A bill to repeal N.H.’s gay marriage law recently won a key committee endorsement, but critics say the bill will fail, and several national movements in support of marriage equality are picking up steam.
It’s been almost two years since New Hampshire’s same-sex marriage law went into effect. Since Jan. 1, 2010, about 1,750 same-sex couples have wed in the state, putting 3,500 individuals in legally recognized marriages.
According to recent polls, the extension of full marriage rights to homosexuals hasn’t bothered many people. A poll released by the UNH Survey Center on Oct. 13 found that 81 percent of residents feel gay marriage has had no impact on personal life. The poll found that 62 percent of New Hampshire residents oppose repealing the state’s gay marriage law. Only 27 percent support a repeal.
Nevertheless, the House Judiciary Committee recently voted 11-6 to recommend passage of House Bill 437, which would repeal New Hampshire’s same-sex marriage law. The Legislature will probably vote on the bill in January, and with Republicans holding strong majorities, it’s likely to pass. Whether it will attain the two-thirds majority needed to withstand Gov. John Lynch’s promised veto is less clear.
Gay rights advocates say they’re confident the bill will fail, and they’re hoping other national efforts to expand gay rights will succeed. A New Hampshire couple is among the plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit recently filed on behalf of gay military spouses, and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen is co-sponsor of a bill that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages.
To supporters of gay rights, these measures reflect a continually growing movement in support of marriage equality. But they still face aggressive opposition from social conservatives and the religious right.
Sponsored by state Rep. David Bates (R-Windham), HB 437 would go beyond repealing gay marriage. Same-sex couples who are already legally married would remain so under the bill, but no new gay marriages would take place. Civil unions would still be available to same-sex couples, but an amendment tacked on to the bill this fall would dramatically alter the definition of a civil union: they would be available to any two individuals—roommates, close friends, even siblings and other family members.
Even more alarming to critics is a provision that authorizes individuals and businesses to discriminate against same-sex couples in employment, housing and public accommodations if it violates their religious or moral beliefs.
Does the New Hampshire public want its Legislature to deny gay couples an existing right and legally permit discrimination against them? Many Republicans seem to think so. Bates did not return a call seeking comment last week.
Judiciary Committee chair Robert Rowe (R-Amherst), who voted in favor of HB 437, said he believes gay couples are entitled to the same rights as heterosexual couples, but that their union should not be labeled a marriage.
“I feel that everyone, whether they are heterosexual or homosexual, if they have a loving, caring, long-term relationship, should have the same rights. But not the same name,” Rowe said.
Why a different name? Because the dictionary has defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman for hundreds of years, Rowe said. “It’s something different and therefore I think it should have a different name.”
As for the expansion of civil unions to any two individuals, Rowe said the provision would enable other loving couples who can’t get married to receive the same rights—divorced Catholics, for example, who can’t remarry without being excommunicated from the church. He suggested the provision could also enable heterosexual people to extend their health care benefits to a sick loved one.
Rowe said he opposes the amendment authorizing discrimination against gay couples, but he expects that provision to be dropped before the bill comes to a final vote. “That will probably end up being changed, I imagine,” he said.
Portsmouth Democrat Jim Splaine would rather not take that chance. Splaine is an openly gay former House member who sponsored New Hampshire’s civil union bill in 2007 and its same-sex marriage bill in 2009. He called HB 437 “hateful and hypocritical,” and he believes many legislators will agree.
“(The bill) is so disgusting, enough legislators are going to see through it and vote against it,” Splaine said.
New Hampshire is one of six states that legally permit same-sex marriage, along with Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Iowa and the District of Columbia. Splaine said New Hampshire has contributed to national momentum in support of marriage equality. He’s relieved the Legislature was able to enact same-sex marriage before Republicans took over in 2010.
“I’m glad that we’re in a position where all we have to do is defend it, and I think we will,” he said.
But same-sex marriage is still not recognized by the federal government, even in states where it is legally allowed. The national Defense of Marriage Act defines marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman. That’s especially bad news for gay service members, whose spouses are not eligible for military benefits.
One such service member is Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan of the N.H. National Guard in Rye, Morgan’s wife and partner of 14 years, Karen Morgan, was initially not permitted to attend a yellow-ribbon integration ceremony to celebrate Morgan’s recent return from a deployment in Kuwait. Karen was only allowed to attend after Sen. Shaheen intervened on her behalf.
A couple of weeks later, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network in Washington, D.C., filed federal litigation against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, and Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki. Filed in the District of Massachusetts on behalf of eight legally married gay service members, the suit challenges the Defense of Marriage Act, seeking equal recognition, benefits and family support for same-sex spouses of past and present service members.
“We are not advocating any special treatment for the families of gay and lesbian service members or veterans, but we want to underscore that all military families should be treated the same when it comes to recognition, benefits and family support,” said U.S. Army veteran Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, in a press release.
