A New Hampshire resident writes to the Nashua Telegraph:
The Dec. 28 editorial titled “Gay-marriage law assault perplexing” left me equally perplexed – and insulted.
What you characterize as an “assault” is actually a commonsense effort to finally put a much-needed check on a social activist agenda that doesn’t reflect the will of the people in New Hampshire.
Your editorial also drips with contempt for voters who last year rejected politicians who supported gay marriage when they should have been focusing on fixing our broken economy.
It may come as news to you, but voters are right to demand that their elected representatives show respect for the will of the people who elected them in the first place.
Unlike The Telegraph, I, for one, am glad to see politicians are heeding the message of 2010 and showing some backbone against liberal activists using New Hampshire to further their political and social agendas.
18 Comments
Oops, the vote has been delayed again, for at least another month. Some backbone.
The vote will come Joe and I predict you will not appreciate the results.
If the vote comes, and it passes and the governor vetoes is, there is some question if they have enough votes to override the veto.
However, say it passes and the law is repealed, this is what will happen: During the next election cycle, Democrats will regain the majority and restore same sex marriage. That is a given.
New Hampshire hasn't had a Republican controlled congress in years because it is an extremely blue state. The only reason they have a Republican controlled congress now is because of the Tea Party hype and people wanted more fiscally conservative representatives. Once in office, these new republicans also started putting through laws focusing on social issues, which the majority of the people do not like.
New Hampshire is one of the least religious states and extremely liberal on social issues (Just look at how poorly Santorum did there on the same ultra-religious platform). Every poll coming out of New Hampshire favors keeping the law in place. If it is repealed, it will be back next year.
Arthur,I am on the whole a "social liberal",and a lifelong Democrat,but nothing makes me more embarrassed to be either,or feel more betrayed by those I have always trusted,by the identification of either label with the monstrous error of treating homosexual orientation as offering any exemption from the absolute responsibility of all humans to refrain from any same-sex sexual activity.
Louis, that is your opinion and you are welcome to it. I was just saying that some people (the majority of the population of New Hampshire for example) do not feel that way.
As mentioned, New Hampshire is not very religious at all. As a result, they are extremely liberal on social issues because they are looking at the world from that standpoint. If same sex marriage is repealed this year, it most definetely will be back next election cycle.
I agree with Arthur. The convention wisdom seems to be the vote got delayed because 1) the leadership was worried it doesn't have the votes to override the inevitable veto and/or 2) NH legislators are not anxious to face the voters on this issue next fall. Something like 75% of New Hampshire voters oppose the repeal. Likely more 1 than 2 in my opinion.
I doubt the repeal of same-sex marriages will result in another democratic legislature. If the economy is good and the legislature is shown to have tackled the fiscal issues head on and handled them the way the people expected, they won't lose their seats.
Like in California, why does it consistently vote democrat? It's not because of social issues, it's because the people in the major cities of L.A., Sacremento and San Fransisco expect the government to provide for them.
Zack, that is precisely my point. None of these republicans ran their election with being against same sex marriage as their platform. To be against gay marriage in New Hampshire is political suicide in that state. They were elected SOLELY on a fiscal platform.
New Hampshire OVERWHELMINGLY approves of same sex marriage, and the majority of the citizens did not want social issues to be involved. The GOP took it among themselves to do so. For a republican to keep their post, the only safe thing to do is focus on nothing but jobs and economy. To start voting on social issues in New Hapmshire is a guaranteed way to lose the next election.
I suppose, Arthur, that it is just a coincidence that the democratic majority in NH and in other states were thrown out immediately after pushing for SS"M" after over a decade of an economic slump.
Regardless of whatever spin the mainstream media and gay activist magazines spoon feed you, support for SS"M" is not nearly as high as you want to believe, otherwise, the NH legislature wouldn't be discussing a repeal at all. Remember that SS"M" enjoyed "overwhelming public support" in CA and ME before it was voted down in both states by referendum.
By taking leftist propoganda as gospel, you are only setting yourself up for a crushing disappointment when this vote eventually comes around.
This letter says, with no support, that SSM is against the will of the people of NH. Who says? In fact, the polls show strong opposition to repealing SSM -- over 60% of voters oppose that.
Son of Adam, each state views same sex marriage differently, but when looking specifically at New Hampshire, ever poll taken says the state is in favor of it. Every poll shows against repeal. Same sex marriage was never brought up during the election.
New Hampshire is very liberal socially. You saw the clips of Santorum being booed by college REPUBLICANS on his stance against gay marriage.
In states like Alabama, where religion is extremely important, in New Hampshire, it isn't and the state's politics reflect that.
New Hampshire is generally perceived as a rather conservative state.I suspect the popular lack of enthusiasm for repealing SSM would quickly poll as lack of enthusiasm for reinstating it if repeal went through.
Your statements are based on your slanted views, Arthur. I saw the clips you mentioned, and the boos you referred to were easily drowned out by the applause of other students.
And I wouldn't trust the polls on this issue if I were you. They are mostly conducted by those who favor SS"M" and know how to structure questions that get the answers they want.
Authur- They said Proposition 8 would not pass either because the people were against it, how did that turnout..?
Also, LET THE PEOPLE VOTE, and see how your “theory" turns out...
"MARRIAGE BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN will ALWAYS be a WINNING argument, period.
It's do or die, there is no gray area or in between, "we" are all genetically heterosexuals... No one is born gay, it would be genetically impossible. We fight in every State until people wakeup to reality about homosexuality and those who prescribes to it…
Artthur SSM is not a political issue even though others make it out to be, it’s a human issue, a moral issue...You speak of compromise as if the SSM argument is worthy of one...
It is our duty as humans for the survival of our society, and future societies to come, to discourage others from homosexuality and to stay on the right side of the issue... not the wrongs side! SSM homosexuality should be discouraged in all 50 plus States, and we work together until that happens, period! Or can give the SSMers NH, while the rest of us move out of that area, and let mother nature take its course… problem solved!
:.)
SS"M" has lost the vast majority of court cases, Arthur. So apparently the values that support the natural family have far more credibility under the law than you think.
The point is that the New Hampshire legislature now has more time to hear from their constituents. CALL, FAX, EMAIL, VISIT every single one of them, including Governor "Flinch!" Make your opinion clear! If they don't hear from you. they'll think they can get away with this nonsense. Tell them NO, loudly and clearly.
Karen...NO on SSM,but YES on repealing it!
Arthur, my point is that them repealing this will not result in them being thrown out. Most likely the people approve of the job they're doing since their unemployment is lower compared to the rest of the nation. When the economy improves, getting "revenge" on those who rescinded the same-sex marriage law are not likely to be thrown out.
Either way, I'm all for the repeal.