Connect with us

Breaking: Hawaii House Passes Same-Sex Marriage, To Become 16th Equality State

Published

on

Same-sex marriage has been all but totally secured in the Aloha State. In a 30-19 vote late Friday night in Honolulu — Saturday morning on the mainland’s East coast — the Hawaii House passed marriage equality, becoming the 16th state in the nation to extend the institution to same-sex couples. All that remains is for the Hawaii Senate to approve the changes the House made to the legislation, and for Governor Neil Abercrombie to sign it — which he has promised to do. The bill, once signed, would go into effect December 2.

Debate on the actual marriage bill Friday began after more than seven hours of debate on amendments attempting to derail the bill.

In announcing his support for SB-1, the same-sex marriage bill, Democratic Rep. Tom Brower, a Christian, told his colleagues, “I urge Christians to be more concerned with the actions of people calling themselves ‘Christians’ than with gay people calling themselves ‘married.'”

Rep. Nicole Lowen took a few minutes to officially correct those who made false statements in their testimony. She reminded the chamber that “gay is not a lifestyle,” and that HIV/AIDS is not caused by homosexuality, “it is a virus.”

Rep. Chris Lee, who received a death threat last month over his support for marriage equality, also spoke eloquently in support of the bill. “It’s time we move forward,” Lee said, “once more.” He compared marriage equality to women’s suffrage, racial equality and to interracial marriage. “I choose to err on the side of fairness, on the side of freedom, on the side of aloha, on the side of love.”

Rep. Kaniela Ing, who just two days ago delivered a heart-warming and heart-wrenching speech, explained how he came to embrace equality. Ing told the stories of Matthew Shepard, and of others, more recent, who have, or are struggling under inequality. He was close to tears at one point, and had to grab his speech off his desk for support. “How many more gay people must God create until we realize he wants them here?,” Ing asked repeatedly.

But of course the bill was not supported unanimously.

Rep. Jo Jordan, who on Wednesday became the first openly-gay elected official to vote against same-sex marriage, cemented that legacy Friday night when, in tears, she declared she had to vote against the final bill. Jordan decried those in the LGBT community who, she said, did not show her support, while she embraced members of the faith community who supported her and offered her love.

And even the state house itself was physically divided, separating marriage equality supporters and marriage equality opponents.

The path to equality is never easy, and this state’s battle was possibly one of the hardest fought of all those obtained through a state legislature.

Opponents attempted a “people’s veto,” which extended testimony in the House alone into almost 60 hours, across five days, which followed a week of testimony and proceedings in the Senate.

All told, the process itself, which ran for two weeks, was packed solid with hearings, debates, hopes, drama, lines, love, frustration, vitriol, amendments, presidential urgings, death threats, NOM testimony, verbal attacks, “mob rule” protests, heart-warming speeches, rallies, cheating scandals, “you would have to kill me” threats, prayer, Mormon Church interventions, charges of NOM violating election law, fake NOM ads, chanting, threats to “to shut this whole thing down,” a flashmob dance, and even, yes, finally, votes.

While same-sex marriage protestors continued their week-long chants of “let the people vote!,” House Representatives in solidarity with the equality opponents made almost 30 attempts to scuttle the marriage bill.

Those attempts, totaling 29 this week, were in the form of poison-pill amendments, attempts to extend religious “conscientious objector” status to any person in Hawaii who opposed same-sex marriage — effectively offering a license to discriminate on demand — and many other amendments crafted to both delay the vote and to “protect” those opposed. All 29 throughout the week, most of them on Friday, were voted down.

Often, anti-gay lawmakers kept pointing to the “momma bear” mothers, and their “keiki” — their children — as if, somehow, as one lawmaker claimed earlier in the week, they needed to be “inoculated” against same-sex marriage.

Lawmakers claimed passing same-sex marriage would force teachers to teach gay sex, and some, primarily Representative Ward, falsely claimed Massachusetts taught children that heterosexual relationships were unhealthy. One astute colleague pointed out the sheer inaccuracy of Ward’s claim.

Other failed amendments would have allowed businesses or people to deny same-sex couples housing or lodging, allowed parents to “opt-out” from having their children learn about same-sex marriage, to allow teachers to “opt-out” of teaching about sme-sex marriage, and to allow businesses or people to claim religious objection and not provide spousal benefits despite public accommodations laws.

