Quantcast
  

Friday, April 18, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 185 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

State House advances same-sex marriage bill after long session

By Star-Advertiser staff

& Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 01:14 a.m. HST, Nov 07, 2013

Polital Radar: State House vote breakdown on SB1 by representative


The state House advanced the marriage equality bill Wednesday night to a final vote, a key hurdle for the measure that would allow same-sex couples to marry while also expanding a religious exemption beyond what the Senate had approved last week.

Tonight's vote -- 30-18, with three members excused -- came after a sometimes-tense, often-loud hearing as hundreds of protesters just outside the House chamber clamored to be heard.

The House has scheduled a third reading and final vote on the bill starting at 10 a.m. Friday.

Throughout today's nearly 11-hour session, lawmakers voted down proposed amendments by opponents to either delay or postpone the bill, or to strengthen its religious exemptions.

The hearing was often emotional and lawmakers sometimes had trouble hearing each other as the crowds outside in the State Capitol Rotunda chanted and sang practically nonstop throughout the day.

One lawmaker, Democratic Rep. Jo Jordan of Waianae, said on the floor that she would oppose the bill -- despite her thoughts and beliefs and gay marriage potentially benefiting her personally. 

"No, nobody's going to beat me up. Nobody's going to throw me out of my (LGBT) community -- I'm not quite sure of that," Jordan said.

But Jordan said she set aside her beliefs when she listened to five days of testimony during a joint committee hearing and listened with an open heart. Much of spoken public testimony during the hearing came in opposition to the bill. 

"I might vote against something that I personally believe in. I personally believe I should have the right," Jordan said. "You know how hard it is for me to say no? I have to say no." 

The House was considering the bill on second reading today, which was considered a key gauge the degree of support in the chamber.

Now that it has advanced, a final House vote is expected to be taken Friday.

 An attempt by opponents to indefinitely postpone a vote on the bill tonight was rejected in a 30-19 vote just before 7:45 p.m.

After some final discussions, lawmakers took the second-reading vote just before 9 p.m.

Today's House session started after 10 a.m. with a large crowd filling the gallery. Audience members cheered for lawmakers who oppose the bill which would allow same-sex couples to marry but also expands a religious exemption beyond what the state Senate had approved last week.

State House Vice Speaker John Mizuno asked the audience to refrain from outbursts and demonstrations that might disrupt floor action.

After opening the floor session, lawmakers immediately went into recess for more than two hours, with majority members in the Democratic-heavy House meeting in caucus to discuss amendments to the bill.

Crowds of people on both sides of the issue chanted and sang outside the chamber. The session resumed just after 12:30 p.m. as hundreds opponents of gay marriage outside chanted, "Let the people vote!", disrupting the discussion inside the House chamber.

"Excuse me, the door's supposed to be closed," House Speaker Joseph Souki said as he tried to keep the meeting in order.

Rep. Marcus Oshiro, a Democrat who has said he has reservations about the bill, proposed an amendment to delay discussion so lawmakers could have more flexibility to review more than 20,000 pieces of written testimony and spoken testimony from more than 5,000 people who signed up.

The amendment was rejected by a voice vote, as were two more amendments that proposed wider religious exemptions, including one that said if any part of the law is struck down in court, the whole gay marriage law would be overturned.

"I do not believe this idea is worth your time," said Rep. Della Belatti, a Democrat who supports gay marriage. She said the expanded exemptions would allow people to discriminate against gay people in many ways.

Another amendment to put the question of same-sex marriage to voters through a constitutional amendment failed in a roll call vote, 28-19 with four members excused.

Rep. Richard Fale, a Republican who pushed for allowing voters to decide the issue, said lawmakers aren't putting their best work forward by pushing the bill through a special session with backroom deals.

"My confidence in this body is shaken. The people's confidence in this body is shaken," Fale said. "We know that this is not the best we can do and we need to go back to work."

After a mid-afternoon recess for lunch, lawmakers considered several more proposed amendments into the evening.

Several proposed amendments introduced by Rep. Gene Ward, a Republican opponent to same-sex marriage, were quickly rejected in voice votes.

Later in the evening, Ward compared the potential impact of legalized same-sex marriage to the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Tuesday evening, the House Judiciary and Finance committees agreed to advance the marriage equality bill after an unprecedented hearing that lasted about 56 hours over five days. More than 1,000 of the 5,184 people who had signed up to testify showed up at the state Capitol to speak to lawmakers, and the overwhelming majority were opposed to the bill, mostly for religious reasons.

The religious exemption in the current bill is modeled after Connecticut law, which is considered among the broadest of states that allow gay marriage. Clergy would not be required to perform gay weddings, a right protected by the federal and state constitutions. Religious organizations as well as nonprofits aligned with religious organizations would have an exemption from the state's public accommodations law and could refuse to provide goods, services, facilities or grounds for weddings or wedding celebrations that violate religious beliefs.

The bill would also strip a section in the Senate's version that applied to parental rights. Some lawmakers were concerned about how Native Hawaiian ancestry might be recorded for the children of same-sex couples.

Gay couples would be able to marry starting Dec. 2 -- instead of Nov. 18 -- to give the state Department of Health adequate time to prepare.

