Governor Lingle continues to weigh impact of civil unions in Hawaii

Reported by: Gina Mangieri
Set Text Size SmallSet Text Size MediumSet Text Size LargeSet Text Size X-Large
Share
Updated: 5/24/2010 8:22 pm

The governor wants to hear from both sides before she makes a decision on civil unions -- and she held the first of two private meetings on Monday.

She's talking to people both for and against the measure that would extend the same rights as marriage to same-sex couples.

About 30 opponents of the measure attended a two-hour long private session in the governor's office.

"House Bill 444 is not about civil rights but about creating special rights," said civil unions opponent Garrett Hashimoto.

Religious leaders and several youth were among the group.

"For example, what comes next, same sex marriage? what comes next, homosexuality being taught in the schools?," asked Ryan Mc Donald, civil union opponent.

Recently the governor shared the factors she'll be considering as she weighs whether to veto, sign or let the measure become law without her signature.

"How the economy, the fiscal situation of the government would be affected, what programs would we now have to expand to cover a lot more people for instance so what would the economic impact be?," asked Governor Linda Lingle.

To that end proponents released a University of Hawaii economic analysis that said:

"The legalization of civil unions in Hawaii will have only a very minimal impact on any aspect of Hawaii's economy and state government operations."

That "There is also no evidence that the legalization of same-sex marriages have adversely affected tourism arrivals to other states with similar laws."

And that the law could even invite more tourism.

The governor must signal any veto intentions to the legislature by June 21st.

"We do want her to veto it on a couple of means, not only on the content of it, but what it gets across, it's really the start of a long war that would come and would lead to a lot of other things," said McDonald.

The governor also said she's reviewing state department input, including a 36 page internal attorney general's opinion pointing out the differences between same-sex marriage, civil unions, and Hawaii's existing reciprocal beneficiaries law.

Share
2 Comment(s)
Comments: Show | Hide

Here are the most recent story comments.View All

bcincalgary - 5/27/2010 3:32 AM
As a marriage commissioner performing same-sex marriages in the Province of Alberta, Canada, I totally support the civil unions bill. Gay marriage has been legal in Canada for the past 5 years, with NO adverse affects. Hawaii has an important opportunity here to REALLY reflect the aloha of th islands.

david0296 - 5/25/2010 5:04 AM
This proves that religious organizations have been lying since the very beginning. All anyone has ever heard is, "As long as gay couples call their relationships anything other than MARRIAGE, we'll support it." As you can clearly see, that was a lie. Now they're using slippery-slope arguments to deny gay couples ANY civil rights. I'm surprised they didn't use the classic, "If gays can marry, what next… marrying your dog!?". What they ARE using is fear to manipulate the public (and the governor). The anti-gay group, National Organization for Marriage uses this same sleazy tactic very effectively. They imply that if gay couples can legalize their relationships, somehow that will force schools to teach little children all about gay sex. Of course, this is also a lie that has already been proven false. Massachusetts has had marriage equality for over 6 years. Schools there are not required to teach students anything regarding homosexuality, marriage or sex. School curriculum has NOTHING to do with a legal contact between two consenting adults. How could it? But that doesn't stop these religious organizations from saying that it MIGHT happen. Yeah, and I MIGHT win the lottery. It's never going to happen, but it might. These religious organizations also have no problem ignoring the fact that our country has a separation of church and state. We are not a theocracy, where religious beliefs define our civil laws. If that were the case, why aren't these people demanding a legal ban on adultery or divorce? Answer: Those issues would actually effect THEIR own parishioners. We can't have that, can we?

Editors' Choice

Connect with KHON2

Apple iPhone App Google Android App Other Phones E-mail Alerts Facebook Fan Page Twitter News Feed Send Photos and Videos Submit News Tips
Inergize Digital This site is hosted and managed by Inergize Digital.
Mobile advertising for this site is available on Local Ad Buy.

Click for the BBB Business Review of this Television Stations & Broadcast Companies in Honolulu HI      © 2012 New Vision Television |  Site Map |  Terms of Use |  Privacy Statement |  FCC Compliance |  Employment |  Advertise on KHON2 |  Contact Us