July 7, 2010

HMM: Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle vetoes civil-unions bill. “Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed a civil-unions bill yesterday after concluding it was the equivalent to marriage, which she believes should be reserved for a man and a woman. But Lingle described the emotional issue as too important to be decided solely by the governor or the state Legislature and recommended a state constitutional amendment be placed on the ballot for voters in 2012. . . . Voters approved a state constitutional amendment in 1998 that gave the Legislature the power to define marriage as between a man and a woman, so gays and lesbians are unable to argue for full marriage rights.” Perhaps I misunderstand, but this seems to tangle up everyone’s storylines: Gay activists usually argue that civil unions, even if they give the same benefits as marriage, aren’t the equivalent of marriage. Anti-gay marriage activists are often okay with civil unions, so long as they aren’t called marriage. Or am I missing something?

Meanwhile, I say we leave the whole gay-marriage issue to a special extra-diverse commission made up of Rush Limbaugh and Elton John. . . .

Comments are closed.