The Senate would review the bill again if it clears the House. Senators could agree to accept the House version Tuesday and send the bill to Abercrombie, or could disagree, triggering a House-Senate conference committee to resolve the differences. House and Senate leaders have said they prefer to avoid conference committee, which would extend the special session and could create enough discord to threaten the bill's passage.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 185 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(185)
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.
allie wrote:
Bill will pass but be thrown out by the courts. This was always a bad bill.
on November 6,2013 | 09:36AM
kainalu wrote:
Be afraid! Be very afraid, allie - SSM is coming!!!
on November 6,2013 | 10:07AM
Nala007 wrote:
I will be rejoicing. No fear for me.
on November 6,2013 | 01:26PM
Pocho wrote:
tell you whats gonna happen in the future. The Government will not recognize Religious organizations that don't perform the ssm's or the use of their religious property for those purposes. GARRANS It's gonna happen in time, the anti ssm's Religious Orgs will have their tax exemptions taken away.
on November 6,2013 | 04:51PM
jrboi96786 wrote:
Now you are just over-reacting!
on November 6,2013 | 08:50PM
ehrhornp wrote:
More imaginary fears?
on November 7,2013 | 04:22AM
Pocho wrote:
It's coming down the line, don't think there's any Men's Only Club left in the States. The Churches rules will come down in time.
on November 6,2013 | 04:54PM
Nala007 wrote:
Really? What is your basis for this erroneous claim. SSM has now passed in 15 states plus Washington, DC. Do you really think the drafters of SB1 didn't research other state marriage equality laws? Please, what is unconstitutional about marriage. Keep hurling your BS about SB1. It won't make it go away. SSM is here.
on November 6,2013 | 01:25PM
Mypualani wrote:
Nala007 thank you for at least trying to clear up the B.S. with the poster above, in fact those churches should get their tax exempt status reversed. People have their freedom of religion and people have the freedom from religion, and there is "separation of church and state for a reason. Not everyone has or follow the same religious principles.
on November 6,2013 | 09:16PM
Mediocrates wrote:
I honestly cannot say if these anti-gay bigots are more ignorant of their own faith or of government. Their testimony and "arguments" will make you either cringe or laugh and either way you are left just scatching your head. With compassion I can certainly understand that if I were that ignorant of government and religion at the same time, I'd be extremely confused and upset too probably but that is no good excuse for their aggressive behavior. It speaks to the character of themselves, their pastors and their church communities to see that they are aggressive in their ignorance rather than humble and more over astoundingly confident and idolotrous in their certainty that they know the mind of God. If heaven is filled with these sorts of people - I honestly don't want to go there.
on November 6,2013 | 01:40PM
Pocho wrote:
Bigots, hahahahahahaha tell me pretel How did you come about to being a Human being?
on November 6,2013 | 04:48PM
Mediocrates wrote:
Outstanding non sequitor response. Thank you for proving my point.
on November 6,2013 | 07:54PM
Mypualani wrote:
Yeah he did he proved it perfectly.
on November 6,2013 | 09:18PM
kaupena wrote:
I am against SB1 but you are right about the manner in which they are protesting. It is my hope that those exhibiting aggressive behavior are not the majority of those opposed to SB1. God's people should not be acting that way. No matter what the issue is, it should be dealt with in a loving and compassionate manner.
on November 6,2013 | 04:57PM
blackmurano wrote:
Acting in loving and compassionate to accept thei Equality in Marriage that is no more than a "Perversion Marriage?"
on November 6,2013 | 09:28PM
Mypualani wrote:
actually it's both! ignorant of how government works and of their own bible.
on November 6,2013 | 09:17PM
blackmurano wrote:
Mediocrates you just can't handle the truth about what God says about marriage. Your only response is anti gay bigots. Laugh at this, if you read Romans chapter one, it is a chapter on God's wrath on homosexuality. He calls homosexuals and Lesbians "NOT NORMAL people and with a "debased mind." The Liberal Democrats want to pass this homosexual marriage bill that they call "Equality in Marriage." It's nothing more than a "Peversion marriage." On the contrary you are the one that is ignorant of God's Written Word in the Bible. You just won't accept that you are accountable with your words and deeds to the God who formed you in your mother's womb. Talking about "cringing." You'll see a lot of that on Judgment Day when you are cast into hell.
on November 6,2013 | 09:27PM
star08 wrote:
A sermon on the forum? Feel better?
on November 6,2013 | 10:40PM
ehrhornp wrote:
These people probably should be pitied as they do not follow the teachings of Jesus. A shame. Gives Christianity a bad name when so many act in such an irrational way. My advice to these people is simple. You don't believe in gay marriage then don't marry someone of the same sex. You might also want to consider moving to Russia. They seem to be more conducive to your position.
on November 7,2013 | 04:28AM
copperwire9 wrote:
You didn't bother to read it, did you allie? Try tell the truth now, okay?
on November 6,2013 | 01:48PM
Mypualani wrote:
at copperwire are you kidding, all lies would know the truth...
on November 6,2013 | 09:19PM
KeithHaugen wrote:
The courts should order the Legislature to determine which laws discriminate and fix those laws instead of trying to change marriage laws in a community where a majority believe that marriage is BETWEEN ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN. It is not about homosexuals, or religion. It is about legislators who don't represent their constituents and who lack common sense. The errant legislators should have identified existing laws that discriminate against any two adults (homosexuals, grandpa-grandchild, siblings, first cousins, etc.) who live together and who many not legally marry, and fixed those laws. No one should be discriminated against. That would have eliminated the need to even consider changing marriage laws, and dividing the community.
on November 6,2013 | 02:13PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Someones individual personal rights are not subject to the will of the majority. By your logic we could outlaw anything as long as a majority of the people support it. It doesn't work that way, nor should it. Just ask a woman or black person if they wish their rights were still subject to the will of the majority.
on November 6,2013 | 04:59PM
KeithHaugen wrote:
Black person? woman? You're reaching. This is NOT a civil rights matter. And if there is discrimination, they should have changed the laws that discriminate.
on November 6,2013 | 09:19PM
ehrhornp wrote:
Saying something is does not make it so. This is a civil rights matter. What the else is it? The majority should not determine the rights of the minority.
on November 7,2013 | 04:31AM
blackmurano wrote:
saywhatyou think: A black person was created by God. That black person cannot change. He is a black person. But a homosexual or a Lesbian was "NOT" created by God. In Romans Chapter one, He calls these people "NOT Normal with a debased mind." Homosexuals and Lesbians can change with the guidance of God.
on November 6,2013 | 09:34PM
star08 wrote:
Quote please, or its not real.
on November 6,2013 | 10:42PM
ehrhornp wrote:
We are all God's children. No gays cannot change their orientation. That is just an urban legend put forth by some charlatans who try to profit off the situation.
on November 7,2013 | 04:33AM
Anonymous wrote:
nawadaha has been working to divide the community for years.
on November 6,2013 | 05:02PM
blackmurano wrote:
KeithHaugen I beg to differ with you. It's about homosexuals and lesbians trying to redefine marriage that God ordained as a Covenant for one man and one woman. It is not about Equality in Marriage like the Democrats would like us to believe, but it is a "Perverion Marriage." Anything that seeks to change the design of marriage of one man and one woman is a Perversion. The Democrats party who also are in trouble with God with your Abortion doctrine, want to pass this perversion marriage bill to appease that Muslim we have in the White house.
on November 6,2013 | 09:32PM
ehrhornp wrote:
I suggest you move to Russia. There they are more likely to protect you from your imaginary threats. Obviously you cannot handle freedom. A pity you need government to run your life.
on November 7,2013 | 04:35AM
false wrote:
One more month till graduation, Yipee.
on November 6,2013 | 02:25PM
Pocho wrote:
you don't even have to bring in the Religious side of Gays. Who do you think you became of this EARTH?
on November 6,2013 | 04:56PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
This bill is being proposed as a result of a ruling from both the Hawaii and the US supreme courts. Both have ruled that gay people CANNOT be discriminated against. Once again you speak without any actual knowledge of the issue. Go back to the reservation already. We got enough mainland scabs here already.
on November 6,2013 | 04:51PM
blackmurano wrote:
saywhatyouthink - You too sound like a genuine Democrat. Yes, very unfortunately the US Supreme courts have ruled that Perversion marriage is legal in this country. But so far I haven't heard the Supreme court making any decisions on discriminating against people that God calls NOT Normal and with a debased mind. Although this past few months, bakery in New Mexico and Oregon refused to make a wedding cake for a Perverse marriage. The court sided with the one in New Mexico while the one in Oregon, the Christian couple decided to close down the shop than do a cake for a Perversion marriage.
on November 6,2013 | 09:39PM
kuniagirl wrote:
you sure do love talking about perversion.
on November 6,2013 | 10:10PM
star08 wrote:
Like the pot calling the kettle...
on November 6,2013 | 10:42PM
star08 wrote:
Who are you convincing BM?
on November 6,2013 | 10:43PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Senate Bill 1, House Draft 1 has passed second reading and will now move to a third and final reading after at least 48 hours from decking. The vote was 30 ayes, 18 noes, and 3 excused.
on November 6,2013 | 08:32PM
jrboi96786 wrote:
What court are you talking about?... When the US Supreme Court already ruled that its constitutional. I believe in traditional marriage and I will exercise my religious tradition, but who are we to shove our beliefs to people's throat? The bible is not the constitution of this country, however I do believe that churches should not be obligated or required to perform any ceremony for same-sex marriage if they don't want to. This is America and everyone has the rights to exercise what we believe as long as we don't hurt anyone. That's one of the reason why this country is born in the first place is because we wanted to have freedom do what we believe without getting prosecuted, so why should we deny people who's intent to be happy?
on November 6,2013 | 08:48PM
Mypualani wrote:
@ jrboi, it's in the bill, no church, or religious organization or even a non profit, or for profit will be forced to marry homosexuals. they changed it to include all churches. but how ever the accommodations law is in effect, has been the law for a while.
on November 6,2013 | 09:25PM
ehrhornp wrote:
Why would the courts reject it? Is this just your hope? Gay marriage is coming. If you don't believe in gay marriage, then don't marry someone of the same sex.
on November 7,2013 | 04:21AM
MKN wrote:
@allie: I doubt that it will be thrown out. The bill with the amedments agreed to in the committee adequately protects a religious orgnization's rights of refusal. If this law were illegal, it would have been thrown out by another state supreme court in one of the other 14 states tha allow SSM years ago.
on November 6,2013 | 09:45AM
Kuniarr wrote:
What were the amendments agreed to in the committee,MN?
on November 6,2013 | 10:37AM
MKN wrote:
@Kuniarr: Cutting and pasting from the article above:

