They’re calling it a “compromise,” but the same-sex marriage bill New Hampshire’s House and Senate agreed on today changes just one word and adds one sentence to the bill they previously passed and sent to Gov. John Lynch. (The Senate previously approved Lynch’s changes to make religious protections more explicit, but the House managed to bungle a vote on the same thing.) The new bills are expected to go to a full vote on Wednesday.
AP: “The new version, which is expected to come up for a vote Wednesday, adds a sentence specifying that all religious organizations, associations or societies have exclusive control over their religious doctrines, policies, teachings and beliefs on marriage. It also clarifies that church-related organizations that serve charitable or educational purposes are exempt from having to provide insurance and other benefits to same sex spouses of employees. The earlier version said ‘charitable and educational’ instead of ‘charitable or educational.'”
And the best part: Gov. Lynch is on board with the changes and, despite Republican objections, is expected to sign the bill when it hits his desk. WHICH MEANS! New Hampshire will become State No. 6 to provide equal marriage rights to gays and lesbians. Yahoo!
Alec
Good news. I’m not really happy with granting evangelicals and Catholics and Mormons a special right to discriminate, but what the hell…politics is compromise.
Hopefully, New Jersey will be 7th or 8th, in competition with New York. When you add in the states that grant the same rights and benefits as marriage, that would bring it to 10 or 11, hopefully followed by Illinois. And given the demographics of some of these states that would be a significant portion of the US population.
The Gay Numbers
@Alec: Probably NJ before Ny. Also possibly, but unlikely, PA as well.
10nessean
A new poll out of Rhode Island shows that at least sixty percent of that state’s residents approve of marriage equality. On the other hand, it has the highest per capita Catholic population.
That could be the next really interesting battle to watch (after NY, NJ, PA, IL…).
It’s a really exciting and hopeful time to be gay in America, we shouldn’t lose sight of that.
Alec
@The Gay Numbers: Agreed on NJ versus NY. And I think the PA bill is DOA. PA is deadlocked on gay rights, and I think it will take about five years or so for that to change.
@10nessean: Well hell, Rhode Island had, until 2006, one of the most pro-gay senators out there…and he was a Republican. He has since converted to “independent.” But Senator Chafee was a bit of a personal hero of mine.
Actually, I really miss his presence in the senate. The good ones always go away too soon.
Faeelin
I’m not sure why everyone is so optimistic about NJ. If Corzine loses in the fall, then the Republican governor will certainly not pass a gay marriage bill.
The Gay Numbers
@Faeelin: We are making a relative comparison between states.
10nessean
I live in Tennessee, so clearly I’m not seeing anything close to a state house and governor even approaching this. But, I think that where there are states where politicians actually bring forth resolutions and there are serious discussions and it is introduced as legitimate legislation that it is a positive thing. All of this country’s gay couples are not going to Niagra Falls next month on their honeymoons. Yet, it took years between the Massachusetts ruling and the next and a while for the next and we’ve had some recent week-by-week successes. That will not be typical. Getting New England and Iowa and a partial win in California are wonderful things. We need to enjoy them. After this current crop we are in for a dry spell.
Bruno
This does NOT mean it will pass the House. The joint committee changed a few words but that doesn’t mean that some or all of the people who switched their votes will switch back, or that there will be attendance issues as well. I’m somewhat optimistic, but this is not a done deal until it passes the House there.
I look for all the other upcoming states with marriage on their plate to stall out in 2009.
Qjersey
Does anyone find it coincidental that the original states and oldest settled parts of our union are the ones now allowing marriage equality?
DaveO
@Faeelin: Why do you say that? Christie Whitman would have been more likely to sign that just about any Democrat.
Rhodesia
@10nessean: Catholics are much more moderate than their loudmouthed clerics would have you believe though.
Javier
Once again, Queerty and the gay media are misreporting the facts. This does not mean that NH will pass gay marriage. It only means that the same House that rejected the governor’s gay marriage bill will vote on it again probably next week, and there is a fair chance the House will not pass it again, since it hinges on attendance and a few legislators’ mood of the moment. This is far from passed, and Queerty will have egg on its face if it doesn’t. Get off your couches, send money to NH marriage groups, and if you live in New England, come to Concord to support the bill on Wednesday.
