Opponents feel wronged by Capitol

Leon Dodson was, by his own account, a quiet man. Strong in religious faith and stalwart in his trust that mutual love and respect binds communities, he’d always preferred demonstrating his beliefs through daily personal example rather than overt political action.

That changed Tuesday when the Senate approved a gay marriage bill, paving the way for Hawaii to become the 15th state to allow same-sex marriages.

Like many who opposed the bill, Dodson was left angered and dismayed by a contentious debate that saw opponents of the measure characterized in broad black strokes as religious fanatics or retrograde bigots, and by an expedited legislative process that he and others viewed as political theater designed to deliver a predetermined result.

"I’ve been a quiet guy on the side, but not anymore," said Dodson, who submitted written testimony opposing the measure. "What this taught me is that I have to be more politically active. Things have gone way too far in the wrong direction."

Dodson is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which holds that heterosexual marriage for the purpose of procreation is central to a divine plan of redemption and that choosing to engage in homosexual lifestyles or behavior prevents receiving eternal blessings.

"People don’t want to take this stand, and legislators don’t want to hear it, but it is religious," Dodson said. "In this political climate, if you follow God, you have to kind of mask it, but I don’t want to do that. I want to tell it like it is. The simple privilege of having a family with a father and a mother — to me it can’t be more basic.

"(The LGBT community) are our brothers and sisters, and they should be treated with respect, period," Dodson said. "That said, we cannot condone their actions."

Dodson said he was disappointed by the special legislative session and "appalling" behavior of legislators who were determined to pass the bill regardless of anything opponents had to say.

"They let us go through the motions of testifying, but a lot of them weren’t listening," he said."There were legislators in the House who were texting while people were testifying. They were taking up seats but not listening. I don’t have the words to express how callous I think they were."

For many who opposed the measure on the basis of religious belief, the same-sex marriage debate has become a de facto referendum on the validity of absolute truth in the political arena and in modern society.

Donna Estomago, director of religious education at St. Anthony of Padua Church and School and self-described "old lady of the church school movement," said the definition of marriage held sacrosanct by the Catholic Church and recognized by various cultures around the world should not be open to interpretation and debate.

"As a person of deep faith, I can’t understand trampling the beliefs of so many people and calling it equality," Esto­mago said. "We’re being twisted into a very different kind of society, and it’s not OK."

Drawing on her religious and philosophical studies, Esto­mago likened truth to a solid, immovable block that lies flat on the ground, and the belief that truth is not absolute as an erosive force that rounds its edges and compromises its stability.

Estomago said she is concerned about the effect that legalizing same-sex marriage will have on public education and on the moral development of generations to come. She worries that young people will become desensitized to sin and that a culture of permissiveness will slowly undermine communities.

"Anything is possible when there is no longer a distinction between right and wrong," Esto­mago said.

Jean Leong drove in Tuesday from her home in Moana­lua to see events unfold at the state Capitol.

"I already know what is going to happen," Leong said, "but I’m still praying that there will be a change of heart and mind and that people will realize what this is really about."

To Leong the special session was unwarranted and unnecessary. She said securing marriage benefits for a relatively small population did not constitute the kind of urgent situation that would justify special legislative attention.

"We already have civil unions," Leong said. "If the federal government would recognize those unions, none of this would be an issue."

In contrast, the impact that re­defining marriage will have on people of faith and the communities to which they belong is unfair, Leong said.

"God created all of us," she said. "They may not believe it but that’s the truth, and we all have a place and a purpose. Marriage is for a man and a woman because men and women are complementary and compatible. It’s not just about love; it’s about common sense."

Noting the 1998 vote to amend the state Constitution to allow the Legislature to reserve marriage for opposite-sex couples, Leong said she was angered that legislators saw fit to "disregard the will of the people."

"It’s a kick in the face," she said.

Like Dodson and Esto­mago, Leong said she is hopeful that a new law will be reversed.

Standing among a small group of like-minded people in the state Capitol courtyard watching the proceedings on television, Leong predicted that opposition to same-sex marriage in Hawaii will intensify as people reflect on the way in which the special session was handled and come to realize the implications of expanding the legal definition of marriage.

"It’s going to take people being willing to stand up," Leong said. "I believe that hearts and minds can change. This isn’t over."