YOUR COMMENTS

A public vote on this is just plain stupid. First of all the only people who would mobilize are the gays and the bible thumpers.. no one else has any skin in this game. Unfortunately, there are way too many bible thumpers. The bottom line is it's a basic human rights issue. I'm sure if you took a vote in Alabama about integration in the 1960's they would vote it down. Even though it may have been democratic, it still would be just plain wrong.
- Brian Findlay, Nashua

This isn't about love, or whom is allowed to love whom, it's about public policy.

Anyone who wants to have relations with a member of the same gender may do so. That affects no one else. Anyone who wants to marry a person of the same gender can go to the nearest liberal church or synagogue and do so. That really does affect no one but them, and more power to them.

But for the state to force employers to give the gay lovers of their employees equal insurance and health benefits reserved for married employees is a financial burden, and to clog the courts with MORE divorces (and deciding custody of the cats, or of the sperm-donor created child, who has an invisible and unknown father) are COSTS on society.

Why is no one mentioning these up in Concord?
- Stephen, Manchester

To all the people who claim that allowing gays and lesbians the right to marry will undermine the sanctity of marriage, how do you figure this? Will it somehow cause you to love your husband or wife less than you do now? Because two more people in the world have found love, and married, it's going to be so monumental, that it will impact YOUR life? How selfish can we as a nation, and a state, get?

Until people can learn to love, and forget the hate, this country will go to Hell. We are not here to judge, we are here to live, to learn, and to love.
- Jenn, Hooksett

That which is existentially imperative, (male-female couple), is NOT EQUAL to that which is NOT existentially imperative, (same-gender couple). Society’s debt to the former does not apply nor transfer to the latter. Acknowledgment of this obligation takes form in the institution of marriage, which reserves a uniquely significant place in society for a uniquely significant and reserved function of nature. The amount of intellectual honesty one has in accepting this essential and irrefutable truth is directly proportional to the amount of emotional courage one is willing to muster.
- John Raymond, Hampton

"In 2007, we were told that all gay couples wanted was equality and that it could be achieved through Civil Unions. Less than two years after the passage of the law allowing Civil Unions in NH, the gay lobby is back for more. They don't want equality and protection (which was attained through Civil Unions). They want to destroy the institution of marriage by bastardizing it." Patricia says.

Hey genius, the Gay Civil Rights Movement seeks equality, and that means marriage equality. If two black people getting married 50 years ago did not ruin all 'white' marriages, then I sincerely doubt gays are a threat to your hterosexual marriage, so clearly based on intolerance of all others. Regurgitate and parrot non-facts all you want. The only threat to heterosexual marriage is in your deluded head, right above your pronounced occipital ridge..
- Mike, Concord

I could care less about gay marriage. Why should anybody care as long as it doesn't affect them. If you brother gets married to a man and invites you to his wedding, tell him you don't believe in it when you RSVP no.

But as far as a referendum goes...what is Lynch and the Democrats afraid of? That they want to create laws that their constituents don't agree with? If that's the case, then maybe this shouldn't pass because it's not what New Hampshire wants. A binding referendum is the only way to be certain and what can be more fairer than allowing us to vote on this issue?

Personally, I would vote yea..but let the people decide!!!
- Steve, Manchester

The Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transexual crowd got full equality with the Civil Union law. Now they've pulled out all the stops to overturn the biological, linguistic, and social norms of marriage which are effectively destroying a working and fairly just society.

This means the GLBT consortium is engaged in deliberate sabotage of our society. And the rest of us, in an effort to be kinder and more accommodating, have been aiding and abetting their actions.

I'm a fairly tolerant man. I'm a live and let live sort of person. But you people aren't happy to be that way. You want to be able to tell me what to do and what to say. Now you have pushed me too damn far!

Well citizens, it's time to not just stop, but to push BACK these greedy, selfish, self-serving advocates of minority tyranny. Let's take this same-sex marriage bill, fold it into a bunch of sharp corners, and shove it up their you-know-whats.
- Michael D. Houst, Barrington, NH

Sheila from Strafford is right, why shouldn’t two people who love each other be joined in matrimony? Unfortunately, this bill prevents that for those who happen to be related. How can those of us who are committed to totally equal rights for all, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or family relationship, allow this to happen.

