NH same-sex 'marriage' hearing draws crowd - but not transgender bill hearing. Also: Vermont files same-sex 'marriage' bill.

The Massachusetts homosexual lobby goes north

February 10, 2009

The Massachusetts homosexual lobby came out in force up in Concord, NH this week for the public hearing on a bill to officially legalize same-sex "marriage" in New Hampshire.

Part of the crowd that packed the hearing room at the NH State House on the same-sex "marriage" bill.

As we've reported, Massachusetts-based Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) and MassEquality are organizing and raising money to force same-sex "marriage" in Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, and New Hampshire by 2012. They were well represented at this hearing.

But MassResistance was also involved. Our document "What same-sex 'marriage has done to Massachusetts" was used in much of the testimony, and was given to each legislator on the Judiciary Committee. MassResistance worked closely with the pro-family group Citizens Leadership of New Hampshire, led by Elaine Driscoll, which is (in our opinion) by far the most effective group in the state.

     Text of New Hampshire "gay marriage" bill

The hearing lasted over 5 hours. About a dozen pro-family and 16-18 pro-homosexual activists testified. Unfortunately, the Judiciary Committee was extremely biased. They let the homosexual activists talk as long as they wanted, but severely restricted the pro-family side, most of whom had to wait until the end to be allowed to testify. (Sound familiar?)

The usual emotions and propaganda

As Elaine watched, homosexual activist Gene Robinson, Bishop of the Episcopal church of New Hampshire, was the first to speak after the bill sponsor, Rep Jim Splaine. Robinson said that he defines marriage as a civil right under the law. He went on to say that the public should have no fear in equalizing marriage because it will have no impact on the family. It will be just like Civil Unions which have had no impact. Religions will have nothing to fear because of separation of church and state, he added..

GLAD attorney Jason Wu cited how same sex partners were treated like second-class citizens because they did not have the title of marriage. He spoke of the hardships they have faced in losing a partner to death but unable to claim the body, and just the everyday stress of not being able to say their partner is their spouse. Civil Unions just wasn't enough; they needed marriage to be able to feel equal.

There was a 10-year-old boy brought up from Massachusetts to testify in support of homosexual marriage. He reasoned that it is "only fair that two people who love each other should be able to marry." It appeared that he came with the GLAD attorney.

Transgender bill

Elaine told us that she was shocked to find out that there was also a public hearing on a transgender rights bill being conducted at the same time. What gave it away, apparently, was the parade of men dressed as women hanging around the hearing room.

Apparently the homosexual lobby in New Hampshire is trying to sneak in a bill similar to the one here. Elaine wasn't able to testify, unfortunately, but she did officially register her opposition. Although not nearly as radical as the Massachusetts version, it's still a hideous bill that forces "gender identity or expression" into everyone's lives.

Text of New Hampshire transgender bill

Waiting to testify for the NH Transgender Rights bill.  These are all men dressed as women!

Gay "marriage" bill introduced in Vermont

Not to be completely outdone, this past week the Vermont legislature also introduced a same-sex "marriage" bill. Hoping to use their current Civil Unions law as a springboard, homosexual activists see this as the next logical step toward "equality." And it seems to be happening with less far fanfare than the civil unions push was several years ago. It's scary.

     Burlington Free Press: 59 Vt. legislators back gay marriage bill

A lesson for pro-family tacticians

What's happening in Vermont should be a lesson to those pro-family people who are willing to compromise and allow civil unions, in order to be "reasonable" and "tolerant". That strategy will never work. Allowing civil unions to become legal only opening the door to bigger things down the road.  If civil unions aren't destructive, then logically, neither is "gay marriage". It happened in California after they passed a Civil Unions law (and it had to be stopped with the huge Prop 8 push) and now it's happening in Vermont. Agreeing to civil unions is a poor tactic that actually helps the other side.