NH GOP Apparently Delaying Attempt To End Marriage Equality

New Hampshire Republicans, who possess veto-proof majorities in both houses of the legislature, have apparently decided not to attempt to repeal that state's marriage equality law in 2011. The Democratic Governor John Lynch signed a marriage equality bill into law June 3, 2009 which went info effect January 1, 2010. He had vowed to veto any attempt to repeal the measure. In the 2010 election the National Organization for Marriage strongly supported Lynch's opponent and supported Republican state legislative candidates.

The Associated Press reports:

"House Republican Leader D.J. Bettencourt confirmed to The Associated Press on Wednesday that jobs and the economy will be the top priorities on an agenda to be announced Thursday. Bettencourt says there's widespread agreement that social issues will have to take a back seat."

The New Hampshire Freedom To Marry Coalition responded:

“We are pleased again to hear the House majority leader say that gay marriage is not a priority this legislative session. Voters want their legislators to focus on the economy; they did not send people to Concord to rehash marriage equality. But we heard some wiggle room in today’s remarks, leaving the door open to bring up a repeal of marriage equality in the coming weeks. We are continuing our efforts to educate and engage all Granite Staters as planned to show that it’s not the role of government to take away rights from New Hampshire citizens and families.”

GLAD, ACLU File Lawsuits Challenging DOMA

Suzanne & Geraldine Ardis are married and
raising three boys in Clinton, CT.

Interesting news on the civil rights front. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) arefiling lawsuits today challenging the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) on behalf of same-sex married couples from New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut and New York.

The New York Times reports in ("Gay Couples To Sue U.S. Over Marriage Law"):

The two new lawsuits, which involve plaintiffs from New York, Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire, expand the attack geographically and also encompass more of the 1,138 federal laws and regulations that the Defense of Marriage Act potentially affects — including the insurance costs amounting to several hundred dollars a month in the case of Ms. Pedersen and Ms. Meitzen, and a $350,0000 estate tax payment in the A.C.L.U. case.

The civil liberties union filed suit on behalf of Edith S. Windsor, whose spouse, Thea C. Spyer, died last year of aortic stenosis. The two women, New Yorkers who had been together for 44 years, married in Toronto in 2007. New York officially recognizes same-sex marriages performed in other states. Had the two been man and wife, there would have been no federal estate tax to pay.

“It’s just so unfair,” said Ms. Windsor, who is 81.

Taken together, said Mary Bonauto, the director of the Civil Rights Project for the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, the cases show same-sex couples “are falling through the safety net other people count on.”

Traditionally, Ms. Bonauto noted, the federal government has left the definition of marriage to the states. “The federal government has respected those determinations, except in the instance of gay and lesbian couples marrying,” she said. The result, she said, is a violation of constitutional guarantees of equal protection.

GLAD does not play. Many people expect them to win their other lawsuit challenging DOMA, Gill v. OPM,  which is currently before the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals with GLAD winning at the circuit court level. That lawsuit was on behalf of same-sex couples who have been married in Massachusetts for at least 5 years.

State Of Same-Sex Couple Recognition in U.S.

hat/tip to Joe.My.God

Now There Are 5 States With Gay Marriage

In New Hampshire, same-sex couples can now get married. There are now five states, New Hampshire, Vermont, Iowa, Connecticut and Massachusetts, where marriage equality is the law of the land. The District of Columbia is likely to join them in a few weeks, and there's an outside chance that New Jersey may enact marriage equality, too, but it must happen before January 19th and a new Republican Governor is inaugurated.

Other than that, in 2010 most of the action in LGBT rights will be happening at the federal level.

From the New York Times coverage of New Hampshire marriage equality, this excerpt stood out for me:

The marriage law grants no new rights to gays, who two years ago won the right to civil unions, but it eliminates the separate status so both heterosexual and homosexual couples will be considered married.

Democratic Gov. John Lynch, who personally opposes gay marriage, signed the legislation after lawmakers passed key language affirming religious rights. The law spells out that churches and religious groups can't be forced to officiate at gay marriages or provide other services.

Through late December, 40 gay couples had applied for marriage licenses valid for 90 days, said Stephen Wurtz, acting director of the state division of vital records. In 2009, 188 civil unions were performed with eight licenses still outstanding. Forty-two civil unions have been dissolved, though some were performed in Vermont. In 2008, 621 civil unions were performed.

