Quantcast

Monday, July 28, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 269 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Judge refuses to block Hawaii's same-sex marriage law

By Star-Advertiser staff

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 01:19 a.m. HST, Nov 15, 2013


Circuit Court Judge Karl Sakamoto ruled against same-sex marriage opponents Thursday, refusing to issue a temporary restraining order to prevent the state from issuing marriage licenses to gay couples starting Dec. 2.

After hearing arguments for about an hour, Sakamoto said that while state Rep. Bob McDermott and others had standing to file their request to block the new marriage equality law, the state Legislature has the inherent authority to define marriage independent of a 1998 constitutional amendment that gave the Legislature the power to reserve marriage to heterosexual couples.

"After all the legal complexities of the court's analysis, the court will conclude that same-sex marriage in Hawaii is legal," Sakamoto said.

The marriage equality bill  -- known as Senate Bill 1 -- was signed into law Wednesday by Gov. Neil Abercrombie after a special session of the state Legislature.

"I'm very pleased with the court's ruling," state Attorney General David Louie told reporters. "I think the court clearly said that SB1 is constitutional. SB1 can go forward. The Legislature had the power to enact SB1 under its general powers as a Legislature."

McDermott and his attorneys did not immediately announce whether they would appeal.

"All you can do is all you can do, and that's what we tried to do today. We tried to give a voice to the people of Hawaii," McDermott told reporters. "We fell short -- and I guess that's my fault -- but we did the best we could do."

Sakamoto heard the request this morning by McDermott, a Republican who opposes gay marriage, and a group of Christians for a TRO to prevent the state from issuing marriage licenses.

In court documents filed Wednesday, the state opposed the request. Deputy Attorney General John Molay argued that McDermott and the others lack standing to bring the legal challenge because they have not demonstrated the potential for actual harm from same-sex marriage. 

McDermott (R, Ewa Beach-Iroquois Point) and the others contend the 1998 constitutional amendment approved by voters that gave the Legislature the power to reserve marriage to heterosexual couples trumps a statutory change to the law. Voters, they argue, would have to approve another constitutional amendment to expand the definition of marriage to include gay couples.

McDermott, for example, claims that his reputation and electability will suffer because he led voters to believe in 1998 that the constitutional amendment would ban same-sex marriage. William Kumia, a pastor and marriage coach, fears hate crimes and lawsuits if he refuses to counsel same-sex couples. Garret Hashimoto, state chairman of the Hawaii Christian Coalition, worries that religious schools would be forced to either teach same-sex education or close.

Molay dismissed such arguments as "'the sky is falling' hypotheticals meant to generate fear rather than demonstrate concrete injuries."

Molay also argues that the 1998 constitutional amendment was "clear and unambiguous," giving the Legislature -- and not the Supreme Court -- the power to define marriage. The constitutional amendment did not, Molay contends, preclude the Legislature from later approving same-sex marriage.

The state also defended ballot information sent to voters by the state Office of Elections at the time that stated that the constitutional amendment would give the Legislature the power to reserve marriage to heterosexual couples only. The word "only," Molay maintained, did not mean that the Legislature only had the power to reserve marriage to heterosexual couples, but could choose to regardless of the ruling by the Supreme Court.

McDermott and others zeroed in on the word "only" from the ballot information as proof of what voters intended. 

