Hawaiian Punch

This is Linda Lingle. She is the governor of Hawaii. Here are a few fun facts about the "Aloha" state:

1.) Hawaii is actually America's southernmost state. (Take that, you loudmouthed Texans...and you sweaty Floridians).

2.) Hawaii is the only state in the union that grows coffee.

3.) The centuries-old Hawaiian monarchy was overthrown by a rifle-wielding rabble of primarily white Christians led by Lorrin A. Thurston, the son of American missionaries. This coup was later deemed illegal by Grover Cleveland's administration, but no action was taken to reinstate the deposed leadership.   It remained a non-self-governing U.S. territory with no voting rights until its incorporation in 1959.

4.) Hawaii has the second highest population density of Mormons in America, behind the great state of Utah, of course. Which brings me to number five.

5.) Hawaii is the latest state in the union to drop a pineapple-sized douce on the collective head of the homosexual community. 

You see, the reptilian succubus pictured above decided that HB 444, a bill guaranteeing same-sex unions to gay couples, was not worth the dainty swish of her condor-feather pen. After "months of listening to Hawaii's citizens" and awaiting the bill's ultimately successful passage (through two legislative houses), Lingle decided that she would rather dip her veto stamp into her puppy blood ink vat and slam away!

Governor Lingle released a brief statement regarding her decision to veto HB 444 and, I must say, it is a work of monumental stupidity unrivaled in contemporary politics. Let's break it down! 

Lingle says:

There has not been a bill I have contemplated more or an issue I have thought more deeply about during my nearly eight years as governor than HB 444 and the institution of marriage. After listening to those both for and against HB 444 I have gained a new appreciation for just how deeply people of all ages and backgrounds feel on this matter, and how significantly they believe the issue will affect their lives. 

Wow. Astounding. In her eight years as governor, Linda Lingle has not reflected on any issue more deeply than the sanctity of the institution of marriage. Really. Think about this statement. The governor of Hawaii is saying that no single issue has been more significant and transformative for the Hawaiian populace than allowing gay people to have legal partnership rights. Not the economic recession. Not one of our two military engagements abroad (fought by thousands of servicemen and women born and trained in the state itself). Not climate change. No, sir. Nothing has had a greater impact on the governor of Hawaii than the thought of allowing a pair of scissor sisters to visit each other in the hospital. Well, at least this must mean she has gone through the gamut of opinions and perspectives on the subject:

Few could be unmoved by the poignant story told to me in my office by a young, Big Island man who recounted the journey he had taken to bring himself to tell his very traditional parents that he was gay. I was similarly touched by the mother who in the same office expressed anguish at the prospect of the public schools teaching her children that a same gender marriage was equivalent to their mother and father’s marriage.

First of all, the governor's writing style is like a grammatical Hiroshima. Second of all, let's take a look at just how absurd this constructed comparison is. On the one hand, you have a young man burdened with an entire lifetime of fear-induced denial and social alienation. Shamed into secrecy by the social retardation of religious traditionalists. On the other, you have a whiny PTA mom who doesn't want her obnoxious third grader growing up to think that men who like ascots are people, too. That would just be way beyond the pale. The ever-fragile, oft-defended family unit would implode and deteriorate as soon as Lance and Harvey became eligible for group insurance rates.


But wait. It gets better. This is my favorite part:

But in the end, it wasn’t the persuasiveness of public debates, the soundness of legal arguments, or the volume of letters and emails that convinced me to reach this decision. It was the depth of emotion felt by those on both sides of the issue...

If you're not shitting your denims in disbelief, then please, read it once more. This statement exemplifies every reason I have for disavowing the legitimacy of American politics. As the governor proudly proclaims, this monumental decision was made on the basis of pure, carnal, stupid emotion. There is no place in the American political process for crazy things like sound legal arguments or public debates. Or even intelligent dialogue with constituents. No. The content of the debate is nothing more than a sideshow to its ferocity. In other words, it only matters how loud the argument is. Not whether it's worth having in the first place.


Which, in all honesty, it isn't. If you're one of the fundamentalist holdouts against same-sex marriage, then do us all a favor and kick your own ass into the twenty-first century. Your entire argument is based on a Levitican concept of social justice that promotes graphic female oppression and mob executions. Those of you who take the alternate route and claim that homosexuals undermine the family unit...I just can't help you. If by undermining the family unit, you mean passionately extolling the virtues of togetherness and inviolable love in the face of epidemic divorce, soaring third-world birth rates, and rampant child abuse, then yes. They are. And thank your God they are. Additionally, as my good friend recently pointed out, more homosexual couples equals less babies. And less babies equals a longer future for humanity. So we all win! Besides, the Bible declares "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman". It doesn't say anything about orgiastic buttsex. And it definitely doesn't say anything about girl-on-girl. Ladies?


I'll end with this little tidbit. Linda Lingle's profound and humble affirmation of the will of the people over the will of the executive:

This is a decision that should not be made by one person sitting in her office or by members of the Majority Party behind closed doors in a legislative caucus, but by all the people of Hawaii behind the curtain of the voting booth.

By suggesting that the people of Hawaii vote on a referendum concerning same-sex unions, the governor performed a master stroke. At first, it may not seem so bad. It may seem as though this was a good idea, after all. Maybe she just wanted to let her constituents vote for equal rights themselves. Not quite.


You see, as the governor herself pointed out, the battle for same-sex unions has been raging in Hawaii for nearly a decade. The first rumblings of legislative action on the matter materialized merely two years ago. Since that time, HB 444 has faced numerous procedural blocks including an insidious motion in January of this year to postpone arguments indefinitely. The bill succeeded due to the efforts of over 60,000 petitioners, several equal rights groups, and Hawaiian business organizations. However, this highlights the broad scale of challenges any possible referendum may face. After all of this, any motion to resurrect the bill or to draft a referendum would take patience and effort within the legislature. And we all know nothing terrifies a politician more than patience and effort.


A ballot-measure referendum would not just be a simple, legislative proposition (which is never simple, by the way). According to Hawaiian state law, it would have to be a constitutional amendment regarding the very definition of marriage. And, personally, I don't see a lot of hope for a constitutional marriage amendment in America's second-largest bastion of Mormonism.