Hawaii House passes civil-union bill
The Hawaii House of Representatives passed a civil-union bill by a vote of 31-19 on Feb. 11.
It grants civil-union couples the same rights and responsibilities that come with marriage.
The measure already passed the Senate by a vote of 19-6 but will need to return there for approval of minor changes made in the House.
Gov. Neil Abercrombie has promised to sign the bill into law once it clears the Senate.
"Today is a great day for the people of Hawaii," said Equality Hawaii Co-Chair Alan Spector. "The action taken by the House today sends a strong message that our state recognizes the importance of moving towards equality."
Freedom to Marry President Evan Wolfson commented: "Hawaii's Legislature acted to acknowledge the state's loving and committed gay and lesbian couples and their families and to provide them a measure of protections under the law -- protections of particular importance during these tough economic times. This is a victory for all families, because it strengthens the lives of many couples and their loved ones while taking nothing away from anyone else."
Including Hawaii and Illinois, where a civil-union law will come into force in June, 14 states and Washington, D.C., now have expansive civil-union laws, allow same-sex marriage, or recognize other jurisdictions' same-sex marriages (as marriages). Same-sex marriage is legal in Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington, D.C. In addition, New York and Maryland recognize same-sex marriages from elsewhere in the nation or world. Civil-union or domestic-partnership laws that grant all state-level rights of marriage are in place in California, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon and Washington.
In Colorado, Hawaii, Maine and Wisconsin, there are laws that grant same-sex couples some of the rights of marriage. In Rhode Island, an attorney general opinion and a subsequent court ruling have resulted in limited recognition of same-sex marriages entered into elsewhere in the nation or world.
California is a further case unto itself. Same-sex marriage was legal from June to November 2008, when voters amended the state constitution via Proposition 8 to put a stop to it. The couples who married then are still legally married, as are other same-sex couples who live in California and got married anywhere in the world before Prop 8 passed. Gay couples who married somewhere else after Prop 8 passed, or who marry elsewhere in the future, receive every state-level right and obligation of marriage in California except for the legal right to call their marriage a "marriage" when they are in California. They are not recognized under the state's domestic partnership law, but rather are married couples who are denied use of the word "marriage."
Eleven other nations allow same-sex couples to marry -- Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden and Mexico (where same-sex marriages are allowed only in the capital city but are recognized nationwide).
NH residents oppose repeal of same-sex marriage
New Hampshire residents overwhelmingly oppose plans by some legislators to attempt to repeal the state's 2009 law that legalized same-sex marriage, according to polling data released Feb. 9.
The Granite State Poll, sponsored by WMUR-TV and conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center, found that only 29 percent of New Hampshire adults support repeal, 62 percent oppose repeal, and 9 percent are neutral on the matter or lack an opinion.
Pollsters questioned 520 randomly selected adults by telephone between Jan. 27 and Feb. 6. The margin of error was 4.3 percent.
In last November's elections, Republicans took control of both houses of the Legislature and have enough seats to override vetoes by Democratic Gov. John Lynch.
Bills have been filed to repeal the marriage-equality law and to amend the state constitution to prohibit same-sex couples from marrying.
Four Republican senators or 32 Republican House members would need to join every Democrat in one or the other chamber to uphold a gubernatorial veto of any bill ending same-sex marriage. The Senate has 24 members, of whom 19 now are Republican, and the House has 400 members, of whom 298 are Republican.
Same-sex marriage also is legal in Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont and Washington, D.C. Internationally, it is legal in Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden and Mexico (where same-sex marriages are allowed only in the capital city but are recognized nationwide).
Pro-discrimination bill introduced in Iowa House
A homophobic bill introduced in the Iowa House of Representatives on Feb. 7 would allow "a religious corporation, association, educational institution, society, charity, or fraternal organization, or an individual employed by such an entity while acting in the scope of employment" to deny "services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for a purpose related to the solemnization or celebration of a marriage (if providing them) would cause such entity to violate the sincerely held religious beliefs to which the entity subscribes or such individual to violate the individual's sincerely held religious beliefs."
Iowa is one of five states where same-sex marriage is legal.
The "Religious Conscience Protection Act" (House Study Bill 50) also permits any individual, sole proprietor or small business to refuse to do "any of the following if doing so would cause the individual or sole proprietor to violate the individual's or sole proprietor's sincerely held religious beliefs or the small business to violate the sincerely held religious beliefs to which the small business subscribes."
* "Provide goods or services that assist or promote the solemnization or celebration of a marriage, or provide counseling or other services that directly facilitate the perpetuation of a marriage."
* "Provide benefits to the spouse of an employee."
* "Provide housing to a married couple."
* "Provide adoption or reproductive services."
Even government employees would be permitted to withhold services as long as another employee or official is "promptly available and willing to provide the requested service without inconvenience or delay."
But in the case of a "judicial officer authorized to solemnize marriage," he or she can refuse to do so even if no other officer is available.
The bill defines a small business as one where the services are primarily performed by the owner, one that has no more than five employees, or one that rents housing but has no more than five units.
The bill is online at tinyurl.com/4u8oge8.
Assistance: Bill Kelley
