Judge: Iowa gay marriage ban unconstitutional

[Imbrifer]

Judge: Iowa gay marriage ban unconstitutional
DES MOINES n Gay rights advocates won a major victory Thursday when a Polk County District Judge ruled that the state's ban on gay marriage violates the Iowa Constitution.

"This court has yet to hear any convincing argument as to how excluding same-sex couples from getting married promotes responsible reproduction in general or by different-sex couples in particular. So far as this court can tell (the law) operates only to harm same-sex couples and their children," said the ruling from Judge Robert Hanson.

The ruling says the law must be rewritten in a gender neutral manner to allow same-sex couples to enter into civil marriage.

"This decision brings to life the Iowa Constitution's promise of equality for same-sex couples and their families in Iowa," said Camilla Taylor, attorney for Lambda Legal, the gay rights group that argued the case.

Sen. David Johnson, an Ocheyedan Republican, said he was disappointed but not surprised. He was one of the co-sponsors of a bill that would have put the gay marriage ban before voters as a proposed Constitutional amendment. He said the ruling underscores the need to resolve this issue with voters, not the courts.

"We should get this issue on the ballot as quickly as we possibly can," he said.

The case will almost certainly be appealed to the Iowa Supreme Court.
http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/arti...470072ece1.txt

Yeah! Equality ftw!

All the same arguments against gay marriage were used against bi-racial marriage in the fifties. Did it destroy marriage, lead to bestiality, erode families or anything else they said it would?

/all about equal rights

[SizeableSSonic]

Indeed, while gay may not be our way, it's their perrogitive, not ours.

[puppychow]

while I'm for it, I don't think the racial angle/comparison even applies due to gender differences.

for me it's simple because of this one "fact": i think it's pretty much indisputible that being gay is not a choice. therefore someone should not be penalized for a choice they did not make and not get equal treatment.

playing devils advocate, it's not even wrong to say the gay population is generally more sexually active and provacative...there is worthwhile concern that some of the relationships may not be on solid footing, but looking at the us divorce rate of near 50% i wonder if it really matters.

but yeah, anyone who gets their undies in a bunch over this should grow up. it's going to be legal everywhere very soon anyways. no sense in fighting a loosing battle. times change.

[uBeR]

Spoke too soon.

[Ihmhi]

I would love to see the appeal brief for this. Let us see their arguments against fair and equal treatment.

Related (second part):

Originally Posted by SPC Jonathan "Skippy" Schwarz (Ret.)

Part One

One experience I’ve found to be nearly universal to all military personnel, and also anyone who has ever had a job, is the stupid boss.

There are plenty of people who are not exceptionally bright. In fact by definition, one half of the population is of lower than normal intelligence.

Most of the time, this doesn’t make any difference in their everyday life, any more than being able to lift a little less, or running a little bit slower.

But true stupidity goes beyond simply being under average intelligence. To be truly stupid you need to have the magic combination of poor reasoning skills, a deficit of useful information, and an absolutely iron-clad conviction that you are a frigging genius.

We’ve all dealt with it at some point or another. What made this particular case so special is the circumstances.

PSYOP is one of those rare military units that encourages creativity, careful thought, and empathy. Our job was to interact with foreign nationals and try to get them to behave in a way consistent with U.S. policy. Naturally this means we needed to understand the various cultures from around the world that we needed to interact with.

This brings us to SGT Generic. I am calling her that for two reasons. The first is that, as much as I want to tell my funny stories, I don’t see any need to antagonize someone for a mistake they made five or six years ago. The second reason is that I can’t remember what her name was. I worked for SGT Generic for one month, while I was assigned to EOC detail. For anyone familiar with EOC, you know what that particular hell is like. For anyone who never had the pleasure, it’s basically being a combination receptionist, gofer, and lawn care specialist all at the same time and without the prestige.

Me, SGT Generic, and a few other lower enlisted were all tasked to EOC at the same time. Which meant that she was in charge. Which basically meant that she sat on her butt and watched CNN and yelled at us for not doing enough to help her.

Examples of things we did wrong:

“The floor is a mess over here! I shouldn’t have to tell you to vacuum this up! What’s wrong with you?” – Referring to the popcorn she had just spilled.

“If you’re not doing something else, you should be helping me look up the answers to this.” – Referring to the correspondence course she wanted my help cheating on.

