NY/NH: Marriage Equality on Tinterhooks

Two news items out today about marriage, both in New England:

• New Hampshire: After a crazy road here, it looks like the State House is, again, ready to bring the marriage bill to the floor. You might recall that New Hampshire's House and Senate (barely) passed it, then it was threatened with a veto by Gov. Lynch unless religious liberties were protected, which was then passed (better) by the Senate (but still barely), and then failed (barely) in the House where it was sent to committee for a compromise. The bill is now coming out of the committee with a compromise that the Governor is happy with, which means we might see stronger passage in the House and in the Senate (where it is required to be voted on again). Got all that? Oh, and all that might be happening today. Or, it could pass the House and get sent back to the Senate, where it might take a few days to pass again, and then a few days to get to the Governor's desk. Those crazy New Hampshire-ites!


• New York: In another crazy marriage state, the marriage equality bill passed the Assembly heartily a few weeks ago, after being introduced by the Governor, and now is sitting in the Senate where we are waiting for action... maybe as early as this week. In order to pass, 32 (not 31) Senators would need to vote for marriage equality. NY1 has a poll of the Senators and finds this: 20 in favor (all Dems), 27 are opposed (22 Republicans, 5 Democrats), 10 are undecided (6, D and 4, R), and 5 not saying (4, R and 1, D). That's rough. It means to pass, all seven undecided Dem's would have to vote yes, and five of the eight Republicans. Please note that not a single Republican is currently planning to vote yes. However, the fact that they aren't saying or are undecided may mean they are more favorable... after all, you would think most of them would think something by now, right? Right? Of course, there's always the Sen. Reuben Diaz (D) bit... who is fiercely lobbying against it... damn that Democrat.

Sigh. It's a lot, and it's a tangled web. Meanwhile, however, the EHEA is being testified on today in Columbus. I'll get an update for you as soon as I can, but it's at 2:30pm at Room 017 in the Statehouse ... they say it's a small room, so get there early if you plan on getting there, at all.

Whither Rhode Island?

Let's re-examine the "6 by 12" strategy shall we? 

The hope is to have full marriage equality in all 6 New England states by 2012. Maine -- done (provisionally). Vermont -- done (with seemingly no challenges coming). New Hampshire -- sitting on the governor's desk. Massachusetts -- done (long time). Connecticut -- done (the legislature just followed up the ruling with a law). Rhode Island...

...well...

Rhode Island is the final hold out. Sure, New Hampshire is not guaranteed, and we might see a vote come up in Maine, but why Rhode Island? I have this image in my head of a semi-large liberal city, much like Portland, snuggled up against a placcid bay where people care more about lobsters than who is porking whom. But a recent AP story indicates that the heavy Roman Catholic influence in the state may leave the Ocean State as the last hold out for marriage inequality in that section of the world for years to come. Even were the legislature to pass a bill, Republican and Catholic Governor Dan Carcieri will not sign it. That takes us all the way to January 2011, when he is term-limited out. The Democratic primary field is pro-marriage, but no word yet on the Republican nominees (don't hold your breath). 

Marriage Equality Rhode Island (MERI) is trying, though. The marriage equality bill is going to be heard in the House this Wednesday the 13th (for the text of H5744, click here).

It's not enough, though, for Cassandra Ormiston, who was one of the two women would tried to get their Massachusetts marriage ended in Rhode Island. For years, she has been working to get a divorce, but the Supreme Court of the state said no. She's starting her own one woman movement -- Equality Rising (no website yet) -- to push faster, harder, stronger. Ormiston is disappointed with the glacial pace of the movement and tired of the "patience" line she's being fed. I can't say I blame her. 

But I don't see how this can happen yet, though we were sure NH was dead in the water. 

So, perhaps, there is still a chance.

Dog Bites Gay Marriage

Today, less than 12 hours after Vermont's legislator passed equal marriage, and days after Iowa's Supreme Court legalized it, this is the front page of CNN. Those are the top stories. Not a single mention of gays or marriage in the top stories. As of right now, it's not even in the top 10 viewed nor the top 10 emailed stories.

Has equal marriage become "dog bites man" news, as opposed to the "man bites dog" news it once was... especially in New England?

California and New Hampshire

In case you've lived under a rock...

... you probably know that California's Supreme Court is hearing arguments about gay marriage again. This time, whether or not Proposition 8 was legal to pass this year. Oral arguments start on Thursday. The only reason I bring it up is this: a piece in the LA Times that does a great job talking about the legal issues surrounding this challenge. I have been decidedly ignorant on the legal issues being thrown around, so it was an excellent and informative primer in case you were interested.

What you may not have heard...

... on the back of the 6 by 12 campaign, and by the multitudes of New England equal marriage bills being proposed, the New Hampshire legislature is considering a bill to open up civil unions to heterosexual couples. Really? "We're going to create a special class for you homosexuals, but not let you into our club, but now we're going to let us into your special class." I don't mind, but, come on.

In related news, I have it from a person in the know, that the likely first state to legislatively pass an equal marriage bill will be Maine, followed probably by New Hampshire or Vermont, and finally Rhode Island. And most of those before then end of 2010.

Six By Twelve: Update

For those who don't know, Six by Twelve (term coined by Joe.My.God.) is a strategy to make New England a full marriage equality zone by 2012.

Rhode Island just started down their path, and is officially the last New England state that we had not heard from in the quest for marriage equality. (Mass -- done; Conn -- done; VT/NH/ME -- laws proposed, court cases ready)

Welcome RI to the fray:

The fight for marriage equality in the Ocean State will be front and center on Thursday,February 26, as the Senate Judiciary Committee hears testimony pertaining to two bills - one prohibiting same-sex marriage and the other granting equal access to marriage for same-gender couples.

S0136, introduced by anti-gay Senator Leo Blais (R-Coventry), would amend the state constitution to limit the definition of marriage as "the legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife."

In addition, the measure would prohibit the state from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Blais has sponsored similar legislation in the past and has been an outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage.

S0147, introduced by Senators Rhoda Perry (D-Providence), Susan Sosnowski (D-New Shoreham), Juan Pichardo (D-Providence), Joshua Miller (D-Cranston), and Charles Levesque(D-Bristol), would allow the state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The bill also guarantees protection of freedom of religion in marriage, stating:

"No court or other state or local governmental body, entity, agency or commission shall compel, prevent, or interfere in any way with any religious
institution’s decisions about marriage eligibility within that particular faith’s tradition."

"Anything less than full marriage equality is discrimination," Miller said. "This is about your friends, neighbors, and relatives being discriminated against."

Oh yea, kids, there are two bills. My guess, though, is that people will feel its an all-or-nothing type thing and then some "brilliant" "compromising" statesman will step forward and say, "I have a solution! Let's do civil unions!"

And we all know how that goes.

But seriously, folks, what's with all the "discrimination" talk coming from the Christian right. This from the religion that has persecuted everyone -- including themselves -- throughout history? Now you're concerned about a little man-on-man, or woman-on-woman love that threatens to destroy your world? Seriously. No one is discriminating against you.

Just laughing at you.

After all, it seems like all the big couples stirring up this marriage trouble end a few weeks after they get wed, so, no big deal, right? Oh, right, divorce bad too...

In other news, apparently the threat of death because of someone's sexual orientation is not enough to grant someone asylum in this country. Details, no doubt.