URGENT MARRIAGE ALERT: Repealing Gay Marriage To Be Voted On Feb 1st! Tell your Legislators to vote YES on HB437!


NH Alert

Dear Marriage Supporter,

I've got exciting news! We've been told that HB437—a bill to repeal same-sex marriage—will be voted on Next Wednesday, February 1st!

Now is the time to call your legislators—especially House members—right away and ask them to VOTE YES ON HB437!

For more than two years, we've been working towards this moment. Thanks to your hard work and dedication, a majority in both houses now supports marriage and we are optimistic about next Wednesday's vote.

But Governor Lynch has already made it crystal clear that he plans to veto the bill—meaning it will take a 2/3 majority to override his veto.

That's why it's imperative that everyone makes calls right now on behalf of marriage and HB437! And the closest battle will be in the House of Representatives.

Please make at least two phone calls right now!

Take Action Now

Please also take the critical step of calling all your friends and family and encouraging them to do the same. Please forward this email on to them, or print this alert out and bring it with you to your church or community center! Everything you can do to encourage people to make calls helps the cause!

A personal phone call from a constituent is, after all, one of the most powerful and effective ways of contacting elected officials, especially New Hampshire state house members who answer their own phones.

Please take a moment to make a few phone calls right away, and plan on making a few calls later as well as we approach the vote next Wednesday. Tell them it's time for them to follow through with the mandate voters gave them in 2010 and repeal same-sex marriage. Time is short! The vote is next Wednesday!

In addition to your phone calls, with just a few clicks of the mouse—and a couple of minutes of your time—you can also send an email to each of the state senators and representatives from your district, giving your legislators a written record of your support for marriage.

Click here to send your email now!

Take Action Now

HB437 is a compromise bill—but it's a compromise that respects and restores the definition of marriage, while also allowing existing same-sex marriages to remain intact and providing benefits through civil unions.

Every vote counts, so please contact your legislators right away. I'll be sure to keep you up to date as things continue to develop. And please join me in praying and working for good news come next Wednesday!


Contributions or gifts to the National Organization for Marriage, a 501(c)(4) organization, are not tax-deductible. The National Organization for Marriage does not accept contributions from business corporations, labor unions, foreign nationals, or federal contractors; however, it may accept contributions from federally registered political action committees. Donations may be used for political purposes such as supporting or opposing candidates. No funds will be earmarked or reserved for any political purpose.

This message has been authorized and paid for by the National Organization for Marriage, 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20006, Brian Brown, President. This message has not been authorized or approved by any candidate.


  1. Louis E.
    Posted January 27, 2012 at 11:17 pm | Permalink

    I wish the headline made clear this was a New Hampshire bill and avoided that loaded term "gay marriage".People being "gay" is not a legitimate consideration in marriage legislation and appears nowhere in eligibility requirements.

  2. Zack
    Posted January 28, 2012 at 12:55 am | Permalink

    Holy cow.

    Go go go!

  3. Fedele Razio
    Posted January 28, 2012 at 5:18 am | Permalink

    Dear NOM:

    Please STOP using the expression "same sex marriage". If it's a marriage, it can't be "same sex".

    If you use the words "same sex marriage" you're admitting it's a marriage, and if it's a marriage, why can't it be legal?

    So, if you continue using the words "same sex marriage", you will loose.

    Let's say it again: if it's a marriage, it's not "same sex", and if it's "same sex", it's not a marriage.

  4. kieran
    Posted January 28, 2012 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    Dear NOM-

    Why are you pushing this legislation and not trying to get a vote of the people, since you constantly scream to "Let the People Vote"?

    Why are you pushing this legislation thru when there are bigger issues, like the economy, to deal with? I mean, that is part of your reasoning for opposing equal rights in Washington and Maryland, right?

    In short, NOM, why are you being hypocritical?

  5. Fedele Razio
    Posted January 28, 2012 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    "Why are you pushing this legislation thru when there are bigger issues, like the economy, to deal with?"

    It's simple: strong man/ woman families implies better economy. So... restoring marriage is a urgent economic matter.

  6. Louis E.
    Posted January 28, 2012 at 1:17 pm | Permalink

    Fedele Razio,it is much better to say "same sex marriage" than "gay marriage" (which is almost as bad as "marriage equality").It's perfectly true that uniting opposite-sex partners is the whole reason marriage exists,but the implication that persons calling themselves "gay" is relevant serves the advocates of SSM,that issue needs to be ignored in the interest of enforcing the opposite-sex-partner requirement.

    Kieran,the NH legislature already delayed the issue to deal with economy etc. last year.But anywhere SSM exists,its abolition is urgent!!

  7. Rick DeLano
    Posted January 28, 2012 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

    "Same sex pseudo-marriage" works for me.

  8. Little man
    Posted January 28, 2012 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

    I sent out some alerts for people who know people in New Hampshire. But it is a tiny State (very classy, and orderly, when i visited) where now there's not as many young people. So, it's hard to find someone we know directly who is a voter, resident of New Hampshire. I suppose that's why the same-sex civil marriage law was pushed there - the people could not build up enough money to neutralize the semi-bribe money coming from organizations in other States using it as a crucible due to the relatively small population. Now that NOM is active there, the matter is more balanced. And since the State is small, it's also easier to reverse the same-sex civil marriage law. Easier, not easy.

  9. yoshi
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    I'm always amused that NOM keeps pushing a rather recent definition of marriage was was last modified by the Supreme Court in 1967.

    This effort fail in NH which isn't doesn't have an large of an evangelical population who insist on forcing their views on others.

  10. Louis E.
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 4:32 pm | Permalink

    Yoshi,the basic definition of marriage remains the same,in 1967 an attempt to interfere with it (not nearly as grave as the attempt to include same-sex couples) was quashed,

Comments are temporarily disabled. Please try back later.