“You stink! What the hell is wrong with you?” Talking to a soldier who is drenched in sweat having just mowed the lawn at one in the afternoon, in North Carolina, in the summer.

So basically she’s your typical useless low-level leader.

One of the few perks you get while working on EOC is that you are allowed to watch the news during the day. During a slow period was a story that vaguely touched upon India and some issues involving the Hindu faith. SGT Generic became loudly confused after viewing this.

At first myself, and the other soldiers present just figured that her knowledge of this particular culture was incomplete. No problem, we gave her a brief rundown on the highlights of that particular belief system, purely layman level stuff.

“There’s no way people in India believe that!”

We assure her, that yes, that is what most of the people in India believe.

I just want to take a moment to remind you that the participants in this conversation are part of a military unit specializing in cross-cultural understanding. And that SGT Generic was in charge of several of us.

“Why would they believe in reincarnation? It isn’t in the Bible, anywhere!”

“They don’t follow the Bible. Hindu’s have their own holy books.”

And then she adopted the tone. The one you use when you are trying to explain a very simple concept to a small, and possibly slow child.

“But everyone follows the Bible. Even Jews use the Bible, they just don’t use the whole thing.”

And as one, the various soldiers who worked for this very special lady, allowed our heads to smack onto our desks, and contemplated the fact that she was the one in charge.

= = = =

Part Two

Before I get into the second part there is a pertinent fact that bears mentioning. SGT Generic is a black woman.

Because I’m white, I am now obligated to spend a paragraph or so defending myself.

I don’t hate black people; I don’t think all black people are stupid. I have black friends, and coworkers. I understand that as someone who has light colored skin it is frowned upon for me to ever mention someone who is darker than me and any form of negative description. I am deeply and personally sorry for every single bad thing to ever happen to any person who happened to have more melanin than me.

Have I spent enough time on this to avoid racist accusations in the comments section? Probably not, but let’s move on anyways.

About a week after Part One happened we saw another story on CNN, this time about gay marriage.

She felt that it was sad and wrong that gay people want to get married. This in and of itself wouldn’t be noteworthy. Many people these days have the same opinion as she does. The noteworthy part is coming.

Being the way that I am, instead of just ignoring her comments, I asked if she really felt okay with the government telling people who they can or can’t marry. I pointed out that in our parent’s generation interracial marriage was illegal, and people gave pretty much the same reasons to justify that piece of discrimination as they give nowadays to prevent gay marriage.

She conceded that taking away people rights seemed wrong, but that she still thought gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry.

“Marriage is too special” she said. “They should make some other kind of thing that works like marriage for gay people.”

“So they should be treated equally, just kept apart?”

“Right.”

“So would you say ‘Separate But Equal’ is the policy our country should adopt?”

“Yeah ‘Separate But Equal’ is exactly how our country should opera—“

“NO!” Bellowed a very large, ticked off black Staff Sergeant who had been listening to our conversation.

YOU!” He said pointing at me, “You should be very ashamed of yourself. SGT Generic, please step outside.” And off they went, presumably for a crash course in the African-American Civil Rights Movement.

If you are ignorant in the whole seperate-but-equal thing, you are welcome to go to your local library and read more about it. Or, ya know, you could just click here.

[uBeR]

I read up to the point he said one half of the population is below normal intelligence, by definition. If he can't even differentiate between normal and median, then there's probably a problem. Maybe he's just a master of irony.

[Ihmhi]

So you stopped reading a significant argument based on a grammatical error? WTG.

[uBeR]

On a reasoning error. If he's going to write an article about stupid people (yes I read it now), he should at least not try to look so stupid himself.

[YomMamasHouse]

It is good to see Fascism is on the decline in the US, of course now God hates the US because they are fag-enablers promoting SODOMY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But seriously this is a lot better than what I had expected from the US, 9 states with some form of recognition and two with full rights, a good start.

I can't believe that people are so opposed to it still. We as North Americans often look to the policies of other countries and think of how awful it must be to live there, how tyrannous some of the things they do are, but then we have people sticking their hands into the lives of thousands of other people and telling them they can't enjoy the same rights others do. I think the best way to end this is to go for the source of such misbegotten beliefs.

[FrenchToast]

Originally Posted by puppychow

for me it's simple because of this one "fact": i think it's pretty much indisputible that being gay is not a choice. therefore someone should not be penalized for a choice they did not make and not get equal treatment.

