The Family Research Council today praised Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle for her veto yesterday of a bill that would have created both same-sex and opposite-sex "civil unions."
"We thank Gov. Lingle for her veto, and for recognizing that 'civil unions' are 'essentially marriage by another name,'" said Peter Sprigg, Family Research Council's Senior Fellow for Policy Studies. "Society gives benefits to marriage because marriage gives benefits to society," Sprigg noted, "and there is simply no benefit from homosexual relationships that would justify society's official affirmation of them, whether under the term 'domestic partnerships,' 'civil unions,' or 'marriage.'"
"The creation of opposite-sex civil unions in this bill as an alternative to marriage just proves that the ultimate aim of this movement is the deconstruction of marriage as a unique social institution," added Sprigg.
Sprigg expressed agreement with Lingle's criticism of the last-minute revival of the bill that led to its passage in April. Gov. Lingle declared in her veto statement, "The legislative maneuvering that brought HB 444 to an 11th hour vote, on the final day of the session, via a suspension of the rules, after legislators led the public to believe that the bill was dead, was wrong and unfair to the public they represent."
Lingle declared that the ultimate decision on this issue should be made "by all the people of Hawaii behind the curtain of the voting booth." Hawaii was one of the first states to amend its constitution to address the issue of same-sex marriage, by taking the power to redefine marriage away from judges. "Now, ideally, Hawaiians should settle this issue through a constitutional amendment permanently reserving marriage and its benefits to the union of one man and one woman," Sprigg urged.