Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Headline, Dec. 8, 1941 - Thousands Of Sailors Wet!
Oh... and the Japanese attacked, too

Helmet tip to Former Alter Boy.

God love the Honolulu Star Bulletin. Check out the headline, then the article proper. Here's some of it; (Emphasis mine.)
Scores attend civil-union rally
By Rob Shikina

Thousands opposed to same-sex marriage rallied at the state Capitol to send a message to lawmakers who support a civil-unions bill in this election year. "Your one vote is just as powerful as their one vote," Dennis Arakaki, an organizer, told the crowd. "Use that power to elect people who are righteous."

Arakaki estimated about 15,000 people dressed in white went to the Capitol yesterday, some on their own and many others bused in with church groups. The turnout was more than last year's traditional-marriage rally that brought 10,000 to 12,000 attendees dressed in red, Arakaki said.
A handful of civil-union supporters stood across the street amid traditional-marriage proponents. Some opponents engaged in debates about homosexuality, but deputy sheriffs reported no major problems. "They're promoting social inequality," said Dave McCaskey, 18, a University of Hawaii student who is not gay. He carried a sign that read, "You can't outlaw LOVE."

"They're defining who we are by depriving us of our rights," said Kealoha Kelekolio, 63, of Manoa. Kamuela Kaahanui, 60, a UH professor, said he was disappointed that they would hold the rally on the eve of Martin Luther King Jr. Day and on the anniversary of the overthrow of Queen Liliuokalani. "If the queen were here, she would ask this question," he said, pointing to a sign reading, "Where's the aloha?"
Actually, under Queen Liliuokalani's reign, the penalty for homosexuality was as follows;
...a fine of up to $1,000 and confinement at hard labor for up to 20 years.Even the Queen back then knew that guys shouldn't be leiing each other.

12 Comments:

Blogger Adeodatus49 said...

Yet in Hawaiian culture before the "depredations" of (Calvinist) Christianity, the Hawaiian Royal Family's the heir apparent brother and sister married each other! I am surprised that Hawaii wasn't the first state to pass legislation in favor of same sex alleged marriage.

4:07 PM  
Blogger Al said...

Ade, not to condone the marriage laws under the Hawaiian monarchy but it was basicly the same idea as the fact that in Egypt at times the pharoah married his sister. It has to do with their religion. They also practiced polygamy.

Like you, I am a bit surprized they haven't passed some sort of "civil union" or "gay marriage" law.

5:02 PM  
Blogger Former Altar Boy said...

1. Adeo, did I miss something? What does brother-sister (or cousin-sousin, etc.) marrriage in Hawaiian history have to do with same sex marriage?

2. Vir's post covers HB 444, a bill intended to legalize civil unions, which put it in direct conflict with Hawaii's marriage laws. Over a decade ago Hawaiians rejected same-sex marriage. Hawaii's legislators, backed by a super-majority of Hawaii voters in 1998, disallowed same-sex marriage. In 1999, the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that because of the 1998 marriage amendment:

» Hawaii's equal protection clause no longer applies to its marriage law;
» Hawaii's marriage law no longer violates the equal protection clause; and
» Hawaii's law limiting marriage to "a man and a woman" is constitutionally valid and must be given full force and effect.

7:45 PM  
Blogger Adeodatus49 said...

Yes, Al, I forgot about the Egypt bit. And yes, the Hawaiian practice was a religious practice also. Unfortunately, these practices inevitably lead to infanticide as the occasional in-bred "defective" was put to death or left to die.

7:45 PM  
Blogger Adeodatus49 said...

1. Adeo, did I miss something? What does brother-sister (or cousin-sousin, etc.) marrriage in Hawaiian history have to do with same sex marriage?

Actually I had a "senior moment!" :-) :-0 . . . although both situations involve sexual perversions! :-))

9:16 PM  
Blogger David Scott said...

It should go without saying that a person should be allowed to marry whomever they choose. Until the right-wing, religious fanatics in this country stop trying to control everybody else and force their “morals” down the throat of the country, there can be no real freedom in the United States. Civil rights cannot simply be "voted away," that is the purpose of the Bill of Rights. Religious activists should be left out of these decisions completely. I invite you to my web pages devoted to raising awareness on this puritan attack on our freedom: http://freethegods.blogspot.com/2009/06/san-franciscos-gay-pride-parade.html

12:01 PM  
Blogger Vir Speluncae Catholicus said...

DS,
So by your reckoning, it's permissable for you to "marry" (re: have copious copulating) with your brother, mother, grandfather, great-grand mother, son, daughter, etc, etc. ad nauseum?

Until the left-wing, orgasm worshipping fanatics in this country stop trying to control everybody else and force their “moral relevance” and "perversion" down the throat of the country, there can be no real freedom in the United States.

I pity you and your deviant ilk.

1:47 PM  
Blogger Smiley said...

Actually why stop at copluations with the human species. what our liberal brothers and sisters want is open season copulations with anything that has a pulse human or animal. After all freedom is freedom isnt it David Scott.

Any pray tell why stop at one wife/husband/partner, love cannot be restricted to only one, monogamy is too cruel a rule.

Do i go on David?

2:23 PM  
Blogger JLS said...

Check David Scott's blogsite; he is a professional sexual and spiritual deviant and pervert, tempting the flames of eternity for himself and for all those he can hook.

4:03 PM  
Blogger Al said...

Ade wrote: "Unfortunately, these practices inevitably lead to infanticide as the occasional in-bred "defective" was put to death or left to die."

Sad but way too true. & another parallel between then & now given how many unborn with Down syndrome & other birth defects are aborted.

5:07 PM  
Blogger Arkanabar T'verrick Ilarsadin said...

ok, I went to find this law you cite. According to this page, an anti-sodomy law very much like you describe was enacted in 1850. At that time, Kamekaheha III, was the first Christian king of Hawaii, and Keoni Ana was Kuhina Nui.

I can find no mention of a Queen Kaahanui.

7:16 PM  
Blogger Vir Speluncae Catholicus said...

ATI,
You're exactly right. That law was in effect from 1850 until the American annexation in 1893. I have no evidence or reason to believe that the Hawaiian anti-sodomy law of 1850 was changed up to or during the reign of Queen Liliuokalani.

But I did mistakenly type "Kaahanui" instead of "Liliuokalani".

Thanks for catching that. I've corrected. All those vowels cought me off guard.

7:38 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home