Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Jase

NH House votes down gay marriage bill because of religious liberty protection clause

57 posts in this topic

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/21/gay-marriage-bill-hits-snag-in-nh/

After a yearlong string of victories nationwide, the campaign for gay marriage hit an unexpected snag Wednesday when the New Hampshire House rejected a bill that also included legal protections for religious institutions.

The House voted down the legislation 188-186, shortly after the Senate approved the bill 14-10 on a party-line vote. Both Democrat-led chambers had approved a same-sex marriage bill and sent it earlier this month to the governor for his signature.

But Gov. John Lynch sent it back, asking the legislature to include language that would protect churches and other religious institutions from prosecution if, for example, they refuse to perform same-sex marriages.

"If the legislature passes this language, I will sign the same-sex marriage bill into law. If the legislature doesn't pass these provisions, I will veto it," Mr. Lynch, a Democrat, said in his May 15 statement.

Despite the vote, the same-sex marriage issue remains in play in New Hampshire. The Senate's passage means the legislation now goes back to a conference committee, where lawmakers will attempt to resolve differences between the two chambers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame that provisions like this have to be put into a bill.

But how can anyone be AGAINST these provisions Lynch put forth...unless your intent is to destroy religous institutions that do not succumb to the homosexual agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SUCComb....lol u are teh funnay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shame that provisions like this have to be put into a bill.

But how can anyone be AGAINST these provisions Lynch put forth...unless your intent is to destroy religous institutions that do not succumb to the homosexual agenda.

Just to clarify, you are ok with churches not marrying interracial couples?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Itz Teh INTERRACIAL AGENDAZ they are pushing down our throat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife and I had several pastors turn us down to marry us for a fundamental religious reason.

While we were disappointed, we would never dream of thinking it's right to have the state force them to marry us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, you are ok with churches not marrying interracial couples?

Like orthodox jews?

Most protestant churches do not have teachings against interracial marriages.

I don't put the two in the same boat. What you screw isn't a civil protected right....yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like orthodox jews?

Most protestant churches do not have teachings against interracial marriages.

I don't put the two in the same boat. What you screw isn't a civil protected right....yet.

Not seeing an answer here.

Are you ok with any church of any religion refusing to marry interracial couples if it is their belief system not to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife and I had several pastors turn us down to marry us for a fundamental religious reason.

While we were disappointed, we would never dream of thinking it's right to have the state force them to marry us.

That would make you level-headed and willing to compromise....and I don't even know the details in which you were turned down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife and I had several pastors turn us down to marry us for a fundamental religious reason.

While we were disappointed, we would never dream of thinking it's right to have the state force them to marry us.

not smart to wear assless leather chaps to the consults.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Jesus. A 3-4 OLB at #8? Two major off-field character concerns in the 2nd round? Another slow WR in the 3rd? Never. Gonna. Happen. There's at least a decent chance that his top three picks won't even be on our draft board. Gettleman has said numerous times in the past that guys who aren't scheme fits for us aren't on our draft board. There goes McKinley. Given our past with guys like Carruth and Hardy, there's zero chance that Mixon is on our board. Given Robinson's off-field issues involving a stolen gun, I'd say there's a better than average chance that he's not on our board either. You'd be hard pressed to come up with a more unrealistic mock draft for the Panthers if you set out to try to do just that.
    • I can't say that any one of those guys ends up a Panther.  I think if Cam is there at 40 (which I doubt), then we would likely pull the trigger.
    • The need by some Americans here and across the country to demonize only select individuals for rioting (ahem, minorities) speaks directly to the fact that we've really made little actual progress since witnessing unrest in our streets dating back to the civil rights era. Ask yourself truthfully, what has really changed when the first thing some white people can think of even today in 2017 when they see a black person "rioting" is, "why are these black people so angry?"? But then white people rioting over a sporting event or a pumpkin festival is viewed as harmless tomfoolery.  If you as not only an American but also a basic human being fail to see the difference in the dynamic at play here as it pertains to the response to these instances, you are part of the problem whether you realize it or not.