Posted on 10/08/2005 4:25:27 AM PDT by Crackingham
Gov. John Lynch said he's against gay marriage, but opposes changing the state's constitution to ban it. The Democratic governor has plenty of company among legislators of both parties, who said Thursday they saw little chance of the amendment passing.
"There is no need to amend our constitution to do what is already set in law," Lynch said, expressing views shared by many. "Our time is better spent focusing on the real challenges facing New Hampshire and working to unite people, not divide them."
New Hampshire law already defines marriage as the union between one man and one woman. But on Wednesday, a commission studying same-sex unions voted to recommend a constitutional amendment to limit marriage to male-female couples. Any move to change New Hampshire's constitution would have to pass the House and Senate before going before voters in a referendum.
Sen. Jack Barnes said he proposed the amendment so voters will be able to see where their representatives stand.
"People have a right to know how the people they elected feel on certain issues," said Barnes, R-Raymond.
But lawmakers on both sides of the issue said they welcomed the start of a long-term debate on gay marriage in New Hampshire.
"From the societal point of view, it's about time we began that," said Rep. Jim MacKay, R-Concord, who sits on the gay marriage commission. MacKay voted against an amendment.
"Right now, it's the third rail of politics: nobody wants to touch it," said Rep. Tony Soltani, R-Epsom, chairman of the commission. Soltani supports an amendment. "I don't expect anybody in a leadership position to be enthusiastic about it or make it a part of the platform. I do expect them to give it due consideration," he said.
Sorta like being opposed to toddlers drinking Drano but against locking the cabinet door?
That's what NH gets for not re-electing Craig Benson.
Wouldn't be a Democrat if he didn't say he personally is
against something immoral but is even more agianst doing
anything to prevent the Courts from easily changing the
status of the immoral -in the ways of the corrupt courts.
Like all the other Democrats &Rinos who insist they are good Christians but also believe in separation of church and state.There is an old Eastern truism that suggests even
a decision to do nothing when action is called for is a valid decision. By his statement we know he is less concerned about his persoanl redemption than he is concerned about protecting his political futures. Rotten to the freakin' core.
That's what NH gets for not re-electing Craig Benson.
Craig didn't work at being re-elected. He was a good Guv.
But he seemed to work at pissing people off.
one of us ha smisunderstood what the other was trying to say.I may well have spoken in terms you cannot understand --but do believe I did NOT say what you seem to suggest?
By not supporting a Constitutional amendment to bring State Law in line with what he professes to believe indicates he is a LIAR. Indicates he believes more that the issue can be
decided by someone else.Indicates his belief in the act of
doing nothing is more potent than his supposed disagreement with the idea of same sex marriage.
EA: That kind of attitude certainly works well- let's see what happened in someplace, oh, let's see what happened in the Netherlands with their open attitude. The society there is not living with a rampant epidemic of drugees, mercy-killings (at both ends of life), abortion, and public intimidation by islamofacists.
Oh, my bad. It is certainly so much easier and more enlightened to cop an attitude of tolerant enlightenment - must be fun at unitarian parties.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.