Friday, July 25, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 20 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Hawaii lawmakers push for marriage amendments

By Associated Press

LAST UPDATED: 12:52 p.m. HST, Jan 25, 2013

A bipartisan group of 15 Hawaii representatives is advocating for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.  

If passed, the amendment would be placed on the ballot during the November 2014 election.

Sen. Mike Gabbard, a Democrat, is proposing a similar bill in the Senate.

A bill to legalize same-sex marriage was also introduced in the House on Thursday. Rep. Faye Hanohano, a Democrat, is the bill’s sole sponsor.

Rep. John Mizuno, a Democrat from Kalihi, introduced two bills Thursday regarding marriage. Both propose constitutional amendments, but while one bill legalizes same-sex marriage, the other limits marriage to heterosexual couples.

Mizuno says that he personally supports traditional marriage but wants voters to make the decision.

“I’m not afraid to let the people decide,” he said.

Gabbard says that a ballot initiative would be the most democratic way to resolve the issue.

Gabbard is a former Republican who campaigned against promoting homosexuality in the 1990s. He pushed for a constitutional amendment giving the state Legislature the power to limit marriage to a man and a woman. The amendment passed in 1998.

 Print   Email   Comment | View 20 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
BlueDolphin53 wrote:
Marriage should be between a man/woman, man/man, woman/woman, man/minor girl, man/minor boy, woman/minor girl, woman/minor boy, mother/son, mother/daughter, father/daughter, father/son......did I miss anything? If you are going to say marriage should be allowed between any two people in love, then all of the above must apply or the argument is simply hypocritical. Marriage should be between a man and a woman period. No need to draw the line anywhere else and start heading down that slippery slope.
on January 25,2013 | 01:10PM
TLehel wrote:
There's a huge difference between same sex marriage, pedophilia, and incest. Your argument is invalid.
on January 25,2013 | 01:37PM
BlueDolphin53 wrote:
That is very intolerant of you. You are discriminating against their personal predilictions. You are intolerant of their lifestyle choices and are forcing your moral beliefs on them. Sound familiar? Gays have used this argument very effectively. So will/are the other groups. So what do you say to them? Gay marriage is ok, but YOUR lifestyle choice is immoral and wrong? Try it and you'll soon find yourself making the same arguments and facing the same angry denouncements that traditional marriage supporters face today.
on January 25,2013 | 02:10PM
MizuInOz wrote:
You know you are being very limited in your liberalism. consider polygamy and polyandry, And your favourite pet or barnyard animal. Shucks, why not dolphins - I know people who would rather be married to a dolphin than a human. Then you have to consider all of the lonely heartbroken plastic blow up dolls and attachments. Love is love is love. Please don't forget all the connubial needs of men, women, children pets and what we consider inanimate objects. I know trees that are lonely, too. Aloha Kakou
on January 25,2013 | 02:49PM
BlueDolphin53 wrote:
I apologize for ignoring that aspect of society. I didn't mean to discriminate against them. Yes, beasiality and polygamy should also be allowed. Forgive my intolerance.
on January 25,2013 | 02:57PM
Sid_Hartha wrote:
The Biblical Definition of marriage is… - An arranged marriage—Genesis 24:1-4 (and many other passages) - A levirate marriage (If a man died leaving no male heir, his brother was required to marry his widow and produce children)—Deuteronomy 25:5-10 - A polygamous marriage—1 Kings 11:3 (and many, many other passages) - Not inter-racial—Deuteronomy 7:14; 1 Corinthians 7:39; 2 Corinthians 6:14 - Filled with sexual prohibitions—no intercourse during menstruation (The woman is unclean. Yet another degradation of women.) —The woman cannot withhold sex from her husband; she has to fulfill his desire for sex when he wants it. (And another example of the Bible’s misogyny) - Not allowed to be dissolved, i.e. NO DIVORCE—Matthew 5:31-32; Mark 10:2-12; Luke 16:18 - Except when the man wanted to because his wife had become ‘displeasing’ to him—Deuteronomy 24:1-4 - Between a rapist and his victim—Deuteronomy 22:28-29 - An arranged marriage by a slave owner for his slaves—Genesis 24:4 - Can be between brother and sister—How else do you explain where Cain’s wife came from! - Intended to produce children—Without children a woman was: Shamed—a barren woman was looked upon as cursed by God Unable to be saved—1 Timothy 2:15 And on, and on… ad nauseam!
on January 26,2013 | 06:28AM
Ronin006 wrote:
IRT Tlehel, there is a big difference between same sex marriage and pedophilia and incest, but what is to prevent lawmakers from legalizing pedophilia by lowering the age of consent to 13 or legalizing incest by saying what two consenting adults do is their own business? Isn’t that the liberal way?
on January 26,2013 | 10:07AM
DowntownGreen wrote:
Their constituents and the collective mores of society. If those mores change, your worry about pedophilia and incest could possibly happen. But, have you noticed a groundswell for either issue or even ANY movement with ANY credibility advocating for those two issues? I'll stipulate the 30 or 40 people on Maui who advocate for polygamy...they exist, but they have zero support outside their tiny group.
on January 26,2013 | 10:25AM
bender wrote:
I think that applies pretty much to any group. Any group has support from within but not necessarily from those outside the group.
on January 26,2013 | 11:00AM
DowntownGreen wrote:
Marriage equality is one of those issues that has substantial support from outside the Gay/Lesbian community. Gays/Lesbians are estimated to be between 3-8% of the general population based on whichever study you choose to reference, but this poll shows that 51% of Americans favor marriage equality now: http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/12/13/wsjnbc-poll-majority-now-backs-gay-marriage/

Virtually all polls have been showing the percentages that support marriage equality to be increasing steadily over the last few years. There is a lot of support from outside the "group".

on January 26,2013 | 11:34AM
Ronin006 wrote:
Some 50 years ago when homosexual acts were illegal in most states, the argument used by homosexual advocates to decriminalize homosexual acts was that what two consenting adults did in the privacy of their own bedrooms was no one else’s business. Gay marriage was not even on the radar. No one was advocated for gay marriage, just the decriminalization of homosexual acts. There was no groundswell for it. Look where we are today. Gay marriage now is legal in several states and advocates are pushing hard to make it legal everywhere.
on January 26,2013 | 12:59PM
hawaiikone wrote:
You're talking to someone who realizes his/her only possible response would have to be an acknowledgement that any sexual behavior, regardless of it's acceptability in today's culture, would require his/her unfettered support. To do otherwise would invite comparison to other "bigots" we hear about every time gay supporters speak.
on January 26,2013 | 01:56PM
Ronin006 wrote:
BlueDolphin53, IRT your question: “… did I miss anything?” the answer is yes. You missed marriage between a human and a dog, cat, horse sheep or other animal.
on January 26,2013 | 09:57AM
DowntownGreen wrote:
Can you point to the groups of citizens/voters who are advocating for those things?
on January 26,2013 | 10:26AM
hawaiikone wrote:
All we're looking for is an acknowledgement from gay activists such as yourself that if these or similar issues do arise, will they or will not have your total support? Once logical parameters, such as minimum age requirements, husbandry health, and other viable concerns are determined, would you in fact treat those requests for legitimacy with the identical logic you apply to the gay rights issue. To do otherwise would place you squarely in the same corner as those of us opposing the legitimization of the gay lifestyle today.
on January 26,2013 | 12:01PM
st1d wrote:
ever think of doing away with marriage altogether?
on January 26,2013 | 07:12AM
Maneki_Neko wrote:
I suggested that to my wife but was informed that my opinion, when needed, would be provided for me.
on January 26,2013 | 09:24AM
moanamalosi wrote:
No matter what the people of Hawaii vote for, Gays are going to "prolapse" the outcum and find ways to reach around, what ever you voted for, to fulfil their wants and needs. Waste time vote, only going get overturned, and the majority going get it in the rear end.
on January 26,2013 | 07:24AM
Heinbear wrote:
Calling Dr. Freud. Every time I hear Gary Okino or Mike Gabhart speak on gay rights the term “reaction formation” comes to mind. Reaction formation is a defense mechanism in which an individual fears or hates homosexuals in defense of his or her own deeply rooted homosexual desires. Maybe they would benefit from therapy.
on January 26,2013 | 09:28AM
Oilpan wrote:
A constitutional amendment is not necessary. The marriage amendment in our constitution, as worded, empowers the Legislature to define marriage. In short, the Legislature can, by simply amending the statutory definition of "marriage", permit same sex marriage. Legislators are paid to introduce bills and vote on them. Time to earn their pay.
on January 26,2013 | 01:48PM
Breaking News