Top Leaderboard, Site wide
August 21, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed


sign up to get updates

American Catch

Truthdig Bazaar
Heinrich Himmler: A Life

Heinrich Himmler: A Life

By Peter Longerich

more items

Ear to the Ground

New Hampshire Legalizes Gay Marriage

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jun 3, 2009
AP photo / Jim Cole

The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, right, the U.S. Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop, shakes hands with Mo Baxley in the gallery of Representatives Hall in the New Hampshire statehouse in Concord after lawmakers voted in favor of same-sex marriage.

The Granite State’s Republican governor opposes gay marriage, but he cut a deal with the Legislature and signed off on three bills that made New Hampshire the sixth state (wishy-washy California not among them) to grant same-sex couples their marital rights. Six down, 44 to go.

Gov. John Lynch got legislators to write in exemptions for religious groups. Essentially, gays can get married as long as churches are not forced to officiate.

The winning vote came at the last possible moment in the legislative calendar.

The other five states to recognize gay marriage are Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont and Iowa. Plus Canada, if you’re feeling cheeky.

AP via Google:

Gov. John Lynch was surrounded by cheering supporters of the move as he signed the three bills about an hour after the key vote on the legislation in the House.

The law will take effect in January, exactly two years after the state legalized civil unions. New Hampshire joins Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Vermont and Iowa in recognizing same-sex marriages, though opponents hope to overturn Maine’s law with a public vote.

Read more

More Below the Ad


Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, June 4, 2009 at 7:22 am Link to this comment

Johannes writes:

“Well are they happy now, wath will be the next step, maby to forbid, or even prohibit the marrying of men and woman.”

Johannes, that kind of warped logic was beautifully satirized by Lewis Caroll in one of the “Alice” books, in which the pompous, deranged queen says:

“A hill? You may call it a hill, by I have seen hills in comparison with which that is a valley!”

Report this

By johannes, June 4, 2009 at 6:06 am Link to this comment

To be honest and fair against other people who have other ways of living and thinking, every body has the right to do as he likes, and to geth happy.

But some times the people are not playing the game, if you start to open clubs and bars for gay’s and lesbians, and forbid hetero’s to visit, and play the economic closed cirkel business, thats not fair, and creates bad blood.

Well I stil think to be married should be for men and woman, its old as the world, its done for their children and heritage.


Report this

By Inherit The Wind, June 4, 2009 at 5:23 am Link to this comment

About time the LAWs of this country recognize that happily consenting adults can form partnerships and call them “marriage”.

I say again that government should NOT be in the “marriage” business, only the “domestic partnership” business.  Let religious and private orgs define “marriage” as they will.

I think if two men or two women want to live their lives together as a married couple, that’s just fine.  They have at least as good a chance of success as any man and woman to make it.

Besides, what IS a marriage? 95% of the time it’s doing and building things together. 5% of the time it’s having sex (if you are super-active).  Do the math: There are 24 hours in a day—you have to spend 1.2 hours EVERY DAY having sex just to reach 5%. If you are only figuring waking hours (assuming 16), then 5% is 50 minutes every single day spent in having sex.

So…what are you going to do with that other 95%?  How much REALLY has anything to do with gender? You’re earning a living, keeping a household, walking the dog, teaching a child, sitting in traffic, watching a movie—living.

The flat out hateful and idiotic assertion that STRAIGHT marriage will be outlawed is simply moral bankruptcy.  In fighting for same-sex marriage, gays are fighting to have the same kind of life straights have—they want the same normalcy in all the other aspects of life that straights enjoy.

How does that threaten straight marriage? It doesn’t. If anything, it STRENGTHENS it and shows it to be one flavor of an ideal relationship between two happy adults.

So how does it REALLY impact us?  About the only thing I can think of is etiquette: At a straight wedding you’re supposed to say “congratulations” to the groom and “best wishes” to the bride. (this harks back to the idea that the REVERSE is insulting to both).  So what’s correct etiquette for wishing the best at a Gay wedding?

Once I know that, I’m all set!

(I never mind going to weddings, odd for a guy. But I look at that I am not the one up there desperate to get it right, to look right and not to make a fool of ones self.  All I have to do is wear a suit, eat, drink and dance and have a great time!)

Report this

By WykydRed, June 4, 2009 at 2:14 am Link to this comment

By johannes, June 4 at 4:05 am #

Well are they happy now, wath will be the next step, maby to forbid, or even prohibit the marrying of men and woman.


Oh come on,Johannes! That’s just really absurd. And people don’t look for something different to do just to annoy the people who don’t like them doing it. It’s called freedom. Of imagination, of the soul, the mind, the body. Funny what happens when no one has the right to demand others not do a thing they don’t agree with, huh?