So in your opinion, if it was a choice, you'd make it illegal?

[Thor-Stryker]

Sadly as much as some would consider him stupid, he's for the most part right on track. The Army uses NCOs to guide their soldiers, but becoming an NCO only requires time and a little knowledge, allowing just about ANYONE to become one.

Back to the argument, theres no reason to keep two people of the same sex out of marriage, except for bible reasons. Which we all know, the bible was created by the devil to confuse people who pray to black baby female jesus.

[puppychow]

Originally Posted by FrenchToast

So in your opinion, if it was a choice, you'd make it illegal?

yes.

[FrenchToast]

Any reason? Or just your dislike for freedom in the land of the free.

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by puppychow

for me it's simple because of this one "fact": i think it's pretty much indisputible that being gay is not a choice. therefore someone should not be penalized for a choice they did not make and not get equal treatment.

What about people that are sexually attracted to children? Animals? I'm sure they would say they were born that way and have always felt that way and that they have no choice to feel that way. I wouldn't draw a line saying "because someone was born this way then that behavior must be OK".

Scuzzy

[Etzell]

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

What about people that are sexually attracted to children? Animals? I'm sure they would say they were born that way and have always felt that way and that they have no choice to feel that way. I wouldn't draw a line saying "because someone was born this way then that behavior must be OK".

Scuzzy

I agree, there are things that aren't ok that some people are born with, but the only arguments I've ever seen against homosexuality stem from religion, and what "God" says is cool. If you've got another one, let's hear it. But I would really hope you're not comparing homosexuality to bestiality or pedophilia.

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by Etzell

I agree, there are things that aren't ok that some people are born with, but the only arguments I've ever seen against homosexuality stem from religion, and what "God" says is cool. If you've got another one, let's hear it. But I would really hope you're not comparing homosexuality to bestiality or pedophilia.

No, I was very specific in my complaint. However, what about plural marriage, should that be legal? Should many men and many woman be allowed to marry?

Scuzzy

[Innoc]

Originally Posted by FrenchToast

Any reason? Or just your dislike for freedom in the land of the free.

I have to admit to being curious as well. Does that mean that you have an innate dislike for homosexuality but you excuse it as you believe it cannot be helped?

[Etzell]

Originally Posted by Scuzzy

No, I was very specific in my complaint. However, what about plural marriage, should that be legal? Should many men and many woman be allowed to marry?

Scuzzy

You avoided my request for more justification, nor have you even offered your position on the issue.
Plural marriage is almost always a strictly religious issue. The large majority of pluralized marriage involves oppression of women, which I hope we can all agree is a horrible, horrible thing. It happens in Islam, happened with Warren Jeffs, it has worked out poorly many more times than it's worked out well.
Now that I've answered your question, how about you give some stances?

[Scuzzy]

Originally Posted by Etzell

You avoided my request for more justification, nor have you even offered your position on the issue.
Plural marriage is almost always a strictly religious issue. The large majority of pluralized marriage involves oppression of women, which I hope we can all agree is a horrible, horrible thing.

I agree the oppression of women is a horrible thing, but that's not a plural marriage issue it's an issue with the people doing the oppression, wouldn't you say? I also don't know that I would agree that the large majority of pluralized marriage involve oppression of women, since it's all done in secret for the most part because it is illegal I think stats are difficult to find. I also don't know that pluralized marriage is the CAUSE of oppression of women, but rather the result of the man doing the oppressing.

Originally Posted by Etzell

It happens in Islam, happened with Warren Jeffs, it has worked out poorly many more times than it's worked out well.

You feel because some religious people like it then it must be bad? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?

Religious people want plural marriage = Must be Illegal
Religious people don't want gay marriage = Must be Legal

Originally Posted by Etzell

Now that I've answered your question, how about you give some stances?

I didn't see that you asked me for my stance before. I think government should get out of the marriage.

Scuzzy

[zSilver_Fox]

I'm in a pissed off mood right now, so I'm going to flame.

To those saying that it should be illegal: Just shut the fuck up. You have NO idea what you're talking about, and are taking things entirely out of context. There's a difference between pedophilia and beastial relationships compared to two consenting adults. If you seriously think that it's a choice, then please sit down and be gay for a day, then straight for a day.


Thank you.