New Hampshire Considering Repealing Gay Marriage And Allowing Civil Unions…Of Siblings

[Galraedia]

In 2009, New Hampshire became the sixth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Of course, conservatives in the state were left up in arms. They immediately began the process of repealing gay marriage and replacing it with civil unions.

The civil union bill, HB 437 has jumped a big hurdle. On Wednesday, the Republican controlled House Judiciary Committee voted to recommend the bill. The bill states that New Hampshire would only recognize a marriage between a man and a woman. It would, however allow civil unions for all adults, including relatives. I guess in New Hampshire, “Love ya’ like a brother” will take on a whole new meaning.

If the bill was to pass, existing same-sex marriages would remain valid. It would prevent new marriages, however.

The bill also suspends state anti-discrimination laws that would give people legal recourse if a group or corporation refused to recognize the civil union. In other words, gay people (or relatives) would be able to form civil unions, but they really wouldn’t mean anything.

Continue ----> http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/10/30/new-hampshire-considering-repealing-gay-marriage-and-allowing-civil-unions-of-siblings/

O_o Wtf? So same-sex is wrong but incest is okay?

[Autumn]

1. Okay

That's pretty fucking scary.

[Marazinia]

2. It's also pretty fucking stupid

If they allow blood related siblings to marry, that is. Think of the gene pool, people! For crying out loud, do you really want your kids to look like some of the more obviously inbred members of royal families? Don't you want your kids to have chins?

[TheCowsCameHome]

4. Imagine - a whole new generation of Mitch McConnell's - ugh.

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. I'm not gonna touch that one.

I love New Hampshire, but........

[pipi_k]

5. What the....?????????

"When asked if the bill would violate incest laws, the bill’s sponsor, Rep. David Bates (R) said it does not, noting, “there is no reason for us to speculate on the sexual nature of that relationship.”


Is this a damned JOKE???

[Marazinia]

6. This man is nuts

Unlike virtually every other state law dealing with sexuality, this one has a firm foundation in science and logic. Never mind no chins, how about viral cancer found among inbred populations of tasmanian devils? Inbreeding is bad, okay, Mr. Bates?

[TheMadMonk]

13. Yes/No. I can actually see siblings entering into a non-sexual...

...contractural relationship to keep kids out of the gears of the system.

If civil union provides provides fo all the legal rights, privileges and responsibilities of marriage, I am perfectly happy with drop kicking the M-word itself into the nave and leaving it there.

[apocalypsehow]

7. So, they intend to take away the rights of a whole class of people based on bigotry, and are going

legalize incest all at the same time.

Excuse my language, but that is seriously fucked up. :puke: :thumbsdown:

[Raine]

8. What if the two siblings are gay, then what? nt

[Marazinia]

11. Well then breeding isn't an issue, is it?

Unless some kind of weird cloning gets really advanced really fast.

It's probably just a way to smear homosexuals. Equating their desire to marry with incest, which, genetic issues aside, definitely bothers most of us, including me!

[Raine]

14. It definitely bothers me too and it's obvious what they're up to.

I was just using a far-out scenerio to emphasize how ridiculous it is, they would be in real dither to deal with such a situation.

[U4ikLefty]

9. Transparent attempt to equate incest and homosexuality.

I need a shower just reading about those Republican pigs.

[Marazinia]

12. You beat me to it and I think you're right

It took my brain a minute to tie itself into the properly greasy, right wing fundie knot required to think like one of them. I'm rusty.

[dionysus]

10. and people say there's no difference between dems and rethugs....