Honor civil unions of gay couples - E...

Honor civil unions of gay couples - Editorials

There are 1985 comments on the Honolulu Star-Bulletin story from Feb 8, 2009, titled Honor civil unions of gay couples - Editorials. In it, Honolulu Star-Bulletin reports that:

Gay marriages have been banned in Hawaii since nearly 70 percent of voters approved a state constitutional amendment in 1998 that validated the Legislature's definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Honolulu Star-Bulletin.

First Prev
of 100
Next Last
Renata

Kahului, HI

#1 Feb 8, 2009
Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona should not be pushing his religious beliefs on the public. He is narrow minded and has no ability to see viewpoints different from his.

Duke should try walking in the shoes of gay couples (families) who choose to partner and commit to each other but find government not willing to recognize their commitment and love for one another. Perhaps that is just asking too much of Duke.

Duke: You will not get my vote for Gov as I cannot vote for a man who is small and narrow-minded.
Steven Leong

Honolulu, HI

#3 Feb 8, 2009
For years, the only Gays that most people experienced were flamboyant, sarcastic, people, who liked to draw attention where ever they were. With the new truthful views of Gays being biologically born Gay, more and more of Gays, coming out of the closet are just "everyday people". Doctors, students, mechanics, homeless, Asian, Polynesian, White, Black, Rich, Poor ...

More families are discovering Gays within their ranks. Those without Gay relatives, will have them someday. Gay siblings, children, grandchildren, great grandchildren, nephews, nieces, uncles, aunties...these are the people we are "paving the way for". These are the people who deserve equal rights as everyone else!

I grew up in a time, and a Hawaii, where being Gay was uncomfortable, and unfamiliar. I went to school with Duke Aiona. My generation didn't know too much about being Gay. Their views were tainted by the "extreme promoters" in the Gay population. They may never except Gays as being equal with them, and that's okay. We will all die off soon, and along with that, our bigotry and narrow mindedness.

The younger generation, and those who support the future of the younger generation, need to rally behind bringing equality to everyone...even those born differently from one's self. This is not Gay rights, it's CIVIL RIGHTS!

Sincerely,
Steve Leong - Aiea
Mama

San Jose, CA

#4 Feb 8, 2009
This is not about rights for gays. This is about taking a 4000 year old institution, one of the few cultural practices which is fairly uniform across all cultures from ancient to modern to lost villages untouched by outside influence for 1000s of years. Yet they all supported "normal" male/female unions and shunned others.

This is about same sex lobbyists taking that 4000 year old institution of the world and forcing its stamp of approval upon their unusual relationship.

If anything, historically and biologically speaking, polygamy is a more "normal" relationship style than same sex unions ever were.

Strict homosexual laws are discriminatory against polygamist relationships between consenting adults, transgender, hermaphroditic and just plain confused individuals and group relationships between consenting adults.

Make sure you know the facts.

1) Make gay marriage legal and all issues such as adoption will also be equal. Gays will be able to go to adoption agencies and pick out kids the way they go to the Humane Society to get a pet.

2) If it is legal, homosexual relationships will be taught at any age in schools. Obama already said that sex education should be taught in kindergarten in an age appropriate fashion. "My Two Daddies" could become required reading for 1st and 2nd graders. All references to "mommy an daddy" and the normal nuclear family will be scrubbed and cleansed from the curriculum and replaced with "parents".

3) In reference to the statement above, polygamy and other arrangements are soon to follow because if consenting same sex individuals are allowed to "marry" then why not any other combination of consenting adults.

THESE ARE FACTUAL STATEMENTS.

But just watch the hate and intolerance that it generates from the other side.
Mama

San Jose, CA

#5 Feb 8, 2009
At least be consistent. If you are going to expand the definition of marriage, then include anything and everything between consenting adults. You want to exclude incest on the basis of medical reasons fine. But every other polygamist, group, transgender, bisexual, a sexual, commune combination should also be allowed.

If not, then it would just be another discriminatory and bigoted bill, this time by the gay lobbyists.

The law should say that any adult or group of adults who which to enter into a social contract may do so.

That's it.

It would include normal one man, one woman relationships so that the government can essentially get out of the business of marriage all together.

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#7 Feb 8, 2009
Mama wrote:
propaganda deleted
Mama,
Sorry to inform you but what you post IS NOT FACTS....just your EXTREME NARROW-MINDEDNESS.
You were one of those people who probably bought into the Yes on 8 propaganda, right?

Gays and Lesbians DO NOT GENERATE HATE OR INTOLERANCE.......what you see is them fighting for a right that was ELIMINATED from them at the ballot box.

Exactly where is your references that MARRIAGE IS A 4000 YEARS OLD INSTITUTION. You probably think the Earth is only 6000 years old too.