Some couples -- like Burr, 51, and Blair, 46 -- plan to wed quickly. A few may gather at the Statehouse to ring in the New Year by exchanging vows in a general celebration. Others want to wait to honor non-legally binding commitment anniversaries from years past.

[...]

Burr and Blair said New Hampshire's marriage law, while important, does not grant them full equality.

''We're halfway there,'' Blair said. ''We got the state rights. We had civil unions. Now we have marriage. But until we get full equal rights under the federal law, we'll never be there. We'll never be truly equal.''

Look at the small numbers involved--in what way can someone else's marriage affect yours? There are still an estimated 18,000 legally married same-sex couples in California (I am in one of them), which is more gay marriages than any other state. If the argument by heterosexual supremacists is true, please explain what impact all these couples have on marriages around the country?

Vermont Same Sex Marriages Start Today!

Same-sex marriages begin tomorrow in Vermont, the fifth state in the Union to allow them, after Massachusetts (May 17, 2004), California (June 16, 2008), Connecticut (November 13, 2008), and Iowa (April 27, 2009). Due to California's Proposition 8, as of September 1, 2009 there will only be four states where same-sex couples CAN get legally married.

Depending on the disposition of Question 1 in Maine's special election on Tuesday November 3, starting January 1, 2010 there will be either five or six states where same-sex couples can get married, since New Hampshire's marriage equality law goes into effect on that date and whether Maine still has marriage equality will depend on the results of the November election.

Census Announces It Will Count Same-Sex Married Couples

Great news about the 2010 Census! Following up on Wednesday's badly received announcement that the Obama administration was directing all federal agencies to include same-sex domestic partners in previously optional employment benefits like relocation reimbursement, the Bureau of the Census has announced that they will include same-sex married couples in the 2010 count of all Americans.

This is big news, and an exciting day for academics and my friends at the Williams Institute at UCLA Law School.

The New York Times reported:

Steve Jost, a spokesman for the Census Bureau, said same-sex couples would be counted, “and they ought to report the way they see themselves,” adding, “In the normal process of reports coming out after the census of 2010, I think the country will have a good data set on which to discuss this phenomenon that is evolving in this country.”

Same-sex couples could not be married in the United States during the last decennial count. But last year, after two states had approved same-sex marriages, the bureau said those legal marriages would go uncounted because the federal Defense of Marriage Act prevented the government from recognizing them.

Interestingly, by the time the Census gets underway in March 2010, there will exist married same-sex couples in at least 7 states, and possibly 9. Right now, there are legally married gay and lesbian couples in Massachusetts, California, Connecticut and Iowa with Vermont and Maine having laws that go into effect in September 2009 and New Hampshire has a law that goes into effect January 1, 2010. The legislative battles over legal same-sex marriage in New Jersey and New York may have been resolved by then as well.

Rea Carey, executive director of The Task Force sent around a list of Frequently Asked Questions:

Why should I care about the Census?

The U.S. Census creates an essential portrait of our nation, every ten years. This data is used to determine the appropriate number of seats in the House of Representatives. It provides key population numbers for Congress and the Administration to determine how federal dollars flow to the states and the data is used by researchers, advocates and policy makers to develop reports, social service programs, and make critical policy decisions. Accordingly, the Census has a big impact on the political power and economic security of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.

Since 1990, when the Census added the “unmarried partner” designation on its form, people in same-sex relationships have provided the first visible record of our partnerships in the history of our nation. This data has been very important in countering misconceptions about the LGBT community. For instance, the 2000 Census showed that same-sex couples live in nearly every county in the nation, and that Black and Latino same-sex couples are raising children at nearly the rates of their heterosexual peers, while earning lower incomes.

Is there a sexual orientation or gender identity question on the 2010 Census?

No. Two Reasons:

(1) Questions on the Census take years to advocate for, and must be funded by the passage of legislation through Congress. We are just emerging from the anti-LGBT years of the Bush administration, when this was impossible.