Attorneys for McDermott argued in court filings on Wednesday that the intent of the Legislature in crafting the constitutional amendment is irrelevant, because the interpretation should turn on the intent of voters who overwhelmingly ratified the amendment.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 269 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(269)
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.
busterb wrote:
Great another waste of tax money. Thanks McDermott. I thought he used to be against gov't waste. Guy is turning into Boehner Jr.
on November 14,2013 | 08:10AM
lwandcah wrote:
It would not be an issue now if the special session wasn't crammed down everyone's throat and ram-rodded through by the legislature.
on November 14,2013 | 08:16AM
HanabataDays wrote:
Wela ka hao, brah.
on November 14,2013 | 08:32AM
bigislandkurt wrote:
Just like the scripture folks want to ramrod their beliefs down everybody else's throat.
on November 14,2013 | 08:52AM
concerned1 wrote:
Cmon bigislandk-we have had for hundreds of years, our founding fathers, base their beliefs on God, all of a sudden its unconstitutional.
on November 14,2013 | 09:27PM
localguy wrote:
Naaahhh, it was a done deal, slam dunk from the start. Remember, religion is a crutch for weak minded individuals. They either accept the change or get left behind. Today's younger generation sees nothing wrong with SSM. It is the religious minions who can't accept the changing world.
on November 14,2013 | 08:56AM
808behappy wrote:
@localguy you are right the younger generation don't see anything wrong. Taking my son to high school one day, I saw 2 girls holding hands and it seemed so awkard for me and I mentioned it
on November 14,2013 | 10:14AM
808behappy wrote:
cont: My son asked me if I was prejudiced. Which I'm not, it was just wasn't something that I normally see.
on November 14,2013 | 10:18AM
mitt_grund wrote:
In Asia, it is culturally acceptable for girl friends to hold hands as they walk. Doesn't mean they are gay, just happy. In many cultures, such as Muslim, men dance with men and women with women. Doesn't mean their gay, just happy.
on November 14,2013 | 12:47PM
Maneki_Neko wrote:
After a few beers I like to dance by myself. Doesn't mean I'm drunk, just happy.
on November 14,2013 | 01:36PM
sooregonian wrote:
@808behappy -- Next, ask your son what he thinks of "boy's in the girl's room" or vice (pun intended) versa? He's graduating just in time as Co-ed locker rooms and more is law in Ca.
on November 14,2013 | 09:16PM
WKAMA wrote:
Look, marriage is a religious ceremony defined as a union between a male and a female. If you want a union between same sex then go find another word and take it out of the religious domain.
on November 14,2013 | 01:52PM
DowntownGreen wrote:
No need... legal now.
on November 14,2013 | 02:04PM
BRock wrote:
Time to face the real world.
on November 14,2013 | 02:45PM
GooglyMoogly wrote:
But the contract of marriage is a document issued by a state, and that's what we're talking about here. Save the religious talk for Sundays. thx.
on November 14,2013 | 03:25PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
What you're saying would be true if not for the fact the state issues marriage licenses, that makes it a legal ceremony as well as religious one for some people. Government should not be in the marriage business in the first place.
on November 14,2013 | 07:29PM
tigerwarrior wrote:
@localguy~ Like several of us had predicted--this was a foregone conclusion from the start--and just about everything was so predictable. If Judge Sakamoto issued the TRO--like I've been saying all week--it would have gone against the U.S. Supreme Court decision to allow state legislatures and governors across the country autonomy to decide for themselves whether or not to redefine SSM.
on November 14,2013 | 04:36PM
concerned1 wrote:
Talk about weak minded, lol. You have been brainwashed in social acceptance of ssm. You hear the same catch phrases "love is love," "equality for all" and the list goes on. If theses are true, the boundaries are limitless
on November 14,2013 | 09:40PM
HIE wrote:
Oh...you mean the special session voted on by a legislature that was elected by the people of Hawaii?
on November 14,2013 | 09:00AM
ehrhornp wrote:
Would not have been an issue is some people didn't freak out about the supreme court. What idiots.
on November 14,2013 | 09:52AM
Leonard_Drake wrote:
What is it with the "anti-gays" and the obsession with the use of language such as "cramming down throats" or "shoving down throats" and "ram-rodding through"? I swear I hear this language in practically every argument against same-sex marriage, or in every other argument against LGBT rights. "We don't want this shoved down our throats, blah blah blah... I wonder what Freud would have to say about this? In other words, get over it people.
on November 14,2013 | 10:06AM
Unutoa wrote:
lol
on November 14,2013 | 10:39AM
hikine wrote:
I think they're closeted queens who do want to get some but still in denial! LOL
on November 14,2013 | 11:12AM
Heinbear wrote:
Freud would say, "Ahhhh, Reaction Formation"? Yes?
on November 14,2013 | 04:16PM
BRock wrote:
Oh, get off your high horse. Nothing was railroaded and, in fact, more attention was given to the people to comment on the proposed bill in the special session because there was more time to devote to the bill as opposed to the regular session where the bill would be one of hundreds to be considered.
on November 14,2013 | 02:43PM
pcman wrote:
What do you expect from Hawaii's judges. They are all KoolAid drinking Dems.
on November 14,2013 | 08:11PM
sooregonian wrote:
Iwandcah -- Special session needed for homeless and transgender equality. Don't want anyone to feel disenfranchised.
on November 14,2013 | 09:10PM
hawaiiwalter wrote:
Will McDermott and his gang have to find another minority now that he lost this one?
on November 14,2013 | 08:39AM
goinglobal wrote:
It was not a waste of money the special session was a waste of money and McDermott is right the voter instructions clearly said a yes vote meant only hetorsexual people could be married... It did not say anything about gay marriage... This is a sham and I hope abercrombie realizes that people will not take this bs... I hope the entire legislature gets thrown out. they clearly did not vote what the constituents wanted.
on November 14,2013 | 09:11AM
Anonymous wrote:
you mean, what the constituents wanted 15 years ago.
on November 14,2013 | 09:45AM
ehrhornp wrote:
You obviously haven't seen the poll that shows SSM is now approved of by a majority. Face it, country is becoming Godless heathens. lol
on November 14,2013 | 09:55AM
Ronin006 wrote:
Yes, ehrhornp, the country is becoming Godless, and as it does it is becoming valueless and moralless and sinking further into a cesspool. Unfortunately, America has sunk so far into the cesspool no one seems to notice when another lump of excrement like gay marriage drops in.
on November 14,2013 | 12:23PM
peum wrote:
I'm godless but not without values and morals. Proof you and your kind have no idea what you're talking about.
on November 14,2013 | 01:13PM
ehrhornp wrote:
All you needed to do was to show a compelling reason why marriage shouldn't include gay marriage. 20 years and no one has been able to make a case. Which is good if one does not believe in big intrusive government. I mean if I want government in my life I would move to Russia.
on November 14,2013 | 02:50PM
Ronin006 wrote:
Show me a compelling reason why one man can't have five wives. Show me a compelling reason why a human can't marry an animal. Show me a compelling reason why an adult can't marry a 12 year old kid.
on November 14,2013 | 08:50PM
sooregonian wrote:
@Ronin -- per previous post...the bay parade will turn the An*l Wai Canal into a bathhouse.
on November 14,2013 | 06:10PM
sooregonian wrote:
@goingglobal -- Tenari Ma'afala for gov or house seat. A leader of men and ohana.
on November 14,2013 | 06:08PM
Anonymous wrote:
I can't see how the lawsuit cost any tax money. The Judge and AG are paid salaries. It didn't cost a dime more for them to be there. This is in contrast to the special session, which was the waste of tax money. There is no reason whatsoever why this could not have been taken up in regular session that is already budgeted for.
on November 14,2013 | 09:37AM
ehrhornp wrote:
Freedom is never a waste of money.
on November 14,2013 | 09:55AM
concerned1 wrote:
Busterb-waste of tax payers money? Give me a break, what about the special session? What did that waste amount to? Jeez
on November 14,2013 | 09:23PM
vball808chick wrote:
VOTE the PIG OUT in next year's elections!!!
on November 14,2013 | 08:25AM
starripoff wrote:
Can't vote a judge out.
on November 14,2013 | 08:47AM
vball808chick wrote:
I meant, Rep. Bob McDermott. Sorry for the confusion, lol!
on November 14,2013 | 08:59AM
Fred01 wrote:
Yeah, McDermott is a total dingbat. His followers are worse.
on November 14,2013 | 09:27AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
The Legislature's version of Tom Berg, and we all know what happened to Berg.
on November 14,2013 | 09:40AM
sooregonian wrote:
@Fred01 -- The looney left are leading their sheeple over the pali with their wanton destruction of ohana.
on November 14,2013 | 06:14PM
ehrhornp wrote:
Are you in McDermott's district?
on November 14,2013 | 09:57AM
ghstar wrote:
Perhaps vballchick means McDermott . . . YAy!
on November 14,2013 | 10:00AM
ehrhornp wrote:
Initially I thought he was referring to Neal. lol
on November 14,2013 | 02:51PM
HanabataDays wrote:
Well, that was a fascinating hearing whose outcome, of course, was never in doubt. The suit was premature, the alleged damages were nothing but future hypotheticals, and the case relied on a preposterous thesis that the 1998 outcome was a "bait and switch". Didn't even need to watch the Instant Replay to know how the ref was gonna rule.
on November 14,2013 | 08:31AM
Nala007 wrote:
Where's Kiragirl? I bet she is going to argue that the judge was wrong since she knows more than the legislature, the Governor, the Attorney General, Retired Hawaii Supreme Court Justice Levinson, and now Judge Sakamoto.
on November 14,2013 | 08:34AM
waikane75 wrote:
yeah where is kiragirl? She's been quiet lately. Not sure where she is going to direct all of that hatred now that SSM has passed. would hate to be her husband. LOL!
on November 14,2013 | 08:41AM
aomohoa wrote:
Maybe she moved away before the sky falls. LOL
on November 14,2013 | 08:45AM
allie wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on November 14,2013 | 09:03AM
Anonymous wrote:
bold and forthright...lol!
on November 14,2013 | 09:39AM
ghstar wrote:
yes, and also zero for three . . .
on November 14,2013 | 10:04AM
Poidogs wrote:
Buahahahaha…
on November 14,2013 | 10:12AM
kimchee wrote:
Yikes…hun…true…agree… Or whatever usual one word lame empty comment you leave after most posts.
on November 14,2013 | 10:35PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
kiragirl climbed back under her rock.
on November 14,2013 | 09:36AM
monkseal2 wrote:
Jesus was about love. Why can't some Christians be more like Jesus? He loved everyone. Jesus H. Christ! Get over it already and move on. WWJD? I know what he would do...he would love everyone.
on November 14,2013 | 10:03AM
Poidogs wrote:
What is Jesus' middle name? Henry?
on November 14,2013 | 10:12AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Poidogs - I'll bet a weeks pay that it wasn't HatesHomos.
on November 14,2013 | 10:26AM
kuniagirl wrote:
Today's prize winning comment.
on November 14,2013 | 08:45PM
lee1957 wrote:
He goes by Hank.
on November 14,2013 | 04:05PM
starripoff wrote:
Don't know her but she probably does. If you were born 5 seconds ago, you already know more than those idiots.
on November 14,2013 | 08:43AM
copperwire9 wrote:
She's hanging out with allie somewhere.
on November 14,2013 | 08:55AM
kiragirl wrote:
No. I haven't got a problem or issues. I've got other priorities in my life that is far more important than this. I am still blessed with many things to be thankful for. Goodbye.
on November 14,2013 | 09:09AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
kiragirl - If you ONLY had a brain.
on November 14,2013 | 09:37AM
kiragirl wrote:
Okay. Maybe the next contentious issue we can be on the same side. Aloha.
on November 14,2013 | 10:50AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
kiragirl - Maybe we can agree that Abercrombie has been a disappointing governor. I am not voting for him.
on November 14,2013 | 11:04AM
ehrhornp wrote:
Why do you think he has been a disappointment? Just curious, not looking for a fight.
on November 14,2013 | 02:53PM
sooregonian wrote:
@kiragirl -- Transgender "equality" got next. Co-ed bathrooms and locker rooms. Google (if you dare) the gender-gory details of Cali Assembly Bill 1226. AKA...boy's in the girl's room.
on November 14,2013 | 06:21PM
hawaiiwalter wrote:
Poor Bishop Larry Silva of the Catholic church. Why didn't he put up a fight like he did now years ago to stop all the Catholic priests from sexually molesting innocent little boys. He could have saved the church billions of dollars. I wonder if parents are afraid to let their innocent children attend Catholic schools? No wonder so many people have left the Catholic church. Too bad Silva, you lost.
on November 14,2013 | 08:37AM
sooregonian wrote:
@Hawaiiwalter -- Yes, this conservative parent fears ALL secular and religious schools. Home school only.
on November 14,2013 | 06:23PM
MichaelG wrote:
Congratulations to all same sex people who can now wed legally. And to the haters, as Jesus said " Forgive them father for they know not what they do".
on November 14,2013 | 08:37AM
aomohoa wrote:
Good post:)
on November 14,2013 | 08:45AM
sooregonian wrote:
@Michael -- Aloha,yes; acceptance of redefining historical marriage, NO.
on November 14,2013 | 06:25PM
kapoleitalkstory wrote:
MARRIAGE EQUALITY WINS AGAIN!
on November 14,2013 | 08:39AM
sooregonian wrote:
@Kapoleitalkstory -- Gay jihad is a fanatical, Taliban-like war on traditional family.
on November 14,2013 | 06:28PM
jess wrote:
Wow! Racist and homophobic!? You are so edgy... get over it. There are many gay and lesbian parents out there who will love and care for children. Have you ever had to console a baby born addicted to meth? I have, and it's extremely sad to watch a baby scream in pain for hours and very angering to think of the mother and father (i.e. your traditional family) who put that child in that perdicament. All the LGTB community wanted was to have the same rights heterosexual couples do. They got that. I'm sorry it goes against your personal beliefs, but quite frankly, your personal beliefs do not influence the law.
on November 14,2013 | 08:11PM
Kuihao wrote:
Thank you, Judge Sakamoto. And Rep. McDermott, the next time you find yourself saying "I can't believe I'm the only one who sees this," perhaps you'll think twice before filing a lawsuit.
on November 14,2013 | 08:40AM
ehrhornp wrote:
It would be nice if republicans practice what they preach. If you are for small uni-ntrusive government, you should be for allowing gay marriage as there is no compelling reason not to allow it. Well there is one republican who does. Thanks Cynthia.
on November 14,2013 | 02:56PM
aomohoa wrote:
it's done. Move on people. The sky is not going to fall.
on November 14,2013 | 08:44AM
FrankieT wrote:
Yes, people get on with your life.......thank you aomohoa
on November 14,2013 | 08:47AM
RichardCory wrote:
B-but, but... what am I supposed to direct my uncontrollable rage towards if not same-sex marriage!? I am unable to think for myself and am only able to be angry at things my church and fairytale book tell me to be angry about. Critical reasoning is SO hard. :(
on November 14,2013 | 08:56AM
Anonymous wrote:
B-but, but... what am I supposed to direct my uncontrollable rage towards if not same-sex marriage!? I am unable to think for myself and am only able to be angry at things my church and fairytale book tell me to be angry about. Critical reasoning is SO hard. :( ======= Sarcasm doesn't always come off so well in print. It make you seem a bit small-minded.
on November 14,2013 | 09:29AM
Kaimiloa wrote:
Maybe you could work on banning divorce? haha
on November 14,2013 | 10:51AM
ehrhornp wrote:
Or people who get married multiple times. (Adultery you know)
on November 14,2013 | 03:00PM
ehrhornp wrote:
How about global warming? How about the United States having a lousy health care system. How about republicans being hypocritical on Obama care and do they hate Richard Nixon today, the last republican president who actually tried to do some good.
on November 14,2013 | 02:59PM
sooregonian wrote:
@ehrhornp -- This radical "climate change" to the islands will devastate the delicate eco-culture of Hawaii. Families will vacay elsewhere --Rio, Australia,etc. -- and innumerable ohana will uproot while those kamaaina living on the mainland won't return...an expensive place to live, poorly performing public schools, homeless haven and now officially a gay mecca will be the tipping point. Oahu is destined to be another San.Fran; perhaps that was the plan.
on November 14,2013 | 06:47PM
kuniagirl wrote:
The plan was to become whatever would keep you away. SUCCESS
on November 14,2013 | 08:48PM
allie wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on November 14,2013 | 09:05AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
allie - You can head on back to North Dakota now.
on November 14,2013 | 09:44AM
kimchee wrote:
Don't think he/she can head back yet. That freshman year at UH isn't finished…yes, yes…we all know it's been what 5-6 years of frosh-status and supposed invite to walk on to UH wahine volleyball team.
on November 14,2013 | 10:38PM
ehrhornp wrote:
Doesn't really matter how many are affected. Civil rights should not be infringed upon.
on November 14,2013 | 03:01PM
sooregonian wrote:
@aomohoa -- The people were denied a vote like '98, therefore they feel (rightly and righteously so) disenfranchised. The people's court have ruled this law and appalling decision a travesty of moral justice/equality.
on November 14,2013 | 06:36PM
Kalaheo1 wrote:
Well. That didn't take very long.
on November 14,2013 | 08:47AM
DowntownGreen wrote:
As you are so fond of sayin: "and, we're done".