"The religious exemption in the House bill is modeled after Connecticut law, which is considered among the broadest of states that allow gay marriage. Clergy would not be required to perform gay weddings, a right protected by the federal and state constitutions. Religious organizations as well as nonprofits aligned with religious organizations would have an exemption from the state's public accommodations law and could refuse to provide goods, services, facilities or grounds for weddings or wedding celebrations that violate religious beliefs.

The bill would also strip a section in the Senate's version that applied to parental rights. Some lawmakers were concerned about how Native Hawaiian ancestry might be recorded for the children of same-sex couples."
on November 6,2013 | 10:56AM
Kuniarr wrote:
I though you actually have access to a copy of SB1 as amended.

The thing about what the politicians say and what they do is exemplified by SB1 which purports to protect religious freedom and liberty except that it actually forces SSM down the throats of religious institution by using the words for profit as criteria for granting religious exemption.
on November 6,2013 | 11:21AM
Fred01 wrote:
Huh?
on November 6,2013 | 11:49AM
MKN wrote:
@Kuniarr: What are you talking about? All religious institutions that don't want to perform gay weddings don't have to under the amendments to the bill even if said religious institutions are for profit. Now if you open a storefront at the mall or on-line and you aren't part of a church organization, you can't discriminate. If you did, it would be no different from the terrible laws in the south 60 years ago that prohibited interracial marriages. Please read before making inaccurate comments. LOL!
on November 6,2013 | 12:08PM
Kuniarr wrote:
MKN what exactly are you ranting about?

What and how exactly can you even rant on the statement "what they do is exemplified by SB! (which is distinct, separate, and completely different from amended SB1) which purports to protect religious freedom and liberty etc. etc."
on November 6,2013 | 01:51PM
star08 wrote:
KuniArr: If you were a bit more mysterious youʻd never get any of your points across.
on November 6,2013 | 10:45PM
Kuniarr wrote:
star08 all you gays can do whatever you all want to do....But not in the church that considers SSM an abomination.
on November 6,2013 | 11:12PM
copperwire9 wrote:
Go read it. http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/splsession2013b/SB1_HD1_.pdf
on November 6,2013 | 01:50PM
Kuniarr wrote:
Good job. Thanks for the link that shows the text of the amended SB1
on November 6,2013 | 06:23PM
pcman wrote:
IRT pcman above. I meant "NO coulda, woulda, shoulda about it."
on November 6,2013 | 12:52PM
pcman wrote:
IRT allie on courts. The law can be thrown out only if it actually hurts someone or a group of persons who bring a suit to the courts. In court, they must shown how the law actually hurt them. Coulda, woulda, shoulda about it. Just real facts.
on November 6,2013 | 12:49PM
HanabataDays wrote:
The last refuge for religious fundamentalists seems, for some reason, always to be a secular court. It doesn't matter. No way the HI Supreme Court will overturn this. No way the US Supremes will hear the case. This is an example of real-world "stare decisis" by the majority of our society, who now believe this is a long-due restoration of rights. Unlikely the courts will see it differently.
on November 6,2013 | 10:14AM
Kuniarr wrote:
This mantra of thinking that any and all SSM laws are untouchable by the Supreme Court is a fallacy because any SSM law that infringes on Religious freedom and liberty are certain to be struck down.