(2) There are only 5 questions on the 2010 Census. They are big, general questions that give over-arching demographic information about every single household in the U.S. They pertain to:

Age

Sex

Race/Ethnicity

Relationship

Tenure (rent/own your home)

While we cannot as individual LGBT people make our sexual orientation or gender identity visible on the 2010 Census form, those of us who are partnered can check the “unmarried partner” box, and those couples that have legally married can check the “husband or wife” box.

A note for bi/multi-racial couples: It is not widely known that the race of the household member who fills out the Census form determines the racial designation of a family in one of the Census’ major statistical tables. Given that people of color are often undercounted by the Census, couples or families may want to consider having a person of color identify as household member #1 when filling out the form for a family.

How do I know that the government won’t use this information to target me or my family for discrimination?

The Census must ensure absolute confidentiality of these records in order to carry out its monumental task every ten years. There is no record of any LGBT individual or family being persecuted for checking the “unmarried partner” box.

Another interesting thought experiment is how many states do you think will have gay marriage in 2020? Ten? Twenty? All 50 (51)?

Gay Marriage Tipping Point Reached?

Kevin Drum and Joe.My.God both blogged about the above graph from Andrew Gelman at FiveThirtyEight.com in the last few days. The key paragraphs are:

Jeff Lax and Justin Phillips put together a dataset using national opinion polls from 1994 through 2009 and analyzed several different opinion questions on gay rights. Here I'm going to talk about their estimates of state-by-state trends in support for gay marriage.

In the past fifteen years, gay marriage has increased in popularity in all fifty states. No news there, but what was a surprise to me is where the largest changes have occurred. The popularity of gay marriage has increased fastest in the states where gay rights were already relatively popular in the 1990s.

In 1995, support for gay marriage exceeded 30% in only six states: New York, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Massachusetts, California, and Vermont. In these states, support for gay marriage has increased by an average of almost 20 percentage points. In contrast, support has increased by less than 10 percentage points in the six states that in 1995 were most anti-gay-marriage--Utah, Oklahoma, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, and Idaho.

These are definitely important and interesting observations, but digging deeper, there is even more.

Most other commenters did not also discuss this even more interesting graph, which shows the current percentage of people who, when polled who support marriage for same-sex couples and/or civil unions.

Looking closely at the dark red dots, notice that marriage for same-sex couples is basically only legal in the states where it is above 50 percent. The three states which have marriage (within margin of error) at 50 percent but do not have marriage equality right now are Rhode Island, California and New York.

Clearly, a state to look at closely at in the future is Iowa which legalized marriage equality though a unanimous court decision in April.

Other interesting data to include here would be to indicate the states which have comprehensive non-discrimination laws that include sexual orientation (and gender identity).

New Hampshire Governor Signs Marriage Equality Bill

Wow, that was fast! Both houses of the New Hampshire legislature passed (14-10 and 198-176) and Democratic Governor John Lynch signed into law a bill to allow same-sex couples to marry starting January 1, 2010 today!

From the Human Rights Campaign press release:

The Human Rights Campaign salutes the work of key state groups and leaders, including: Gov. John Lynch, Senate President Sylvia Larsen, Senate Majority Leader Maggie Hassan, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Deb Reynolds, House Speaker Terie Norelli and Representatives Jim Splaine, Ed Butler, Paul McEachern, Barbara Richardson, New Hampshire Freedom to Marry Coalition, MassEquality, GLAD, and the many activists, including HRC members, who have been working to build support for this legislation, and the majority of New Hampshire voters who support marriage equality.

"When the National Organization for Marriage [a group opposed to marriage equality] started making $50,000 ad buys in New Hampshire, I put out a call for help and HRC answered. We could not have done this without them," said Mo Baxley, Executive Director of the New Hampshire Freedom to Marry Coalition.

[...]

In addition to New Hampshire, five states have recognized marriage for same-sex couples under state law: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont (effective September 1, 2009), and Maine (effective September, 2009, pending a possible referendum). California recognized marriage by same-sex couples between June and November of 2008, before voters approved Proposition 8, which amended the state constitution to prohibit marriage equality. The Proposition 8 vote was challenged, but the state supreme court upheld the amendment last month. The 18,000 marriages of same-sex couples performed before the passage of Proposition 8 remain valid.