The most active lawmakers to oppose the marriage legislation seemed to include Rep. Sharon Har, Rep. Gene Ward, Rep. Marcus Oshiro,and Rep. Bob McDermott, who has a lawsuit that will go into affect as soon as the governor signs the bill into law, possibly scuttling the entire effort.

Rep. Har, who offered a great many of what she called were “friendly amendments” at one point claimed the same-sex marriage bill was an “attempt to regulate thought.”

Lawmakers in the chamber on Friday opposed to the bill dug deep into the language of the legislation, drawing and dissecting every nuance, attempting to divine every “unintended consequence” — and pretending to care what those effects on same-sex couples would be.

Once all the amendments were offered, debated, and voted down — a seven-hour process — debate on the actual bill began.

In the end, with more than 12 hours of debate in the final day, the vote was called and same-sex couples and their families were given a much brighter future in the Aloha State.

Mahalo.

Image, top, by MichelleBVD via Instagram

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

‘I Hope You Find Happiness’: Moskowitz Trolls Comer Over Impeachment Fail

Published

10 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) is mocking House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer over a CNN report revealing the embattled Kentucky Republican who has been alleging without proof President Joe Biden is the head of a vast multi-million dollar criminal bribery and influence-peddling conspiracy, has given up trying to impeach the leader of the free world.

CNN on Wednesday had reported, “after 15 months of coming up short in proving some of his biggest claims against the president, Comer recently approached one of his Republican colleagues and made a blunt admission: He was ready to be ‘done with’ the impeachment inquiry into Biden.” The news network described Chairman Comer as “frustrated” and his investigation as “at a dead end.”

One GOP lawmaker told CNN, “Comer is hoping Jesus comes so he can get out.”

“He is fed up,” the Republican added.

Despite the Chairman’s alleged remarks, “a House Oversight Committee spokesperson maintains that ‘the impeachment inquiry is ongoing and impeachment is 100% still on the table.'”

RELATED: ‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

Last week, Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) got into a shouting match with Chairman Comer, with the Maryland Democrat saying, “You have not identified a single crime – what is the crime that you want to impeach Joe Biden for and keep this nonsense going?” and Comer replying, “You’re about to find out.”

Before those heated remarks, Congressman Raskin chided Comer, humorously threatening to invite Rep. Moskowitz to return to the hearing.

Congressman Moskowitz appears to be the only member of the House Oversight Committee who has ever made a motion to call for a vote on impeaching President Biden, which he did last month, although he did it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

It appears the Moskowitz-Comer “bromance” may be over.

Wednesday afternoon Congressman Moskowitz, whose sarcasm is becoming well-known, used it to ridicule Chairman Comer.

“I was hoping our breakup would never become public,” he declared. “We had such a great thing while it lasted James. I will miss the time we spent together. I will miss our conversations. I will miss the pet names you gave me. I only wish you the best and hope you find happiness.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Doesn’t Care if Pregnant Women Live or Die’: Alito Slammed Over Emergency Abortion Remarks

Published

12 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case centered on the question, can the federal government require states with strict abortion bans to allow physicians to perform abortions in emergency situations, specifically when the woman’s health, but not her life, is in danger?

The 1986 federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), signed into law by Republican President Ronald Reagan, says it can. The State of Idaho on Wednesday argued it cannot.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, The Washington Post’s Kim Bellware reported, “made a clear delineation between Idaho law and what EMTALA provides.”

“In Idaho, doctors have to shut their eyes to everything except death,” Prelogar said, according to Bellware. “Whereas under EMTALA, you’re supposed to be thinking about things like, ‘Is she about to lose her fertility? Is her uterus going to become incredibly scarred because of the bleeding? Is she about to undergo the possibility of kidney failure?’ ”

READ MORE: Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Attorney Imani Gandy, an award-winning journalist and Editor-at-Large for Rewire News Group, highlighted an issue central to the case.

“The issue of medical judgment vs. good faith judgment is a huge one because different states have different standards of judgment,” she writes. “If a doctor exercises their judgment, another doctor expert witness at trial could question that. That’s a BIG problem here. That’s why doctors are afraid to provide abortions. They may have an overzealous prosecutor come behind them and disagree.”

Right-wing Justice Samuel Alito appeared to draw the most fire from legal experts, as his questioning suggested “fetal personhood” should be the law, which it is not.

