As the New Hampshire legislature prepares to vote on legislation to repeal the state’s same-sex marriage law in the coming days, some Republican lawmakers are hinting that they may not have the votes to override Gov. John Lynch’s (D) expected veto of the measure. Republicans — who hold veto-proof majorities in the both the House and Senate — remain split on whether the government should limit residents’ personal freedoms, the Concord Monitor reports, and the party leadership is hoping to avoid a prolonged debate on the issue:

Rep. Seth Cohn, a Canterbury Republican who moved here as part of the Free State project, a libertarian movement to relocate to New Hampshire, is also against repeal. Cohn and others believe the bill may pass the House but does not have the two-thirds majority to override a potential veto by Democratic Gov. John Lynch, who signed the bill three years ago legalizing same-sex marriage.

“I know for a fact, based on people I’ve talked to, that if Gov. Lynch vetoes it, that veto is not override-able,” Cohn said.

Cohn said he plans to introduce an amendment on the House floor that would take government entirely out of marriage, instead giving all couples a civil union and leaving marriage up to churches and other religious institutions. That same approach is supported by the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire, a libertarian-leaning group that endorsed 107 House members elected in 2010.

“[T]hey don’t want to get dragged into it,” Gene Chandler, a former Republican House speaker explained. “It’s kind of one of those issues we’re going to have to deal with but wish we didn’t have to, in my opinion,” he added. Senate Majority Leader Jeb Bradley (R) — who voted against marriage equality — has also pledged that party members can vote their consciences on marriage. “These are deeply personal issues,” Bradley said. “Leadership in the Senate is not going to push people one way or the other.”

Over 1,800 gay and lesbian couples have married in New Hampshire and voters overwhelmingly support the existing same-sex marriage law.

Today the New Hampshire House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on HB 1264, which is essentially a “License To Discriminate” bill. The measure would allow businesses that oppose marriage equality to deny services to same-sex couples based on their “conscience” or religious beliefs. It also protects them from any civil claim of action for doing so:

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person, including a business owner or employee thereof, shall be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges to an individual if the request is related to the solemnization, celebration, or promotion of a marriage and providing such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges would be a violation of the person’s conscience or religious faith. A person’s 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 person.

Given the bill doesn’t even specify “same-sex” marriage, it would hypothetically protect the right of “conscience” to discriminate against any kind of marriage, including interracial, binational, and interdenominational couples. For this reason, it’s likely this bill would be preempted by the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, among other nondiscrimination statutes.

The language in this measure mirrors similar “license to bully” exemptions that have been proposed in Michigan and Tennessee that would protect students from discipline if they expressed anti-gay views in school. New Hampshire’s Republican-dominated legislature is also considering a bill that would repeal marriage equality despite the fact most New Hampshire voters support maintaining the law.

White House spokesperson Shin Inouye told the Washington Blade yesterday that President Obama opposes the effort by New Hampshire Republicans to repeal marriage equality, saying he “believes strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away”:

INOUYE: While the president does not weigh in on every single action taken by legislative bodies in our country, the record is clear that the president has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples. The president believes strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away.

It has been well over a year since Obama said that he was “evolving” on the issue of marriage equality and he has faced scrutiny for stalling on that evolution. In this week’s Metro Weekly, Chris Geidner has outlined some ways the Proposition 8 court case could create opportunities for the president to complete his evolution.

The GOP presidential candidates discussed marriage rights for gay and lesbian people for close to ten minutes during Saturday night’s ABC News/Yahoo debate in New Hampshire. The Republicans expressed support for extending limited benefits to same-sex couples, but strongly opposed marriage equality:

NEWT GINGRICH: We want to make it possible to have those things that are most intimately human between friends.

RICK SANTORUM: I’m certainly not going to have a federal law that bans adoption for gay couples, when there are only gay couples in certain states.

MITT ROMNEY: There is every right for people in this country to form long-term committed relationships with one another. That doesn’t mean that they have to call it marriage.

RICK PERRY: That is a war against religion and it’s going to stop under a Perry administration.

New Hampshire legalized same-sex marriage in 2009 and the law is widely supported across the state. Watch a compilation:

Former Utah governor and GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman is speaking out against Rick Santorum’s efforts to link marriage equality to polygamy and urging the former Pennsylvania senator to treat all voters with dignity, Bloomberg reports:

One of the other candidates, former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, in an appearance earlier this week compared gay marriage to polygamy, asking voters “what about three men?” Huntsman described that kind of rhetoric as divisive, saying the conversation ought to be based on “fairness and dignity.”

Huntsman is one of the few Republican presidential hopefuls to support civil unions and reciprocal beneficiary rights for same-sex couples, and would allow states to enact marriage equality. He has previously spoken out against homophobia in the campaign, condemning his fellow candidates for allowing a debate audience to jeer an openly-gay servicemember.

Huntsman first embraced civil unions in February 2009, despite supporting a constitutional amendment outlawing same-sex marriage in 2004.

During an appearance on MSNBC this morning, New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R) counseled the GOP presidential candidates to avoid discussing the state’s effort to repeal its 2009 marriage equality law, noting that voters are focused on “how you’re going to get this spending under control.” Ayottee also said she did not agree with Rick Santorum’s argument that marriage equality would lead to polygamy and expressed some confusion about how her state should treat married gay and lesbian couples if the marriage law is eliminated:

CHUCK TODD: New Hampshire, gay marriage is legal here. And I know there is an attempt to repeal it here. You favor that attempt, do you buy Sen. Santorum’s argument here that once you legalize same-sex marriage then you know, why not then legalize polygamy ?

AYOTTE: I don’t. And I really think, the issue, the focus of this primary is on the economic issues and while certainly among Republican voters there are strong feelings on the social issues, but the focus on New Hampshire in terms of the number one issue is going to be spending, size of government and how do we get people to work, so I think he’s really getting off message there.

TODD: But getting back to what New Hampshire is doing, what do you do to same-sex couples that have married, if the law is repealed here?

AYOTTE: What do you mean what do you do? … I mean obviously that’s a legal issue that would have to be addressed… you know, usually you have to, traditionally in a situation like that under law you have to grandfather people, rely on the law as it was and certainly that will be an issue the legislature will have to address if they change the law.

Watch it:

Ayotte’s suggestion that the legislature create different tiers of marriage for gay and lesbian people is reminiscent of the position Mitt Romney — who Ayotte endorsed — has staked out. Romney has proposed that the state maintain marriage rights for straight couples, allow gays who have already married to remain married, but prevent future same-sex marriages.

A former state Attorney General, Ayotte cut her teeth as a social conservative causes and has previously repudiated same-sex marriages performed in other states and championed a landmark case to the Supreme Court upholding New Hampshire’s parental notification abortion law.

This afternoon, during a rally in New Hampshire, former governor and Mitt Romney supporter John Sununu (R) highlighted the candidate’s opposition to marriage equality in a state where an overwhelming majority of residents support same-sex marriage. “Mitt Romney fought for traditional marriage with the groups down there [in Massachusetts] that felt so strongly about it. That’s a true conservative, that’s a real leader,” Sununu said. Watch it:

The New Hampshire legislature will take up a bill to repeal the state’s 2009 same-sex marriage law later this month, even though “only 27 percent of New Hampshire adults support repealing” the measure. Romney himself has endorsed eliminating the law and has even developed three different tiers of marriage for gay and lesbian coupes. Sununu’s remarks could also be an indication that the Romney campaign is expecting presidential challengers Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich to continue questioning the governor’s anti-gay credentials.