Sadly, it won't stop them from continuing to try.


on November 14,2013 | 08:56AM
sooregonian wrote:
@Kalaheo -- Many here have opined the fix was in...appears locals know their Palace Pols well.
on November 14,2013 | 06:50PM
DowntownGreen wrote:
Yeah, those "Constitution" and "Rule of Law" things get in the way of your "fix" talking point, don't they?
on November 14,2013 | 08:03PM
starripoff wrote:
Gee, should we be surprised??? Lawmakers/government doesn't give a damn what the PEOPLE want - they vote what they want. Sakamoto is a waste - if he really had no intention of really HEARING the case, why bother telling McDermott he would? Just another liar in government. I voted in that election and like the majority, believed I was voting that marriage was a MAN and a WOMEN. But at this point with ObamaIdiotCare in crisis, with lies and damn lies from Emperor Obama and our local government, I just don't give a crap anymore. What I do know is that you can't TRUST ANY POLITICAN!!! They're all a bunch of idiots and hacks who only look out for themselves.
on November 14,2013 | 08:48AM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Yes Starr, understand your pain. Just don't vote. Thank you. Oh and if you don't vote, don't post. Mahalo.
on November 14,2013 | 09:44AM
starripoff wrote:
Your bigoted law NanakuliBoss? Thank GOD, yes I saw GOD (not PC, I know) I don't live in your universe.
on November 14,2013 | 01:36PM
kuewa wrote:
Well next time look carefully at what you are voting for. And if you feel so strongly that our form of constitutional democracy is so terrible, then perhaps you might consider moving to another country. Uzbekhistan comes to mind.
on November 14,2013 | 09:46AM
starripoff wrote:
Probably better than the haters here.
on November 14,2013 | 01:37PM
sooregonian wrote:
@kuewa -- All patriotsare welcome in the 33rd state. No gay marriage and "if you like your oregun you can keep your gun.'
on November 14,2013 | 07:08PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
As I said before, opponents to SSM were pinning their hopes on "low-information voters" (e.g., kiragirl, starripoff) and Judge Karl Sakamoto's ability to read the minds of these "low-information voters" when they voted. "low-information voters" should not be voting on people's rights. Besides, there is no need to vote. The Hawaii 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]" “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.” SB1, HD1 is the result. Judge Sakamoto's findings confirm this.
on November 14,2013 | 09:52AM
kuniagirl wrote:
I so wish you lived in my district and would run for office. Cullen, bye bye.
on November 14,2013 | 08:51PM
BRock wrote:
Hey numb knots, the judge heard the arguments and found Rep. mcDermott's lacking. He did his job and rather well I think.
on November 14,2013 | 02:59PM
sooregonian wrote:
@starripoff -- The conservative ohana base has been activated (thanks,Dems) and our movement to be heard will not dissipate prior to next year's election. Local house seats can be won. Just look at 2010 national results. We need town halls, but you know the pols will refuse. No matter, a typical low turn out ensures some surprises!
on November 14,2013 | 06:58PM
kuniagirl wrote:
MAN and WOMEN? polygamist!
on November 14,2013 | 08:49PM
konag43 wrote:
thank you sentor mcdermott for trying to fight and save the morals of this state and the people who are in pwoer who appear to have no morals and don't give a dam about the children or people of the future and present but it appears that the people in power have gathered together along with the gay people and have decided that they will do what ever they want no matter what the majority of us want. why not waste our nmoney after all the governer wasted our money with this special session to pass a gay marriage bill which could have been done next year. so busterb is it only the gay people that can waste the money of this state but the the good and god fearing people and hetersexual familys dont' have the right to waste money also. that does not sound like equality to me sounds pretty onesided
on November 14,2013 | 08:54AM
HanabataDays wrote:
"The good and god fearing people and hetersexual familys dont' have the right to waste money also" On the contrary. Please feel free to waste all the money you want. You're off to a great start, paying lawyers in a futile effort to get an injunction that had no rational basis and no chance of being granted. Nobody's gonna stop you from throwing good money after bad, you have the perfect right to continue to make fools out of yourselves.
on November 14,2013 | 09:01AM
allie wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on November 14,2013 | 09:06AM
kuniagirl wrote:
I'll give you a couple of dollars if you'll put it to a one way ticket to ND
on November 14,2013 | 08:52PM
kimchee wrote:
Non-gays have dollars too hon. Yikes!
on November 14,2013 | 10:39PM
hawaiiwalter wrote:
Sorry konag43. Every poll for the last two years said that the people of Hawaii and the entire country favor marriage equality. It's time for you to get a life.
on November 14,2013 | 09:14AM
Anonymous wrote:
Do you have a link for any such poll results in Hawaii or elsewhere?
on November 14,2013 | 09:32AM
DowntownGreen wrote:
http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm You can find the Hawaii one on your own.
on November 14,2013 | 09:38AM
kiragirl wrote:
DTG: It was nice. Hope we see eye-to-eye on the next issue. Aloha, Kiragirl
on November 14,2013 | 10:51AM
DowntownGreen wrote:
The sky won't fall and we will live to argue another day. Aloha.
on November 14,2013 | 12:20PM
kiragirl wrote:
I would want you on my debate team. Take care.
on November 14,2013 | 02:52PM
sooregonian wrote:
@Downtowngreen -- I'd prefer to keep arguing to keep the base engaged as transgender "equality" is on the horizon thanks to the Cali / San Fran pervs. I'm sure you have heard about the new Co-ed "protections" law aka...choose your gender (and locker room), even if it differs from what's on your birth certificate or pupil records. Only in California could this pass (?)
on November 14,2013 | 07:23PM
DowntownGreen wrote:
Argue with yourself. Your nasty comments have made it clear where you stand. You lost.
on November 14,2013 | 08:07PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) - A new statewide poll shows a majority of Hawai'i residents support allowing gay couples to marry and fewer oppose it. The survey was conducted through 442 telephone interviews by QMark Research. Hawai'i residents statewide were asked: "Do you strongly favor, somewhat favor, strongly oppose or somewhat oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry?" 54% say they support same-sex marriage, while 31% oppose it. (http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/23089592/statewide-same-sex-marriage-poll-indicates-greater-support-less-opposition) -- Translation for "low information voters" -- In Hawaii, 54% say they support same-sex marriage, while 31% oppose it. That means 15% are undecided (I assume). If we distribute the Undecideds in a proportional manner to those who have an opinion, then 63% would support same-sex marriage, while 37% oppose it. Suppose all of the Undecideds just flip a coin (which seems to be how they decide things), then 61% would support same-sex marriage, while 39% oppose it. Even if we give the benefit of the doubt to our homophobic mob, and alot all Undecideds to oppose, then 54% would support same-sex marriage, while 46% oppose it. 54% > 50% >46% =>The public still supports SSM.
on November 14,2013 | 10:22AM
sooregonian wrote:
Anonymous -- Great question; no gay marriage in blue Oregon.
on November 14,2013 | 07:15PM
kuniagirl wrote:
no we're coming to your state next. BAMMM
on November 14,2013 | 08:53PM
ehrhornp wrote:
What is more impressive is the change. When that pinko commie constitutional amendment was approved I think gay marriage was only favored by around a third. Now gay marriage is favored by a majority. What do you think it will be in another 10 years? two thirds?
on November 14,2013 | 03:12PM
sooregonian wrote:
@ehrhornp -- Superfluous...Gayer and grayer. Plus it's a fad; like Obama.
on November 14,2013 | 07:29PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
konag43 - says the loser.
on November 14,2013 | 09:53AM
ehrhornp wrote:
What morals were those? The shutting down of freedom? Hate to tell you this but it appears that your side is no longer in the majority.
on November 14,2013 | 10:42AM
sooregonian wrote:
@konag43 -- Can he or another family values candidate win? Conservatives are on the upswing in national polls due to Obamascare.
on November 14,2013 | 07:12PM
localguy wrote:
Word is Bobby Boy ran crying out of the courthouse and home to his mommy, s n o t and tears running everywhere. Can't stand losing.
on November 14,2013 | 08:54AM
sooregonian wrote:
@localguy -- Pyrrihic victory. The child-like approval and acceptance the LGBTs so brazenly -- redefining marriage -- crave isn't forthcoming from the silent majority of Americans. Yes, Hi.and a few other liberal enclaves may be the exception. NO rewards for bad/bully behavior. Should have left it at civil unions (for another generation) and anti-discriminatory laws. The special session was the tipping point for people of goodwill who didn't begrudge your alternative lifestyles. Thanks, your side made a mockery of Aloha and traditional ohana. P.S. Please be discreet, and NO public displays of affection until this volcanic torrent of lava you folks caused to flow stops or at least cools off.
