When Hawaii dealt with the issue of Civil Unions for same-sex couples in February of 2011 many people who have moral objections to homosexuality in general said, “Well… okay. I still believe homosexuality is wrong, and is not good for society, but I am a fair person, and if this grants more citizen rights to them, okay. I am not really thrilled that our government has moved from acceptance to endorsement, but…”
At the time, I noted that this was NOT the end, but only the beginning, because the LGBT community are masters of creeping incrementalism. They never state their ultimate goals clearly and honestly up front; they chip away, slowly but steadily until they restructure society in their image.
So here we find ourselves in Hawaii less than two years later having the fabric of our community ripped asunder by rancorous debate because, “Civil Unions? Not good enough.” The problem, of course, is not Hawaii’s at all. The problem is the denial of certain benefits by FEDERAL laws and regulations. That problem could be eliminated with a simple signature of the sitting President of the United States making those benefits available to those entered in Civil Unions. He hasn’t done so, and — as far as is known — the Governor of Hawaii has not requested that he do so, sparing this state the cost, both financial and sociological, of this ugly fight that divides communities and families.
An Assistant Professor at Brigham Young University Hawaii, Joshua Smith, even drafted the Presidential Directive for the President’s consideration, so all it needs is a signature:
(Suggested) Presidential Executive Order
November 7, 2013
EXECUTIVE ORDER
– – – – – – –
RECOGNITION OF CIVIL UNIONS FOR EQUAL BENEFITS, RIGHTS, AND PRIVILEGES AS MARRIAGE
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy.
Addressing the rights of same-sex couples is a priority of my Administration. The Government Accountability Office has identified 1,138 statutory provisions in which marital status is a factor in determining benefits, rights, and privileges. The 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was held to violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution and ruled unconstitutional.
With the repeal of DOMA, States remain responsible for the determination of benefits, rights, and privileges for same-sex couples. As those powers are necessarily limited to the State, it is necessary to accord similar recognition to civil unions legally enacted by States. Accordingly, all State civil unions shall be afforded federal recognition and given the same benefits, rights, and privileges as those provided by statutory provisions in which marital status is a factor and shall be considered identical to marriage in every material respect, provided that:
(a) State civil unions afford the same benefits, rights, and privileges as marriages in the State;
(b) States provide notice of civil union legislation to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that documents compliance with Sec. 1(a) as part of the application for federal recognition; and,
(c) The notice received from the State is approved by the Director of the OMB and duly recorded.
Sec. 2. General Provisions.
(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(1) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or
(2) the functions of the Director of the OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) If State civil union legislation is modified, the State must renew its application for federal recognition to ensure compliance with Sec.1(a) of this Executive Order.
Sec. 3. This order is effective at 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on January 1, 2014.
BARACK OBAMA
There. It really is that easy… except that it doesn’t follow the LGBT narrative that demands the total restructuring of societal norms to make the 97% conform to the desires of the 3%.
But, Gary, you say, surely when they achieve marriage equality with Hawaii’s adoption of SB1 they will then (finally) be happy, right? If you believe that, you are more than naive.
I’ll give you a hint so you won’t be caught off-guard in the next step in their creeping incrementalism.
The next step is the reduction, leading to the elimination of the concept of gender. Period. They do not accept the concept of binary gender, the idea that we hold fundamental. In other words, you and I — and most people — believe that there are MEN and there are WOMEN: binary gender. We know that there are some manly women and some effeminate men, so there’s a wide latitude on gender behavior, but there are still MEN and WOMEN. That is NOT what many in the LGBT community believe, and there will soon come a new demand for genderless public restrooms and changing rooms, and changes to laws that recognize gender as a reality.
Do you find that hard to believe? Save this blog post. In a couple of years I will be here to say “told ya.”
Creeping incrementalism is the way we got into this quagmire.