Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #civilunions #hawaii #legislation stories and more


  • 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:


  • 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



  • the crustybastard

    By all means, go ahead and fill that “half-full” glass, kids.

    Just don’t forget your place.


  • 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.

Comments are closed.