Supreme Court ruling(s) will put this issue to bed once and for all.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#50 Oct 31, 2011
Umninimuzi wrote:
<quoted text>
Would it be correct to say that the repeal of DOMA will BY DEFAULT require all states to recognize other states' same-sex marriages UNLESS individual states have specifically enacted legislation or altered their constitutions to preclude that?
Another question: Were there ever states that legislated against interracial marriage, and where did that get them?
Either way, it's obvious that it's going to be a long, bumpy road ahead, and ultimately only Supreme Court ruling(s) will put this issue to bed once and for all.
Repealing DOMA will make no difference at all at the state level.

NOTHING in the federal DOMA is preventing ANY state from recognizing same-sex marriages right now. It says they don't HAVE to, not that they CAN'T.

The only change I see from overturning or repealing DOMA will be federal recognition of same-sex marriages.

The SCOTUS ruling in Loving v Virginia overturned all state legislative bans against inter-racial marraiges.

“God made in the image of man”

Since: May 07

Sausalito, CA

#51 Oct 31, 2011
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Repealing DOMA will make no difference at all at the state level.
NOTHING in the federal DOMA is preventing ANY state from recognizing same-sex marriages right now. It says they don't HAVE to, not that they CAN'T.
The only change I see from overturning or repealing DOMA will be federal recognition of same-sex marriages.
The SCOTUS ruling in Loving v Virginia overturned all state legislative bans against inter-racial marraiges.
So is there nothing in federal law that requires states to recognize heterosexual marriages contracted in other states? Divorces? What about business contracts? And driver's licenses? Has there ever been any federal legislation attempting to regulate inter-state recognition of NAYTHING across all 50 states?

Excuse my ignorance -- even though I'm a citizen today, I was not born here. Still struggling to make sense of the federal system, not to mention the legal quagmire with regard to the plethora of Native American reservations. I suspect it's confusing to many Americans as well!

“God made in the image of man”

Since: May 07

Sausalito, CA

#52 Oct 31, 2011
Correction: ANYTHING.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#53 Oct 31, 2011
Umninimuzi wrote:
<quoted text>
Would it be correct to say that the repeal of DOMA will BY DEFAULT require all states to recognize other states' same-sex marriages UNLESS individual states have specifically enacted legislation or altered their constitutions to preclude that?
Another question: Were there ever states that legislated against interracial marriage, and where did that get them?
Either way, it's obvious that it's going to be a long, bumpy road ahead, and ultimately only Supreme Court ruling(s) will put this issue to bed once and for all.
From my still preliminary investigations, FF&C has yet to be applied outside of State Judicial decisions.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#54 Oct 31, 2011
Umninimuzi wrote:
Another question: Were there ever states that legislated against interracial marriage, and where did that get them?
Actually, in the nineteenth century nearly all states had miscegenation laws. When the Supreme Court overturned them all in 1967, sixteen states still had them on the books.

And the only reason that Loving vs Virginia was even tried is that it went beyond failing to recognize interracial marriage: It made it a crime. The Lovings were actually arrested for being married to each other while they lived in Virginia (having moved back from DC, where they were married). They reached a bargain with the state: Their one year sentence for felony miscegenation was suspended as long as they never set foot back in Virginia.[Can you believe states effectively exiled citizens in the late twentieth century?]

They moved away, but decided to fight the injustice. And won after a decade in courts.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

New Hampshire Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Are ghosts real? (Dec '07) Jan 17 rOcketer 201
Response to Senator Shaheen Jan 7 Peter Macdonald 1
Michael Jutras Construction, LLC Is A Crook and... Dec 31 Playa123 2
News Nashua's Sheehan picks up firefighter endorseme... (Aug '14) Dec 28 jeamlee 5
Malractice 3rd page Dec '16 veteran Resort-Ch... 1
Malpractice 2nd page Dec '16 veteran Resort-Ch... 1
Horror hills Nov '16 Someone 1
More from around the web