This bill soon will be hitting the house here.
Two of the most watched issues of the week
Gay marriage and equal rights for the transgender individuals.
We had a deadlock on this 10-10 on a bill that would permit same -sex couples to marry in NH.
This is good news and hoped that someone will break the deadlock.
I posted a couple of letters that we have been getting here and here is what they are saying.


Next week, the New Hampshire House is scheduled to vote on HB 436, which will significantly change the meaning of marriage in our state by allowing same-sex couples to marry.

The institution of marriage is created in societies for the purpose of preservation of the society into the future. It is designed to achieve the best possible environment for future generations to develop their skills and moral character so as to contribute successfully to the society as they attain adulthood.

Numerous studies show that a child's development is best served by having the biological parents of that child in a loving, stable family relationship. Of course, this ideal environment is not always possible, and many children have become quite productive adults raised by single mothers, grandparents, or adoptive parents. However, on average, these arrangements are not as effective as having a mom and dad together raise the child.

In light of this understanding, marriage has traditionally been supported by the state, which has provided financial and legal support to try to keep as many marriages intact as possible.

To extend the legal status of marriage to same-sex couples would indicate that the state believes that same-sex couples are equally as effective in raising children as heterosexual couples. This is contradicted by numerous studies, including "Review of Research on Homosexual you statements as I have done. The discussion was about children and my point was that children can be adversely affected by the large divorce rate in this country. If you think that's "marriage bashing" then I guess you are as ignorant as I thought you were to begin with.

Your preoccupation with my spelling doesn't hide the fact that you sure couldn't have done any research on your own. Ancient Greeks, Romans, Phoenicians, Sumerians, etc. all had marriage institutions way more than 2000 years ago. I picked 4000+ years (note the "+") because I believe that's about the stretch




Gay marriage bill is a threat to churches


A horse, of course, is a horse. And marriage, of course, is marriage.

The odious attempt of New Hampshire House Bill 436 to pirate the trademark and copyright of one of God's seven sacraments, marriage, is wrenchingly wrong. This effort not only tries to make a sacrament out of a sin, but it would create a lace-covered sledgehammer to threaten churches to not speak the truth about the sin of homosexual activity. It is an attempt to silence and/or edit the sacred scriptures, the Bible - our greatest hope and source of true peace, love and joy.

The feeble saving clause in the proposed legislation of House Bill 436 that claims the bill does not force reverends to perform these acts of piracy and theft is a joke. It has no teeth and will, like the rest of this admitted incrementalism, be eventually removed. HB 436 is clearly an attempt to force the church to not only go silent on the truth but to turn things upside down, make black white, and define a sin as a sacrament. It is a boorish attempt to bully the Church.

Where are the criers now of separation of church and state? Too busy stealing. Those who claim to be so creative should come up with their own term instead of committing thievery. Please contact your representatives and Gov. John Lynch and play your vital role in this great experiment in self-governance.