This is the ONLY time I have ever agreed with Mr. Cheney. What is God's will here? What is the will of the people on the civil front? The movement has begun and the question is whether we will be behind it or out in front. Thank you Mr. Cheney.

While I personally agree with same-sex marriage and see it as a question of equality, I worry about the impact of the law on other religions. For instance, if a church owns a hall that they rent out to anyone who wants to use it, but that denomination forbids same-sex marriage, can they be sued? They would have no exposure if they only rented to people within their denomination, but if they open the facility, as a way to generate revenue, they could be sued for failing to rent regardless of the reason and people renting. It's new legal ground.

Ellen Lincourt

It is a moot point Ellen. As long as they do not accept public funds in any form regarding the property, religious bodies are protected and can discriminate to their heart's content.

The case of the lesbian couple wishing to use the gazebo at the United Methodist camp ground facility was a completely different situation. The Methodists had dedicated the property as a public right-of-way to receive a tax exemption in the past. They had also publicly stated that the property was open to use by everyone without exemption to qualify for state programs which provided public funds for repair and maintenance of the property. You cannot take public funding and continue to discriminate.

That is the difference.

Folks operating private businesses are a different matter. If they are operating in states where the business licensing and public accommodation laws say that they cannot discriminate based on gender or sexual orientation, then they cannot discriminate, regardless of their personal religious beliefs.

Gene Robinson will eventually be recognized as married. The effective date of the marriage bill (HB436) in New Hampshire is January 1, 2010, after which New Hampshire will no longer do civil unions. Same-sex couples who got civil unions or marriages in other jurisdictions will be recognized as married in New Hampshire. Couples who already have civil unions will be able to apply for marriage licenses and have their marriages solemnized. Or they may, for free, simply ask the town clerk to have their civil union converted into a marriage. Gene Robinson, the Bishop of New Hampshire, could either get a marriage license and marry his civil union partner or simply have their union designated as a marriage.

New Hampshire, which so far has given the Anglican Communion its first openly gay and civil unioned Bishop, could now produce the first openly gay and civilly married bishop. I suppose the Episcopal Church would need to form another secret commission to decide what to do with openly gay civilly married bishops.

Even if the Bishop of New Hampshire does nothing and caves in to pressure from the Episcopal Church and the Archbishop of Canterbury not to pursue marriage--highly unlikely given what I have read of Gene--his civil union will be automatically converted to a civil marriage after January 1, 2011, as I read the text. Gene Robinson will either be married in 2010 or 2011.

The bill text for HB0436 may be found at:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HB0436.html

457:46 Obtaining Legal Status of Marriage.

I. Two consenting persons who are parties to a valid civil union entered into prior to January 1, 2010 pursuant to this chapter may apply and receive a marriage license and have such marriage solemnized pursuant to RSA 457, provided that the parties are otherwise eligible to marry under RSA 457 and the parties to the marriage are the same as the parties to the civil union. Such parties may also apply by January 1, 2011 to the clerk of the town or city in which their civil union is recorded to have their civil union legally designated and recorded as a marriage, without any additional requirements of payment of marriage licensing fees or solemnization contained in RSA 457, provided that such parties’ civil union was not previously dissolved or annulled. Upon application, the parties shall be issued a marriage certificate, and such marriage certificate shall be recorded with the division of vital records administration. Any civil union shall be dissolved
by operation of law by any marriage of the same parties to each other, as of the date of the marriage stated in the certificate.

II. Two persons who are parties to a civil union established pursuant to RSA 457-A that has not been dissolved or annulled by the parties or merged into a marriage in accordance with paragraph I by January 1, 2011 shall be deemed to be married under this chapter on January 1, 2011 and such civil union shall be merged into such marriage by operation of law on January 1, 2011.

The amendment to HB0436, HB0073, may be found at

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HB0073.html

This is the one that explains how religious organizations may be exempted.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a religious organization, association, or society, or any individual who is managed, directed, or supervised by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association, or society, or any nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised, or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association, or society, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges to an individual if such request for such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges is related to the solemnization of a marriage, the celebration of a marriage, or the promotion of marriage through religious counseling, programs, courses, retreats, or housing designated for married individuals, and such solemnization, celebration, or promotion of marriage is in violation of his or her religious beliefs and faith. Any refusal to provide
services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges in accordance with this section shall not create any civil claim or cause of action or result in any state action to penalize or withhold benefits from such religious organization, association, or society, or any individual who is managed, directed, or supervised by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association, or society, or any nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised, or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association, or society.

Gary Paul Gilbert

David Allen, it's not a question of them accepting public funds, but rather cases like I site would loose their tax exempt status. While I support same-sex marriage, I don't think we should be holding a gun to other denomination's head forcing them to toe our line. If they are supplying services to the community, such as adoption and accepting public funds, that's a different story. They need to supply services without reference to sexual identity, but renting out their property....

I think that you are wrong Ellen. I do not believe that the example that you site does not exist, it is a strawman. A religious body can rent their religious facility to whomever they please without regard to whether they are discriminating.

Other property which they may hold and rent for profit is another matter, and is not usually tax exempt anyway.