Report this

By johannes, June 4, 2009 at 1:05 am Link to this comment

Well are they happy now, wath will be the next step, maby to forbid, or even prohibit the marrying of men and woman.

In Europe they have all the freedom, but they are looking all the time to find something new, to annoy
the normal people, its not the problem thath they are differend in sexuel behavior, but they are a kind of mad, and jelous on normal people.


Report this

By hippie4ever, June 3, 2009 at 11:27 pm Link to this comment

Ed Harges wrote: “Gay people are like poor “Sissy”-phus, and conservatives are the big, stupid stone that has to be rolled up the hill, over and over and over.”

Yeah, the stone’s beginning to crumble but it took everything going to hell to get this far with gay rights. I saw a John Water’s film (either Pink Flamingos or Female Trouble) and Edith Massey’s character was opining on men:

“If they’re intelligent, they’re queer;
if they’re stupid they’re straight.”

Sorry for being so politically incorrect but I can because I’ve got the gay, right?

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, June 3, 2009 at 10:37 pm Link to this comment

Re: By Thomas Mc, June 3 at 9:32 pm:

Yeah. Conservatives are so that, aren’t they?

Gay people are like poor “Sissy”-phus, and conservatives are the big, stupid stone that has to be rolled up the hill, over and over and over.

Only, unlike in the Greek myth, there’s hope here: the stone is at long last starting to get noticeably smaller.

Report this
Russian Paul's avatar

By Russian Paul, June 3, 2009 at 7:52 pm Link to this comment

Hawkeye, I know you don’t care about gay people, but this is an important issue for those of us who are concerned about equal rights. The economy and health care are more important, but not really germane to this discussion, except maybe to say that more marriages definitely would not hurt the economy.

Anyways, bravo New Hampshire! As someone else stated, Obama is now TO THE RIGHT OF DICK CHENEY, time for him to get with the program.

Report this

By runescape gold, June 3, 2009 at 7:09 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Yeah! New Hampshire gives gays and lesbians a chance to marry, while shoving it up the asses of their trans population. Let’s celebrate!

Report this
Ed Harges's avatar

By Ed Harges, June 3, 2009 at 6:36 pm Link to this comment

OK, so Iowa, New Hampshire, and Dick Cheney are all now to the left of Obama on this issue.

How frickin’ politically safe does Obama have to feel before he can endorse gay marriage - and also, by the way, put an end to “don’t ask, don’t tell”, as he explicitly promised in his campaign?

Don’t hold your breath. Just as Obama will not take a firm stand against the Israel lobby until the day that Joe Lieberman declares his admiration for Norman Finkelstein, Obama won’t endorse gay marriage until the day that Joe Lieberman and Norman Finkelstein are married in Iowa, at the state capital building, with Pat Robertson conducting the ceremony.

Report this

By Thomas Mc, June 3, 2009 at 6:32 pm Link to this comment

Why have the Conservatives been on the wrong side of EVERY civil liberties issue? Oh, right, because they are EVIL.

Report this

By Chris in NH, June 3, 2009 at 6:23 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

FYI on the content of the article:

“The Granite State’s Republican governor…”

Governor John Lynch is a Democrat.  NH’s last Republican Governor was one-termer Craig Benson, ‘01-‘02.

That said, he often acts like a Republican…which is part of the magic formula he has used to stay in office.

Report this

By RobertinWestbury, June 3, 2009 at 6:16 pm Link to this comment

Lynch is a Democrat, not a Republican. 

Thankfully, he didn’t let his own personal beliefs taint his decision to do what was right. 

His exceptions are a bit humorous to me.  NO church ever has - or ever could be - forced to perform a gay marriage.  And I can’t imagine there are many of us who would want to be married in a church that was being forced to do it (if that were possible)...

This is the kind of concession I think we’re happy to make.

That doesn’t mean I don’t hope to see a grand outdoor wedding ceremony on the streets of Salt Lake City, across from Temple Square someday…

Report this

By WykydRed, June 3, 2009 at 5:10 pm Link to this comment

Californians aren’t “rednecks”, Bob. Their brains are just loose from all that shakin’. smile

Wanna defeat Prop. 8 in California? Demand that all these religos use their OWN money to get to CA (and especially the Mormons) who have no say in your state but insist on showing up “in numbers” to con the rest of America into believing they’re a bigger majority than they really are.

Or just hit the people bussed in with paint balls to “mark” them and talk to the press to let them know those marked don’t even live in the state.

Propaganda and paintballs. It’s like PETA and paint.

Report this

By BobZ, June 3, 2009 at 3:57 pm Link to this comment

The New England states are making us Californians look like a bunch of “rednecks”.

Report this
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.