No one has yet to offer a logical argument as to why this hateful exclusion is still in the bill. Those narrow minded Neanderthals who are against this can only resort to name calling. Well, it’s time to crawl out of your caves and address the real issue. Do we insist of equal rights for all or are will going to accept half a bill?

How can you be against it when it won’t affect you one bit? If you don’t want a family relative marriage, don’t get one.
- George, Concord

My fellow granite staters, we live in the age of tyranny. The tyrants are the democrats. They seek to force their values onto an unwilling population. The Republicans who voted all rightly saw that it is the people they represent, and it is the people that should be heard. Every Democrat that voted has no interest in hearing from the people. They represent themselves and their special interests only. Remember this when the next election comes around. Do you want representatives that will represent you, or do you want representatives that pick and choose whom they are willing to represent?
- Alex, Nashua

Governor Lynch reminds me of Lt Norman Dike in the HBO Series Band of Brothers. A failed leader. Unable to command respect or make decisions when it really matters. Retreats at the first hint of trouble. Caves under pressure, Never takes the lead. Gov. Lynch is a nice guy but like Lt Normand Dike, not someone you want to trust your life with or follow into a battle. New Hampshire needs to elect a leader with some courage the next time around
Lynch does not stand by his own words. "I support marriage between one man and one woman I will veto this bill if does not pass with my ammendments. It did not pass where is the veto? Governor Lynch ( aka Lt Norman Dike)
- Gary, Moultonborough

Why can't 2 people who love each other be joined in matrimony? Who in the world does it hurt? Love is love, no matter whether you are straight or gay. We need more people who feel so strongly about their love for each other that they are willing to fight for the right to have equality in this issue. I am straight but I am not narrow.
- Sheila Varden-Straffin, Strafford

In 2007, we were told that all gay couples wanted was equality and that it could be achieved through Civil Unions. Less than two years after the passage of the law allowing Civil Unions in NH, the gay lobby is back for more. They don't want equality and protection (which was attained through Civil Unions). They want to destroy the institution of marriage by bastardizing it.
- Patricia, Raymond

We should put everything up to a vote of the people. And by "the people" I mean property owning white men. The right to vote for women and minorities was never decided by "the people," so it would be unfair to allow them to vote on anything until we have determined that the majority of people agree they should have that right.
- Dan, Manchester (circa 1894)

The way this works is you vote every two years for the person you want to represent you. Rep Vaillancourt was re-elected and if those who voted for him didn't know his politics they weren't paying attention. My feeling is he was re-elected because his constituents know he is one of the smartest and hardest working politicians in Concord and NH is lucky to have him.
- Linda, Raymond

If our elected NH government officials need washingtons help to resolve this issue of gay marriage. What do we need them for.
This issue is a waste of everyones time
Lets kill this bill & start doing more of what you all said you would do when you took over the position your in .

Govenor Lynch what are you touring Chrysler dealerships for when you should be Vetoing this bill
step up & do what you said you would do
- steve T., milford nh

This saga just keeps continuing and continuing. When will the opposition just let things work themselves out as THEY voted for it to? Wasn't there a vote to let the Committee of Conference work on this piece of legislation. And, after that vote, there's a bunch of legislators grandstanding at a press conference calling for something else. This type of politics is what has stalled not only this bill, but countless others as well. You vote - now let the process work!
- Mike, Manchester, NH

It's peculiar that I haven't read a comment from one gay individual who is against this! It only seems to be opposed by people who it will not affect in any way whatsoever. What a luxury this would be for these close-minded losers to be able to vote on something that has nothing to do w/ them. If you don't want a gay marriage don't get one.
- Jeff, Manchester

Whether the radical left likes it or not, the people of New Hampshire WILL vote on this issue in 2010.

