Gay/LGBT Chicago entertainment news and lifestyle guide featuring dining and nightlife directories, local voices, travel, businesses, free personals, vip event access and photos

Lesbian Rep. Jo Jordan explains why she voted against Hawaii gay marriage bill

Honolulu, HI — Hawaii state Rep. Jo Jordan, who is openly lesbian, on Friday voted against a gay marriage bill, becoming the first openly gay lawmaker to vote against such legislation.

(Related: In an interview which took place before Friday's vote, Jordan told Honolulu magazine that she opposed the bill because it failed to meet "the needs of all."

"I had come to the decision that SB1 needed to [be] amended," Jordan explained. "It wasn't protective enough of everybody."

"When you look at a measure, you have to consider, how do we make this the golden standard, as bulletproof as possible? My major concerns on SB1 was, first, the parental maternal rights, 57-2C, that wasn't healthy. That definitely needed to be fixed. The religious exemption was not adequate enough. And the divorce portion in there is not fair. We're talking about creating equality. They have made a provision here where you don't have to domicile here. And I totally get what they're saying, but I have some serious problems with that. We should at least make some sort of domicile in our state, so they can file for divorce here."

Jordan was referring to a section of the proposed bill that allows gay couples who marry in Hawaii to file for divorce in the state without taking up residency (usually 6 months) if the couple lives in a state without marriage equality.However, the requirement is not waived for couples living in states that allow gay couples to marry.

"I really am not happy with the exemptions. Too narrow," she added.

"I'm not here to protect the big churches or the little churches, I'm saying we can't erode what's currently out there. We don't want to scratch at the religious protections at all, because if we don't create a measure that's bulletproof or as close to bulletproof as possible, then the measure will go to the courts. And they will interpret it however that may be. A judge will make assumptions and make a ruling, and that will become the law of the land. So you really want us to create the legislation."

The religious protections found in the amended version of the bill approved by the House were reportedly modeled after Connecticut's marriage law, considered to have the nation's broadest religious exemptions.
Article provided in partnership with On Top Magazine
 
photo
Smells like a traitor........quacks like a traitor.......
Posted by Stephen Kay on Sun, 11/10/2013 12:05 PM
FBItem: 210068715842631_415837
That is not particularly convincing. Political cowardliness is a more likely reason, but she won't admit that all she cares about is winning office.
Posted by James462 on Mon, 11/11/2013 6:11 AM
Having watched most of the debate on this, her arguments against the bill are flimsy and border on bogus. Her big gripe is with the religious exemption. What she wants is for every individual to be able to opt out of providing services to gays and lesbians because of their religious beliefs. The bill already protects any religious organization or any religiously affiliated organization. This would open a Pandora's box of bigotry, not only against gays and lesbians, but anyone who decides they don't like a group and based on religion. The divorce portion is a technical issue that will more than likely be resolved in subsequent sessions. The only reason it wasn't in this session is that the amendment had been offered by a rep who actively obstructed and delayed the proceedings. There is more going on here than meets the eye. Rep. Jordan was on the losing end of a power struggle at the beginning of the year. There are still quite a bit of bruised feelings for those that lost and they took this opportunity to magnify the rift in the majority caucus and try to embarass the current leadership. She had been grasping at reasons to oppose the bill from day one. Yeah, she is a traitor.
Posted by David Gibson on Mon, 11/11/2013 9:09 AM
FBItem: 210068715842631_416743
When I listened to why the many straight legislators decided to vote for SSM in Hawaii, I was sincerely moved. The BS statement by Jo Jordan on why she voted "NO" is indicative of small thinking and someone who doesn't really belong in elected office. She is a disgrace to the LGBT community and her rationale for voting the way she did stinks.
Posted by Stephen Herman on Mon, 11/11/2013 12:46 PM
FBItem: 210068715842631_417025
All lawmakers are paid to be intelligent, informed, articulate, and unambiguous. Jo Jordan is none of these.

Her statements are contradictory, conflated, and confused. She isn't able to organize her thoughts, or to speak clearly. The same-gender civil marriage proposal sat on Jo Jordan's desk for the last ten months, yet she remains totally inarticulate about the topic. Everything she says or writes is empty of reason.

Her random, neural firings are idiotic.

She ignored history and science, and instead sided with the imaginary superstitions of ignorant, fearful theocrats reciting lists of apocalyptic fears for which they had not one shred of evidence.

Jordan voted to deny 1,138 federal marriage-related benefits to citizens who are entitled to them, and who pay for them with their tax dollars. She voted to deny equal protection of the law as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. She voted the exact opposite of the vast majority of her own constituents.

Based on her very own words, Jo Jordan is totally, thoroughly inept.
Posted by Ned Flaherty on Mon, 11/11/2013 1:25 PM
FBItem: 210068715842631_417060
There is a small piece written about Newt Gingrich and why he shut down the government during the Clinton Administration. He was insulted because he was on Airforce One and was not invited into the cabin where others were invited.

The truth about Jo Jordan is that she was offended by some gay people earlier in the year and decided to lash out at the entire gay community because of it, including gay teens who were counting on leaders to help them in their future.

Jo is lying, obviously. She is the Newt Gingrich of the equal rights bill in Hawaii. I think a befitting name for her should be Jo Gingrich... a person willing to take down an entire group of persons because she was offended. It's called... being a complete spoiled brat.
Posted by Forrest Bradford on Mon, 11/11/2013 5:11 PM
FBItem: 210068715842631_417294
Vote her hypocritical 'okole out!
Posted by Pua Tokumoto on Sat, 11/16/2013 12:55 PM
FBItem: 210068715842631_423316
Morgan Stanley
{ts '2014-04-23 20:40:36'}