on November 14,2013 | 07:47PM
kuniagirl wrote:
It would be nice if some of these Americans -- who don't even live in Hawaii --- would be more silent on Hawaii matters.
on November 14,2013 | 08:56PM
Anonymous wrote:
Why don't these opponents of SSM get a life instead of worrying about why 5% of the population want equality. Stop trying to control other's lives. It's totally pathetic that these so-called Christians think that a few SS marriages will have a negative impact on the larger community. It's time to work to beat ignorant bigots like McDermott at the ballot box. The bill signing yesterday was a display of real Aloha. So many wonderful straight citizens willing to support this small minority. It was truly impressive. Thanks to all especially Rep Lee and Sen Hee
on November 14,2013 | 09:06AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
I am waiting for the first post to accuse Judge Sakamoto of being part of the greater conspiracy to destroy the morals of our society.
on November 14,2013 | 09:08AM
sooregonian wrote:
@HawaiiCheeseBall -- Your honor wanted some press too. All politics, all the time. Must be bucking for a national platform to catch the eye of the prez. He thinks he's on the "right" side of history. Me and other posters believe he will be judged "wrong."
on November 14,2013 | 07:53PM
Mythman wrote:
Ahh, the wonders of government - always pushing things forward, creating that perfect New World hat always is right around the next bend in the road. How lucky we are to have government working so hard to make our lives so much better in the future.
on November 14,2013 | 09:18AM
kainalu wrote:
"McDermott, for example, claims that his reputation and electability will suffer" because the people from his District have now seen the real Bob McDermott - a transplant from another District. McDermott "led voters to believe" when he was a representative for another District, not the one he represents now. They threw him out from his old District, and now Ewa Beach/Iroquois Pt. will throw him out from representing theirs.
on November 14,2013 | 09:31AM
DowntownGreen wrote:
He just spent the last few months making sure "that his reputation and electability will suffer".
on November 14,2013 | 12:21PM
sohappy2beme wrote:
So tired of people crying for separation of church and state...when it is convenient for them! How in the heck will SSM affect any heterosexual marriage? Can they not hear themselves? Can they not hear the bigotry dripping from their carefully worded comments that they claim in the name of Christianity...that they want to deny a benefit to one group of individuals simply because of their lifestyle? Who are they to judge? I thought God tells us NOT to judge? I thought that is HIS job? If you don't believe in homosexuality, don't be one. What happened to love the sinner, hate the sin? Go to church, worship as you please, raise your children according to your God's word, but don't expect an entire state to follow your religious beliefs. THAT is wrong.
on November 14,2013 | 09:33AM
dk1028 wrote:
Really good post, sohappy2beme! And I agree. Everyone should just go to church and worship and be thankful for their blessings. Love is more powerful than fear. (I John 4:18) Let's all just be happy, let others be happy, and focus on being loving to each other.
on November 14,2013 | 09:47AM
ehrhornp wrote:
Same Sex marriage will not affect heterosexual marriage aside from gays trying to be straight. Amazing this fear was allowed to persist all these years.
on November 14,2013 | 10:49AM
hikine wrote:
I wonder how many God fearing heterosexual marriages will fall apart because now those that married to protect their closeted way of life will finally come out of the closet?
on November 14,2013 | 11:42AM
kuniagirl wrote:
and how many heterosexuals won't find themselves in sham marriages b/c a gay person felt compelled to be in a "traditional" marriage?
on November 14,2013 | 09:01PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Whoa, homophobe losers. Another loss for you. Another win for equality.
on November 14,2013 | 09:35AM
Anonymous wrote:
It's all good. Focus on Education, Up bring our children with love and respect, teach them the differance between SS mattiage and traditional marriage, the world is changing, life style is changing, values are changing but respect and love never changes and that is the virtue in life.
on November 14,2013 | 09:36AM
CriticalReader wrote:
"McDermott, for example, claims that his reputation and electability will suffer because he led voters to believe in 1998 that the constitutional amendment would ban same-sex marriage." So McDermott is asking the Court to bail him out because he can't read or understand the impact of ballot initiative language? That dynamic is something that should be carefully considered by Mr. McDermott's constituents. What does a voter do when their representative tells them something that isn't true? That's the question for Mr. McDermott's district residents, and Mr. McDermott has framed it quite nicely. As someone who is not against same sex marriage, I am angry with Mr. McDermott for causing and contributing to the expense and pilikia that extended the special session from 5 days to 3 weeks in an attempt to impose an arguable religious view upon the law of equality.
on November 14,2013 | 09:37AM
kuewa wrote:
I agree. McDermott was a big lolo in the first place for not understanding that the Constitutional Amendment simply reaffirmed the right of the State to define marriage. Now he is a super-sized lolo for telling everyone that he was a big lolo. And now there are mini-lolos like Kumia and Hashimoto who apparently don't understand about the new law, but are running around like Chicken Littles. Comical in a way.
on November 14,2013 | 09:53AM
Pacej001 wrote:
McDermott was correct on the ballot issue, regardless of the judge's statements today. However, the judge did rule that McDermott has standing should he decide to appeal. I hope he does. We decided this issue by plebiscite in 1998. That's the only legitimate way it should be reversed. If the voters do reverse their 1998 decision, so be it. Otherwise, leaving matters as they are will leave about half of the thinking public feeling (correctly) that they've been swindled by our governing "elite".
on November 14,2013 | 09:58AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Pacej001 - Big talker. You should pay for the appeal.
on November 14,2013 | 10:18AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Pacej001 - Losers always feel that they've been swindled.
on November 14,2013 | 10:28AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Well, we're all losers now, because the legislature and, now, the judiciary has decided to overturn the will of the voters. Would the vote tally be different this time? Maybe, but now we'll never know, unless, on appeal, our judicial overlords acknsowledge what has just happened, the legislative cancelation of a matter previously decided by popular vote.
on November 14,2013 | 04:09PM
sooregonian wrote:
@Pacej001 -- Our demigods at the palace know what's best for the proletariat.
on November 14,2013 | 07:59PM
jess wrote:
If you let the majority make decisions for the minority there would never be equality. Our state representatives voted on our behalf, by people the voters willingly elected to represent them. The judge ruled it was within the law to hold and pass the legislation. Why don't you focus your diligence on other more pressing issues, like the alarming rates of homelessness and the kids in Hawaii who don't know where their next meal will come from. Might take your mind off the hatred.
on November 14,2013 | 08:19PM
NanakuliBoss wrote:
Time to move forward. Nuff on SSM.
on November 14,2013 | 09:41AM
sooregonian wrote:
@NanakuliBoss --Noooo...we'll, at least I still have Fox News. Did you hear they are the most trusted media source on Obamascare -- per Youguv survey?? Hope M4 Sees this post! He LOVES surveys.
on November 14,2013 | 08:04PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
We need to put our an All Points Bulletin for Tenairi Mofomofo the Cop. He is likely going to go berserk when he finds out. Not sure whether we need to protect him from himself (“You would have to kill me”) or protect LGBT from him (who testified that he would never enforce a law requiring same-sex marriage).
on November 14,2013 | 09:43AM
hikine wrote:
Yup I think he'll be retiring soon. He already said he wasn't going to follow the law when it becomes effective, a rebel without a cause.
on November 14,2013 | 11:37AM
HawaiiCheeseBall wrote:
or a clue.
on November 14,2013 | 04:10PM
sooregonian wrote:
@hikine -- Ma'afala is retiring...to run for public office. Please spread the word for this pono warrior. M4 won't help.
on November 14,2013 | 08:07PM
hawaiiwalter wrote:
If we're lucky, Mofomofo the cop will quit and go serve his god at New Hope. How can a police officer not obey the law? Is this guy a nutcase?
on November 14,2013 | 03:41PM
miz wrote:
"NA" one term govenor
on November 14,2013 | 09:49AM
808behappy wrote:
Anti gay marriage opponents keep saying that it will hurt them. How does it affect them besides beliefs? Other states have legalized same sex marriage and I haven't heard anything about it hurts the people of that state.
on November 14,2013 | 09:54AM
sooregonian wrote:
808behappy -- Safe in "the Land of Jefferson." I'm crowd-sourcing for a one-way ticket back to gun country culture and gay safety zones.
on November 14,2013 | 08:11PM
Anonymous wrote:
Yup, the people in this socialist, nazi State do not have any say in their government. Unless, of course, unless we vote out all these dictatorial leaders and have new judges appointed who will learn what it is like to live in a representative democracy and how to uphold the constitution which is by the people, of the people and for the people.
on November 14,2013 | 10:01AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
"... socialist, nazi ..." These two don't go together well. See World War 2.
on November 14,2013 | 11:20AM
ISCREAM wrote:
Here is the next step in the LGBT progressive plan...Public school bathrooms that allow transgendered to use the public school bathrooms of the opposite sex... http://watchdog.org/115719/culture-war-california-rages-public-school-bathroom-stalls/ That will be followed by public school education on homosexual sex... Private school enrollment will increase dramatically...
on November 14,2013 | 10:09AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
ISCREAM - Oh lordy, lordy the sky is falling.
on November 14,2013 | 11:21AM
ISCREAM wrote:
So the California law requiring public schools to allow the "transgendered" to use any facility they want is not law? Get a clue...California law also requires public schools to teach gay history and activism...What will likely cause this to explode is the first time a "transgendered" youth commits a sexual assault.
on November 14,2013 | 11:47AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
ASSCREAM - This iis Hawaii. I think you want California. You took a wrong term somewhere. (I would guess at birth)
on November 14,2013 | 12:33PM
ISCREAM wrote:
Mahu-puu this thread is right up your alley...if you know what I mean...you should try expanding your knowledge instead of your cheekyness...
on November 14,2013 | 07:48PM
GooglyMoogly wrote:
I've been trying to get an answer to this for weeks: what is "gay history"? How will it differ from the "straight history" class that will also be offered?
on November 14,2013 | 03:31PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
GooglyMoogly - BS
on November 14,2013 | 03:51PM
ISCREAM wrote:
Mahu-puu....A middle school student in Virginia was made to ask another girl for a "lesbian kiss" so that she could feel what it was like...in a class on bullying. But you probably like that...
on November 14,2013 | 07:52PM
ISCREAM wrote:
Gay history follows the LGBT movement...the press has made it like the civil rights movement....
on November 14,2013 | 07:50PM
sooregonian wrote:
@ISCREAM -- 'You must sign the bill to know what's in it." Ca.AB 1266: I read as much as I could stomach. Not legal to "look under the hood" and steer confused kids to the correct facilities.
on November 14,2013 | 08:19PM
hikine wrote:
Do you actually believe that they'll be no gays in private schools?
on November 14,2013 | 11:35AM
ISCREAM wrote:
Has nothing to do with gays in public or private schools...has to do with the forced indoctrination of our youth into the "gay lifestyle"...there may be gays in school but the private school has the option to teach lifestyle...
on November 14,2013 | 11:49AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
ASSCREAM - You should worry more about religious indoctrination from an early age that has created you and others just like you.
on November 14,2013 | 12:34PM
ISCREAM wrote:
Mahu-puu...why try to have a discussion with an illiterate?
on November 14,2013 | 07:54PM
jess wrote:
I went to a private, Catholic, all girls school and learned a lot about homosexuality. It wasn't from a teacher but it was surely taught ;-)
on November 14,2013 | 08:25PM
EightOEight wrote:
Iscream, LGBT have been around you all your life. They obviously haven't converted you into the gay lifestyle. What makes you believe they're on some kind of active recruitment program? Like religion, someone can indoctrinate you as to beliefs but that doesn't mean you'll convert to their religion. What are you really afraid of?
on November 14,2013 | 03:48PM
ISCREAM wrote:
808....LGBT have been around forever and several of my friends are gay...we have great intelligent discussions. They do not actively recruit...that is absurd. What we do have now is government involved in the indoctrination of children as to lifestyle choices...and what research tells us is that children are more open to sexual experimentation. Further, there may be confusion between what the learn from their parents and what they learn at school...Laws that promote a lifestyle choice over another is wrong and while the LGBT community may believe they are born a certain way, sex is a behavior not a way of being...no amount of belief will change the chromosome and make someone a boy instead of a girl...like the parents that said their little boy at age 7 played with dolls so he must really be a girl and sued for the right to use the girls restroom...
on November 14,2013 | 08:02PM
jess wrote:
It already happens here. All the time. And if a teacher isn't going to teach your kids about homosexuality, somebody will. Wouldn't you rather it be a teacher?
on November 14,2013 | 08:21PM
BobOfTheNorth wrote:
I wasn't here in 1998, but it certainly sounds like the amendment then was sold to the folks about like ObamaCare was sold in 2010. If you like traditional marriage, you can keep it. Period. But now we're adding' "Well, unless the Legislature decides to go the other way". Sounds like the court decided to ignore what the state's election literature said in the process of selling the amendment. This is a clear battle between legit gay rights on the one side and legit freedom of religion on the other. I believe there was a win-win possibility, but it was rushed through and nobody had time to find it. The citizens were duped by this process. The GOP was right this time. Let the people vote.on an amendment that says clearly what it means. How about replacing the entire 18 pages with 1 sentence: "All the rights, benefits, protections and responsibilities conferred on gay marriage by the federal government shall apply to civil unions granted by the state of Hawaii." And maybe move the issue of Civil Union Licenses from the Department of Health to the same place Marriage Licenses are issued. And maybe find a less cold, clinical term than Civil Unions. The LGBT community gets everything but the word, and those who want to guard traditional marriage get to keep the word. I think that gives everybody 90% of what they want (well, as long as "what they want" doesn't include delivering a sound defeat by taking away what the other side wants).
on November 14,2013 | 10:11AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
BobOfTheNorth - Everybody is ignoring BobOfTheNorth. Maybe BobOfTheNorth should move back to the North.
on November 14,2013 | 10:19AM
starripoff wrote:
Quiet...shhhh....the rock on looney tunes planet you crawled out from is calling you back. GO!
on November 14,2013 | 01:33PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
?????
on November 14,2013 | 03:52PM
ISCREAM wrote:
Progressives have been liars for years...nothing new...
on November 14,2013 | 11:52AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
ISCREAM - Nobody can match tbgrs for lying or wasting time and money.
on November 14,2013 | 12:30PM
starripoff wrote:
True.
on November 14,2013 | 01:34PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
starripoff - Nobody can match tbgrs for lying or wasting time and money.
on November 14,2013 | 03:52PM
sooregonian wrote:
ISCREAM -- It's pathological, isn't it?
on November 14,2013 | 08:27PM
kuewa wrote:
Your comment is nonsensical. The State cannot grant Federal benefits to civil unions. Civil unions are not recognized by the Federal government. States have traditional rights to define legal marriage, which is the legal relationship recognized by the Federal government. So it's more than a word.
on November 14,2013 | 12:16PM
sooregonian wrote:
@BobOfTheNorth -- Apt metaphor. The sheeple were fleeced.
on November 14,2013 | 08:25PM
skamitaki wrote:
the same-sex law is extremely evil and dangerous for all the children and students in school. they don't deserve to be brainwashed to become LGBT. they are not born gay as the gay people want you to believe. the buddhists don't care about this law and they don't care about the Christians. They love to attack, sin against, and sometime have murderous thoughts towards the christians. Woe to those who call good evil and evil good!
on November 14,2013 | 10:21AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
skamitaki - Is that you thos? If not, you have a real challenger for over-the-top knucklehead.
on November 14,2013 | 10:30AM
ISCREAM wrote:
All you can do is call names??? talk about knucklehead...
on November 14,2013 | 11:50AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
