Um, What?

Jim Burroway

November 7th, 2013

Hawaii Democratic state Rep. Jo Jordan — make that openly gay Democratic state Rep. Jo Jordan — seems to be suffering either from some kind of political Stockholm syndrome, some misguided martyrdom complex, or maybe she just feels like she has something to prove. I don’t know. But guess what?

One lawmaker, Democratic Rep. Jo Jordan of Waianae, said on the floor that she would oppose the bill — despite her thoughts and beliefs and gay marriage potentially benefiting her personally.

“No, nobody’s going to beat me up. Nobody’s going to throw me out of my (LGBT) community — I’m not quite sure of that,” Jordan said.

But Jordan said she set aside her beliefs when she listened to five days of testimony during a joint committee hearing and listened with an open heart. Much of spoken public testimony during the hearing came in opposition to the bill.

“I might vote against something that I personally believe in. I personally believe I should have the right,” Jordan said. “You know how hard it is for me to say no? I have to say no.”

Jordan voted “no” during yesterday’s unusually contentious Second Reading. Preliminary celebrations aside, second readings are ordinarily procedural votes to consider amendments and move the bill from committee to the House floor. The real vote, the one that counts, is the Third Reading which is scheduled for tomorrow. But because yesterday’s 30-18 vote was so contentious, I think it gives us a good indication of where things stand for final passage.

Because the House has made a few changes to the bill, it must now go back to the Senate for a concurrence vote. Again, this is ordinarily a simple procedural vote. Last weekend there had been some concerns expressed that the Senate may not go along with the House’s proposed expansion of the religious exemption clauses. But now it looks like the Senate is on board, so concurrence should be no big deal, although this report says that it won’t get to the Senate “until Tuesday, at earliest.”  I’m keeping my champagne on ice for a while.

You can track the bill’s progress here.

james

November 7th, 2013

I have no idea what she is saying. She has given no reason why she is voting no, only that it’s her prerogative, which it is. There must have been lots of people from her district who testified against the bill.

james

November 7th, 2013

Jim Burroway, we may revoke your gay card for confusing champaign, a city in Illinois, with champagne, a sparkling wine kept on ice. It’s question 518 on the LGBT community entrance exam!

Jim Burroway

November 7th, 2013

I think autocorrect got away from me. I know how to spell champagne because a little French voice takes over in my head and pronounces it as I type it, and he doesn’t make it rhyme with campaign (or Champaign). But my bad typing must have opened the door for autocorrect to step in and quietly make its change without my noticing. I hate autocorrect.

Ryan

November 7th, 2013

She listened with an open heart to those who hold her in contempt. Very sad. As for her other comments, I don’t want anyone to beat her up, but if she thinks she’s going to be invited to the next Hawaii Pride Parade, I think she’s quite mistaken. I hope so, anyway. This woman has declared herself to not be a member of the LGBT community.

Ray

November 7th, 2013

Compared to her co-conspirator, Rep. Ward, she was meek. He compared gay marriage to the 9/11 nightmare. I watched the Twitter feed a couple of hours before the final vote and, I’m not exaggerating, the opposition, who were mostly Democrats, sounded like the Tony Perkins X 19. It was uuuuuug-ly.

Ray

November 7th, 2013

Here, here, Jim! The mortification of autocorrect.

Bose in St. Peter MN

November 7th, 2013

Words fail me. But they certainly won’t fail the Fischers, Browns, LaBarberas etc. who will now name her as their best friend, regardless of her wishes or likely pending walk-backs.

Mark F.

November 7th, 2013

Can we set aside the notion that only Republicans are bad guys? I recall very clearly the support Bill Clinton got from our community after he spit in our eye, because he was “better than the Republicans.” Phooey! In any case, I have no idea WTF this woman is thinking.

Priya Lynn

November 7th, 2013

No one said only Republicans are bad guys but more bad guys are Republicans than Democrats.

Stefano A

November 7th, 2013

According to The Honolulu Civil Beat Jordon voted “no” because she opposed the current language of the bill after it was amended. The presumption is that she opposed the expansion of the religious exemptions based on the law enacted in Connecticut.

Lord_Byron

November 7th, 2013

Reminds me of the tea party politician who said that if his constituents wanted he would vote to re-enact slavery. She is basically saying that because so many testified against it she has to vote no on the bill. Though if Stefano is correct I am very off.

Mark F.

November 7th, 2013

So, she’d rather deny gay couples marriage than grant a few religious exemptions? I don’t buy her reasoning.

Priya Lynn: I do indeed know people who think all Republicans come from hell. And I have heard people argue that anti-gay Democrats should be elected just so the party has a majority. But yes, more Republicans are anti-gay than Democrats.

jpeckjr

November 7th, 2013

Thanks for that bit, Stefano. If correct, then Rep. Jordan should say “I object to the religious exemptions language.”

What she said was: “Voting no, can’t say why, maybe wrong thing, maybe right thing, I don’t no, maybe I shouldn’t, still probably will, heard from lots of people, not in my best interest, gonna vote no anyway, can’t say why, might get in trouble.”

Jay

November 8th, 2013

I don’t think Stefano’s explanation is correct. She wanted MORE religious exemptions, not fewer. Apparently, the real story, as explained in some Hawaiian political blogs, is that she was in some sort of alliance with Say and Oshiro who lost a leadership struggle within the Democratic Party. Say finally voted yes, leaving Say and Jordan hanging in the wind. But what a dubious distinction it is for a lesbian to vote against equal rights. Truly disgraceful. I hope her constituents vote her out of office.

razorthin

November 8th, 2013

She should of instead said No to the Honolulu Poof she’s sporting.

That would have made no one sad.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

Ex-Pope Benedict Took On The Gay Lobby And Won, Says Ex-Pope Benedict

North Carolina Lawmakers Plot Raid Of Disaster Relief Fund to Defend HB 2

Federal Judge: Mississippi's Right-To-Discriminate Law Was Designed "To Put LGBT Citizens Back In Their Place"

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1943: Gay Resistance Fighters Shot By Nazis

Today In History, 1969: DC Appeals Court Rules Against Civil Service Commission's Gay Employment Ban

Today In History, 1982: Larry Craig Preemptively Denies Connection to Gay Page Sex Scandal

Born On This Day, 1925: Farley Granger

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.