Morgan is a cancer survivor who was recently diagnosed with a recurrence. She and Karen, a part-time special education teacher, are raising a 4-year-old daughter.
“I worry every day that my health may take a turn for the worse, and Karen would be unable to receive the survivor’s benefits to help take care of our daughter,” she said in the release. “We are only asking for fair and equitable treatment as a recognized family.”
Another challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act is a proposed bill introduced this year in the U.S. Congress. The Respect for Marriage Act would allow same-sex couples whose marriage is recognized by a state to receive the same treatment under federal law as straight married couples. The Senate version of the bill is sponsored by Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) along with 18 co-sponsors, including Shaheen.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on the bill this week. It is already supported by President Barack Obama and former President Bill Clinton, who signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law in 1996.
It wouldn’t be the first victory claimed by gay rights advocates this year. A repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy went into effect in September, allowing gays to serve openly in the military.
But a demonstration of the ongoing animosity toward homosexuals came during a Republican presidential debate in Orlando in late September. The audience loudly booed an Army soldier who identified himself as gay and asked a question about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” New Hampshire Rep. Alfred Baldasaro (R-Londonderry) applauded the booing and said he was “disgusted” by the soldier.
Several organizations are seeking to stifle the marriage equality movement, both nationally and in New Hampshire. The National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex marriage, praised the N.H. House Judiciary Committee for voting in favor of HB 437 last month.
Chris Plante, executive director of the NOM’s Rhode Island branch, denied that the marriage equality movement is gaining national steam. He said every state that has put the matter to a public vote has rejected same-sex marriage.
Despite consistent polling numbers that show strong opposition to a repeal of gay marriage in New Hampshire, Plante maintains that most citizens want the law repealed. He said polling results are often flawed.
“I’m convinced that it’s something the citizens of New Hampshire really want,” he said. “There are problems with most of those polls, the way the questions are asked.”
What speaks for itself, Plante continued, is that state citizens voted out Democratic majorities in the 2010 elections, a year after the Legislature passed gay marriage. “I think that’s the clearest indication of what the people of New Hampshire want.”
But, according to Andrew Smith, director of the UNH Survey Center, the Republican victories in 2010 had little to do with gay marriage.
“I don’t think there’s really any evidence to support that,” he said.
Republicans won big across the nation in 2010 because, in the eyes of voters, the president’s party bears the blame for poor economic conditions, Smith said. The reverse happened in 2006 and 2008, when Democrats swept into office due to anger toward President Bush.
“What they were doing was voting for the ‘R’ or ‘D’ after the person’s name,” Smith said.
He also contests the notion that polls were skewed because people misunderstood the questions.
The UNH Survey Center conducted the same gay marriage poll in February and the results were virtually identical. In fact, the Survey Center began gauging support for gay marriage as far back as 2003.
“The results were quite similar, that people tended to favor gay marriage,” he said. “It’s been consistently between 55 and 60 percent supporting gay marriage.”
Another telling poll result is the adamancy of support for gay marriage, Smith said. Fifty percent of those polled in October said they “strongly oppose” a repeal of gay marriage, and another 12 percent said they simply “oppose” a repeal.
“Strong opponents of repealing same-sex marriage continue to outnumber strong proponents by more than two to one,” Smith said in a report about the October poll. “The New Hampshire public is not showing any strong desire to repeal this law.”
The National Organization for Marriage, meanwhile, has been accused of embellishing support for a repeal with a doctored photo. Until recently, the organization’s New Hampshire website included a photo of a large outdoor crowd, with some people raising their fists in solidarity. The other side of the photo showed NOM president Brian Brown speaking at a podium. The clear implication was that the crowd had assembled to support Brown and his anti-gay marriage message.
It was later revealed that the photo of the crowd was actually taken in Columbus, Ohio, in 2008, at a rally of Obama supporters (he was then a candidate for president). The trick was first reported by the website www.goodasyou.org and was later called out on “The Rachel Maddow Show” on MSNBC.
Plante said he was aware of the accusation but did not know enough about it to comment. He deferred questions to Brown, who was out of the country last week. The photo has since been removed from NOM’s website.
At least one group supporting gay marriage has run into its own troubles lately. Mo Baxley, executive director of the Freedom to Marry Coalition, announced on Nov. 2 she was stepping down after six years due to “a lack of funding,” according to the organization’s blog.
“We are very sad to lose Mo but remain confident in the foundation that we have built together,” board member Claire Ebel said in the blog entry.
Representatives from the Freedom to Marry Coalition did not return a call last week. Representatives from fellow gay rights advocacy group Standing Up for New Hampshire Families also could not be reached.
Splaine believes gay marriage opponents, both in New Hampshire and across the nation, are fighting a losing battle. It’s only a matter of time, he said, before the whole country recognizes that marriage equality is a basic right.
“I think we’re going to see in 20 years, 30 years, virtually all of the country ... breaking down this barrier of discrimination,” he said.
Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment