Hawaii lawmakers question benefits of gay marriage

Oct 28, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: WFAA-TV Dallas

Hawaii's battle over gay marriage brought state lawmakers back to work Monday after the governor called a special session that could make the islands a wedding destination for more couples.

Comments
1 - 12 of 12 Comments Last updated Oct 31, 2013

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Oct 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

So when is the Hawaii Senate supposed to vote on the bill ?

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Oct 28, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

From the article:
Hawaii already allows civil unions, and some members of a Senate committee questioned Monday whether it was important to also allow gay marriage.

Yes, IT'S IMPORTANT because Civil Unions are NOT recognized at the Federal level and therefore are NOT equal to marriage in ANY way and treat Gay and Lesbian couples DIFFERENTLY, which VIOLATES their Due Process and Equal Protection under the Constitution!!!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Oct 29, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

It was an interesting hearing for the first hour, but then it turned into the typical- abomination, let the people vote, & equal rights comments.

The AG kinda screwed up by saying same-sex couples who get married elsewhere would get all the federal benefits, which led to the questions of why the legislature should bother passing the bill.

In the end it passed by a 5-2 vote out of committee.

The full Senate is expected to easily pass it today.

The House then takes up the bill on Thu, where it may be a closer vote, but it still looks like a 30-21 final tally.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Oct 29, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
It was an interesting hearing for the first hour, but then it turned into the typical- abomination, let the people vote, & equal rights comments.
The AG kinda screwed up by saying same-sex couples who get married elsewhere would get all the federal benefits, which led to the questions of why the legislature should bother passing the bill.
In the end it passed by a 5-2 vote out of committee.
The full Senate is expected to easily pass it today.
The House then takes up the bill on Thu, where it may be a closer vote, but it still looks like a 30-21 final tally.
I hope you're right.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Oct 29, 2013
 
WeTheSheeple wrote:
It was an interesting hearing for the first hour, but then it turned into the typical- abomination, let the people vote, & equal rights comments.
The AG kinda screwed up by saying same-sex couples who get married elsewhere would get all the federal benefits, which led to the questions of why the legislature should bother passing the bill.
In the end it passed by a 5-2 vote out of committee.
The full Senate is expected to easily pass it today.
The House then takes up the bill on Thu, where it may be a closer vote, but it still looks like a 30-21 final tally.
As always, thanks for the update and hopefully we have Hawaii before November:-)

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Oct 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

NorCal Native wrote:
<quoted text>
As always, thanks for the update and hopefully we have Hawaii before November:-)
While I certainly hope that the Hawaii legislature passes the bill and the governor signs it, this is now an exercise in the Law Of Diminishing Returns. What does this really get us at this point ?

What we need, and what we should focus on, is getting the federal courts to rule that the U.S. Constitution's "Full Faith and Credit" clause MUST be applied to ALL marriages in the U.S. That is what the U.S. Constitution says, and this is what we need instead of going state by state at this point.

In 10 years, do you still really want to be fighting this battle in places like North Dakota and Idaho and Montana, and all those other states in the Deep South that nobody ever heard of before anyways ?!

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Oct 29, 2013
 
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
While I certainly hope that the Hawaii legislature passes the bill and the governor signs it, this is now an exercise in the Law Of Diminishing Returns. What does this really get us at this point ?
What we need, and what we should focus on, is getting the federal courts to rule that the U.S. Constitution's "Full Faith and Credit" clause MUST be applied to ALL marriages in the U.S. That is what the U.S. Constitution says, and this is what we need instead of going state by state at this point.
In 10 years, do you still really want to be fighting this battle in places like North Dakota and Idaho and Montana, and all those other states in the Deep South that nobody ever heard of before anyways ?!
No, the returns are not diminishing. Hawaii represents 2% of the states, just as Massachusetts represented 2% of the states. The only difference is that, when Massachusetts allowed marriage, the set went from 0% to 2%. With Hawaii, it goes from 28% to 30%, which is a 7% increase in the number of states. The sixteenth state will represent less than a 7% increase in the size of the set allowing marriage, but it will still represent 2% of the states.

The larger the set of states allowing same-sex marriage, the better the chance of pulling the laggards along. The smaller the set, the longer it will take to make the case nationwide.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Oct 29, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the returns are not diminishing. Hawaii represents 2% of the states, just as Massachusetts represented 2% of the states. The only difference is that, when Massachusetts allowed marriage, the set went from 0% to 2%. With Hawaii, it goes from 28% to 30%, which is a 7% increase in the number of states. The sixteenth state will represent less than a 7% increase in the size of the set allowing marriage, but it will still represent 2% of the states.
The larger the set of states allowing same-sex marriage, the better the chance of pulling the laggards along. The smaller the set, the longer it will take to make the case nationwide.
I disagree.