Gay couples can gloat and be able to get SSM anywhere, anyplace, anytime - except on the grounds or facilities of any religious institution that considers SSM an abomination. Any law that would forcibly make the facilities or grounds of any religious institution against their will under any excuse would be challenged as unconstitutional.
on November 6,2013 | 10:44AM
Pocho wrote:
dream on. Libearls will change that law on the Fly.
on November 6,2013 | 05:30PM
Kuniarr wrote:
SB1 or the Marriage Equality Law has indeed been changed so as not to infringe on religious freedom and liberty.

See http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/splsession2013b/SB1_HD1_.pdf
on November 6,2013 | 06:26PM
star08 wrote:
Excellent! Thatʻs pretty clear.
on November 6,2013 | 10:46PM
MichaelG wrote:
Hopefully it will pass and bring us out of the dark ages. Equal rights to all .
on November 6,2013 | 10:16AM
daniwitz13 wrote:
Of course it will pass. Everything is stacked for it to win.. The Senate has it as their Platform. Why else is it 80% for it and the constituents are 87% against it? The House is something else. They concern themselves with exemptions and vote for it if enough exemptions are put it. They fail to see that exemptions are NOT a concern for Gays. Gays could care less about exemptions. Just get it passed. They are NOT going to a Church to get Married anyway. They could put in a thousand exemptions, they would not care because they are NOT going there anyway. This is a Win/Win for the LGBT side. The issue is SSM. and they want it passed. The Gays get their win, the Church with their exemptions are left back at the station holding their crosses and wondering where did everyone go. They all went to celebrate their Victory. duh! The Church cut a hole in the fish bag to take out their one fish (exemptions) and lost the whole school of fish through the opening. Sad to say that they are clueless on top a of the fact that the House, Senate, Gov. and AG. are equally clueless on the matters of LIFE. My biggest Pity.
on November 6,2013 | 11:23AM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
I suggest you organize your peeps and vote those gay loving democratic politicians out of office for good. They're all corrupt anyway, Hawaii would be better off without most of them.
on November 6,2013 | 05:04PM
Mypualani wrote:
IRT saywhatyouthink. LOL that is your subjective view on things, what is wrong with loving gays? I actually have loved ones who are gay, friends who are gay and guess what! a lot of gays here in Hawaii also have family and friends who love them, and care about them. Gays are nothing new, especially not to Hawaii or Polynesia in general, they were a part of society until so called Christians came with their bibles and SHAME! that things changed,
on November 6,2013 | 09:38PM
star08 wrote:
Thatʻs all they wanted in the end.
on November 6,2013 | 10:47PM
Fred01 wrote:
THE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY VOTED! The right wing dingbats' campaign to "let the people vote" is an absolute farce, founded in bigotry and hatred. In 1998, the people of Hawaii voted to amend the constitution, in order to give the legislature the power to decide this issue.
on November 6,2013 | 10:24AM
serious wrote:
Agreed, but the President has spoken--he likes gays and racial and political and class stress and the Democratic politicians have taken heed.
on November 6,2013 | 10:31AM
Anonymous wrote:
No, the people told the Legislature to define marriage as between opposite sex couples. Read it correctly and do not mis-interpret. That is what is wrong with this issue, too much misinterpretation.
on November 6,2013 | 10:33AM
Fred01 wrote:
Read the amendment dingbat! Stop making things up!
on November 6,2013 | 10:41AM
LanaUlulani wrote:
Actually Anonymous is correct. You are wrong.
on November 6,2013 | 01:07PM
LanaUlulani wrote:

You are correct. The question was, "Shall the Constitution of the state of Hawaii be amended to specify that the Legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples?"

69.2& said Yes.

Even in their election results it explicitly states" LEG to REG MARRIAGE TO OPP-SEX COUPLES"

http://hawaii.gov/elections/results/1998/general/98swgen.htm

on November 6,2013 | 01:10PM
Fred01 wrote:
Hey dingbat, maybe you should read the constitution before you embarrass yourself anymore. Or maybe you just have reading comprehension problems? Here is Article I Section 23: "The legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples." [Add HB 117 (1997) and election Nov 3, 1998]
on November 6,2013 | 01:29PM
LanaUlulani wrote:


Resorting to argumentum ad hominem is typical of some others who are pro gay marriage. Purport to speak of love while hating.

However once again the link to the PEOPLE'S VOTE

Question: Shall the Constitution of the state of Hawaii be amended to specify that the Legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples?"

69.2% said Yes.

Even in their election results it explicitly states" LEG to REG MARRIAGE TO OPP-SEX COUPLES"

http://hawaii.gov/elections/results/1998/general/98swgen.htm

This is how the PEOPLE VOTED.


on November 6,2013 | 01:44PM
Fred01 wrote:
To give the legislature the power to define marriage. Yes. Can you read?
on November 6,2013 | 02:28PM
Mypualani wrote:
I guess not, can read but cannot understand what they are reading. Kind of like reading the bible and coming away with different understanding. especially when you have the head of said church telling the sheeple to go out and waste time, I guess these people against SSM feel that their marriage is less than if anyone can marry. Oh well to each his own, Got a question if Marriage is so sacred why all the divorce? all the broken families,
on November 6,2013 | 09:52PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
I doubt the people would vote that way today. Times change and people change with them.
on November 6,2013 | 05:08PM
Pocho wrote:
Wonder why they won't let the people vote today?
on November 6,2013 | 05:33PM
localguy wrote:
LanaUlulani - That was back in 1998 or did you know that. Times and people have changed, now SSM is acceptable in the Nei. People have realized it is not a big deal. Well, the bible thumpers are still afraid, totally clueless.
on November 6,2013 | 08:01PM
Mypualani wrote:
It's reading and comprehension Fred01, they keep missing shall have the power! part of it, they also have the power NOT to reserve....Sorry
on November 6,2013 | 09:43PM
Usagi336 wrote:
Yes, although that is what was on the ballot, the people actually voted to continue having Gay marriages banned. In 1993, the Hawaii State Supreme court ruled that refusing to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples was discriminatory. The only way to prevent Gay couples from having that right was to amend the Constitution. If everyone was in favor of Gay marriages at the time, the amendment would not have passed. So let's vote again.
on November 6,2013 | 01:40PM
Anonymous wrote:
Ah, so you were able to read their minds? How omnipotent of you.
on November 6,2013 | 05:03PM
ejkorvette wrote:
Same Sex marriage is an Affront to God. An Abomination.
on November 6,2013 | 10:28AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
ejkorvette is an Affront to God. An Abomination.
on November 6,2013 | 10:34AM
Fred01 wrote:
There is a spot in hell waiting for ejkorvette and those like her, where they will burn for eternity for their hatred and bigotry.
on November 6,2013 | 10:46AM
LanaUlulani wrote:
Actually Christians are exercising their right to religious freedom and the right to freedom of expression without government intervention. I am pro gay marriage myself but do not speak of rights for gays while depriving local people of theirs. Equal rights for ALL including for gays AND Christians.
on November 6,2013 | 01:07PM
Fred01 wrote:
"local people"???
on November 6,2013 | 01:30PM
LanaUlulani wrote:


Local, adjective:

1. pertaining to or characterized by place or position in space; spatial.