Five states-California, New Jersey, Oregon, Nevada (effective October 1, 2009), and Washington (as of July 26, 2009, pending possible repeal effort)-plus Washington, D.C. provide same-sex couples with access to the state level benefits and responsibilities of marriage, through either civil unions or domestic partnerships.

Hawaii provides same-sex couples with limited rights and benefits. New York recognizes marriages by same-sex couples validly entered into outside of New York. The New York legislature is considering marriage legislation that would permit same-sex couples to marry in those states, and the D.C. Council has passed legislation that would recognize marriages by same-sex couples legally entered into in other jurisdictions (that legislation is going through a Congressional review period).

Text Of "Religious Freedom Amendment" To HB 436

Here is the text of the language Governor John Lynch (D-NH) has insisted must be included into that state's marriage equality bill in order for him to sign it into law:

I. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a religious organization, association, or society, or any individual who is managed, directed, or supervised by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society, or any nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges to an individual if such request for such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges is related to the solemnization of a marriage, the celebration of a marriage, or the promotion of marriage through religious counseling, programs, courses, retreats, or housing designated for married individuals, and such solemnization, celebration, or promotion of marriage is in violation of their religious beliefs and faith. Any refusal to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges in accordance with this section shall not create any civil claim or cause of action or result in any state action to penalize or withhold benefits from such religious organization, association or society, or any individual who is managed, directed, or supervised by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society, or any nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society.

II. The marriage laws of this state shall not be construed to affect the ability of a fraternal benefit society to determine the admission of members pursuant to RSA 418:5, and shall not require a fraternal benefit society that has been established and is operating for charitable and educational purposes and which is operated, supervised or controlled by or in connection with a religious organization to provide insurance benefits to any person if to do so would violate the fraternal benefit society's free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States and part 1, article 5 of the Constitution of New Hampshire.

III. Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed or construed to limit the protections and exemptions provided to religious organizations under RSA § 354-A:18.

IV. Repeal. RSA 457-A, relative to civil unions, is repealed effective January 1, 2011, except that no new civil unions shall be established after January 1, 2010.

I would like a reiteration that nothing in this statute allows discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation but, barring that, perhaps a severability clause if one part of the bill is struck down, the rest of the statute remains law.

Competing Marriage Equality Ads in New Hampshire

There is an air war going on in New Hampshire as Governor John Lynch decides on what he wants to do with HB 436 when it reaches his desk. He will have five days to either sign or veto the bill or it becomes law without his signature. Here are the competing videos:

First, here's the opposition from the "National Organization for Marriage":


Notice the use of the religious imagery of the yellow cross in the "marriage is between a man + a woman" even though this legislation is about civil marriage and does not impact the definition of marriage for any church, synagogue or mosque. Shameless exploitation of children, not unexpectedly (litotes!)

And now here's the New Hampshire Freedom To Marry Coalition ad


Please help NH FTM raise money to keep this ad on the air. They say they are being outspent 3 to 1 by NOM.

New Hamphire Marriage Bill On Gov Lynch's Desk

Yesterday, the New Hampshire legislature put the final touches on a marriage bill when the House passed the amended version of HB 436 by a vote of 178-167 and sent it to Governor John Lynch (D) who can sign it, veto it or allowing it to become law through inaction.

TowleRoad reports that Lynch made a comment on the bill yesterday:

"I'm going to talk to legislators and I'm going to talk to the people of New Hampshire and ultimately make the best decision I can for the people of New Hampshire."

Governor Lynch wants to hear from you! Won't you contact him?

Office of the Governor
State House
25 Capitol Street
Concord, NH 03301
(603)271-2121
(603)271-7680 (fax)

Maine Gov Signs Marriage Bill Into Law!!

Pam's House Blend is reporting that Governor Jim Baldacci, Democrat of Maine, has signed LD 1020 into law, making Maine the 5th state in the United States to end the exclusion of same-sex couples from civil marriage. Maine becomes the third state this year (after Iowa and Vermont) to enact same-sex marriage, with New Hampshire, New Jersey and even New York expected to follow by the end of the year.

Here's Baldacci's statement on why he signed Maine's marriage equality bill into law:

“I have followed closely the debate on this issue. I have listened to both sides, as they have presented their arguments during the public hearing and on the floor of the Maine Senate and the House of Representatives. I have read many of the notes and letters sent to my office, and I have weighed my decision carefully,” Governor Baldacci said. “I did not come to this decision lightly or in haste.”

