Snowman:

New Hampshire and U.S. law currently allows marriage to be brought up for a vote.

Ryan, no just because they are voting doesn’t mean they have the votes to override. This isn’t New York. In NH, when a bill is docketed, it gets a vote. Numerous bills have been passed and then vetoed, with the veto later sustained.

I think we will win this round. But that makes the 2012 election critical, since the Dem governor is stepping down. We either need to elect another Dem as governor, or otherwise substantially reduce the super-majorities that the GOP currently enjoys in the state legislature. I’d put that as a top priority, right after WA and ME.

I would’ve thought there might be enough precedents in American jurisprudence by now that they might get the idea_it’s not right_legally or otherwise.

Maybe if somebody starts advocating for putting the rights of rednecks or old rich white guys up for a vote…once their rights are threatened by such a move, do you suppose they would get it?

I’d bet money the answer would be no.

There is a piece in the Concord Monitor that quotes at least one Republican stating that a veto-proof majority in both the house and the senate is not an absolute.

http://www.concordmonitor.com
(It’s #1 under the most read a little down on the page, titled “Gay Marriage Repeal No Sure Bet”

A little piece from the article:

Rep. Seth Cohn, a Canterbury Republican who moved here as part of the Free State project, a libertarian movement to relocate to New Hampshire, is also against repeal. Cohn and others believe the bill may pass the House but does not have the two-thirds majority to override a potential veto by Democratic Gov. John Lynch, who signed the bill three years ago legalizing same-sex marriage.

“I know for a fact, based on people I’ve talked to, that if Gov. Lynch vetoes it, that veto is not override-able,” Cohn said.