2. pertaining to, characteristic of, or restricted to a particular place or particular places.

3. pertaining to a city, town, or small district rather than an entire state or country.


on November 6,2013 | 01:49PM
false wrote:
makapuu4: Spoken like a malevolent, raging queen. Wig too tight?
on November 6,2013 | 12:09PM
localguy wrote:
Makapuu4 - What? You already admitted there is no God so why are you thumping your bible?
on November 6,2013 | 08:02PM
BRock wrote:
On the improbable chance that there is a god, I doubt if it cares what people do with their bodies.
on November 6,2013 | 07:44PM
Mypualani wrote:
what about divorce, lying, stealing adultery, idolatry ? ooh I know how about coveting ? seems to me that's the main stuff for Christians, no ? yeah killing is one of those affronts, a bigger abomination is the Hypocrites, who preach love, but go and spit on people, bullying and ripping up others property. One guy at the capitol was wearing a Jesus shirt and asking a trans gender about her fake P****y.
on November 6,2013 | 09:58PM
waverider808 wrote:
if we are to separate church and state, then all the testimonies from anti ssm is invalid to determine if we should past this law or not. to me this is a law strictly on equality and nothing else.
on November 6,2013 | 10:40AM
CloudForest wrote:
Once again the delegations from Sodom and Gomorrah where unable to make the journey to testify since the weather had turned wicked with ever increasing fire and brimstone.
on November 6,2013 | 11:17AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
CloudForest - Oh and the fact that they would be several thousand years old and the long distance to the middle east.
on November 6,2013 | 02:09PM
CloudForest wrote:
That is correct.
on November 6,2013 | 06:04PM
nari50 wrote:
the amendment to this bill regarding religious organizations has been modeled after the Connecticut bill, but only includes some specifics of this bill and leaves the original intent of SB1 mostly unchanged. In the amendment they add protections to the solemnization AND celebration of a marriage. Solemnization protections for clergy only extend as far as saying the words "By the powers vested in me by the State of Hawaii, I now pronounce you man and wife." Additionally, the amendment in discussion does not cover individuals or small businesses. Some of these people are being sued in other states where SSM was passed. These protections still aren't good enough. This simple amendment does not give this bill strength comparable to the Connecticut bill. Also, in no way was the public accommodations law addressed in the amendments being voted on by House members.
on November 6,2013 | 11:22AM
mcc wrote:
Christians hate other people. I think their God created ALL people. Thou shall not hate.
on November 6,2013 | 11:24AM
Fred01 wrote:
Not all Christians hate other people. But yes, most of them hypocritically use their religion as an excuse to hate and judge. There are a few, however, who actually follow Jesus. They are not the ones testifying against equality.
on November 6,2013 | 11:29AM
LanaUlulani wrote:
Conversely there are other pro gay marriage supporters who speak of equal rights while depriving local people of theirs.
on November 6,2013 | 01:05PM
Fred01 wrote:
Again, "local people"? What's your obsession? I sense much bigotry..
on November 6,2013 | 01:32PM
LanaUlulani wrote:

Local, adjective:

1. pertaining to or characterized by place or position in space; spatial.

2. pertaining to, characteristic of, or restricted to a particular place or particular places.

3. pertaining to a city, town, or small district rather than an entire state or country.




on November 6,2013 | 01:47PM
Anonymous wrote:
Here's the actual wording of the State of Hawai'i constitution: Section 23. The legislature shall have the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples. [Add HB 117 (1997) and election Nov 3, 1998] "...shall have the power to..." doesn't define marriage as between opposite sex couples. It seems they are still deciding whether to choose to do so (or not.)
on November 6,2013 | 11:40AM
Fred01 wrote:
Right! The people voted in 1998 to amend the constitution to give the legislature that power. THE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY VOTED! The right wing dingbats' campaign to "let the people vote" is an absolute farce, contrary to the will of the people of Hawaii and their constitution.
on November 6,2013 | 11:52AM
LanaUlulani wrote:
Actually LOCAL people are insisting that their vote not be infringed upon which Abercrombie and the Legislature are doing:

http://hawaii.gov/elections/results/1998/general/98swgen.htm This is voter disenfrachisement.

Worse SB1 deprives married gay couples of their parental rights. They need to do it pono or else do not do it at all!


on November 6,2013 | 01:12PM
Fred01 wrote:
This time in capital letters. Geez.
on November 6,2013 | 01:32PM
LanaUlulani wrote:

Local, adjective:

1. pertaining to or characterized by place or position in space; spatial.

2. pertaining to, characteristic of, or restricted to a particular place or particular places.

3. pertaining to a city, town, or small district rather than an entire state or country.


on November 6,2013 | 01:48PM
localguy wrote:
LanaUlulani - So what else did you get for your birthday besides the "Copy and Paste" feature for your computer?
on November 6,2013 | 08:03PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Apparently, LanaUlulani, has designated herself/himself/itself as the spokesperson for all locals. Did you let them vote?
on November 6,2013 | 02:08PM
Mypualani wrote:
EXACTLY! OM Gina thank you....
on November 6,2013 | 10:03PM
bumba wrote:
Same mentality that used to burn women at the stake. " Christians" starting to show their colors.............
on November 6,2013 | 12:42PM
Fred01 wrote:
THE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY VOTED! The right wing dingbats' campaign to "let the people vote" is an absolute farce, founded in bigotry and hatred. In 1998, the people of Hawaii voted to amend the constitution, in order to give the legislature the power to decide this issue. Take your signs and your hatred home people.
on November 6,2013 | 12:52PM
Fred01 wrote:
THE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY VOTED! The right wing dingbats' campaign to "let the people vote" is an absolute farce, founded in bigotry and hatred. In 1998, the people of Hawaii voted to amend the constitution, in order to give the legislature the power to decide this issue. Take your signs and your hate home people!
on November 6,2013 | 12:52PM
LanaUlulani wrote:
The people voted to give the legislators the power to define marriage as between a man and a woman. NO they should not go home. They are NO ONE'S SLAVES!
on November 6,2013 | 01:05PM
Fred01 wrote:
Yes, clearly you have problems with reading comprehension.
on November 6,2013 | 01:33PM
LanaUlulani wrote:
Clearly you have a problem with people exercising their RIGHTS. I am so glad they are IGNORING YOU. I am so proud of them whether gay OR straight!
on November 6,2013 | 01:48PM
Fred01 wrote:
Well, at the end of the session, Hawaii will be more equal, no thanks to local fogies like you.
on November 6,2013 | 01:56PM
LanaUlulani wrote:
Actually I am pro gay marriage but I OPPOSE SB1 because it deprives Hawaiian children of their rights and now deprives gay couples of their PARENTAL rights and deprives their children of their RIGHTS.

