|
||||||
|
|
|
Gay Marriage Bill Puts Focus On Lynch
By Josh Rogers on Monday, May 4, 2009.
While the same-sex marriage debate has involved the 400+ lawmakers and hundreds of members of the general public, its fate may rest with one man, Governor John Lynch. Lynch was in a near-identical situation two years ago when lawmakers passed same-sex civil unions. Governor John Lynch known for many things, high popularity: "You could say that John Lynch is probably the most popular governor in modern American history." An ever-ready response to weather emergencies: "Hundreds of people have been evacuated; 34 shelters have been set up; I activated 400 members of the national guard." An easy way with children: “So you’re 11, too? “I’m 12.” “I am, too .” “Well, my son, I’m going to tell you, he has a tickle-spot right here.” (laughs) And a solicitous approach, at least publically, when it comes to dealing with the legislature “I have that style where I reach out to lawmakers, both Republicans and Democrats and get input from them as the various bills proceed.” But when the bills proceeding are controversial, and deal with same-sex couples, the Governor has tended to play things close to the vest, with eyes apparently averted. “I haven’t read the amendment yet and I’m really here talking about the swine flu and that’s all I’m going to focus on for now.” -Do you have any sense when you’re going to read it? “You know over the next several days, I’m sure.” That was the Governor last week, a day after the senate passed its same sex marriage bill. If something about Lynch’s response seems familiar, it’s because it is. Two years ago, almost to the week, he sounded a near-identical message as house lawmakers were poised to vote through same-sex civil unions. “I’ve not looked at the bill yet, but I will be talking with lawmakers about that issue at the appropriate time.” -And when would that appropriate time be? “Well, I want to get the school funding off the ground. I want to get the constitutional amendment past the Senate and then I want to work with house members to see if we can get it passed in the House.” That school funding amendment was shot down in the house, but the Governor, did, ultimately sign civil unions into law. Given that he’s repeatedly said he sees marriage as between as man and a woman, there’s little indication he’s likely to do the same should same sex marriage reach his desk. At the same time, the governor isn’t acting like a veto is in the offing. If it reaches his desk and he does nothing, it will become law. In the meantime, Lynch can expect hard lobbying both sides of the issue, lobbying that that will probably only intensify the longer he leaves his intentions unstated. comments
All comments are moderated before appearing on the site. Comments must adhere to the NHPR.org comment guidelines and terms of use. |
Support FromHighlights |
I really hope and pray that our very popular Governor allows same sex individuals to Marry. There are legal and social limitations to civil unions that don't exist in a marriage. How can we go back to the archiac "separate but equal" philosophy? It may have been seperate but it wasn't equal back in the 50s/60s and it still won't be in 2009.
Lynch should VETO the bill as soon as it hits his desk. MARRIAGE IS BETWEEN A MALE AND FEMALE. Give the gays their civil unions, along with the tax breaks and visitation rights they seek. But Veto the bill and leave marriage alone.
I would really want to understand your reasoning. There are alot of things I don't agree on. Does that mean I should impose my beliefs on others and make it law?? Short answer, NO! It is about civil rights for all. Isn't that why we love this country so much! Live and let live!
I pray Governor Lynch Veto's this bill. We should not have to redifine marriage. A marriage is between one man and one woman. It has always been and I pray to God it will stay that way. Soon people will want to marry more than one person then they will want to marry their animals. Think this is crazy. Did we ever think we would be where our country is now having same sex marriage. It isn't as crazy as you think. Please veto this.
Separation of church and state? When did marriage become a religious issue? In all actuality it is a legal document between 2 people. If you suggest "civil unions" for gay couples, why not for straight? A legal contract is just that, and there needs to be separation of church and state.