“I appreciate the tone brought to this debate by both sides of the issue,” Governor Baldacci said. “This is an emotional issue that touches deeply many of our most important ideals and traditions. There are good, earnest and honest people on both sides of the question.”

“In the past, I opposed gay marriage while supporting the idea of civil unions,” Governor Baldacci said. “I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law, and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage.”

“Article I in the Maine Constitution states that ‘no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor be denied the equal protection of the laws, nor be denied the enjoyment of that person’s civil rights or be discriminated against.’”

“This new law does not force any religion to recognize a marriage that falls outside of its beliefs. It does not require the church to perform any ceremony with which it disagrees. Instead, it reaffirms the separation of Church and State,” Governor Baldacci said.

“It guarantees that Maine citizens will be treated equally under Maine’s civil marriage laws, and that is the responsibility of government.”

“Even as I sign this important legislation into law, I recognize that this may not be the final word,” Governor Baldacci said. “Just as the Maine Constitution demands that all people are treated equally under the law, it also guarantees that the ultimate political power in the State belongs to the people.”

“While the good and just people of Maine may determine this issue, my responsibility is to uphold the Constitution and do, as best as possible, what is right. I believe that signing this legislation is the right thing to do,” Governor Baldacci said.

From your mouth to California Chief Justice Ronald George's ears. The California Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of Proposition 8 by June 3, and it rumored that it may announce its decision as soon as Thursday May 7th or Monday May 11th. MadProfessah has his money on Thursday May 21.

VIDEO: New Hampshire Marriage Equality Ad

Action on Marriage in New Hampshire and Maine

The above graphic reflects the reality of the New York Times/CBS poll MadProfessah blogged about earlier in the week. The legislative action on ending the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage moves to committees in Maine and New Hampshire.

In New Hampshire the State Senate amended the bill that passed the lower House 186-179 a few weeks ago and passed the measure 13-11 on its second reading today. After the third reading, it will go back to the House for concurrence on the amendments, which were (according to activist Lane Hudson):

1. amendment replaces entire bill
2. nothing in amendment takes out gender specific terms in marriage statute
3. section 1 includes new purpose and intent clause that makes clear that all NH citizens have a right to a civil marriage or a religious denomination, and that religion determines who they will marry.
4. each party to a marriage shall be designated as a bride, groom, or spouse.
5. clear now with new language that no one person can be married to more than one person at one time (duh!)
6. Section 2 ensures that the same rules that govern the age in which heteros can enter into marriage apply to same sex marriages
7. Section 3 makes clear that marriage in NH may be solemnized in one of two ways: civil or religious. hetero and homo will have access to both. again, religion determines if they will perform same sex ceremony.
8. section 5 makes clear how the State would address and accept civil unions from other States....they would be accepted as marriages in NH. those who got a civil union in NH would have a choice of pursuing and affirming a new marriage ceremony under this law, but by Jan 1, 2011, it would automatically become a marriage.
9. instructs sec of state and clerks to update their marriage certificates
10. NH Retirement system can interpret new marriage law the same as under the civil union law.
11. Section 9 indicates that if the bill should become effective, then civil union bill is repealed
12. Effective Date is Jan 1 2010.

NH Democratic Governor John Lynch has not indicated he would veto the marriage bill like the two Republican governors who have faced marriage bills previously(Arnold Schwarzenegger of California in 2005 and 2007 and Jim Douglas of Vermont in 2009).

In Maine, the Senate Judiciary committee approved their marriage bill by a 11-2-1 vote and sent it to a floor vote, which should occur within the next 48 hours. Maine's Democratic Governor, John Baldacci has also not stated whether he would sign the bill if it reaches his desk.

CT Legislature Passes Bill Codifying Marriage Ruling

Joe.My.God is reporting that the state legislature of Connecticut has completed action on a bill to codify that state's landmark Kerrigan ruling that the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage by the availability of civil unions was unconstitutional. Republican governor Jodi Rell has said that she will sign the bill once it reaches her desk.

Interestingly, the bill that was passed in Connecticut Wednesday night was similar to a bill enacted by the Vermont legislature a mere two weeks ago by overriding the veto of that state's Republican governor Jim Douglas.

