CONCORD – Supporters of a civil unions bill will have to wait another week to see how the New Hampshire House votes on the issue.

After a day of wrangling over a resolution calling for withdrawal from Iraq, and fights over two measures dealing with gay marriage, the House adjourned last night before taking up HB 437, which would establish civil unions.

Speaker of the House Terie Norelli, D-Portsmouth, said the House will take up the bill as its first piece of business next Wednesday.

The House defeated by a 2-1 margin a proposed constitutional amendment that said marriage would be the only legal union between a man and a woman. But the momentum that lopsided vote built up didn't last.

The House struggled through a series of parliamentary moves on a marriage bill when questions arose over its wording. House Bill 235 would have recognized as valid all marriages legally contracted anywhere outside the state.

The bill was only one sentence long, but its Republican opponents argued that it could require the state to recognize the legality of a visiting foreigner's marriage to a child bride or multiple wives.

After about an hour of debate, the bill was sent back to the committee for more work. It is unlikely to emerge again this session because a key House deadline passed at midnight.

Rep. Dudley Dumaine, R-Auburn, led the fight for the constitutional amendment, CACR 1. He argued that the voters are demanding the right to vote on the issue.

"They want this on the ballot so they can vote it up or down," he said. "They're going to be watching us on this one."

To go before voters, the amendment needed to get 240 votes, or 60 percent of the membership. However, it lost, 233-124. To take effect, an amendment also needs a two-thirds approval on Election Day.

Rep. Bette Lasky, D-Nashua, was among those who argued against the bill.

"The Constitution should never be amended to restrict rights, nor should this House of the people discriminate against anyone in this state," she said.

Rep. Carole Estes, D-Plymouth, who said she lived through racial discrimination as a black citizen of Florida in the 1950s, argued against the measure.

"Irony of ironies, I am now asked to enshrine discrimination in the New Hampshire Constitution," she said. "I cannot perpetuate such a travesty, even though the people say they should vote."

Yesterday, Karen Testerman, executive director of Cornerstone Policy Research, criticized the GOP's work on the gay marriage issue.

"The deafening silence from the NH Republican Party is creating a huge vacuum," she said.

She said party leaders have said nothing about the gay marriage and civil union bills.

Last week, the House Judiciary Committee voted 15-5 in favor of civil unions, with support from conservative Republicans, including House Republican Alliance co-chair David Bettencourt, R-Salem.

In December 2005, a Republican-dominated study commission recommended against civil unions, saying it would be a first step toward gay marriage. It also called for an amendment defining marriage as solely between a man and a woman.

A minority of the commission called for legislation that would expand rights for gay couples, and said that marriage among same-sex partners was "the only long-term, fair and equitable solution."

Commission meetings often descended into partisan bickering and personal sniping, and its proceedings as well as its conclusions were roundly criticized.