ASSCREAM - You earned every name you were ever called e.g., racist, homophobe, knucklehead, loser.
on November 14,2013 | 12:31PM
sooregonian wrote:
@skamitaki sensei -- Wise words. One more: Home school.
on November 14,2013 | 08:30PM
Mana07 wrote:
We didn't actually think that one of these puppet judges would do what was right, legal, and moral did we?
on November 14,2013 | 10:58AM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Mana07 - We did and he did.
on November 14,2013 | 11:21AM
sooregonian wrote:
@Mana07 -- Refuse to lose puppet judge (your words) should recuse.
on November 14,2013 | 08:32PM
BigOpu wrote:
I give McDermott props for trying, evan though the decision was already made before the first word of his argument. Right on for the couples who have been waiting for this day. If my girls choose that path, at least now there is resolve. In my eyes, it's all good. Live, laugh, love
on November 14,2013 | 11:06AM
hikine wrote:
People have been targeted for being 'different'. The opposition is a sort of bullying to quell other people's right to exist. Religious leaders are always going to be biased and control their flocks with skewed quotes from the Bible to satisfy their own agenda. I call them false prophets. Even the Pope stated that we're too fixated with the gay agenda. The bill doesn't force the churches to perform SSM and it's at their discretion.
on November 14,2013 | 11:31AM
mreduardo wrote:
Look up New Hope Leeward Pastor Mike Lwin on Facebook. All of his current posts are about opposing marriage equality at the Legislature. And then there is the glaring picture with his shiny convertible BMW parked in (presumably his luxury private driveway), a birthday gift from his wife. Somehow, I don't think that is what Jesus was looking for in a pastor…But whatever. We all make mistakes...
on November 14,2013 | 11:45AM
swagger wrote:
Sounds like you are jealous.
on November 14,2013 | 11:54AM
starripoff wrote:
That's exactly what I was thinking. LOL
on November 14,2013 | 07:59PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
mreduardo - No hope in New Hope.
on November 14,2013 | 02:37PM
hawaiiwalter wrote:
A gift from his wife? Didn't you know that "men of the cloth" make a very nice income, thank you.
on November 14,2013 | 03:45PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
hawaiiwalter - From fleecing the sheep.
on November 14,2013 | 03:53PM
Heinbear wrote:
The members give 10% of the personal income to New Hope...gotta spend that fleece somewhere.
on November 14,2013 | 05:00PM
sooregonian wrote:
@hawaiiwalter -- FYI: Joel Osteen and many other "celebrity" religious leaders don't take a salary bet earn big bucks from book sales, live events, etc. They earn it -- like Hollywood -- and are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor.
on November 14,2013 | 08:37PM
Heinbear wrote:
He looks kinda gay on TV.
on November 14,2013 | 04:27PM
DRH wrote:
What's that thing about a camel and the eye of a needle?
on November 14,2013 | 05:27PM
DRH wrote:
If Lwin were officiating at a marriage and at "the" point said: "By the authority granted me by God - or by the New Hope church, I hereby pronounce you man and wife," would the couple legally be married? Marriage is a secular activity and the church should stay out of it. Fine, if the church wants to bless a union, but stop trying to make the government's business the church's business. Face it - thank God - the U. S. is not a theocracy.
on November 14,2013 | 06:48PM
OldEnoughToRemember wrote:
"McDermott, for example, claims that his reputation and electability will suffer because he led voters to believe in 1998 that the constitutional amendment would ban same-sex marriage." And it should. As a legislator you didn't even know what the language meant? Really? And instead of reading the actual language of the legislation, you made your own assumptions about what it means. That's what happens folks when you let others read the directions for you. Read, learn, and think for yourself. Don't let others do it for you.
on November 14,2013 | 11:54AM
starripoff wrote:
...I voted in that election and thought the same thing. If you remember, there was a lot of TV ads and debates. Jackie Young (I think) led the PRO same sex marriage view; Mike Gabbard led the ANTI same sex marriage. Maybe some of us didn't read it correctly but it shouldn't take a law degree to read that (and I have a law degree). The ads were pretty clear and maybe that's where the misunderstanding came from.
on November 14,2013 | 08:03PM
Tahitigirl55 wrote:
Good job Sakamoto - I hope now your grandchildren or great grandchildren do a SSM. Let's see how you take that. It was just a losing battle.
on November 14,2013 | 11:54AM
DowntownGreen wrote:
Yes, it was. And equality won.
on November 14,2013 | 12:25PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Good job Sakamoto - I hope now your grandchildren or great grandchildren are nothing like Tahitigirl55.
on November 14,2013 | 12:39PM
opalaedo wrote:
Hope Tahitigirl55 will be blessed with such wonderful children and grandchildren who can love freely without the bias and hatred that you show, whether straight, gay, bi or transgender.
on November 14,2013 | 03:42PM
Mypualani wrote:
Tahitigirl that was NAILZ! Maybe you can also pass that blessing on to Tenari Maafala, I am sure he would be thrilled!
on November 14,2013 | 04:48PM
sooregonian wrote:
@Mypualani -- Tenari M will (re)unite the islands if he runs for political office.
on November 14,2013 | 08:43PM
starripoff wrote:
Maybe he's gay and not ready to come out yet. And for those who may want to point out that he's married (if he is - I don't know nor do I care), being married to the opposite sex and gay (and having children) isn't uncommon.
on November 14,2013 | 08:05PM
sooregonian wrote:
Tahitigirl55 -- Right on...He "misjudged" the trade winds.
on November 14,2013 | 08:41PM
France wrote:
Hoodwinked by legislators that feel they can do whatever they want to regardless of what the people they represent want. This issue should have been put to a peoples vote.
on November 14,2013 | 12:39PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
France - "low-information voters" should not be voting on people's rights. Besides, there is no need to vote. The Hawaii 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]" “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.” SB1, HD1 is the result.
on November 14,2013 | 12:50PM
starripoff wrote:
How to you plan to figure out who the "low-information voters" are. Is there a "magic test" when you enter the voting booth?
on November 14,2013 | 08:07PM
sooregonian wrote:
@France -- Demigods.
on November 14,2013 | 08:45PM
96706 wrote:
Pfffft ... the judge had his mind made up. Waste of time. Waste of money.
on November 14,2013 | 12:47PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
96706 - The law made up the judge's mind.
on November 14,2013 | 12:50PM
Mypualani wrote:
Makapuu4 you do know that you are replying to one of those low information voters don't you?
on November 14,2013 | 04:50PM
Ray500 wrote:
Ole McDermott worries about his reputation? That went out the window long ago, and his true chosen nature emerged as one of the biggest New Hoper bigots we've seen in quite a while! He chose to align himself and his campaigns with radical religious right, and they lost big time in the marriage equality fight. They can now choose to follow the law and be open to others in our society or just go off in a corner and nurse their wounds. The lesson here is when you align yourself with the evil of discrimination you won't win in the long run. And these cultist organizations like th Hopers and such have to unerstand that the citizens of Hawaii won't put up with their attempt to establish their forms of theocracy here.
on November 14,2013 | 12:48PM
hawaiiwalter wrote:
Poor New Hope. How will they raise money now?
on November 14,2013 | 03:46PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
hawaiiwalter - Extort the tooth fairy?
on November 14,2013 | 03:54PM
starripoff wrote:
Isn't it the "tooth fairies" that are extorting the public?
on November 14,2013 | 08:08PM
sooregonian wrote:
Ray500 -- It's the Dems who are acting as if we have Sharia law.; no vote as per '98. They disenfranchised far too many constituents in a rush to judgement (special session) of what is pono for the people.
on November 14,2013 | 08:50PM
WKAMA wrote:
I don't agree with Ken Conklin on opening up Kamehameha Schools to others without Hawaiian ancestors, however much of his ideas regarding same sex marriage(separation of church and state) is worth considering. See, "My testimony of marriage equality, Oct 24, 2013" on web..
on November 14,2013 | 01:24PM
topgun wrote:
Warriors with their new rainbow uniforms, rainbow leis, rainbows in the sky, rainbows everywhere. Dang I feel gay today! Boyee
on November 14,2013 | 01:28PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
topgun - Don't worry. You're not gay, just incredibly stupid.
on November 14,2013 | 01:44PM
starripoff wrote:
Oh...and what do you call the next step down below "just incredibly stupid" as that appears to be where you are.
on November 14,2013 | 08:09PM
sooregonian wrote:
topgun -- Bravo. The boy's bay parade continues...
on November 14,2013 | 08:53PM
Maneki_Neko wrote:
"All you can do is all you can do...