And btw, I don't remember what thread I posted it on, but I mentioned that I sold some software on ebay the other nite, and when I printed out the address label from ebay, I discovered that the purchaser is a Baptist pastor.

THEREFORE........ I sent an email via ebay, AND printed out a note I included with the package that said:

"Your discs were shipped today. You should receive them on Thursday because I shipped them 2 Day Priority Mail. After you receive them, please leave me positive feedback. The entire amount of your payment has been donated to GLAAD (the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) FULLY HOMOSEXUALIZING the states one by one !

THANK YOU for your support !

Peace In Christ,

Daniel P. Hanover"

(and yes, I DID IN FACT DONATE THE MONEY TO GLAAD on their website via Paypal !)

ROFL ! If he wasn't a Baptist preacher, GLAAD wouldn't not have gotten a surprise donation from me ! LOL

As a Christian who attends church each Sunday, as a gay man, and as one who has known many fine gay and lesbian pastors, I just COULDN'T RESIST this opportunity to tweak a Baptist !

LOL
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Oct 29, 2013
 
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree.
And btw, I don't remember what thread I posted it on, but I mentioned that I sold some software on ebay the other nite, and when I printed out the address label from ebay, I discovered that the purchaser is a Baptist pastor.
THEREFORE........ I sent an email via ebay, AND printed out a note I included with the package that said:
"Your discs were shipped today. You should receive them on Thursday because I shipped them 2 Day Priority Mail. After you receive them, please leave me positive feedback. The entire amount of your payment has been donated to GLAAD (the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) FULLY HOMOSEXUALIZING the states one by one !
THANK YOU for your support !
Peace In Christ,
Daniel P. Hanover"
(and yes, I DID IN FACT DONATE THE MONEY TO GLAAD on their website via Paypal !)
ROFL ! If he wasn't a Baptist preacher, GLAAD wouldn't not have gotten a surprise donation from me ! LOL
As a Christian who attends church each Sunday, as a gay man, and as one who has known many fine gay and lesbian pastors, I just COULDN'T RESIST this opportunity to tweak a Baptist !
LOL
Good for you!
.
Revenge; sweet revenge! lol ;o))

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Oct 29, 2013
 
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
While I certainly hope that the Hawaii legislature passes the bill and the governor signs it, this is now an exercise in the Law Of Diminishing Returns. What does this really get us at this point ?
What we need, and what we should focus on, is getting the federal courts to rule that the U.S. Constitution's "Full Faith and Credit" clause MUST be applied to ALL marriages in the U.S. That is what the U.S. Constitution says, and this is what we need instead of going state by state at this point.
In 10 years, do you still really want to be fighting this battle in places like North Dakota and Idaho and Montana, and all those other states in the Deep South that nobody ever heard of before anyways ?!
Those cases ARE in the works already, but will take 3-5 years to get to the SCOTUS.

In the meantime we continue to get as many states as we can.

Up next in 2013- New Mexico.

Coming in 2014- Illinois, Alaska, Oregon, Montana, Idaho, Nevada, & Arizona.

Patience grasshopper.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Oct 31, 2013
 
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree.
And btw, I don't remember what thread I posted it on, but I mentioned that I sold some software on ebay the other nite, and when I printed out the address label from ebay, I discovered that the purchaser is a Baptist pastor.
THEREFORE........ I sent an email via ebay, AND printed out a note I included with the package that said:
"Your discs were shipped today. You should receive them on Thursday because I shipped them 2 Day Priority Mail. After you receive them, please leave me positive feedback. The entire amount of your payment has been donated to GLAAD (the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) FULLY HOMOSEXUALIZING the states one by one !
THANK YOU for your support !
Peace In Christ,
Daniel P. Hanover"
(and yes, I DID IN FACT DONATE THE MONEY TO GLAAD on their website via Paypal !)
ROFL ! If he wasn't a Baptist preacher, GLAAD wouldn't not have gotten a surprise donation from me ! LOL
As a Christian who attends church each Sunday, as a gay man, and as one who has known many fine gay and lesbian pastors, I just COULDN'T RESIST this opportunity to tweak a Baptist !
LOL
Sweet. Let us know if he follows up with feedback!

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Oct 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree.
Spoken like true Republican: When faced with hard mathematical facts, disagree. It's the same dedication to ideology at the expense of facts that has kept our economy moribund all these years.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••