Gov. Linda Lingle is trying to decide if she will sign or veto a bill passed by the Hawaii state Legislature to grant unmarried couples the right to Civil Unions. The underlying question is this should same-sex couples be treated to the same legal rights and responsibilities as opposite-sex couples. Since couples are made up of individuals, then he decision will determine if gays and lesbians will be treated as equal citizens in Hawaii, or as second class and inferior citizens. all this, in an attempt to protect “marriage.” Why is it that “Marriage” deserves more protections than the rights of tax paying citizens?
The bill would give same-sex and heterosexual couples who enter into civil unions the same rights, benefits and responsibilities as in marriage under state law.
Couples in civil unions, however, would not be recognized under federal law. Gay rights activists believe this distinction, as well as the fact that civil unions would not have the same social and cultural significance as marriage, separates civil unions from marriage.
On the one hand, it looks like this should be easy. A Civil Union isn’t marriage, and she should have no trouble signing, yet her hesitation is that even by a different name, it looks exactly like marriage.
I think this could be a turning point in the marriage equality battle. If she vetoes it, then it is clear, that it isn’t really “marriage” opponents are trying to protect. Their efforts are a blatant attack on the rights of gay and lesbian individuals to form meaningful and protected relationships.