Our legislator doesn't have a filibuster. The bill has to come up for a vote. I seriously doubt the legislators will vote against it or that the governor will veto it. I'm not zoosexual, but I can understand your frustration. Being in the minority sucks. Nobody is speaking out against the bill in NH because there is too much at stake for other liberties. NH is a “beacon of liberty” in the sense that it has attracted liberty lovers from around the world, but not everyone in NH agrees with liberty. Our state is a battleground between the liberty and ant-liberty individuals. Anti-liberty legislators like Katherine Rogers are fighting back. If this bill gets passed that doesn't mean that the liberty lovers living in NH agree with it. Push-back like this should be expected, but that doesn't mean we should give up and tell liberty lovers not to move to NH because of one loss. Considering all the wins liberty have achieved in NH over the years, this will be a minor setback. I'm discouraged by this news as well, but it's important to remain optimistic. Indeed there is much work to be done in NH. That's why people need to move here and fight for our rights.
I'm just worried that this bill will become law and then everyone will forget about this issue -- or, even worse, introduce more bills in the future which would make penalties even harsher for zoosexuals (that's what Oregon did). As an example, consider Maine: around the year 2001, when Maine created its anti-zoosexual law, there were zoosexual people protesting it based on the fact that it violated civil liberties. The bill in Maine became law, and for the past 15 years, no one has ever challenged the law, either judicially or legislatively. To this day, a zoosexual in Maine can be unjustly arrested, thrown in jail, and have their animals taken from them just because they had ethical interspecies sex. And there has been absolutely no discussion AT ALL in Maine about getting rid of that law. That's what I'm worried will happen in New Hampshire: that it will do the same thing as Maine and keep its anti-zoosexual "carved in stone" so-to-speak.
You said to be optimistic -- how can a zoosexual be optimistic in New Hampshire with representatives whose beliefs are so opposed to their own beliefs? Is it optimistic to believe that NH-liberty organizations such as the FSP, NH Liberty Alliance, and NH ACLU will try to undo the damage done by HB 1547 if it does become law? (And by "undo" I mean legislative repeal or lawsuit). Because if this doesn't happen, I worry that this bulls**t bill (if it becomes law) will stick around for decades and decades while zoosexuals in New Hampshire hide in fear and paranoia, fearful of suffering a devastating loss via persecution (such as their animal lovers being confiscated by them by police, being arrested, fined, police record, a ban on keeping animals, etc) if their interspecies sex is discovered. And at some point, if HB 1547 becomes law, there will eventually be a zoosexual that fails to hide himself/herself properly and he/she will be caught, arrested, and put in jail because of the bulls**t law.
It is worth noting that so far the ACLU, NH Liberty Alliance and Libetarian Party of NH have done absolutely nothing to stop this bill, which is disheartening and dejecting. What is even more disheartening is that whenever this kind of bill is brought up in a state legislature, whether it is in Alabama or Alaska or Florida, there is never any dissent
, and it always passes unanimously
-- I find that very troubling.
Consider this MLK Jr. quote:“One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ' an unjust law is no law at all.”
But unfortunately, that kind of civil disobedience will probably help zoosexuals very little in New Hampshire, as the state legislators in NH appear to be irrationally hostile towards anything zoosexual-related, and from their perspective, there is no difference between civil disobedience and being a "felonious criminal" (made a criminal under bad laws they wrote).
And I agree with you, there are of course people NH that are pro-liberty and would oppose this bill, but their voices aren't being heard, at least on this bill -- and worse, the anti-liberty forces appear to be getting their way.
If someone says to a zoosexual "well, we succeeded in 14 out of 15 pro-liberty goals in the NH state legislature, and the only one we failed at was failing to stop the interspecies sex ban", that wouldn't matter to a zoosexual: banning intespecies sex, a lifestyle viewed by some as even spiritual/religious, is extremely offensive to them -- whether they chose to live in NH or not would be their decision, but certainly it wouldn't be inviting.
And remember: no liberty is less important than another liberty. Just because interspecies sex is a marginalized, fringe, taboo subject doesn't mean their liberty (the liberty of zoosexuals) is less valuable than another person's (it's called equality before the law).