Follow breaking news @lgbtqnation
New Hampshire

Rally held in NH to repeal same-sex marriage, replace it with civil unions

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

CONCORD, N.H. — New Hampshire Republican State Representative David Bates on Tuesday led a rally outside the capitol building of more than 200 people interested in repealing New Hampshire’s same-sex marriage law and replace it with civil unions for any unmarried adults, including relatives.

Bates, who is the chief sponsor of a measure to repeal the law, told the crowd there is no truth more self-evident under the federal Constitution than men and women were created for each other.

David Bates

“Other arrangements are unnatural and incapable of sustaining the human species,” Bates said.

Supporters said the proposed repeal bill would not apply to gay marriages that have already occurred, but would stop new ones.

Since 2010, 1,866 New Hampshire gay couples have married, according to the state division of vital records. Repeal opponents say Bates’ bill has conflicting provisions that appear to bar the courts from recognizing same sex relationships as valid, while declaring same sex marriages in effect before the repeal took effect to remain valid.

Bates has said he is working on an amendment to clarify that and several other issues. Republican House Speaker William O’Brien called the gay marriage law an attack on the family that must be reversed.

Associated Press, via The Boston Globe

Bishop Gene Robinson — the Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop, and a resident of the state — observed, “I’m surprised at how small the crowd is.”

Robinson also indicated that he had not heard of any clergy suffering an ill effect because of the law or that any individuals suffered ill effects, and said New Hampshire polls show a majority oppose repealing the law.

The state’s Republican-controlled Legislature has not scheduled a date for Bates’ measure to be voted on in this year’s session, and Gov. John Lynch (D) has repeatedly warned lawmakers he will veto attempts to repeal the law, which he signed in 2009.

Lynch had signed the civil unions law enacted in 2007, which was replaced that with the marriage equality law two years later.

Bates’ bill would not enact the same civil unions law that was in effect before gays were allowed to marry. That law granted gays all the rights and responsibilities of marriage except in name.

Under Bates’ proposed civil unions law, any two adults could enter into a union, any person or group would be able to refuse to recognize the unions.

It also would allow anyone to discriminate against the couples in employment, housing and public accommodations based on religious or moral beliefs.

Bates has also launched a direct mail campaign using personal funds to garner support for his bill.

Archives: , , , , ,

Filed under: New Hampshire

22 more reader comments:

  1. I dont support this but if it does go through, it’s not the worst that can happen

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:32pm
  2. MARRIAGE ONLY! WE WANT NOTHING LESS

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:33pm
  3. Go figure, republican bullshit at work.

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:33pm
  4. So how does gay marriage affect these idiots lives ? So pathetic !

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:34pm
  5. …and the prop 8 ruling in ca will apply directly…go for it…

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:34pm
  6. The word “Marriage” and the Institution of Marriage doesn’t belong to any one group of people! People who are anything other than Heterosexual are NOT below you! We are equally human and deserve equal human rights!

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:34pm
  7. People need to GET A FUCKING LIFE and leave us gays ALONE. damn

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:36pm
  8. 200 people really isn’t much.

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:40pm
  9. My the entitlement you hetros feel, the germans felt the same way and look at what they did to the world TWICE..first world war and second world war..People who feel in titled usually are just bigoted idiots and guess what no one own my right but me.

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:42pm
  10. Pathetic.

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:42pm
  11. does he read the news?

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:42pm
  12. Can I hear an “On the wrong side of history”?

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:52pm
  13. Wow, 200 whole people against gay marriage? In ten years, that’s how many anti-gay marriage people youll be able to gather together in all of New England.

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 9:58pm
  14. Leave it alone …..these constant conflicting rulings feel like a rubberband

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:05pm
  15. Shame on the state of New Hampshire if the people let this happen.

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:08pm
  16. The country is falling apart but lets spend time, energy and money on screwing with the lives of loving adults who want nothing more than the right to be equal. Enough already!!

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:11pm
  17. This pathetic fecal-head & his “followers” are just the advance guard for (P)rick San(i)tor(i)um. When someone finally lets the hot air out of his balloon, they’ll fold, along with him.

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:16pm
  18. Honestly… whats the big difference? Its all the same concept. Just because the “marriage” lable isnt on it makes you sleep better at night? Dumbass’

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:23pm
  19. didnt know there were 200 idiots in NH…

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 10:35pm
  20. While we’re at it let us enact annulments for infertile couples and those who just don’t want children. They are not helping in sustaining the species…How about if you don’t pop out a child within the first year of marriage, your marriage automatically goes poofta and you get downgraded to civil union status.

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 11:01pm
  21. So your marriage was so bad, that you left your house to go bother other people. Sounds like a good case of the ” need a bone” issue rearing its head again.

    Posted on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 at 11:29pm
  22. “Seperate but Equal”? Does that ring any bells?

    Posted on Wednesday, February 8, 2012 at 3:32am