Another Angry Perspective on Lingle’s Veto of Civil Union Legislation
A reader and old friend writes:
Linda Lingle has failed in so many ways, my head is still spinning. When she voiced her commitment to protecting the sanctity of marriage, she failed to mention her 2 divorces. She failed to fulfill her 2006 campaign promise to not veto legislation on same sex marriage. She failed as an executive, unable to decide based on her own principles or the arguments of proponents and opponents. She failed to see the consequences of not deciding on this issue. She condemned representative democracy and suggested governance by referendum (or legalized “mob rule” in my view), making herself redundant. If the governor should not make a decision on this issue, why should she on any issue? In so doing, she confirms her failure as a student of history. Her former place of residence, California, is virtually a failed state due to the limitations that ballot initiatives have imposed on its governments and its citizens.
Don’t overlook the fact that the Hawaii legislation permits “civil unions”, not civil marriage. Separate but equal is unacceptable when based on race; it is equally unacceptable based on gender or sexual orientation. We are being worn down arguing with the insane and unreasonable. We should not lose sight of the notion that we are looking for equality not something like equality. Accepting something less in one state (Hawaii’s civil union) poses a threat to legal same sex marriage in other states. It is a constant reminder that something less is okay.