Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle's (right) unfathomable act of cowardice in vetoing basic protections for thousands of same-sex couples was not egregious enough to elicit a reaction from the Obama administration, even as it prepares to appeal this week's historic ruling against DOMA.
Mufi Hannemann, Neil Abercrombie, and Linda Lingle
Thursday’s outright rejection of the constitutionality of DOMA’s third section was indeed a brand new day, transporting the mass of America back from the darkness of Tuesday when Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle vetoed a civil unions bill passed handily by her state legislature.
“Judge Topples U.S. Rejection of Gay Unions” practically leapt off the front page of the
New York Times Friday morning, just three days after Lingle, perhaps living in some parallel universe, offered the most craven of explanations for her decision.
“I am vetoing this bill because I have become convinced that this issue is of such significant societal importance that it deserves to be decided directly by all the people of Hawaii,” Lingle said at a Wednesday afternoon press conference.
Lingle, in what can only be described as a truly heartless and depraved act, had called in interested parties with whom she had conferred on the matter over the past weeks to hear her final decision on the bill. As the cameras rolled on live TV, gay couples who had hoped and fought for the most basic recognition of their love, found out that their inherent value might be voted on – a sort of adolescent popularity contest of one’s humanity where you’re either declared worthy or, perhaps, worthless.
One day there may be a special kind of remorse for this woman as she stares into the mirror. For even as the basic dignity of thousands of her fellow human beings rested in her hands, Lingle explained, “It would be a mistake to allow a decision of this magnitude to be made by one individual or a small group of elected officials.”
It’s really quite difficult to know where to begin in picking apart how morally and intellectually bankrupt her entire rationale is. The bill, HB 444, was in fact given a stamp of approval by a legislative body with 76 people in it, where 49 of them – or about 2/3 – voted for passage. So its approval never rested on the decision of just one person, but it was in fact solely the decision of one person -- and only one -- to reject it.
(continued)
Follow us on Twitter. 
Follow us on Facebook.
Page 1 of 3