Homosexual behavior is a biological and evolutionary dead end. Society has no interest in promoting/supporting this behavior; however, we here in New Hampshire have been respectful and generous enough to grant legal status to homosexual couples (Why only homosexuals? Why only couples?) through civil unions.

I encourage our legislators to move on and tackle the people's business.
- Tom, Campton

I'm glad that this issue is not going to be put to a vote. Why would it matter what 'straight' people think about this issue? It has absolutely nothing to do with us. We should keep out of other peoples business. People should be free to marry whom ever they wish, regardless of gender.
- Jenn, Hooksett

The reason they won't put this to a non-binding referendum is because if they did they know it would never pass. The majority of NH citizens don't want the state to put their stamp of approval on gay (what ever that means) marriage.
How many times is the house and senate going to vote on this? For the life of me I can’t understand why so much time and effort is spent on this. There has to be other legislation more important that this cries out for attention.
- Pete, Somersworth

Marriage is between a man and woman. End of discussion. Take civil unions and be happy with it. So many out there think they are entitled to every single god given right out there, and while we are on the subject, I am in strong disagreement of gay couples adopting children, or lesbians becoming pregnant. Having children is also something that should be between a man and woman. Take the cards you are dealt with and deal with it.
- Kristin, Manchester

Amazing that the libs are too afraid to see what the good people of NH really think.

I think they are afraid that we will have the same result as Cali... which of course we will.

This debate over gay marriage is a waste of time. Kill it, let's be done with it, and move on to more relevant and pressing matters.
- Marc, Weare

I found one thing interesting, Rep. Reynolds said that it is the legislators job to find out what the voters think and act on it. So the question remains when was this done? I saw nothing in the last few elections that made this a topic that was pressing by the voters or something that had to be done right now. I have seen none of my legislators in my area coming out and asking for voter input. Yes I have stated my feelings to them in writing but there are very few who do the same. This is agenda that is being pushed by special interests and is not necessarily the views of the majority of voters. So if that is the case Rep. Reynolds then I suggest you do just that and try to get a consensus and stop trying to pass legislation that does not necessarily reflect the wishes of the voters.
- Bill B., Peham

Let the people vote is right...and the next vote is to remove those who stand only for themselves and not the constituents
- Tom T, Manchester

To compare gays seeking to redefine what marriage is to slavery is about as dishonest as one could get. The people can now get ready for any combination to start seeking marriage as a right once the definition is changed to the obscure.

Of course they voted it down. They work for the people after all and they know what is best once elected like with what food we can eat and what we can do on our own land. Especially on an issue they never mentioned during the election process.
- Deb, Derry

Abraham Lincoln was a great Republican who did not agree that the South could or should put slavery on the ballot.

The South could have gone state by state, and town by town, and it would not have made slavery right.
- Bob Jean, Northwood, NH

Let the people speak. REMEMBER how to vote!
Marriage is a about pro-creation and providing a sound family for it.
Good luck to the gays on that one!
- mark, enfield

There are no rights issues involved and the california suprieme court even agrees with that 6-1 (else they would have disallowed the referendum result).

Marriage requires one gender of each type, as it has been since before the start of civilization. Marriage is what gender difference means. You are welcome to use another word, but it isn't marriage without wife and husband, one of each gender. To pass laws trying ignore gender in the very place that gender difference is needed is irresponsible and legislators backing such measure are not doing their job.
- Molly, Nashua

Put it for a vote.

Elected reps do what THEY want once their elected, not what the voters want. I thought reps were supposed to do what their constituents wanted, but that idea is apparently too old-fashioned for today's politicians. Their attitude is "Vote me out if you don't like what I am going to do..." But in the mean time, a lot of damage can be done.

Let the people's voice be heard with our vote on this issue. I know, it's crazy that government would allow us peasants to weigh in, but we have to try.
- Matt F, Center Barnstead

To the NH General Court- Let the people vote on it- what are you afaid of? Your names are on the record for denying the citizens of NH their voice on this issue. (Of course, that would be contrary to the demands of your out of state campaign supporters.) Sweep the state house clean in 2010.
- Mae, Plaistow

Still gotta love how someone doesn't agree with gay marraige, they are narrow minded and bigots.