The ONLY ONES SHOVING ANYTHING DOWN ANYONE'S THROAT is the CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVES. I am entitled to religious freedom and just because I believe differently does not make it wrong.....I believe God is my creator and HE CREATED ME EXACTLY THE WAY HE WANTED ME TO BE.

You have NO FACTS, just Fear......that have NO BUSINESS IN MAKING LAW.

Polygamy is ALREADY A FACT......THOSE WHO WANT IT CAN FIGHT TO HAVE IT RECOGNIZED.......It has not a damn thing to do to with SAME-SEX COUPLES HAVING THE RIGHT TO MARRY.

Try and get some real education on the issue, it might truly open your narrow mind.

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#9 Feb 8, 2009
Mama wrote:
At least be consistent. If you are going to expand the definition of marriage, then include anything and everything between consenting adults. You want to exclude incest on the basis of medical reasons fine. But every other polygamist, group, transgender, bisexual, a sexual, commune combination should also be allowed.
If not, then it would just be another discriminatory and bigoted bill, this time by the gay lobbyists.
The law should say that any adult or group of adults who which to enter into a social contract may do so.
That's it.
It would include normal one man, one woman relationships so that the government can essentially get out of the business of marriage all together.
Here you go......It's so easy to BLAME THE GAYS AND LESBIANS:
First things first

Honolulu, HI

#10 Feb 8, 2009
Hawaii's several gay lawmakers should come out of the closet first, and set an example.
Mama

San Jose, CA

#11 Feb 8, 2009
Rose T-H wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you go......It's so easy to BLAME THE GAYS AND LESBIANS:**** rixkck8QnjY
Here we go people.

I argue for TRUE EQUALITY by saying at least allow all arrangements between consenting adults and what does the homosexual extremist do? Shout bigot, ignorant hate hate hate.

The only one hating is you.

If we want to go there, then Marriage Freedom For All! Not just the gay lobbyists.

Interesting how you have a problem with total equality and freedom?

Could it be that its just YOU that you want to join the special 4000 year old club so that YOU can feel "normal". Isn't that what this is all about really?
Mama

San Jose, CA

#12 Feb 8, 2009
Rose T-H wrote:
<quoted text>Try and get some real education on the issue, it might truly open your narrow mind.
You are way to emotional on this issue and can't see the forest from the trees.

I am arguing for equal marriage rights for all consenting adults (once the normal one man, one woman definition is broken).

I am the one standing up for all people of all kinds.

You are the bigot here.
Kapaa

Kailua Kona, HI

#13 Feb 8, 2009
First things first wrote:
Hawaii's several gay lawmakers should come out of the closet first, and set an example.
Yes starting with LINGLE!!!!
flyboy

Richmond, VA

#14 Feb 8, 2009
Mama wrote:
At least be consistent. If you are going to expand the definition of marriage, then include anything and everything between consenting adults. You want to exclude incest on the basis of medical reasons fine. But every other polygamist, group, transgender, bisexual, a sexual, commune combination should also be allowed.
If not, then it would just be another discriminatory and bigoted bill, this time by the gay lobbyists.
The law should say that any adult or group of adults who which to enter into a social contract may do so.
That's it.
It would include normal one man, one woman relationships so that the government can essentially get out of the business of marriage all together.
The defintion of marriage is already open to gay couples. There has been no constitutional amendment banning marriage for gay couples. Gay/lesbian couples are legal and equal under the law, and marriage is a civil right. Therefore, we require marriage under the law.

Polygamy is illegal. Incest is illegal. Homosexuality isnt illegal. People are more than sex objects.

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#15 Feb 8, 2009
Mama wrote:
<quoted text>
Here we go people.
I argue for TRUE EQUALITY by saying at least allow all arrangements between consenting adults and what does the homosexual extremist do? Shout bigot, ignorant hate hate hate.
The only one hating is you.
If we want to go there, then Marriage Freedom For All! Not just the gay lobbyists.
Interesting how you have a problem with total equality and freedom?
Could it be that its just YOU that you want to join the special 4000 year old club so that YOU can feel "normal". Isn't that what this is all about really?
I'M A BIGOT.......Please......Who is the one trying to INVALIDATE MY LEGAL MARRIAGE TO MY WIFE?

You are the one trying to LUMP PEDOPHILES AND WHAT THEY DO.....TO CONSENTING ADULTS OF LEGAL AGE.

You are the one LUMPING POLYGAMY IN WITH TWO CONSENTING ADULTS.....not me.

I gave you a video to watch.....you attack me....WHATEVER.
flyboy

Richmond, VA

#16 Feb 8, 2009
Mama wrote:
<quoted text>
You are way to emotional on this issue and can't see the forest from the trees.
I am arguing for equal marriage rights for all consenting adults (once the normal one man, one woman definition is broken).
I am the one standing up for all people of all kinds.
You are the bigot here.
Normal is subjective, marriage is already a right for gay couples, and inecst, polygamy are not legal. The correct comparison of homosexaulity is heterosexuality.

