Unfortunately, you posted only part of HB473. Here is the other critical piece:

IV. The marriage laws of this state shall not be construed to affect the ability of a fraternal benefit society to determine the admission of members pursuant to RSA 418:5, and shall not require a fraternal benefit society that has been established and is operating for charitable and educational purposes and which is operated, supervised, or controlled by or in connection with a religious organization to provide insurance benefits to any person if to do so would violate the fraternal benefit society’s free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and part I, article 5 of the New Hampshire constitution.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.u.....B0073.html

The requested amendment is a real twist of legalese, which makes it hard to read. All of that mumbo-jumbo is tied to this short yet important phrase “…related to the solemnization of a marriage, the celebration of a marriage, or the promotion of marriage…”

What it says, in short, is that they DO have to recognize your marriage for insurance and everything else. They DO NOT have to rent you their hall, their honeymoon suite, bake your cake, or arrange your flowers for anything to do with your wedding or honeymoon. Selling you insurance or recognizing your medial rights over your legal spouse does not promote your marriage, it simply uses the rights and responsibilities of it.

Most of what’s in there, by the way, is actually de facto law for heterosexual couples too. (re: Catholics, Mormons, etc) But don’t leak that out! We want the religious folks to think they’re getting a deal.

The text of the actual amendment:

“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a religious organization, association, or society, or any individual who is managed, directed, or supervised by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society, or any nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges to an individual if such request for such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges is related to the solemnization of a marriage, the celebration of a marriage, or the promotion of marriage through religious counseling, programs, courses, retreats, or housing designated for married individuals, and such solemnization, celebration, or promotion of marriage is in violation of their religious beliefs and faith. Any refusal to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods or privileges in accordance with this section shall not create any civil claim or cause of action or result in any state action to penalize or withhold benefits from such religious organization, association or society, or any individual who is managed, directed, or supervised by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society, or any nonprofit institution or organization operated, supervised or controlled by or in conjunction with a religious organization, association or society.”

Is that a reasonable compromise in order to achieve civil marriage equality? I believe it is. It will then be up to our advocates to convince churches–one congregation at a time if necessary–not to discriminate. But some members of the New Hampshire House disagree and they do not want to write discrimination of any sort into the law.

I hope that helps clarify the debate.