Having the right to have an opinion on a matter does not make one a bigot, the ones with narrow minds are the one who keep criticizing those with opposite opinions.

Mr. Vallaincourt says "If you want people to vote, change the constitution to allow it. Until then, stop pandering".

How can the constitution change? You elected officials in Concord are the ones that do that, and with Dems in the majority, it wouldn't get done on this issue because Dems favor the gay marriage.

Stop hiding behind UL blogs and take charge, be a leader and not a blogger.

Let the voters of NH vote on this and stop hiding behind the state constitution.

I hope that voters are really watching this elected group of officials and start voting some of the sheep out.

The real constitution says "We the people", that's not the case here.

When it comes to abortion, prochoice women tell me I have no right to comment on the issue because I'm a man, of course that's only if I disagree with them. It's the same group of people that call me narrow minded on the gay marraige issue because I don't share the same view.

What, you never played baseball? Then you don't have the right to cheer against the Red Sox? Sounds silly doesn't it?
- Scott, Pembroke

Civil Union is enough. Marriage is between a man and a woman. nuf said!
- Dave, E. Kingston

If we're going to start voting on stuff--let's vote on sharing the costs of schooling our kids equally...taxed across the board, divided fairly on a per pupil basis. I've been waiting to vote on THAT for a long time.
- Ellen, Milford, NH

What amuses me about this is the simple fact that essentially one group wants a freedom and the other doesn't want them to have it. If you don't want gay marriage, don't get one. Really, how is it going to affect your life?

Alternatively, if your religion prohibits such a practice, then you should also be able to not have anything to do with gay marriage. Nobody has the right to impose on or expect accommodation from a religious establishment.

Another thing, the U.S.A. isn't a pure democracy and it never was. Get over it and vote for the representative that is against gay marriage next election. That is, if there is even a Republican party then.
- Jesse, Hill

Mr. Vaillancourt: You have hidden behind the doors for many years and waited for your turn to get what you think is yours. NEVER did you campaign on a platform to raise taxes, spend my money non-essentially and to pass a law allowing gays to marry. If you had you would never have been elected. But you didn't, you campaigned on innuendo. Now you have to face the piper.
- sandy, thornton

Dear legislature,
I fail to understand why this is not a referendum, considering its split right down the party lines. I do not believe in this and never will, politics, just like justice is completely equivelant to what you will pay for it.
- Ron, Northfield

"we are not demeaning your religious marriage - we are not fighting for religious recognition. we do not chastise you for your belief, religion, or personal opinion." -micael, manchester

Of course this is demeaning religious marriage & as for not chastising people for their belief, religion, or personal opinion? The gay community or liberals have been very critical of our beliefs, religion & our personal opinion. We keep getting called racist, bigots, religious fanatics, etc by them. It is kind of strange that people who have faith & hope through their religion & have followed good moral values for THOUSANDS of years are now being thought of as racist, bigots & religious freaks.

Sorry, I will never agree to this marriage bill, since the civil union law has all the rights available to gay couples like married couples. I know many gay couples & I still feel this way. Just because I follow a religion faithfully & try to be a good example, I could be made out to be homophobe or racist? That's ridiculous!

I can't wait for 2010 to vote all these irresponsible legislators out, doesn't matter if Democrat or Republican.
- Dave, Manchester

Why don't we have an amendment to the NH constitution defining marriage as between a man and a woman? or one allowing homosexual marriage?
- David, Salem

It's not the issue that is the problem here, it's the vote that is a straight party vote. Typical Democrats -- all for free speech unless it's against their agenda.
- Chris, Chester

Let the people vote on it!

It should not be by legislative fiat!

