Lingle tries to cast off her veto as a decision that is made by the voters (hence her election since she has always been opposed to same-sex marriage).
"It would be a mistake to allow a decision of this magnitude to be made
by one individual or a small group of elected officials."
The pathetic thing is that, in my opinion, this shouldn't be up for debate. If the church decides they don't want to 'marry' gay couples that is their issue but nothing should stop anyone from civil unions at the state/government level.
Thoughts?
