"The rights of a minority should never be subjected to the tyranny of the majority and this is exactly what the governor is suggesting. Imagine if a voter referendum had been applied to past issues in history. Congress would not have been able to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the U.S. Supreme Court would not have been able to overturn state bans on interracial marriage in 1967."--Hawaii Star-Ledger editorial today (here)
The editorial is in response to Gov. Linda Lingle's (R,HI) veto of a same sex civil unions bill (the "colored water fountains" of relationship recognition!). And Lingle didn't veto the bill because it's an offense to citizens who aren't afforded equal protections (which would be possibly be a legitimate reason).
No, Lingle vetoed it for a litany of conflicting and ultimately stupid reasons:
- A brother can't marry a sister (this might have been germane had this been a marriage bill, but it's not)
- First cousins can't marry in Hawaii (which is actually untrue, if they are of the opposite sex they can get married and divorced and remarried)
- The act of creating these same-sex
colored water fountainscivil unions is so significant that it should not be done by the Hawaii legislature (as the Hawaii Constitution requires) but by the general electorate of the state. The legislature was obligated to take this step.