From before recorded history marriage has been exclusively between a man and a woman. Two men or two women can more be married then two rocks or two whales. Having said this I also feel equal rights and equality under the law should be afforded to everyone. The law is suppose to be blind to differences and I don’t think anyone would disagree, if it is only a question of not getting certain benefits under the “law” beyond civil unions then have a vote and I’m sure the benefits will be given. But please don’t forcibly change the definition of marriage because a small narcissistic group of people want to impose their legitimacy upon everyone else. It makes me physically ill to read the hypocritical, belligerent, narrow-minded and myopic statements made by the left.
- Anthony, Troy

Democrats are terrified of putting such an important social issue up for a vote. Conservative folk would come out of the wood work and in droves to vote this down.
- Todd, Andover, NH

Trashing a 5,000-year-old institution like traditional marriage and changing the definition of "family" forever shouldn't be done on a whim in a back room in Concord with a few out-of-state, well-funded pressure groups scaring liberal legislators into it.

If the radical, extremist, society-changing concept of gay marriage was put up to a vote, it would go down in flames. That's why they want to either have the courts impose it on us or do it in the dark of night.
- James, Manchester

Senate Majority Leader Hassan should be commended for being brave enough to showcase her party's ignornace evident in its namesake, the demacrats. She said, "we are the most democratic place on this earth". Unfortunately even if she were corrrect, it is her reference to democracy that showcases her general misunderstanding on the constitution and spirit in which it ws written. We have a republican form of government, not a democracy as so many of us assume. In Federalist paper 10 the differences between a democracy and a republic are best highlighted by the following quote: "a democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner"

Like it or not, our state constitution is also based on a republican form of government, not a democratic or socialist one
- Michael Layon, Derry

Lets let the Legislators decide, isn't that why we elected them, besides if referendum are unconstitutional in this state whats the problem
- Dude, Manchester

This is one of the many reasons "why" I choose not to vote.
- Randy Rouleau, Durham

Mr Vaillancourt you are right; we do need to change the state constitution to allow these referendum votes on the ballots. If we truly had representatives who LISTENED to their constituents and voted accordingly we may not need it; but you do not listen. I personally do not give a damn about this vote, but I have seen your blogs. It is obvious you have an opinion on this issue and will vote that way (no matter what your citizens from Manchester tell you); that sir is not true representation. I guess the only way you people will get it is when we take our state back. If you are really against voters having a voice Mr V, then I am looking foward to seeing you voted out in 2010.
- Brian, Manchester (currently Iraq)

This State of New Hampshire should allow Same-Sex Marriage because people can feel happy by who they love and who the can have the right to love. I am gay. Straight marriage is wrong for this State anyway. Because Women say to Men that you have to be tall to marry a Woman. That did not say that in the Bible. Women are being taught by their Mothers and their Family too. We want Gay Marriage and we just can`t wait until next year for that. We need our freedom to marry. We want Same-Sex marriage now.
- Joe Richard Haley, Exeter, NH

Marriage is generally defined as being
between a man & a woman, what's so wrong
about wanting to protect that.

Civil Unions are ok by me & should include
similar rights of married couples

whats next if this passes?
Polygamy, Adult/Child, Bestiality
Marraiges??

Can anyone honestly deny that this issue
does create a slippery slope?
- Tony, Hillsboro

James in Manchester - yes, the world is moving forward. But that doesn't mean that moral standards and religion must be tossed aside. You can knock old people if you want, but we gave you most of what you have today. It was us who gave you cell phones, television, microwaves, computers and every other thing you consider so "necessary". We gave all these things to the next generation. What are you going to leave for those who follow you?
- Brian, Farmington

I've bloody had it with all this. Not this bill, in particular, because frankly how one lives their life is their own business. But I thought all the concerns were addressed? Is this about the verbiage? Civil Unions and "Marriage?"

Whatever it be, it's enough. The democrats, for the first time in a long time, are the majority in Concord..and what do they do but push through their social agenda! When they swept in the last election I was elated. As a lifelong registered and active democrat I was happy. But with that was also concern. What I feared then has occured and continues...pushing too fast and hard. The irony, or foolishness is it happens when this state and nation face its worst economic crisis in generations.