Do not assume!
on November 6,2013 | 02:07PM
Fred01 wrote:
Oh, you are a dingbat.
on November 6,2013 | 02:29PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
The sheer volume of the protests outside have disrupted the House proceedings ... The homophobe animals are at it again.
on November 6,2013 | 12:54PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Looks like it is time to break out the rubber bullets, fire hoses, and tranquilizer darts for the rapid opponents of SSM. I would guess that disrupting legislative is a crime. Lock 'em up.
on November 6,2013 | 01:56PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
... rabid ... Nothing rapid about them.
on November 6,2013 | 02:12PM
GANANSA wrote:
I'm glad that I won't error and marry a gender that is similar to my own and yet it sucks to be alone . also in financial hardship , where a same sex marriage would solve financial problems as well as being alone. I know God's RULE and Laws. SEX is not but a gift from GOD meant for procreation. If two of the same sex would love God mainly and above all and remain celibate , yet love each other and be kind and civil , think about God ,pray like me , more than a Muslim . I don't want people going to hell .
on November 6,2013 | 01:21PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
GANANSA - There is no god. The bible(s) a work of fiction. Nobody is going to hell (except allie when she moves back to North Dakota).
on November 6,2013 | 02:00PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
I think the vast majority of ALL people would disagree with you but you have a right to believe whatever you want to, just don't represent it as fact, it's your opinion.
on November 6,2013 | 05:20PM
jotobuddy23 wrote:
I am so sick and tired of reading, hearjng, watching this gay marriage debate. Can they just pass this bill, have the Governer sign it tnto law and move on. The institution of marriage changed in Hawaii once the special session was called. It's a done deal. This is getting old real fast.
on November 6,2013 | 01:23PM
Oahuan wrote:
Don't let the F@.GG.0Ts marry! Our society will rot in hell.
on November 6,2013 | 01:24PM
copperwire9 wrote:
You should be ashamed. But I'm pretty sure you're not.
on November 6,2013 | 01:54PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Oahuan - You are already rotten from the neck up. What's a little bit more.
on November 6,2013 | 01:59PM
false wrote:
makapuu4: That's right. Lisp your anger!
on November 6,2013 | 02:32PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
false = Oahuan, could be.
on November 6,2013 | 02:57PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Ah... prejudice and discrimination at it's best. No need for you to worry, your entrance to heaven is all but guaranteed right.
on November 6,2013 | 05:24PM
blackmurano wrote:
You call it prejudice or discrimination, God calls it a sin against His Covenant of marriage. All these liberal Democrats in our State legislature who supports "Perversion marriage" will be accountable for their action on judgmen day.
on November 6,2013 | 09:50PM
kuniagirl wrote:
That you can write something like that without shame is a sign that we are already rotting in hell.
on November 6,2013 | 10:13PM
KeithHaugen wrote:
Dear Governor: Look what you've started. Instead of pushing for a change in marriage laws, just to get on the bandwagon with a dozen other Mainland states, you should have called on the Legislature to identify existing laws that discriminate against any two adults (homosexuals, grandpa-grandchild, siblings, first cousins, etc.) who live together and who many not legally marry, and fix those laws. No one should be discriminated against. That would have eliminated the need to even consider changing marriage laws, and dividing the community.
on November 6,2013 | 02:19PM
kuewa wrote:
Good luck with that thought. The bottom line is that since SCOTUS overturned DOMA and the Federal govt is legally required to equally grant Federal tax and other benefits to any married couple (but not civil unions or other variations), failure to recognize SSM in any particular state creates a Constitutional equal protection issue since some States already recognize SSM. One could argue, as you seem to be, that the Federal and State governments should never have gotten into the business of granting exclusive benefits and rights based on State-defined (as opposed to religion-based) marriage. However, it is what it is, and the Governor and Legislature are apparently smart enough to see that it is in the best interests of the State to recognize SSM and move past this issue. This is in addition to SCOTUS essentially upholding the lower court ruling against Prop8, an attempt to subject SSM to popular vote even though no party materially harmed by SSM could be identified.
on November 6,2013 | 02:50PM
false wrote:
Just as a sidenote. Seattle voted in a new mayor yesterday, Ed Murray, who is gay. Washington state voters also approved to legalize same-sex marriages. To me, it shows a contrast between a progressive forward looking city/state and a backwards country type bumpkin city/state. You decide which is which.
on November 6,2013 | 02:42PM
kuewa wrote:
Also noted is that NYC's new first lady is a well-respected black lesbian...a very interesting story.
on November 6,2013 | 02:55PM
blackmurano wrote:
kuewa. so. She is on Judgment path with God for her lesbian lifesty.
on November 6,2013 | 10:02PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
false - Are there two "false"s? You seem like the sane one.
on November 6,2013 | 03:21PM
false wrote:
makapuu4: You sound irritated. Run out of KY?
on November 6,2013 | 04:39PM
false wrote:
Yes Makapuu4. There are at least two "false" posters, possibly more. Leave it to the SA to change our original screen name to "false" for whatever reason. Lucky, now you folks can read dissenting opinions and decide.
on November 6,2013 | 09:41PM
blackmurano wrote:
False - I thought our State was more liberal. But our citizens here would shoot down homosexual or Perversion marriage if given the opportunity to vote on it. We sure are living in the last days. . .
on November 6,2013 | 10:01PM
kuewa wrote:
And for all of you who are predicting your god's punishment on SSM advocates and practitioners, you can rest assured that no law in the US will force you to condone or enter into SSM. Therefore, if you have led a completely virtuous life, obeying every tenet of your religion as set forth in your religious texts, you will certainly gain entrance to your heaven when you depart this earth. Right? And those of you who profess to belief in Christianity, where are your similar protests against heterosexual adultery, divorce and remarriage?
on November 6,2013 | 03:02PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
The legislature further finds that the question of whether or not the State should issue marriage licenses to couples of the same sex is a fundamental policy issue to be decided by the elected representatives of the people. This constitutional measure is thus designed to confirm that the legislature has the power to reserve marriage to opposite-sex couples and to ensure that the legislature will remain open to the petitions of those who seek a change in the marriage laws, and that such petitioners can be considered on an equal basis with those who oppose a change in our current marriage statutes.
on November 6,2013 | 03:32PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
For those of you who are interested, the above represents the legislative intent of H.B. No. 117, Regular Session 1997 which led to the 1998 Amendment to the Hawaii Constitution. For those of you that want to believe that the court will overturn SSM, or that the public needs to vote to change the amendment, or that the legislature has no right to pass SSM, you are in for a real surprise. The court will look at legislative intent and SSM will be upheld.
on November 6,2013 | 03:46PM
blackmurano wrote:
Makapuu, the homobible. The Democrats will approve this "Perversion marriage" But I said this again, it's not over yet because God iwll have the last word on Judgment Day.
on November 6,2013 | 10:13PM
Anonymous wrote:
Oh you and your facts.
on November 6,2013 | 04:09PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Anonymous - Sorry. Maybe I should strive to be more like blackmumbojumbo and just make things up and use no facts.
on November 6,2013 | 04:25PM
blackmurano wrote:
Makapuu my homobible. Your sticking around Democrats too often that you sound like them. .
on November 6,2013 | 10:14PM
blackmurano wrote:
Makapuu shame on you for calling marriage "Equality in Marriage." It's not. The truth is it's a "Perversion marriage." Anything that seeks to change God's design for marriage is "Perversion." Stop talking like a Democrat. I am tired hearing of hearing these donkeys not doing the will of the people .
on November 6,2013 | 10:12PM
blackmurano wrote:
Keuwa - we are all born sinners. It started in the beginning of Creation when God created the first male and the first female. It was a perfect world until they desobeyed God and listen to some "doubts" from the devil. But Jesus Christ came to bridge men and God together by going to the cross and dying for us in our place. You can be a heterosexual adulter, a divorce, a homosexual or a lesbian you can each go to heaven if you repent of your sinful behavior and return to God's ways. This is not religion at all but "relationship" with God Almiighty. Jesus Christ (God) didn't make it complicated to follow Him. You sound as though being a Christian is impossible. What's wrong with God telling you to not be involved with homosexuality? He has a reason. God formed your body in your mother's womb so He knows what will hurt you. Homosexuality will hurt you. This is why HE says to stay away from that evil sin.
on November 6,2013 | 10:10PM
kuewa wrote:
I have bad news for you. Your god did not write your bible. Men wrote it, then revised, chopped and edited it to meet their own needs and desires. The KJ version that you and other seem to think is ultimate truth has been shown by your own scholars to contain mis-translations and nonstandard interpretations of older Hebrew and Greek text, including in the sections that supposedly forbid homosexuality. So before you starting preaching your wisdom and truth, you might want to investigate the source of your wisdom.And if you insist on believing what you just wrote, then I hope you repent of every one of your sins before you die, including the eating of finless sea creatures.
