Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Gay Marriage Approved in New Hampshire
New Hampshire became the sixth state in the nation today to approve gay marriage, after legislation was enacted by both the state House and Senate and then signed by Governor John Lynch.
Supporters of gay marriage cheer in the gallery of representatives hall in the State house after lawmakers voted in favor of gay marriage in Concord, N.H., Wednesday, June 3, 2009.(AP Photo/Jim Cole) "Today we're standing up for the liberties of same-sex couples by making clear they will receive the same rights, responsibilities and respect under New Hampshire law," Lynch said this afternoon before signing the bill at about 5:20 p.m. "It is my hope and my belief that New Hampshire will once again come together to embrace tolerance and respect and to stand against discrimination."
The new law makes New Hampshire the sixth state in the nation to allow gays to marry.
Shortly after 4 p.m., the House had voted 198-176 for the bill. The bill had been passed earlier in the day by the Senate.
Lynch said in mid-May that he would sign a bill legalizing same-sex unions as long as the Legislature made it clearer that religious groups would not be forced to conduct "marriage ceremonies that violate their fundamental religious beliefs."
Rhode Island is now the only New England state to bar gay marriage.
When Massachusetts became the first state in the nation to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2004, New Hampshire seemed unlikely to follow. Republicans had enjoyed virtually uninterrupted control of both houses of the Legislature since the late 19th century.
But in 2006, Granite State voters unseated a pair of GOP congressmen amid rising upopularity for the Iraq war and the presidency of George W. Bush. The voters also swept Democratic majorities into the State House. A few months later, the new Legislature approved civil unions.
In early May, Lynch reiterated his position that civil unions were best for the state. But two weeks later, he said his thinking had changed. He said society's views on civil rights have "constantly evolved and expanded" throughout our history. "That is what I believe we must do today."
Material from The Associated Press was used in this report.

17 Comments so far
Show AllIt's wonderful to have some news to celebrate for a change!
My thought exactly!
· Yr Obd't Servant
Indeed it is wonderful news!
so when do adults without children get the same rights as adults with children?
ahhh when they have children? {one pothole at a time}
lino - what exactly are these rights people with children have that those without children don't have?
uh, humbaba, i think you miss the point.
Yay!
OK, we'll do it the hard way, one state at a time. I can see a day in the near future when only California and Utah (and perhaps Mississippi) will belong to the bigots.
Rhode Island will be a challenge too; the place is crawling with Catlicks.
· Yr Obd't Servant
South Dakota will take its Air National Guard to battle before this state allows marriage for all.
Go ahead and bomb me. It'll just help to demonstrate how morally superior you really are.
OK I'll bite; what was Lino's point?
I'm also curious if Lino actually had a point. And if so, why was it not made clear once it was apparent that the point was not obvious?
I'm trying to figure out what those rights would be, and I assume there was a legit point, but please, if you're still out there, explain.
P.S. way to go NH!
Awesome. So New Hampshire has less than 50% religious a$$holes in it's population. That's really all it takes to allow gays the right to marry as they please.
it's called tax deduction(s). to the tune of about 20 years' worth. let me know, wilmoor and fromadistantplanet and slackbatter, if any of you need further elaboration.
"so when do adults without children get the same rights as adults with children?" followed by "it's called tax deduction(s). to the tune of about 20 years' worth.". Hardly relevant to the discussion.
As far as it goes where I live any 'tax deductions' provided to parents are minimal compared to the real costs of raising children. Few parents would consider rearing a family to be a financially profitable enterprise regardless of tax deductions.