Brilliant job, dems! I suspect you'll have ushered yourselves out in 2010.
- Jack, Manchester

Democrats = Fascists
- Ann, Manchester, NH

Lets let people vote on raising the speed limit which is broken by 95% of the people every day.
Lets let people vote on seat belt usage.
Lets let people vote on banning the inhumane greyhound racing which virtually no one watches but which holds animals hostage for profit of track owners trying to get slots.
Lets vote on parental notification.
How about pensions for public employees, shall we vote on them.
I'm against trapping; lets put that to a vote.
I could list a dozen, two dozen, maybe a hundred things we should let the people vote on but hey, letting the people vote directly ended when town meeting halls couldn't hold thousands of people that probably should be voting. Of course, we could just let everyone email a vote in today. Come to think of it, lets get rid of all elected officials and just vote on everything, 5 p.m. each night on your favoite wed site. Give me a break.

If you want people to vote, change the constitution to allow it. Until then, stop pandering.
- steve vaillancourt, manchester, nh

Lets let people vote on raising the speed limit which is broken by 95% of the people every day.
Lets let people vote on seat belt usage.
Lets let people vote on banning the inhumane greyhound racing which virtually no one watches but which holds animals hostage for profit of track owners trying to get slots.
Lets vote on parental notification.
How about pensions for public employees, shall we vote on them.
I'm against trapping; lets put that to a vote.
I could list a dozen, two dozen, maybe a hundred things we should let the people vote on but hey, letting the people vote directly ended when town meeting halls couldn't hold thousands of people that probably should be voting. Of course, we could just let everyone email a vote in today. Come to think of it, lets get rid of all elected officials and just vote on everything, 5 p.m. each night on your favoite wed site. Give me a break.

If you want people to vote, change the constitution to allow it. Until then, stop pandering.
- steve vaillancourt, manchester, nh

Just pass the bill, the world is moving forward and old voters are stuck in 1930.
- james, manchester

Jeff,
Do you even know what you are saying? That is what this country is about. The majority voted for Obama and Lynch, but there were those of us (aka the minority) that didn't want him in office. How about that lovely bailout nonsense? So we should not vote at all and let the morons in office just keep taking the decency of this country away from us?You must be a dem to have come up with that one- twisting the rules to fit your own agenda.
Paula, the homosexuals HAVE equal rights, marriage is not a right.
- Pauline, Franklin

After seeing what just took place in California, namely, that people were afforded the right to make their own decision via ballot on social policy, there is no way the democrats/Leftist interest groups would want this put towards a vote.

A pure example of hypocrisy, as lawmakers would rather silence their constituents (the actual ones) in order to due the bidding of activist organizations.
- stuart dunmeyer, Manchester

You just gotta love the people who are against a referendum question on this issue. I guess they're afraid of democracy. Local referendum questions would be great but the democrats are scared as heck. It would surely expose their statements about New Hampshire 'changing' as pure science fiction. My prediction is virtually ALL communities would reject gay marriage by at LEAST a 2-to-1 margin. Probably even 3-to-1. A society has every right to say what marriage is and isn't. Let democracy rule.
- Gary, Lincoln

its amazing... those against this bill voice their opinion but dont think about the fairness of the bill... the right to all to be equal in the eyes of the state. we are not demeaning your religious marriage - we are not fighting for religious recognition. we do not chastise you for your belief, religion, or personal opinion. Yet you must have some form of cognizant reasoning for your stance against being fair to your fellow citizens and tax payers. most will just say, "cause i dont like it"... well, that is not good enough - that is nothing more than the answer a 2 year old would give that does not have the knowledge of the topic.

and this is why we should not put it to a vote... too many under-educated people with blinders on and bigotry under their family belt. bigotry in the name of religion will not save you from judgment in the end.
- micael, manchester

It's not up to the citiizen's to decide equality. It's a constitutional right.
- Paula, Manchester

