Time for talk has passed; OK marriage equality now

Sunday’s newspaper carried several commentaries and letters regarding marriage equality.

As the widower of Bill Woods, who was key in the start of the initial effort in 1991 that led to the Hawaii Supreme Court decision in 1993, I feel a need to respond.

>> To those who say we need more time for discussion: As the state that was the first to recognize the discrimination in marriage per the Hawaii Supreme Court decision, we’ve had 22 years of discussion and argument on this topic, while the rest of the world (Europe, much of South America, Canada) and many states now representing almost 40 percent of the U.S. population have moved on and recognized marriage equality.

>> To those who try to maintain that marriage is for rearing children: All studies to date over the past 18 years have found that children raised by same-sex parents have as good or better outcomes in life than those in traditional marriages.

When same-sex couples decide to have children included in their family, it is a well-thought-out and planned choice.

As I’ve repeated to many, our children are not “accidents” but a choice, that is often difficult to achieve. And would you ever say couples that cannot have children should not be able to marry?

>> To those thinking recognizing marriage equality somehow infringes their religious rights: Nothing requires any religious organization to marry anyone, any more than a Catholic priest, Jewish rabbi or Mormon official is required to marry couples outside of their faith. It is only when a religious group opens facilities to the public, at a fee, that those facilities enter the realm of “public accommodations,” similar to a restaurant or hotel, and discrimination is not allowed.

>> To those objecting to a special session: If Hawaii doesn’t act now to provide marriage equality, we would still need a special session to change our tax laws prior to Jan. 1, 2014, since the IRS has established that if you are married in a jurisdiction recognizing marriage equality (Bill and I were legally married in Canada), you would file jointly or individually as married.

As Hawaii taxes are based on your federally filed forms, marriage equality in Hawaii will address this issue; not having marriage equality requires us to change how taxes are filed in Hawaii.

I believe having a special session to only deal with marriage equality allows a focused attention to the issues at hand, which have a long history of being evaluated.

This is not an issue that needs to take up the Legislature’s time and effort during a regular session when many other issues including taxes, budget, genetically modified organism concerns, etc., must be handled.