Tuesday | October 17, 2017
About Us | Contact | Subscribe

Your Views for October 22

Not enough attention

A meeting, regarding an upcoming special session of the Hawaii Legislature, between State Rep. Richard Onishi and constituents was cancelled on short notice by Rep. Onishi. The meeting was scheduled for 2:30 p.m. on Oct. 10 at the Keaau Community Center.

Rep. Onishi’s cancellation was apparently due to too many people interested in attending and/or local press interest.

Approximately 60 of Rep. Onishi’s constituents met anyway to discuss efforts to persuade state legislators to let the people vote on marriage. These efforts are in response to a special session of the Hawaii Legislature called by Gov. Neil Abercrombie to attempt legalizing same-sex marriage in Hawaii. This special session is slated to convene on Oct. 28.

Meeting attendees believe this decision should be reserved for the people of Hawaii to decide in a referendum, not enacted during this special legislative session.

Meetings cancelled due to lack of interest is one thing, canceling a meeting because of too much interest is hard to understand. For such an important matter there should be public legislative hearings and “town hall” meetings conducted here on the Big Island.

Mark Statler


The real persecutors

This is in response to your article, “Opponents (of gay marriage): State shouldn’t rush vote” published on Wednesday, Oct. 16. I find it interesting that the opponents of gay marriage would utilize their religion to impose their beliefs on those who do not follow their particular brand of faith and cloak their own bigotry under the guise of protecting “our freedom of religion.” Have these people never taken a logic class?

I’d like to know how someone else’s gay wedding is an imposition on their ability to hold the covenants within their own straight wedding or marriage sacred? Getting married is a personal decision, just as which religious practice or faith to follow (if any) is. Another person’s wedding and marriage does not in any way affect your own.

And to defend that fact is in no way persecuting you for your beliefs, as Jean Nodacker of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, would have one believe. That’s just an example of faulty logic, to put it mildly, or downright manipulation, to be blunt. She did get it right in saying that it is a “civil rights issue,” but not for her conservative flock, I’m afraid.

Their ability and rights to get married aren’t at issue. It is their attempt to impose their narrow views on the rest of society that are at stake, not the other way around. So let’s just be clear about who is persecuting who.

Stone Willow



Rules for posting comments