New Hampshire may well become the next battleground for gay marriage rights, as the state Senate considers a bill that would spell out marriage as a traditional union reserved for a man and a woman.
The proposed bill seeks to close a statutory loophole that would acknowledge same-sex unions from out-of-state couples. With the recent influx of states poised to recognize and grant same-sex marriages, the New Hampshire legislature is preparing to address the loophole that was once not of immediate concern.
Unlike the decisiveness that characterized the recent Massachusetts battle on gay marriage, both supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage in New Hampshire peacefully assembled for an orderly discussion of "an act relative to the definition of marriage."
Some 500 people arrived at the state Capitol Tuesday to listen in on a state Senate hearing on the proposed legislation. The hearing was moved twice for lack of space, eventually filling the Capitol assembly hall normally used by the full state House of Representatives.
There, religious leaders and legal experts offered contrasting views on the issue of gay marriage before lawmakers. Legislators and lobbyists argued the potential implications of the loophole, with some predicting that same-sex marriage will become legal by default if the legislature fails to act. Still others contended the loophole could force New Hampshire to honor gay marriage, polygamy, child marriages and other remote foreign union customs.
The Rev. Ed Arsenault, chancellor of the Catholic Diocese of Manchester, argued that "marriage is more than just a word -- it is the basic building block that defines human civilization."
"Marriage has always been between a man and a woman," Arsenault added.
But Democratic state representative and former Dartmouth professor Hilda Sokol said she fears the proposed legislation to limit marriage rights could come to the New Hampshire House, and eventually become law when signed by Gov. Craig Benson, a Republican.
"I only hope there are enough forward-thinking people to realize this is a civil rights issue," Sokol said.
On more than a half-dozen occasions the New Hampshire legislature has rejected measures to bar recognition of same-sex unions in other states. However, the highly-publicized success of gay marriage activists in Massachusetts and San Francisco over the past weeks has led legislators to deal with the matter on a more timely fashion.
Legislation designed to restrict or prohibit same-sex marriage is pending in 18 other states. Thirty-eight states already have "defense of marriage" statutes restricting marriage to a union between a man and a woman.
New Hampshire law restricts prevents gay marriage, calling such unions void and incestuous.
"It's a situation that I find disturbing," Sokol said. "There are so many people that are unwilling to accept the fact that there are homosexual couples that want to form a legitimate, recognized union. To say that this is God-ordained union, I don't accept."
Religion professor Susan Ackerman, who has taught courses on homosexuality in the past, doubts that New Hampshire will recognize same-sex marriage any time soon, citing the conservative nature of the Granite State.
"I would be profoundly doubtful that New Hampshire would be willing to go in either direction," Ackerman said regarding both civil marriages and civil unions.
More optimistic, women's and gender studies professor Michael Bronski said same-sex marriages are inevitable, and "whatever New Hampshire does now, it's only one small fight in a much larger context."
The larger question, Bronski said, is what will happen in the future, when married homosexuals "face, in the next 15 years, a much larger battle -- the battle for full faith and credit."
Members of the Dartmouth Rainbow Alliance also weighed in on New Hampshire's consideration of issues of same-sex marriage.
"There's no reason for gay marriage to be illegal anywhere," Tory Tompkins '04 said plainly.
The pursuit of gay marriages "is going to be one of those things we look back on in 15 years and not understand what the real problem was," added Andrew Shute '05.