“A JOURNEY OF A THOUSAND MILES”

Since: Aug 08

MUST BEGIN WITH A SINGLE STEP!

#17 Feb 8, 2009
Mama wrote:
<quoted text>
You are way to emotional on this issue and can't see the forest from the trees.
I am arguing for equal marriage rights for all consenting adults (once the normal one man, one woman definition is broken).
I am the one standing up for all people of all kinds.
You are the bigot here.
Oh and on being REAL EMOTIONAL ON THIS ISSUE.....Your RIGHT I AM......Getting Prop 8 overturned directly AFFECTS ME AND MY WIFE, ALONG WITH 17,999 OTHER COUPLES.

Really........You are standing up for PEDOPHILES.....Great........Yo u must of NEVER BEEN SEXUALLY ABUSED AS A CHILD?

I am DEFINITELY ALL FOR MARRIAGE EQUALITY.....I just will NOT EVER AGREE WITH PEDOPHILES MARRYING THEIR VICTIMS.

If you want to......then go right ahead......but I think you would not be in the majority on that issue.

Blessed Be to Everyone
Mama

San Jose, CA

#18 Feb 8, 2009
flyboy wrote:
<quoted text>Polygamy is illegal. Incest is illegal. Homosexuality isnt illegal. People are more than sex objects.
What are you talking about.

Polygamy, as in having multiple boyfriends or girlfriends is not illegal. Even having orgies or other unsafe and abnormal practices aren't illegal.

Only Polygamous MARRIAGE is illegal.

Only group MARRIAGE is illegal.

Incest is illegal due to real medical ramification such as disease and deformity.

Quit being a bigot. If you want "equal rights" then don't the rest of the consenting adult population deserve those right too?
Mama

San Jose, CA

#19 Feb 8, 2009
Rose T-H wrote:
<quoted text>
I'M A BIGOT.......Please......Who is the one trying to INVALIDATE MY LEGAL MARRIAGE TO MY WIFE?
Same people, and you appear to be one of them, who want to invalidate the opportunity for polygamists, groups and transgenders and hermaphrodites and bisexuals to marry as well.

Quit being such a bigot. Or at least admit you are one.
sandman

Aiea, HI

#20 Feb 8, 2009
Too bad none of the "Editorial Board" got laid off

Since: Sep 08

Haleiwa, HI

#21 Feb 8, 2009
Renata wrote:
Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona should not be pushing his religious beliefs on the public. He is narrow minded and has no ability to see viewpoints different from his.
Duke should try walking in the shoes of gay couples (families) who choose to partner and commit to each other but find government not willing to recognize their commitment and love for one another. Perhaps that is just asking too much of Duke.
Duke: You will not get my vote for Gov as I cannot vote for a man who is small and narrow-minded.
Duke is gay.
Mama

San Jose, CA

#22 Feb 8, 2009
flyboy wrote:
<quoted text>Normal is subjective, marriage is already a right for gay couples, and inecst, polygamy are not legal. The correct comparison of homosexaulity is heterosexuality.
Homosexual Marriage is not "legal" in Hawaii. Don't impose Massachusetts or Connecticut on Hawaii laws. Gay marriage in Hawaii is ILLEGAL. That's the point of this bill and this thread.

Why don't we just clean this mess up with one bill.

Why not just make all relationships between consenting adults legal.

Then it will be done.
Mama

San Jose, CA

#25 Feb 8, 2009
Rose T-H wrote:
<quoted text>Really........You are standing up for PEDOPHILES.....Great........Yo u must of NEVER BEEN SEXUALLY ABUSED AS A CHILD?
Um, cool off honey.

I said CONSENTING ADULTS with the exception of incest.

That's what I said.

Nothing about children. That is your own sick mind talking.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 100
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Vermont Government Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Ben & Jerrya s Co-Founder Shares Bernie Sanders... (Oct '15) May 29 Three Psyche 27
News The Truth of the Matter: Let's try to keep them... May '16 Cheddar Cheese 1
News On Native GroundFUKUSHIMA Reminds Us of the Rea... Mar '16 APEFARANGUMINDEBD... 2
News Bernie Sanders' Iowa showing excites Vermont su... Feb '16 Community Disorga... 3
News Single payer advocates propose expansion of Dr.... (Dec '15) Jan '16 FEDERAL CIRCUS OF... 2
News Sanders' Face on Underwear Line (Oct '15) Nov '15 DILF 32
News Some Vermonters may get religion as vaccine out... (Sep '15) Oct '15 Hi sexy 3
More from around the web