“Justice Alito is trying to import fetal personhood into federal statutory law by suggesting federal law might well prohibit hospitals from providing abortions as emergency stabilizing care,” observed Constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis.

Paraphrasing Justice Alito, Kreis writes: “Alito: How can the federal government restrict what Idaho criminalizes simply because hospitals in Idaho have accepted federal funds?”

Appearing to answer that question, Georgia State University College of Law professor of law and Constitutional scholar Eric Segall wrote: “Our Constitution unequivocally allows the federal gov’t to offer the states money with conditions attached no matter how invasive b/c states can always say no. The conservative justices’ hostility to the spending power is based only on politics and values not text or history.”

Professor Segall also served up some of the strongest criticism of the right-wing justice.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

He wrote that Justice Alito “is basically making it clear he doesn’t care if pregnant women live or die as long as the fetus lives.”

Earlier Wednesday morning Segall had issued a warning: “Trigger alert: In about 20 minutes several of the conservative justices are going to show very clearly that that they care much more about fetuses than women suffering major pregnancy complications which is their way of owning the libs which is grotesque.”

Later, predicting “Alito is going to dissent,” Segall wrote: “Alito is dripping arrogance and condescension…in a case involving life, death, and medical emergencies. He has no bottom.”

Taking a broader view of the case, NYU professor of law Melissa Murray issued a strong warning: “The EMTALA case, Moyle v. US, hasn’t received as much attention as the mifepristone case, but it is huge. Not only implicates access to emergency medical procedures (like abortion in cases of miscarriage), but the broader question of federal law supremacy.”

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Gag Order Breach? Trump Targeted Cohen in Taped Interview Hours Before Contempt Hearing

Published

14 hours ago

on

April 24, 2024

By

Hours before his attorneys would mount a defense on Tuesday claiming he had not violated his gag order Donald Trump might have done just that in a 12-minute taped interview that morning, which did not air until later that day. It will be up to Judge Juan Merchan to make that decision, if prosecutors add it to their contempt request.

Prosecutors in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office told Judge Juan Merchan that the ex-president violated the gag order ten times, via posts on his Truth Social platform, and are asking he be held in contempt. While the judge has yet to rule, he did not appear moved by their arguments. At one point, Judge Merchan told Trump’s lead lawyer Todd Blanche he was “losing all credibility” with the court.

And while Judge Merchan directed defense attorneys to provide a detailed timeline surrounding Trump’s Truth Social posts to prove he had not violated the gag order, Trump in an interview with a local television station appeared to have done so.

READ MORE: ‘They Will Have Thugs?’: Lara Trump’s Claim RNC Will ‘Physically Handle the Ballots’ Stuns

The gag order bars Trump from “commenting or causing others to comment on potential witnesses in the case, prospective jurors, court staff, lawyers in the district attorney’s office and the relatives of any counsel or court staffer, as CBS News reported.

“The threat is very real,” Judge Merchan wrote when he expanded the gag order. “Admonitions are not enough, nor is reliance on self-restraint. The average observer, must now, after hearing Defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well. Such concerns will undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself.”

Tuesday morning, Trump told ABC Philadelphia’s Action News reporter Walter Perez, “Michael Cohen is a convicted liar. He’s got no credibility whatsoever.”

He repeated that Cohen is a “convicted liar,” and insisted he “was a lawyer for many people, not just me.”

READ MORE: ‘Old and Tired and Mad’: Trump’s Demeanor in Court Detailed by Rachel Maddow

Since Cohen is a witness in Trump’s New York criminal case, Judge Merchan might decide Trump’s remarks during that interview violated the gag order, if prosecutors bring the video to his attention.

Enter attorney George Conway, who has been attending Trump’s New York trial.

Conway reposted a clip of the video, tagged Manhattan District Attorney Bragg, writing: “cc: @ManhattanDA, for your proposed order to show cause why the defendant in 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘷. 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘮𝘱 should not spend some quiet time in lockup.”

Trump has been criminally indicted in four separate cases and is facing a total of 88 felony charges, including 34 in this New York criminal trial for alleged falsification of business records to hide payments of “hush money” to an adult film actress and one other woman, in an alleged effort to suppress their stories and protect his 2016 presidential campaign, which experts say is election interference.

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Blood on Your Hands’: Tennessee Republicans OK Arming Teachers After Deadly School Shooting

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.