the big ‘if’ on gay marriage

No longer leaving New Hampshire to wonder, Gov. John Lynch says he will sign a bill legalizing gay marriage—if, and only if, the Legislature broadens exceptions for people who disagree with it on religious grounds. His suggested amendments would apply to House Bill 73, which was scheduled for its second public hearing on May 19, in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

But in a feat of legislative acrobatics, there are actually three bills at stake. Sponsored by Rep. James Splaine (D-Portsmouth), House Bill 436 redefines marriage to include same-sex couples, taking the same-sex civil union law that passed two years ago to a new level. House Bill 310, sponsored by Rep. David Cote (D-Nashua), contains a clause that exempts religious institutions from being required to participate in any ceremony that violates their religious beliefs. Both bills have passed the House and Senate (although Cote did not support Splaine’s bill) and are ready for Lynch’s signature. 

But he’s not ready to sign. In his opinion, HB 310 doesn’t go far enough to protect the religious freedoms. 

Here’s where the acrobatics come in: HB 436 and 310 have already passed the House and Senate, and both have been “enrolled,” meaning that they can’t go back to either chamber for tinkering. Enter House Bill 73, sponsored by Rep. Lucy Weber (D-Walpole). It actually has nothing to do with gay marriage, but it does relate to marriage and, importantly, it’s still in committee. In other words, it can still be changed. 

The real intention of HB 73 is to make the state’s laws about who can perform marriage ceremonies more ecumenical. Originally written with a Christian bias, subsequent laws said that Jewish Rabbis, Quaker Friends, and secular justices of the peace, in addition to “ministers of the gospel,” were allowed to “solemnize marriage.” HB 73 streamlines and broadens all of this with a more general reference to “clergy.” 

If the Senate accepts Gov. Lynch’s proposed amendments, HB 73 would also bring legalized gay marriage one step closer. Not only would religious institutions not have to perform same-sex ceremonies (according to HB 310) but they also would not have to provide any marriage-related services, such as counseling or housing, for marriages that violate their faith. This exemption would also apply to individuals and nonprofit organizations working for or in conjunction with those religious institutions. 

An amended—and greatly expanded—HB 73 would still have to pass a full Senate vote. And, since the House already passed the original HB 73, the amended version would have to pass that chamber, too. Only then would it go to the governor for signature. 

So only if an amended HB 73 passes both houses and comes to the governor will he consider making New Hampshire the sixth state in the country to legalize same-sex marriage, which has also been legalized in Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts and Vermont. 

Lynch, who opened his public statement on the matter by clarifying his personal belief that marriage is between one man and one woman, said that he studied those states’ laws closely and weighed them against New Hampshire laws and culture. 

“Throughout history, our society’s views of civil rights have constantly evolved and expanded. New Hampshire’s great tradition has always been to come down on the side of individual liberties and protections,” he said. “But following that tradition means we must act to protect both the liberty of same-sex couples and religious liberty.” 

To be clear, the proposed amendments refer only to recognized religious institutions and associated nonprofits. An independent caterer or photographer, therefore, who opposes gay marriage, would have no civil authority to deny services on religious grounds for a gay couple’s wedding. Also, the exemption refers specifically to marriage-related services, thereby preventing a religious hospital, for example, from denying medical services. 

One difference between homosexual and heterosexual marriages as written in HB 436 is that of age. Same-sex marriage has to be between two legal adults, age 18 or older, while the age limits for heterosexual marriage remain unchanged: 14 for boys and 13 for girls. 

Rep. Weber, sponsor of HB 73, voted for both HB 436 to legalize gay marriage and HB 310 to allow exemptions from the law. HB 436 sponsor Splaine also voted for HB 310 and has expressed support for Gov. Lynch’s proposed amendments. House Speaker Terie Norelli and Senate President Sylvia Larsen have both reportedly said that their chambers will act quickly to get the amended HB 73 to the governor’s desk for signature.   

Front Door Politics is a weekly legislative update for everyone affected by New Hampshire laws. An online learning center, additional reporting, and a blog subscription are available at www.frontdoorpolitics.com.