June 2nd, 2008
Last week the Attorneys General of ten states united to request that the Supreme Court of California stay its decision to treat all citizens equal under the law until November: Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah. They claimed that if California allowed gay couples to marry that this would create havoc and confusion for the court systems in their own states.
Immediately one state stood out from the others.
Although not all of these states have anti-gay marriage clauses in their constitution, only one state, New Hampshire, has taken efforts to offer recognition to same-sex relationships. And New Hampshire already had taken legislative steps to direct how out-of-state gay marriages would be treated – as civil unions.
Now it seems that the havoc and confusion caused by gay marriage in New Hampshire has been cleared up. Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, has now been apprised of the law in her state.
The Boston Globe reports
[O]n Saturday, Attorney General Kelly Ayotte announced that New Hampshire was withdrawing from the request because the state addresses the recognition issue in its civil union law.
She said under the law, New Hampshire will recognize a legal gay marriage from California as a civil union.
Latest Posts
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.
Stefano
June 2nd, 2008
I suppose this is “good news”. However, this leads me to ponder the question of if individuals married in California with the full privileges afforded to married individuals will be losing some of those privilegs when only recognized as a civil union.
werdna
June 3rd, 2008
From what I’ve read New Hampshire’s civil unions are identical to marriages in all but name, so all rights, responsibilities and privileges should be retained by couples with a California marriage if they move to NH. As various states adopt different kinds of partnership/union/marriage laws transportability is going to be an increasingly complicated matter. Still, I’d rather have a somewhat lesser civil union or domestic partnership than nothing at all.
banshiii
June 3rd, 2008
she jumped the gun, no?
makes ya wonder.
howller
June 4th, 2008
Imagine the Lovings moving to New Hampshire after being granted full marriage rights only to be treated as second class.
Jessica G
June 4th, 2008
Florida is particularly facing difficulties regarding their proposed Amendment 2. What makes Amendment 2 so deadly is that it not only affects Florida’s LGBT community, but the unmarried community as well (same-sex and different-sex). Amendment 2 should not only be viewed as a gay marriage ban because Florida already has laws against gay marriage. It is meant to go beyond this. Millions of Floridians are unmarried, and should not be forced to marry for the sake of issues such as financial stability. DOMESTIC PARTNERS registered in Tampa, Miami-Dade and other counties; they will lose their legal status. UNIVERSITY EMPLOYEES could lose their job benefits. SENIOR CITIZENS; Unmarried senior citizens will be forced to marry and lose their pension plans or Social Security from a previous marriage, or remain unmarried and lose benefits provided by their present partner. Providing unmarried couples and specifically same-sex couples does not prevent any couple from getting married if they choose to. No family should be discriminated against based on their marital status.
Please vote NO on Amendment 2!
Leave A Comment