A constitutional right that is afforded to people via the Constitution. A Constituion which was put in place by the citizens. It is always up to citizens to decide...put it to a vote.
- William, Hampstead

i'll state the obvious...of course they don't want a vote on it...they will lose!! example, kali-forn-ya! and look how the liberal whack jobs react. protests and name calling and chararcter assassinations. this is called liberal greed. the left has pushed and crammed their agenda down our throats for sooo long, they just kept pushing. now the well is dry and the right is pushing back. the revolution is coming!!
- fpc, manchester

I hope the Dems weren't thinking of keeping gay amrriage off the ballot to dampen turnout of right of center voters. They are many other issues that will turn out those voters in 2010.
- Chris, Merrimack

I have cross line voted many a time in my 64 year old life. Never, have I seen such a thurst for power by elected officials, regardless the issue. I think the people who block public opinion are guilty of Disenfranchise – (to take away the power or opportunity to vote). No matter the party, these people do not serve the best interest of the people, no matter the party they support. Take action fellow Americans and demand to reveal them to the public at large. We will do what needs to be done. We are Americans who value our rights.
- John Mills, Rindge, N.H./ Lyman S.C.

Harry, you say it best!
Put it up for a vote and lets move on!
- FreddyD, Goffstown

Oh give me a break..

Well I guess all the Athiest should fight to pass a law taking God out of the pledge of allegience..just because they don't believe in God. So what that it's been around for years, no big deal. But apparently so amazingly a big deal to one's daily life that they have to keep arguing and going to the government to get what they want.


Having a different opinion is NOT ignorant, btw. There is more personal agenda than facts in this argument. Comments like that come out of a herd of sheep.
- Rick, Manchester

You want a non-binding referendum on gay marriage? How about a referendum on the budget? I strongly oppose cutting critical government services because others don't want to pay their fair share. Got some other hot button issues? Line them up, folks, it's open season on mob rule.

Thank goodness this isn't a referendum state. Look at the way government in California is hog-tied by propositions.

There's a reason we have elected officials. Like it or not, we choose them to make critical decisions that bind all of us. That's our system of government. We don't change the rules of the game because we don't like the outcome.

If you're unhappy, deal with it in 2010, but given how far off into space the GOP is drifting, I wouldn't bet the family farm on reversing the trends.
- zoot, Manchester

OF COURSE they don't want to let a ballot vote happen....because they may actually have to face the fact that there are plenty of people out there who disagree with this!

I'm not sure which way I would vote personally, BUT I'm sick and tired of these idiots in office deciding what is best. Let our voices be heard!
- Jane, Derry

This is another form of "nation building". We are doing it in Iraq and now we're on the receiving end of domestic nation building. Cramming an idea down the throats of the people, regardless of how they might feel about it. Forcing your vision of how other's should live on everyone. It's the basis of the Democrat Party.
- Mike, Manchester

Yes! Yes! Let's vote on it, and every other issue. Let's have the people vote on helmet laws so that everyone who does not own a motorcycle can regulate all those who do. Let's all vote on the right to own a gun. Forget what the constitution says, we should have a right to vote on it. Who needs the legislature we should all be able to vote and tell other people what they can and can't do. You won't to save marriage, then I say we vote to eliminate divorce. And while we are at it lets also vote on a new state motto - since it obviously is now "Live free or die... but ONLY if you are in the majority"
- Kevin, Manchester

A quote from Thomas Jefferson:

"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government."
Thomas Jefferson

The fact that it would be a NON-BINDING referendum proves the legislators simply do not want to hear what we all know...the majority of NH will vote against gay marriage. Put it to the people!!
- DF, Candia

The State of New Hampshire belongs to the citizens of New Hampshire; not the governor, not the Supreme Court, nor the House, and certainly not the Senate.

The issue of marriage being arbitrarily redefined to include same sex couples is a prime example of the members of the legislature failing to represent the desires of their constituents.

A non-binding referenda is a legitimate method of discovering the true will of the majority. I'm highly suspicious of anyone who would fight asking such a question harboring a vastly overinflated opinion of their own importance.
- Michael D. Houst, Barrington, NH

I hope now Governor Lynch will see this set of bills for what they reall are: an attempt to go behind the backs of the voters and force gay marriage on them against their will. If the Senate refuses to let the voices of the people be heard on this issue - if they are THAT certain this is not something the people would support - it's pretty clear that this is not something the Governor should sign. I hope he has enough respect for the voters to veto this now.

