[reaganaut1]

When judges can rewrite the meanings of laws, we live not in a democracy but a judicial tyranny. Someday a governor and legislature, when confronted with a ridiculous court decision, will need to say "this ruling is bunk, we will not abide by it", followed by impeaching the judges involved. The problem is that most Democrats and some Republicans like the policy inventions of our courts.

[Always Right]

It is sad, but the only way to stop judicial tyranny is by Constitutional amendment.

[BobL]

The simple question to ask when a judge says “equal protection means gay marriage” is whether the people who wrote that clause had any thought of this result. If the answer is NO, which of course it is, then these judges should be impeached.

[Batrachian]

If the people of Iowa are so opposed to gay marriage, then why do they elect Democrat governors who then appoint liberal supreme court judges?

I hope Iowa becomes a Mecca for gay marriage as homosexuals from all over the nation flock there to get married.

That'll teach these corn bread dimwits that electing Democrats means something.

Didn't Iowa go for Obama? What a disgrace.

[SandRat]

[nonliberal]

Chrissy Rants has no guts. He will fold in the end.

The Iowa GOP, like every other GOP organization, would screw up a two car funeral.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

will need to say "this ruling is bunk, we will not abide by it", followed by impeaching the judges involved.

I totally agree...I just wish one Republican would flip a middle finger at these rulings.

[iowamark]

State Representative Christopher C. Rants, a Republican who proposed amending a state health and human services budget bill with the constitutional provision, said he was pleased, at least, that his fellow representatives were forced to take a vote on whether to allow the debate. The idea was rejected 54 to 44, largely along party lines....

[Governor Chester] Culver, who says he personally believes marriage should be between a man and a woman, said he was unlikely to support a constitutional amendment. “After careful consideration and a thorough reading of the court’s decision,” he said, “I am reluctant to support amending the Iowa Constitution to add a provision that our Supreme Court has said is unlawful and discriminatory.”

The statement was seen by some as a shift. In 2008, Mr. Culver told reporters that he would wait for the courts to rule on same-sex marriage in Iowa but that lawmakers could then react quickly.

“We’ll do whatever it takes to protect marriage between a man and a woman,” he said[in 2008], according to local news reports.

All 44 Republicans present voted for marriage. One Republican, Royd Chambers, is on active duty with the National Guard in Afghanistan and another was at a funeral. Only 2 of the 56 Democrats voted for marriage, Geri Huser and Dolores Mertz.

[Tanniker Smith]

Gay marriage article on digg.com. (Guess what side they're all taking.)

http://digg.com/politics/AntinGay_Marriage_Ad_Sparks_YouTube_Revolt