New Hampshire lawmakers move to repeal same-sex marriage

Related Topics

By Lauren Keiper

BOSTON | Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:27pm EDT

BOSTON (Reuters) - Some lawmakers in New Hampshire, one of only six states that allow same-sex marriage, moved on Wednesday to repeal the state law allowing gay nuptials.

An amendment passed by a House Judiciary subcommittee 3 to 1, alters a bill that in its original form banned both gay marriage and civil unions, said House spokeswoman Shannon Shutts.

The amended bill would allow civil unions but would define marriage as only between a man and a woman, said state Representative David Bates, a Republican and co-sponsor of the amendment.

It would allow existing same-sex marriages to be recognized.

New Hampshire is one of six states that allow same-sex marriage, along with Iowa, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, New York and the District of Columbia.

New Hampshire's gay marriage law took effect on January 1, 2010. Democratic Governor John Lynch has said he would veto any bills to repeal it.

Legalization of gay marriage in New York less than two months ago, was widely seen as a boost to gay rights and momentum for passage in other states.

But New Hampshire has strong Republican majorities in both the House and Senate, and many Republicans are opposed to gay marriage.

Results of a WMUR Granite State Poll released in February showed 62 percent of respondents opposed repeal of the New Hampshire law.

The amended bill will be recommended to the full House Judiciary Committee next month and early next year to the House, Bates said.

If passed, it would eventually move on to the state Senate for a vote.

(Editing by Greg McCune)
U.S.
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (6)
Snidely70448 wrote:
Republicans need to get a life. Mind their own business. Get out of peoples’ bedrooms. I do not think it is the business of government to discriminate on the basis of whom people love and want to spend their lives with. If benefits are given to opposite sex couples, they should be given to same-sex couples.

Sep 14, 2011 5:48pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
daniwitz13 wrote:
One only perceives that people care what is done in others bedroom. That is NOT the case. Gays are NOT denied whom to love or live with. That is NOT the case. The case is, that Gays want benefits as the above points out so glaringly. But one needs to qualify for benefits of most things. It’s the Gays that should mind their own business, instead of demanding things. Pity.

Sep 14, 2011 6:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
david0296 wrote:
@ daniwitz13: Your comment is complete nonsense. The ONLY qualifications to getting married are that you have to be heterosexual, an adult, and not related too closely. That’s it! Legally, you don’t have to be in love or even know the other person your marrying. Two virtual strangers could go to city hall and get married if they wanted to. You also don’t have to be able to procreate. (Senior citizens, infertile couples, and those that don’t want children can marry.) Straight people can also get divorced and remarried as many times as they want. Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich ring a bell?

There is no rational legal argument to exclude gay American citizens from having the right to marry each other.

Sep 14, 2011 7:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.
See All Comments »