Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie will sign the state’s civil union bill into law at a 2pm Wednesday ceremony, which will be streamed live here. Once singed, gay couples can begin receiving paperwork for their junior marriages on Jan. 1, 2012.
Don't forget to share:
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
@Kernelt – The reason that that is the date, is because legislation that goes into affect immediately requires 2/3ths approval from both house bodies. Since the house didn’t have the 2/3rds, there is a waiting period. This happened with Illinois, too.
Why do you have to be SOOO unbearably negative? A step forward is a step forward. Sometimes it is nice to rejoice in the smaller victories because they remind us people are trying. Please seek therapy.
Considering the long and tortuous road it took to get to this small victory, I will raise my glass in a toast to the beautiful state of Hawaii. Ho’omaika’i!
I hate the whole separate but not equal as @the crustybastard: puts it, but I think this is a great step in the right direction, and the more states that embrace it the better. Also, my main concern right now is, yes, equality, but also as many immediate protections as possible.Civil Unions, depending on what each state’s bill says, affords us protections we couldn’t have dreamed of in most places 5 years ago. If our own damn President won’t even come out and say he supports marriage, and the VP still supports DOMA, we can’t really be so unrealistic as to expect them to say yes to marriage. So, in short, good going Hawaii, I wish I lived there.
Hawaii may not have the ideal solution yet, but it helps stem the tide of victories for NOM & their ilk and will provide many couples some measure of protection they wouldn’t have otherwise.
Enough of an improvement to clink glasses — half full, with a splash.
1993: Supreme Court of Hawaii is the first to hold that the state’s refusal to grant marriage license to same-gender couples violates Hawaii’s equal protection clause; remanded to trial court to review under strict scrutiny.
1996: State fails to meet evidentiary burden under strict scrutiny review, has no “compelling interest” in denying marriage. Judge stays own ruling, (stalling to allow for…)
1998: Hawaiian public amends state constitution to allow legislature to exclude same-sex couples who wish to marry from equal protection clause.
You guys are free to ignore history and pretend that Hawaii is making great strides toward equality, as you are likewise free to cheer the same legislature who excludes gays — and only gays — from their constitutional right to equal protection under the law.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
kernelt
why does it have to be next year, what’s the hold up?
Vermont
@Kernelt – The reason that that is the date, is because legislation that goes into affect immediately requires 2/3ths approval from both house bodies. Since the house didn’t have the 2/3rds, there is a waiting period. This happened with Illinois, too.
Mikey S
Why do you have to be SOOO unbearably negative? A step forward is a step forward. Sometimes it is nice to rejoice in the smaller victories because they remind us people are trying. Please seek therapy.
the crustybastard
It’s not “second-class marriage.” It’s not “junior marriage.”
It’s not marriage, period.
It’s this:
[img]http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kyz2gmaitl1qb3mmfo1_250.jpg[/img]
Steve-O
GOD stop being so negative. Can’t you look at this as a small victory…
It might not be marriage, but its a step in the right direction.
Stop looking at the glass as half empty and rejoice in a pivitol step TOWARDS marriage equality.
Austin
@Stev-O Yes, Thank you!
Little more than a year ago, this would have been trumpeted
as a major advance. It’s more than 46 other states allow.
bob
@Austin:
Exactly!
the crustybastard
By all means, go ahead and fill that “half-full” glass, kids.
Just don’t forget your place.
[img]http://www.incontemptcomics.com/toons2004/021604.gif[/img]
jak
Considering the long and tortuous road it took to get to this small victory, I will raise my glass in a toast to the beautiful state of Hawaii. Ho’omaika’i!
Shannon1981
I hate the whole separate but not equal as @the crustybastard: puts it, but I think this is a great step in the right direction, and the more states that embrace it the better. Also, my main concern right now is, yes, equality, but also as many immediate protections as possible.Civil Unions, depending on what each state’s bill says, affords us protections we couldn’t have dreamed of in most places 5 years ago. If our own damn President won’t even come out and say he supports marriage, and the VP still supports DOMA, we can’t really be so unrealistic as to expect them to say yes to marriage. So, in short, good going Hawaii, I wish I lived there.
Jeffree
Hawaii may not have the ideal solution yet, but it helps stem the tide of victories for NOM & their ilk and will provide many couples some measure of protection they wouldn’t have otherwise.
Enough of an improvement to clink glasses — half full, with a splash.
Joe in Decatur, GA
Thanks, Hawaii, for making some advances in our favor.
the crustybastard
1993: Supreme Court of Hawaii is the first to hold that the state’s refusal to grant marriage license to same-gender couples violates Hawaii’s equal protection clause; remanded to trial court to review under strict scrutiny.
1996: State fails to meet evidentiary burden under strict scrutiny review, has no “compelling interest” in denying marriage. Judge stays own ruling, (stalling to allow for…)
1998: Hawaiian public amends state constitution to allow legislature to exclude same-sex couples who wish to marry from equal protection clause.
You guys are free to ignore history and pretend that Hawaii is making great strides toward equality, as you are likewise free to cheer the same legislature who excludes gays — and only gays — from their constitutional right to equal protection under the law.