aloha, equality

State Senate Says YES: Hawaii Is ThisClose to Gay Civil Unions

In a veto-proof 18-7 vote, the Hawai’i State Senate yesterday voted to approve an “everything but marriage” civil unions bill for gay and straight couples, leaving the State House — which already approved a gays-only civil unions bill — with the momentum to line up its bill with the Senate’s version.

Then it’s off to the desk of Republican Gov. Linda Lingle, who hasn’t said whether she’ll support the bill, but has urged lawmakers to drop the issue altogether. Which could be a moot point if the House scores at least 34 votes, ensuring another veto-proof passage.

Get Queerty Daily

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


  • OrchidIslander

    A proud and lucky resident of the Big Island and of our beautiful one-of-a-kind state. While full-fledged marriage would be ideal; our state does have sizeable conservative and religious influences. We are heading in the right direction. Aloha!!

  • Ryan

    I live outside Honolulu, and we went through a similar measure last year that failed. I didn’t have high hopes to be honest considering how strong the Mormon influence is on the islands. They completely own one section of Oahu’s north shore, after all.

  • Grgg

    Ok, I don’t mean to be a bitch…

    I’ve been following the state of gay marriage in the USA for a long time now (I live in Europe). Here’s how it seems to go (from my point of view):

    1. State allows some form of partnership/marriage.
    2. Gay people all over the world rejoice.
    3. Someone suddenly decides that the majority should actually be allowed to decide what the minority is allowed to do, because that’s “democratic”.
    4. State suddenly changes their mind.
    5. Gay people are once again dirty and sinful.

    It’s getting boring and repetitive, and I refuse to rejoice until governments stop changing their minds…

    wouldn’t it be nice if the federal government grew a pair and decided to enforce the constitution?

  • stephen kay

    I agree with Grgg, between prop 8 then question 1 with Washington State`s CP`s referendum and the DC fight only beginning. Basically the US fight is actually 50 plus 2 fights. The 50 states, DC and the fed gov.(and a few extra-territories/islands and associated states like Puerto Rico).

  • rf

    The US was founded by lunatics who were basically kicked out of England for their wacky and very restrictive beliefs. Then they came here and fought each other because one side wasn’t restrictive enough. Unfortunately, even with our fairly level headed founding fathers, that early history put religious protection front and center in the Constitution–even before skin color or sex. It also meant that all the laws and attitudes in this country were shaped in some way, often subtly, by our Puritanical beginnings. When you get down about how long its taking for gay rights, just think about all the blacks who died in slavery and women who couldn’t vote. And if that doesn’t work, think about how all the heteros are being screwed over by our now fascist leaning government too (thanks Supreme Court!). Now don’t you feel better?

  • schlukitz

    No. 5 · rf

    Now don’t you feel better?

    Not really. Misery may loves company, but that doesn’t deal with the problem making us miserable.

    think about how all the heteros are being screwed over by our now fascist leaning government too (thanks Supreme Court!).

    In what manner, specifically and how does that affect marriage equality for the LGBT community?

  • rf

    no6 – um, the supreme court just allowed corporations, whom they have already established have the same rights as people (something Sotomayor says may be a mistake), to spend unlimited money campaigning for political candidates. What do you think that does to the ability of pro-gay candidates, who are often unlikely to be very friendly to business, to get elected? The most powerful companies can now control the political process–which more or less is fascism. Supposedly 1 billion was spent during the Obama/McCain election in 08. Exxon’s profits were 45 billion that year.

    That ruling affects everyone, including straight people who have now completely lost their voice in govt, so while they’re (many not all) discriminating against us, the corporations, with the help of the govt, can now smash us all into submission. Even IF the current legislature gets something passed that limits the amount of money corporations can spend–google Grayson and Frank–, corporations will try to chip away at the legislature until those laws are overturned. Maybe 2 election cycles, maybe 10. but in the end, we’re all screwed.

    This is such a big deal, even Obama said we have to do something. and he doesn’t take a stand on anything.

  • schlukitz

    No. 7 · rf

    Thank you for your response and the clarification me of your original post no. 5.

    Your points are very valid and good reason for concern on behalf of all voters, gay and straight.

    I think both Sotomayer and Obama are onto something and they definitely need to take a stand on this issue or we, as you so aptly pointed out, will all be screwed.

  • Daniel

    The Supreme Court ruled that corporations – many of which are controlled by foreign governments like Saudi Arabia – can spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. The Supreme Court just empowered non-Americans to heavily control USA elections. They should be renamed the Supreme Corruption.

  • Daniel

    All five justices who gave that corrupt ruling should step down and apologize to the people of the United States.

  • Sam

    @No. 3 · Grgg: Not trying to be a bitch back, but…

    You’re talking about two of the 15 states that have passed some form of relationship recognition: California and Maine. None of the 13 other states that have passed relationship recognition for same-sex couples have “suddenly change{d) their mind.” That means 87% of the states that have passed these laws have kept them. (We have yet to see if DC will have their minds changed for them.)

    California and Maine were major setbacks and shouldn’t have been allowed to happen. But it’s not accurate or helpful to say the glass is empty when it’s really nearly full.

  • Sam

    Also, I love that in Hawaii the Repug Governor wants to drop the geigh issue, while in Iowa, all the Repug candidates for Governor want to bring it up.

  • mb00

    No we’re not getting Civil-Unions. Just got back from the voting by the house of reps. They pussied out and voted to “DEFER THE BILL INDEFINITELY”.


  • schlukitz

    No. 13 · mb00

    As Chester A. Riley used to say in the Golden Days of Radio “What a revoltin’ development this is.”

Comments are closed.