The Governor has to be our voice now that the Senate has decided to totally silence us on this issue! He has to speak up for the voters of New Hampshire! At the very least, that's one reason he was elected - to be our voice when others try to silence us. I hope he's not totally deaf as well, or did the Senate silencing us make it equally as impossible for him to hear us as it did our so-called representatives? Governor Lynch? Can you hear us now?
- Karen Grube, San Diego, CA

It's simple people, if you don't like gay marriage, then don't have one! Now go back to your caves and do something useful.
- Richard, Manchester

Obviously, the only way to get the message through to these clowns in Concord is to vote them out in 2010.
Voters who care about this state not being taken over by the extreme left really need to work to get the vote out, it's the only way to send the clearest message possible.
- Patty, Bedford

New Hampshire's Democrat overlords are going to find out how the people of this state feel about their priorities in 2010. I've never been so motivated to vote.
- Mike, Dunbarton

It's not up to the citiizen's to decide equality. It's a constitutional right.
- Paula, Manchester

I love watching everyone up in arms about this. It's good for a hearty chuckle.
- Ben, Manchester

at least we know what our elected representatives think of our opinions.
- Eric Shirley, Belmont, NH

Just another example of the dems cramming their agenda down our throats and sticking their noses in where it doesn't belong.
They know that if it comes to a general vote, they will lose miserably and have to admit that all that static was caused by mostly out of state people and NOT the general populus of this state.
- Pauline, Franklin

How do you expect the majority to make decisions for the minority? Of course you can't have a vote on an issue like this. There are too many ignorant people in NH that have no idea what any of this means, and they would vote yes or no depending on what they perceive to be fact.
- Jeff, Manchester, NH

The land of "Live Free or Die" - but don't plan on voting and directly voicing your opinion on critical issues. Go figure!
- R, Raymond

I think its time for a whole bunch of Public Information Act Requests to be served to our reps demanding a summary of all communications for/against by their constituents as well as copies/transcripts of all communications with special interest groups/non-constituents on the issue.

Lets see what survives the light of day.
- JP, Warner

The truth about how NH feels about this subject would get in the way of the agenda. They wouldn't want that to happen. There may be 424 of them but they don't represent us.

As it appears on the front page of this newspaper, "There is nothing so powerful as truth." Daniel Webster
- Mike, Manchester

NH is not a referendum state (thank God) and never has been. Republicans know this and should be proud of it. This is what happens when you lose elections. (I'm a Republican) Better to win the argument than to grandstand. Let's keep our eyes set on 2010.
- Nate, Canaan

Of course they didn't let it go to the people, it would get killed and then they wouldn't get all that extra cash for their campaigns !! Funny how majority rules in the senate and house but not for the people. A minority with a lot of cash to spend gets their when clearly the Majority of the people do not want this to pass.

I know I am a bigot and a homophobe because I have something with my wife that is not the same as two of the same gender. When Unions went to pass you should have done your homework and gotten what you were looking for. You got unions and that is what is it not a marriage and not you want more ? I guess in a year or so you will get more than a male and female marriage.
- We the people, nh

"Reynolds said it is the job of a legislator to talk to voters and find out what they are thinking". I find this quote very interesting since the voting by the legislators was a straight party vote, Democrats for and Republicans against.
- P. Gattinella, Kingston

Can't let the people speak, that would be...(shudder)...democratic.
- Tom, Campton

Once again, the SocialCrats know better than the PEOPLE do and stop your right to make your opinions known.
- Mike, Nottingham

So the count every vote crowd doesn't want a vote on the homosexual marriage question. Seems like they've taken a page from their colleagues from Mass. But my question is this. Since when did liberal Dems start to care about the Constitution?
- R. Cassidy, Hudson

I still think the citizens of NH should decide this issue.

Put it up for vote next year, and be done with it.
- Harry, Atkinson