According to The Day:

”Public opinion has rapidly surpassed the position that many legislators hold,” said Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, the co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee and an architect of the codification bill. “There's no doubt that the vast majority of Connecticut citizens are more than comfortable with equal rights for same-sex couples, and it doesn't undermine their lives.”

And even some of the fiercest opponents of the marriage bill were expressing satisfaction with the exemptions it carves out for churches and religious groups, like the Knights of Columbus and Catholic Charities, which sought to preserve the right to refuse to serve gay couples hoping to reserve wedding facilities or to arrange adoptions.

[...]

Religious groups warned that the bill would infringe on religious freedom and did win a late bipartisan compromise, as sponsors agreed to modify the proposal to more explicitly exempt church-affiliated groups from some provisions. The language closely mirrors that in a bill recently passed in Vermont, overriding a gubernatorial veto to legalize same-sex marriage in that state. The language expressly permits churches and related organizations - including church-owned venues and adoption agencies - to continue to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation as long as the specific services that discriminate do not receive funding from the state or federal government.

When raving homophobe Maggie Gallagher from the National Organization for Marriage debated Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese on CNN after the Vermont bill was enacted and the hilarious NOM-sponsored "Gathering Storm" ad was released she tried to get Solmonese to agree to support the "religious exemption provisions in the Vermont statute" and he demurred.

I was initially suspicious of these "religious exemption" but if they really just apply to specific services that do not receive state or federal funding then I am probably okay with that.

The problem is that the opponents of marriage equality often try to blur the difference between civil marriage and religious marriage (Dennis Prager appeared on CNN earlier this week and did exactly that while debating Perez Hilton), going as far to say insane things like if gay marriage passes preachers will be forced to marry gay people in their churches and other nonsense.

As Maine and New Hampshire continue their legislative debates of marriage bills it should be interesting to see where they land on this religious exemption question.

New Hampshire House Approves Marriage Equality

Not to be outdone by their fellow New Englanders in the Vermont Senate, the New Hampshire House of Representatives has approved a marriage equality bill by a vote of 186-179.

Interestingly, it was almost exactly two years ago that the New Hampshire legislature passed a civil unions bill that Democratic Governor John Lynch signed into law. He has said that he is opposed to same-sex marriage but unlike the Republican governor of neighboring Vermont, Lynch has not announced that he will veto the legislation if it reaches his desk.

In 2007, the House approved the civil unions bill by a vote of 243-129 and the Senate approved by a vote of 14-10. I think this is probably a good sign that the bill will make it to Lynch's desk and we can find out if takes a Democratic governor to have the cojones to sign a marriage equalitybill, or is this a peculiarly bipartisan gubernatorial defect.

NH Governor Signs Civil Unions Bill Into Law

Democratic Governor John Lynch of New Hampshire signed HB 437 into law, making the state the fourth in the Union to enact a civil unions bill, and the first not compelled by a state supreme court to do so. Vermont (1999), Connecticut (2005) and New Jersey (2006) also have civil unions laws in effect. New Hampshire's law will go into effect January 1, 2008. The official press release from the Governor's office reads:

"Dating back to the Abolitionist movement, we in New Hampshire have a long, proud history of taking the lead in opposing discrimination. Today, that tradition continues. Today, we are taking an important step against discrimination. Today, we are acting to protect New Hampshire families," Gov. Lynch said.

"Over the last several months, I have spoken with hundreds of people about this issue, and most of those people support civil unions. Some support civil unions, but feel it may be happening too fast, or too soon. Others oppose civil unions altogether and see it as a threat to marriage.

"I've listened and heard all the arguments. I do not believe this bill threatens marriage. I believe this is a matter of conscience and fairness. And my view is that, it's never too soon to act to prevent discrimination.

"People in committed relationships should not have to worry about visiting a loved one in a hospital, or whether their loved ones will inherit their estate, or the many other legal protections so many of us take for granted," Gov. Lynch said. "How could any one of us look into the eyes of our neighbors, our friends, or our loved ones if we continued to deny them these basic legal protections?

"That is why I am pleased to be here today as we further the interest of fairness, dignity and the strengthening of families.

"That is truly the New Hampshire way," Gov. Lynch said.

Wow.