Not one dime will I spend in Hawaii. With not one vendor will I do business if they are officed in that state. Gay people had enough of non-representation yet? Planning a trip to Hawaii? Jim Nabors..where are you?????

You know, that change.org thing is popping up and prevents me from reading comments and there is no way to turn it off. That’s wrong. I’ve re-loaded the page three times and it’s persistent. I know this site needs to generate income but that’s going to be moot when people stop coming here because we can’t read content or comments hidden by ads.

And how the heck did a homophobic Republican get elected governor in Hawaii?

Margaret, I’m not having that issue.

On the whole issue of Governor Lingle. . .this was pure politics. Plus 80% of Hawaiians supported this. She is a coward, plain and simple.

Margaret, I’m not having that issue.

Yep. I wasn’t either last night when some others were. It’s annoying at best.

I read where some Hawaiians contend that Linda Lingle ended a same sex relationship in order to run for Governor. By vetoing this bill she can remain in the closet.

80% of Hawaiians supported it? Then she must be more afraid of Rush Limbaugh and her donors than she is of her constituents. “Representative” government indeed.

She’s been married twice, NOT that that is particularly relevant or revealing. Rick Perry is married but he’s quite gay.

Despite words you doubtless have heard to the contrary President Obama was born in Hawaii. Were it not for Loving v. West Virginia in 1967 he would not have been born at all.

Back then opposition to interracial marriage infinitely greater than opposition to same-sex marriage today.

At Lingle’s press conference where she announed that the matter should be “put before the voters” the disgusting harridan went on and on and on about how seriously she’d considered “both sides” of the issue, mentioning the upset of some fundie bitch over the prospect of her children being “taught” that same-sex couples were the same as opposite sex ones, plus the personal story of one gya man whocame out to his parents and what he went through with that.

IOW we are always supposed to be regarded as damaged beings in an abject state.

I kept hoping someone [edited by mod].

[Mod Note: No violence please.]

I am SO not surprised.

She’s the Roy Cohn of governors.

Not even metaphorically?

This is all very typical. A politician backs something assuming that it will never happen. When it does, they renege on their pledge, citing the voters, the weather, whatever.

I do hate it when politicians avoid hard decisions by tossing the ball back to the voters. What do they think we elected them for? In Lingle’s case she is using the “voters should decide” as an excuse for vetoing the bill. This is just as bad.

In case anyone was wondering I support same sex marriage or civil unions.

Discrimination in any form is always wrong and those that try to justify it should not hold positions of leadership. She either did this for political reasons or religous reasons or both, and neither should be part of this decision. Perhaps the California case will works it way to the Supremes, where Bois and Olsen will be able to convince the court to end this discrimination once and for all. It would be ironic is gay people got “marriage” from the Supremes and “civil unions” became as obsolete as typewriters and phone booths.

That ad completely blocked a comment here. I couldn’t get rid of it.

I strongly hate intrusive ads like this (other sites that I used to visit use them).

There is no excuse for idiot web designers to destroy a web site because they feel their shitty paid message is more important than the blog itself.

The plaintiffs, Mildred Loving (nee Mildred Delores Jeter, a woman of African and Rappahannock Native American descent, July 22, 1939 – May 2, 2008) and Richard Perry Loving (a white man, October 29, 1933 – June 1975), were residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia who had been married in June 1958 in the District of Columbia, having left Virginia to evade the Racial Integrity Act, a state law banning marriages between any white person and any non-white person. Upon their return to Caroline County, Virginia, they were charged with violation of the ban. They were caught sleeping in their bed by a group of police officers who had invaded their home in the hopes of finding them in the act of sex (another crime). In their defense, Ms. Loving had pointed to a marriage certificate on the wall in their bedroom; rather than defending them, it became the evidence the police needed for a criminal charge, because it proved they had been married in another state. Specifically, they were charged under Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code, which prohibited interracial couples from being married out of state and then returning to Virginia, and Section 20-59, which classified “miscegenation” as a felony, punishable by a prison sentence of between one and five years. On January 6, 1959, the Lovings pleaded guilty and were sentenced to one year in prison, with the sentence suspended for 25 years on condition that the couple leave the state of Virginia. The trial judge in the case, Leon Bazile, echoing Johann Friedrich Blumenbach’s 18th-century interpretation of race, proclaimed that

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix

The Lovings moved to the District of Columbia, and on November 6, 1963, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a motion on their behalf in the state trial court to vacate the judgment and set aside the sentence on the grounds that the violated statutes ran counter to the Fourteenth Amendment. This set in motion a series of lawsuits which ultimately reached the Supreme Court. On October 28, 1964, after their motion still had not been decided, the Lovings began a class action suit in the U.S District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. On January 22, 1965, the three-judge district court decided to allow the Lovings to present their constitutional claims to the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Virginia Supreme Court Justice Harry L. Carrico (later Chief Justice of the Court) wrote an opinion for the court upholding the constitutionality of the anti-miscegenation statutes and, after modifying the sentence, affirmed the criminal convictions.
Ignoring United States Supreme Court precedent, Carrico cited as authority the Virginia Supreme Court’s own decision in Naim v. Naim (1955), also arguing that the case at hand was not a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause because both the white and the non-white spouse were punished equally for the crime of miscegenation, an argument similar to that made by the United States Supreme Court in 1883 in Pace v. Alabama.
In 1966, the Presbyterian Church took a stand, stating that they did not condemn or prohibit interracial marriages. The church found “no theological grounds for condemning or prohibiting marriage between consenting adults merely because of racial origin”.[6] In that same year, the Unitarian Universalist Association declared that “laws which prohibit, inhibit or hamper marriage or cohabitation between persons because of different races, religions, or national origins should be nullified or repealed.”[7] Months before the Supreme Court ruling on Loving v. Virginia the Roman Catholic Church joined the movement, supporting interracial couples in their struggle for recognition of their right to marriage

In 1967 opposition to interracial marriage was INFINITELY greater than opposition to gay marriage today. Had interracial marriage been put to a vote Barack Obama would not exist.

Thanks to Loving v. Virginia he was born in Hawaii two years later.

He has claimed to be in favor of civil unions as opposed to same-sex marriage as “God is in the mix”

Marraige is apparently much like Bisquick.

And yes, the twice-married, twice-divorced Lingle is a closet case.

Eight years ago, before Lingle was elected to her first term, she promised to sign a civil unions bill.

Yet another reason that voters should ignore everything a candidate says during a campaign and examine their record instead. If they have no record of action, don’t vote for them.

Also, for those who have troubling viewing FDL because of intrusive ads:
http://adblockplus.org/en/

If gays can marry, Limpy Limbaugh’s past, present, and future marriages will mean so much less.

Latest FaBlog: Some STILL Call It Loving

Why do all the female governhaters look like Beaver’s mom? It’s just so 50′s.

Republic men love that look.

Wow, a GOP went back on her word.

Color me unsurprised.

(And O/T, it’s my understanding that FDL’s tech team is working with change.org to mitigate the problem. It’s irritating and not the commenter experience we want for our folks.)

Discrimination in any form is always wrong?(!)

Hopefully you just wrote this because you thought it sounded profound or noble and not because you actually thought about it before writing or that you actually believe it.

There is no excuse for idiot web designers internet posters to destroy bitch about a web site because they feel their shitty paid message internet post is more important than the blog itself.

Fixed it for ya.

xargaw, comment 14, you mentioned religious reasons. Marriage was the first institution for mankind and male and female make up the basic family union. When this basic union is ignored family values begin to deteriorate. Where did gays and lesbian individuals come from, the sexual union of a man and woman. And where are same sex couples going to get children to raise? Yes I know there are 101 reasons and cases of bad marriages between men and women, however that does not make the ‘marriage institution’ bad, its people, human beings that mess up and abuse the privilege, not God. Read the scriptures, He has always called people out of there self caused destructive lives into His grace, pease, health and prosperous way of LIFE.

Don’t forget that in Biblical Times, men were allowed to have many wives. Marriage is an institution of property rights that has evolved over time as our society has.