@Captain Freedom: I also hope you’re right, but so far the signs from Lynch haven’t been encouraging. But then again I still have a feeling we may get a good ruling this time from the CA Supremes, so I guess anything can happen.

No matter what Lynch is thinking of doing now, we need to turn up the heat in NH to make sure he knows the consequences of vetoing marriage equality.

Only REPUBLICAN Governors have previously vetoed marriage bills. Does New Hampshire’s John Lynch want to be the first Democrat to do so?

Especially when marriage has nothing to do with religion?

I think it will be hysterical if in 2012, the two first Presidential primary states NH and IA both have gay marriage!!

John Lynch has approval ratings in the 70s and 80s. He knows damn well that as a Democrat from New England he is OBLIGATED to support this. Especially when Jodi Rell, Republican, from Connecticut flipped on this issue.

John Lynch is not going to enrage millions of LGBT donors, the Democratic caucus, progressives nationally, and his own primary voters by vetoing this. It would kill ANY CHANCE of running for President in 2016 when Iowa progressives WILL USE THIS ISSUE AS A LITMUS TEST.

Gays: 1. Mormons: 0.

http://www.necn.com/Boston/New.....30698.html

It’s very vague.

You know, the article I originally saw that in has disappeared. I think it might have been erroneous. I’ll see what I can dig up.

It should be a no brainer in the 21st century to give people the same rights. It should have nothing to do with whether you like or dislike them personally, approve of their “lifestyle” etc. in the same way, theoretically, people are more or less free to practice the religion of their choice, have as many or no children as they like, choose where they live/work etc.

It is not as if vetoing this bill will stop Gay couples from existing, living together etc. That is the maddening part about the conservatives, Christee Crazees etc…. If you don’t vote to put something on paper, it doesn’t exist, in their minds apparently.

The only reason I think Lynch won’t veto or let it stand is because he’s a Democrat. And that’s not because I think he’s a good person, but I think the pressure from within the Democratic party to pass SSM laws is starting to mount, and he just *might* be a little concerned about his future image?

If he vetoes this, though, he’ll get every piece of wrath that should still be coming at Jim Douglas, who lucked out when his veto was overridden.

By the way, this amended bill has to go BACK to the NH House first, where it was barely passed in its original form, and was rejected in this form apparently earlier. Hopefully they’ll push it back through and leave it up to Lynch.