Oh, New Hampshire...
Nov. 10th, 2011 05:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
averygoodun42I don't know whether to praise the craftiness of your Libertarian representatives, or be appalled at your arch-conservative bigotry...
I don't know if it's made national news yet, but since the NH House and Senate changed hands to a sweeping Republican majority last election, several bills have been presented to repeal the same-sex marriage law that went into effect here in January, 2010. This spring, the House Judiciary Committee recommended that they shelve the efforts to repeal, as the protests against the repeal were both loud and populous.
About two weeks ago, the Judiciary Committee recommended the approval of a nasty little bill that would not only repeal same-sex marriage, but would make civil unions a mockery (brothers and sisters could get a civil union under this bill, as a civil union is described as just a contract between consenting adults).
The bill also has this jewel of a passage:
“Children can only be conceived naturally through copulation by heterosexual couples. Because of this biological reality, New Hampshire has a unique, distinct, and compelling interest in promoting stable and committed marital unions between opposite-sex couples so as to increase the likelihood that children will be born to and raised by both of their natural parents. No other domestic relationship presents the same level of state interest.”
Because single parents, infertile parents and adoptive parents (and so many others) are unworthy of parenthood status, of course.
Now, normally I would be completely up in arms about something this unspeakably repugnant being approved for a vote, but, I'm thinking... Most of New Hampshire is opposed to the repeal of gay marriage. Like, 80% (!!!) are opposed to changing the current law. I wonder if this is a sneaky way of making the bill unsupportable, and therefore, get it off the table and out of the House forever. Because shelving it requires that they review it again and again and again...
It's also a way of punishing the person who presented the bill. He was told not to do so at that time by the Republican leadership who wanted to focus on jobs and debt. He did so anyway. He was seriously in the doghouse with his party at that point. I wonder if he's done something else in the meantime to piss them off enough to make an example of him.
Anyway, I suppose it is time to call my representatives (as well as my Representative friend to get the behind-the-scenes dirt) and give them my two cents. Hopefully each representative will get enough $0.02 against the bill to buy everyone in the House and Senate (and their staff) a Starbuck's Extra Grande Hazelnut Mocha Latte. And something tognash nosh on, too.
I don't know if it's made national news yet, but since the NH House and Senate changed hands to a sweeping Republican majority last election, several bills have been presented to repeal the same-sex marriage law that went into effect here in January, 2010. This spring, the House Judiciary Committee recommended that they shelve the efforts to repeal, as the protests against the repeal were both loud and populous.
About two weeks ago, the Judiciary Committee recommended the approval of a nasty little bill that would not only repeal same-sex marriage, but would make civil unions a mockery (brothers and sisters could get a civil union under this bill, as a civil union is described as just a contract between consenting adults).
The bill also has this jewel of a passage:
“Children can only be conceived naturally through copulation by heterosexual couples. Because of this biological reality, New Hampshire has a unique, distinct, and compelling interest in promoting stable and committed marital unions between opposite-sex couples so as to increase the likelihood that children will be born to and raised by both of their natural parents. No other domestic relationship presents the same level of state interest.”
Because single parents, infertile parents and adoptive parents (and so many others) are unworthy of parenthood status, of course.
Now, normally I would be completely up in arms about something this unspeakably repugnant being approved for a vote, but, I'm thinking... Most of New Hampshire is opposed to the repeal of gay marriage. Like, 80% (!!!) are opposed to changing the current law. I wonder if this is a sneaky way of making the bill unsupportable, and therefore, get it off the table and out of the House forever. Because shelving it requires that they review it again and again and again...
It's also a way of punishing the person who presented the bill. He was told not to do so at that time by the Republican leadership who wanted to focus on jobs and debt. He did so anyway. He was seriously in the doghouse with his party at that point. I wonder if he's done something else in the meantime to piss them off enough to make an example of him.
Anyway, I suppose it is time to call my representatives (as well as my Representative friend to get the behind-the-scenes dirt) and give them my two cents. Hopefully each representative will get enough $0.02 against the bill to buy everyone in the House and Senate (and their staff) a Starbuck's Extra Grande Hazelnut Mocha Latte. And something to
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-11-10 10:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-10 11:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-11-11 04:15 am (UTC)Which isn't fair because to the Libertarians to be lumped in with the Republicans. Libertarians are pro-gay marriage - that government has no business regulating marriage. Anyone who is calling themselves a Libertarian and is for dissolving the same-sex marriage act or is for this Defense of Marriage Act is not a Libertarian posing as one in name alone.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-11 04:00 pm (UTC)And, well, Libertarians are anti-government, which translates to not wanting any gov. interference on the left or right side of things. There are definitely some Libs who aren't "for" gay-marriage, but will accept it as a necessary evil to shed the chains of government.