Comments You Don’t Want To Miss – July 10
This was a week with news about controversial topics, from civil unions to the Akaka Bill. It can be difficult to keep up with all the conversations. To help save you time, here are some examples of the “must-read” comments from recent days that I hope give you an idea of the level of discussion on Civil Beat.
On civil unions:
You only need to look at the weeks leading up to the vote on Prop 8 in CA to see what happens when an issue that represents a fundamental civil right to one group is viewed as an attack on religion by another group. It gets messy. Really messy and polarizing. Nothing civil came from that.
Before this gets put on a ballot in Hawaii, do you think there’s a chance that an open civil discussion can take place 鈥 maybe then some of us can have a chance of hearing how civil unions directly impact and threaten heterosexual marriage. I still don’t understand this part.
I have reached out to opponents of civil unions to ask for articles explaining that point of view. So far I’ve been unsuccessful, but the purpose of Civil Beat is to build understanding by exposing people to differing points of view.
For an informative sampling of the concerns of civil unions as a threat, read the on the Hawaii Family Forum site (as of the latest update on March 18, 2009):
According to James Hochberg, whose op-ed, “Civil Unions: A Lesson in History,” is linked at the page above, civil unions and, by inevitable extension, same-sex marriage “destroys religious freedom”:
“In our next history lesson, we鈥檒l discuss how same-sex 鈥渕arriage鈥 destroys religious freedom and the fundamental rights of Americans who believe and live their faith in the country that supposedly represents the cradle of freedom. But that鈥檚 for another day.”
What I find missing from all of this brew-ha-ha is the mention of children. Correct me if I am wrong, but the original intention of the laws and privliges pertaining to marriage were meant to protect a family with children, so the children would have some protection after the death of one or both parents. I suspect this goes all the way back to English Common Law. Not so very long ago a married couple were expected to have children, and pitied if they could not. Why get married, if not to have a family?
One way to cut the Gordian Knot is to put the emphasis back on the children. I propose we reserve all the laws and tax regulations that favor being married to only those couples who have children, whether heterosexual or gay.
On the Akaka Bill
It seems that a sovereignty declaration–as soul-cleansing and satisfying as it may be in response to the overthrow of Native control and the domination of the Native culture by an outside culture–would come with its share of problems, the sovereign government’s need for resources, possibly a need for outside support, and the need to interact with other government entities. It will be a complicated relationship.
One big lesson here is pretty obvious: When one culture overruns another, the results continue forever and there is no way to restore the prior conditions. It appears that no solutions are entirely satisfactory; we find ourselves looking at compromises no matter what we do.
The above is an excerpt from a much longer post.
Although some people look to Alaska as a possible model for native self-governance (including Ed Case), I think it may be important to acknowledge that the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) is often described by federal Indian law scholars as the worst piece of native settlement legislation.
If federal recognition happens, here will definitely be a complex relationship between the Native Hawaiian governing entity and the state government. Complex however, does not necessarily have to mean hostile.
What I see happening on message boards is this, “there’s this horrible result happening one particular reservation that I heard about, and that’s definitely going to happen here if Native Hawaiians are federally recognized.” (In no way am I suggesting that this is what Russ has done, but this type of perspective appears prevalent. I actually think Russ has done an awesome job of just informing us of something that has happened elsewhere, without asserting that the same will happen here.)
This also is an excerpt from a larger post.
I’ll leave it there for today. Thanks to the participants in our discussions for their thoughtful comments.