Andrew
Hey, maybe I’m oblivious to this, but it doesn’t necessarily take an enormous and expensive campaign for a ballot initiative to equalize/legalize marriage, especially in a state where public opinion is favorable. Why not bypass the legislatures and governors and just take it to the people? There are actually some states where the people would vote with us.
Stephen Weiss
@Qjersey: Indeed, the way I see, only one of the original 13 colonies will probably take away rights from gays by 2012 – South Carolina. That’s saying something about how American the whole idea is.
Bruno
@Andrew:
Unfortunately it seems like the states where people would vote for us are ones without initiative/referendum like NH, NY, NJ, RI. Plus, yeah, it generally takes a lot of money to fight off the fundies.
Chris
@Alec: Don’t forget Nevada this week….will they override the Gov and create a DP category like CA, OR, WA?
Chris
@Faeelin: No — they plan to do it in the lame duck session in December if Corzine loses. The legislature will be D=controlled in any case. Corzine is very unpopular, but he has as much money as he could ever need to get his numbers up — the GOP candidates aren’t that great either.
Chris
@10nessean: you’re half right — it won’t be that fast, but here’s, based on the states’ politcal leanings/where they are in the process/where they are on gay rights in general/and whether they an obstructionist Gov who can be turned out in 2010, my marriage predictions:
2009: VT, ME, IA, NH, NY, NJ, DC
2010: CA, RI, MD
2011: IL, MN, WA
2012: election year dry spell
2013: OR, HI, NV, CO, DE, federal recognition of marriage rights.
about 40% of the US pop by 12/2013
After this kind of progress I think the full faith and credit prohibition in DOMA would be hard to sustain.
civil unions:
2009: IL, NV
2010: HI, WI, DE
2011: NM, MT, PA, AZ
2012: VA, OH
2013: IN, ND, NC
about 21% of the US pop by 12/2013
ask ena
AM I WRONG, or was the NH bill not passed by the House because they were against the governor’s meddling with the bill in the first place?
The 1st bill was not passed because the governor was pressured by the “Christians” to add some disclaimers;
The 2nd bill was not passed because the House resented the governor making changes to THEIR bill;
Now this NEWLY written 3rd bill is even more conservative (slightly) than the 2nd version.
Am I missing something here?
Katie
Re: Rhode Island, I think the role that religion plays in the fight for marriage equality is a bit overstated. Same-sex marriage was legalized with little fan-fare in heavily Catholic Countries like Spain and Belgium. Also, the Scandinavian countries that are heavily Lutheran have mostly legalized same-sex marriage and the ELCA is voting to recognize same-sex marriage denomination wide this August.
Some people are just bigots, and they try to use religion to over up their bigotry to make it more palatable. I know plenty of secular bigots who just think gays are “pansies” and “don’t want to be hit on” blah blah blah who also hate religion of all forms. Some of them are unfortunately members of my family.
Which is why I think we need to re-frame the debate away from religious bigots v sinners, because as long as religion feels under attack their parishioners will come to the rescue. Just my two cents on the subject.
Faeelin
@Chris: Is there any evidence for this promise, or is this sort of like how New York was going to pass gay marriage once the Democrats gained control of the Senate?
gary47290
@Chris:
Unfortunately, this is not the year for New York. The senate is split 31-29 Dem-Rep, and at least two democratic senators have already made it clear that they will caucus with the GOP if marriage is brought to a vote.
Ian
I think that this whole “state-by-state” strategy is the biggest cop out ever. You all realize that there are hundreds of rights that we still would not have since our marriages would not be recognized federally.
Obama did promise equal rights at the federal level which is 100 times better than these state marriage bills. Even if we were forced to call them civil unions or second-class partnerships or what have you, we would still have EVERY SINGLE RIGHT that our straight counterparts already enjoy.
So please stop falling for these tactics that, at the end of the day, will still treat us differently, and support a FEDERAL amendment of equal rights even if they call it something else.
I rather have more rights and call it pseudo-marriage than have much less rights (such as sponsoring your foreign partner for citizenship) and call it marriage.
Use your brain, people.
hyhybt
@Ian: The more states have it first the easier it will be to get federally. Or so the theory goes…