Hmmmm.! That is interesting. I never considered that little detail. I asked an AI for some basic understanding of it (as I am not a lawyer):

The U.S. Constitution provides for a separation of church and state, primarily through the First Amendment, which prohibits the establishment of religion by the federal government and protects citizens' rights to freely exercise their religion. This means that while individual states have some latitude to govern their own affairs, including the potential to enact laws that may reflect religious beliefs, they are still bound by the Constitution. Any state law that establishes a specific religion, enforces religious practices, or discriminates against individuals based on their religious beliefs would likely be challenged in court as unconstitutional.

Additionally, the Fourteenth Amendment extends these protections against state actions, ensuring that state governments cannot infringe upon the rights granted by the First Amendment.

Therefore, while states can have laws that may be influenced by religious beliefs, they cannot enforce religious laws that violate individuals' constitutional rights.

Based on this initial overview of the matter it would appear that Hawaii will be taken to court at some point. I don't think they will be able to keep that law...

no laws of Hawaii would conflict with the law of Jehovah God.

How exactly are they going to enforce this anyway? What are "the laws of Jehovah God"? Hawaii is a blue state, so I presume they allow for abortion and a bunch of other crap, yes? Does that not conflict with the laws of Jehovah God?

Point- the state, either an individual state or the fed, should not be the enforcers of any religion's laws or beliefs. (Christians get a nice little hidden boost, however, because we are right! So the laws will reflect our values, because they are RIGHT. BUT when the state decides to arbitrate matters of our faith it will always end badly)

Hmmmm.! That is interesting. I never considered that little detail. I asked an AI for some basic understanding of it (as I am not a lawyer):

The U.S. Constitution provides for a separation of church and state, primarily through the First Amendment, which prohibits the establishment of religion by the federal government and protects citizens' rights to freely exercise their religion. This means that while individual states have some latitude to govern their own affairs, including the potential to enact laws that may reflect religious beliefs, they are still bound by the Constitution. Any state law that establishes a specific religion, enforces religious practices, or discriminates against individuals based on their religious beliefs would likely be challenged in court as unconstitutional.

Additionally, the Fourteenth Amendment extends these protections against state actions, ensuring that state governments cannot infringe upon the rights granted by the First Amendment.

Therefore, while states can have laws that may be influenced by religious beliefs, they cannot enforce religious laws that violate individuals' constitutional rights.

Based on this initial overview of the matter it would appear that Hawaii will be taken to court at some point. I don't think they will be able to keep that law...

no laws of Hawaii would conflict with the law of Jehovah God.

How exactly are they going to enforce this anyway? What are "the laws of Jehovah God"? Hawaii is a blue state, so I presume they allow for abortion and a bunch of other crap, yes? Does that not conflict with the laws of Jehovah God?

Point- the state, either an individual state or the fed, should not be the enforcers of any religion's laws. (Christians get a nice little hidden boost, however, because we are right! So the laws will reflect our values, because they are RIGHT. BUT when the state decides to arbitrate matters of our faith it will always end badly)