*sigh* The last two days have been a whirlwind of political phraseology and predictions and testimony from both passionate sides. This Hawaii House bill 444 which gives civil partners (two of the same gender) the same legal right and responsibilities under law as a married couple, is likely the most controversial bill in the last couple of years. The battle is made even more interesting in that eleven years ago a proposal was added to the ballot to amend the Hawaii Constitution to define marriage between a man and a woman. It passed. Overwhelmingly. Now this bill seeks to give civil unions, which are recognized by Hawaii, the same legal status as marriage. Opposition to the bill is led by but not limited to the Christian influence on the Island causing the support to scream their old calling card of seperation of church and state. Because of the religious conantations the bill has grown into a civil rights issue with the support saying that they are for equal treatment for everyone, no matter their sexual preference. How nice. I do believe poor Mr. King Jr. has been dragged through enough muck and mire in the name of civil rights to make even the Cheery Cheer Bright lady cringe in disgust. Civil rights was established because, honestly, people do not choose their race or skin color based on preference. Gay people do. In fact, they even call it “sexual preference”. This bill has nothing to with civil rights, even looking at the facts their argument crumbles. We do not refuse gay people service because they are gay, nor do we make them walk on a different sidewalk or drink at a different water fountain. We do not fire or hire based on whether or not they are gay (military excluded). We will fire you based on what’s on your MySpace but it’s the same for heterosexuals as it is for homosexuals. Gays on avereage actually make more money than heterosexuals. No, this not a civil rights bill.
If not civil rights, what is this bill? To be honest I didn’t really take it seriously when I first read it. Who cares? They’re just being regarded legally the same as married couples. By law, marriage in Hawaii is between a man and a woman. That won’t change. However when I began to listen to other people and think of what the repercussions of this bill would mean I began to realize maybe this was a bit bigger than what I had first scoffed at. In the bill it states that every reference to marriage in any Hawaii laws will apply equally to civil unions. Practically marriage = civil unions, from a legal standpoint. So then…what’s the difference? If it means the same thing legally and you can get a civil union just as easily as you can get a marriage…? I fail to see the difference. If this passes (which it’s on a crash course to not, but bear with me) a couple years come and then people start wondering, Why not just replace marraige with civil union? Legally they’re the same thing. Civil unions is more inclusive and less condeming…blah,blah,blah” That’s the slippery slope and it has already started to slide inside the walls of the Capitol. House bill 878 was refered to the same commission as HB444 but three days later. This bill goes a step further than 444 to actually change the wording of marriage from gender specific to gender neutral. It has not made it to a hearing and most likely won’t but don’t look me in the eye and say we won’t change the defination of marriage in Hawaii. It’s already started.
But right now we have the chance to affect change. And I think we have. Early this morning after eighteen hours of testimony the Judiciary Commission took a vote on the bill on whether or not to take it to the floor of the Senate for another vote. The vote was 3 to 3, deadlocked. It has not moved forward but it still can. This is a small victory, we have many more to go.
