Wednesday, March 21, 2012

New Hampshire House Rejects GOP Led Repeal Of Marriage Equality

I am truly fascinated with the world view of homophobes, especially in this day and age.  Do they have no sense of history.  Do they not see themselves as the modern day equivalents of George Wallace in the civil rights era.  I guarantee you everyone else will.  Their children will.  Your children will.  Historians and novelists and readers of their books will.  Hopefully, for their sake, they will come to a point of reflection and regret their choices in the same way that Wallace himself did.  The "choice" is theirs and history's judgement of their bigotry will or will not be tempered by that choice.


We have reached a tipping point that can not be reversed.  What really fascinates me are the holdouts.  Today, in the New Hampshire House, they're were much fewer "holdouts" than expected.  This is a Republican-led body that could not even gather a majority, let alone a veto proof majority. 
     
Via The Advocate:



A Republican-led effort to repeal marriage equality in New Hampshire decisively failed today. Lawmakers voted against the repeal, against replacing marriage with civil unions, and against putting marriage rights up to a voter referendum. 

Democratic Gov. John Lynch
Just to ensure the message was clear, Republican representative Seth Cohn, who supports marriage equality, proposed banning marriage between left-handed people. That didn't pass either.The final vote was 211-116 to kill a bill that would have rescinded marriage equality in the state, and the votes against the repeal included several Republicans, such as Cohn, who broke with their party.

Gov. John Lynch signed marriage equality legislation in 2009 after it narrowly passed through the legislature, and he has promised to veto any effort to repeal the law. It would have needed to pass through both Republican-led chambers before reaching his desk. 

But the bill, introduced by state representative David Bates, couldn't muster the votes to pass the House, let alone come anywhere near the two-thirds majority needed to override a veto.

No comments:

Post a Comment