And that's the end of that doo doo. Or, as Sinatra would say, "Do be do be do."


on November 14,2013 | 01:35PM
Dimbulb wrote:
By reading these comments it seems to me that the haters are those that are for same sex marriage. Both sides of this issue need to slow down. The law has been passed. It is now time for people to get along. For many, homosexuality will never be accepted. There is not much you can do about that. The more noise that is made, the more the problems come. Settle down.
on November 14,2013 | 01:39PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
That's what a Dimbulb got from reading these posts?
on November 14,2013 | 01:43PM
puamamane wrote:
Coward
on November 14,2013 | 02:34PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Hero.
on November 14,2013 | 02:38PM
Tarakian wrote:
Respectfully, to my gay family members and friends, I am looking forward to another constitutional convention. I believe the intent of the people was overwhelmingly clear on this issue. A question to the people, are you voting for the same legislatures that passed same sex marriage bill?
on November 14,2013 | 02:53PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Tarakian - Not going to happen. SSM is now the law of Hawaii. Absolutely voting for the legislators that passed it. Time to toss those who voted against it.
on November 14,2013 | 02:58PM
sooregonian wrote:
Tarakian -- Heck no...the conservative base is boiling! Shocking election results in the House! (2014)
on November 14,2013 | 08:56PM
ghstar wrote:
Never have so many words been shouted, spoken and written and yet changed so few minds. Time to agree to disagree, get back to life, mind our own business and go along with the law.
on November 14,2013 | 02:59PM
hawaiiwalter wrote:
It's over folks. Congratulations to the winners. Pity the losers. Anyway, they will have to find another minority to use as a scapegoat. How else will they raise money?
on November 14,2013 | 03:51PM
konag43 wrote:
laugh now becasue you think you have won but you will cry later.
on November 14,2013 | 04:06PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
konag43 - Cry - No. Pity for you - yes.
on November 14,2013 | 04:08PM
ohimesan wrote:
It is what it is....For or Against ....it's here. You are in charge of your own children morals...what ever your belief is.I was raised with my parents beliefs and I'll pass it on to my children. Which ever side I am on doesn't really matter...I will teach my children to treat everyone with respect.
on November 14,2013 | 04:54PM
sooregonian wrote:
konag -- Correct. Just like Obamascare, this law will fall. Big O's never last...
on November 14,2013 | 08:58PM
middleofdasea wrote:
Another Liberal Judge - SAD DAY
on November 14,2013 | 04:55PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
middleofdasea - That law stuff is a bother to you tbgrs, isn't it? Happy day that you homophobes got slapped down.
on November 14,2013 | 05:11PM
sooregonian wrote:
middleofdasea -- Yes, another December day of infamy for Hawaii. My Japanese wife is SAD too.
on November 14,2013 | 09:03PM
Rickyboy wrote:
Other than this what else has the Attorney General for the state of Hawaii done?.
on November 14,2013 | 05:24PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Rickyboy - This was enough. What do you think he should do? Go to the AG's page if you are really interested.
on November 14,2013 | 05:36PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
Since I am totally convinced that you really want to know, I am going to help you out - http://ag.hawaii.gov/ -- Enjoy.
on November 14,2013 | 05:53PM
starripoff wrote:
The same thing Abercrombie, the rest our local government and my representatives have done: not a darn thing.
on November 14,2013 | 08:12PM
false wrote:
Folks, happy hour is over, the door is closed. Let's move on.
on November 14,2013 | 06:32PM
Warrior32 wrote:
McDermott;s political career is over. He was ineffective to his supporters, and enraged is detractors.
on November 14,2013 | 06:49PM
sooregonian wrote:
Judge Refuse...we needed a judge recuse!
on November 14,2013 | 07:03PM
mjoseph wrote:
Another waste of taxpayers money!
on November 14,2013 | 07:29PM
saywhatyouthink wrote:
Garret Hashimoto, state chairman of the Hawaii Christian Coalition, worries that religious schools would be forced to either teach same-sex education or close. That's got to be the craziest thing I've heard yet from the religious right. Fear mongering at it's best.
on November 14,2013 | 07:33PM
Makapuu4 wrote:
saywhatyouthink - You think that's crazy? Read sooregonian's or thos' posts.
on November 14,2013 | 07:39PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News
Blogs
Political Radar
`My side’

Political Radar
‘He reminds me of me’

Bionic Reporter
Needing a new knee

Warrior Beat
Monday musings

Small Talk
Burning money

Political Radar
On policy

Warrior Beat
Apple fallout