on November 7,2013 | 12:31AM
Lehua1982 wrote:
I think a solution could be that no one, Gay or Straight be legally allowed to Marry. Marriage is a term taken directly from the Bible with religious implications. The confusion lies in the fact that this traditionally religious term has been adopted and used as a legal term. If there truly is a separation of church and state the term should not be used for legal purposes. This would allow all Domestic partners (same-sex or opposite sex) to receive equal benefits in the eyes of the law and would not affect churches regarding the obligation to marry same-sex couples. A second thought is that on many occasions have I heard that Christians hold themselves to a “higher” standard than non-Christians with regard to God’s laws and the bible. If that is the case the law of the State, being outside of the church should be separate than the beliefs of one church. I don’t believe it is the job of the church to force their beliefs into law. I believe more people would be moved to want to know about God’s law by seeing the people of God in action in a positive way- by loving and respecting different beliefs, especially when the belief is very different than your own. I pray that we all, including myself, remember what the greatest commandment is, to love one another.
on November 6,2013 | 03:16PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Lehua1982 - Good luck with that one.
on November 6,2013 | 03:48PM
blackmurano wrote:
Howzet Makapuu my homobible. . .
on November 6,2013 | 10:27PM
blackmurano wrote:
Lehua1982, God has established three institutions: the home, government and the Church. It is God who has established the governents of the world. This does not mean that He is responsible for the sins of tyrants, but only that the authority to rule comes orginally from God. God established human government because man is a sinner and must have some of authority over him. Any citizen can obey the law because of fear of punishment, but a Christian ought to obey because of conscience in each person. Of course if the government interferes with conscience, then the Christian must obey God rather then men. The Democratic party is about to pass a "Perversion marriage" that attempts to change the design of marriage that God instituted. God ordained marriage as a Covenant for one man and one woman. As born again Christians we obey God rather than men. God's law is above every constitution in the world. You cannot have it any other way. The Democratic party want to call the issue "Equality in Marriage." It's pure "Perversion Marriage" because an attempt is made to change God's covenant. of marriage. You love the homosexual or Lesbian by telling the Truth of God. Your not there to tickle their ears because you don't want to offend them. No you tell them the truth in love.
on November 6,2013 | 10:26PM
Johnmakiki wrote:
Perhaps we need the people to vote on whether Churches should continue to be tax exempt. I wonder if Churches would ok that referendum?
on November 6,2013 | 03:43PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Johnmakiki - I am sure that they would have no problem with that. They want people to vote on everything. And, they want to be fair. What do you say church types?
on November 6,2013 | 03:55PM
blackmurano wrote:
Makapuu my homobible why would you not let the people of Hawaii vote on this Perversion marriage? We trusted the Democratic party in 1998 when a whopping 70 percent of Hawaii voters gave the power to the State Democratic control legislature to keep marriage of one man and one woman. But this year, these rascals, turn around and renege on that promise and is about to vote this Perversion marriage into State Law.
on November 6,2013 | 10:29PM
danji wrote:
If the senate cannot come to an agreement then the special session should just cease. It sounds like if both the senate and house disagree they must resolve their decision to PASS the BIll??? WRONG JUST CEASE THE SPECIAL SESSION AND HANG THE GOVERNOR FOR CALLING THE SESSION. YOU LEGISLATORS SHOULD FORFEIT ALL WAGES FOR THE SPECIAL SESSION--HOW MUCH IS THIS SPECIAL SESSION COSTING THE TAX PAYERS?? MOST OF YOU DEMOCRATS ARE SELF SERVING PEOPLE LIKE OBAMA(GOT HIS HEALTH PLAN PASSED AND IT'S NOT READY FOR USE).
on November 6,2013 | 03:53PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
danji - You apparently know nothing about the legislative process. If the senate agrees with the house's amendments, they can proceed to a vote. If the senate does not agree with the house's amendment, they can work out their differences in a conference committee. Both senate and house then vote on the conference draft. They are not going to cease the special session (even if you use all caps).
on November 6,2013 | 04:07PM
localguy wrote:
danji - You might want to either clean your keyboard or get a new one. Your caps key keeps sticking, meaning you are YELLING. So many clueless rookie posters................
on November 6,2013 | 08:05PM
blackmurano wrote:
Whats wrong localguy I see nothing wrong with those caps. Its a deep expression of danju's pist-off with the Democratic control legislature. Bother you?
on November 6,2013 | 10:32PM
rbzs1 wrote:
22 days til thanksgiving....55 more days til Christmas....61 days til the 2014.....and most of all, 94 days til THE SUPERBOWL! let's celebrate this!!!! com'on mannnn....
on November 6,2013 | 03:55PM
RandolphW wrote:
So at the end of the day, we are going to be left with just another big mess.
on November 6,2013 | 04:42PM
Wahiawamauka wrote:
I say let all the different so called churches get all the exemptions they ask for. Then, turn around and start taxing them all. I am tired of hearing all their del'usional talk. And how about Ma'afala the cop. His testimony was laughable and a total embarrassment to the police department. On a side note, I do believe the people should vote on the matter.
on November 6,2013 | 04:44PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Senate Bill 1, House Draft 1 has passed second reading and will now move to a third and final reading after at least 48 hours from decking. The vote was 30 ayes, 18 noes, and 3 excused.
on November 6,2013 | 08:17PM
blackmurano wrote:
Wahiawamauka why is sharing God's truth laughable? Why do you say it's embarassing to the Poilice department to share God's truth about marriage? Maybe it's because Ma'afala didn't say things to tickle your ears and not offend you with God's truth. Yes, I agree, the people of Hawaii should be allowed to vote to ban this "Perversion marriage" in our State of Hawaii for good!
on November 6,2013 | 10:34PM
Pocho wrote:
I say ProGay's like you are the opposite bigots of the anti-gay bigots. You heard the saying, it takes one to know one.
on November 6,2013 | 04:55PM
Anonymous wrote:
Did you just prove your own point? Thank you.
on November 6,2013 | 05:06PM
localguy wrote:
As former governor of Minnesota and US Navy Seal Jesse Ventura said it so well, "Religion is a crutch for weak minded individuals." Sadly the Nei is full of them. So many dysfunctional people afraid of change.
on November 6,2013 | 07:59PM
blackmurano wrote:
Are you afraid of your make localguy? The one who formed you in your mother's womb - HE is God. Well, God created a male and a female six thousand years ago. In the garden of eden, He performed the first marriage on earth. God Himself was the only witness. Imagine that, only two people on earth. He ordained this marriage as a "Covenant" of one man and one woman. Than He told the couple to populate the world. Homosexual marriages cannot produce children. Jesse Ventura, and people like him will answer to God on Judgment day. God keeps a book on each of us and records every word that comes out of your mouth. Every deed that is done on earth, bad or good. Than on judgment day when you face God face to face, your book will be open. It will show evidence of your rejection of God almighty. Than you will be cast into the lake of fire with the devil and his angels. Read all of this in the book of Revelation in God's Holy Bible.
on November 6,2013 | 09:48PM
kennysmith wrote:
i am mad at the person with his book in his hand, i like to call him out.
on November 6,2013 | 08:17PM
blackmurano wrote:
Lets have a "total recall" of all the Democrats in the State Senate and State house who voted against the people's will and allowed this "Perversion Marriage" to pass. You can't wait till election night. It has to be done now. Every district should start a petition to recall this Democrats who voted for this "Perversion marriage." While you at it, add U.S. Senator Brian Shultz who has been working behind the scene from his DC office to push for this Perversion marriage bill.
on November 6,2013 | 10:39PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Senate Bill 1, House Draft 1 has passed second reading and will now move to a third and final reading after at least 48 hours from decking. The vote was 30 ayes, 18 noes, and 3 excused.
on November 6,2013 | 08:32PM
waikane75 wrote:
Jo Jordan must have some serious issues. What a joke!
on November 6,2013 | 08:32PM
waikane75 wrote:
Your vote as a lesbian against equal rights is one that will not be forgotten by those who you have been discriminated against.
on November 6,2013 | 09:57PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
It's a bad day for homophobes. It's a good day for civil rights.
on November 6,2013 | 08:38PM
Anonymous wrote:
Your estimate was very close. And it won't change on Friday.
on November 6,2013 | 09:02PM
blackmurano wrote:
Makapuu you again - maybe I should call you Makapuu the homobible?
on November 6,2013 | 09:42PM
SY808 wrote:
God is supportive of gay marriage because her son Jesus Christ was a homosexual!
on November 6,2013 | 08:45PM
Anonymous wrote:
Another stake in the hearts of homophobes in Hawaii!
on November 6,2013 | 09:13PM
2NDC wrote:
No "equality" until the allow ALL deviant behavior. Polygamists, pedophilia, bestiality, incest, etc. are all excluded. If they're gonna allow one, then they should allow the rest as well.
on November 6,2013 | 09:48PM
Shotzy wrote:
Bellatti just lost her next re-election.
on November 6,2013 | 09:49PM
CloudForest wrote:
Militant Homosexuality is one of the signs of the times. Prepare!! For there is a war in heaven and on earth -- and this very day you are seeing it play out in Hawaii ................
on November 7,2013 | 01:09AM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News