Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iowa court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional
Associated Press ^ | April 3, 2009

Posted on 04/03/2009 7:10:08 AM PDT by Zakeet

The Iowa Supreme Court says the state's same-sex marriage ban violates the constitutional rights of gay and lesbian couples, making it the third state where gay marriage is legal.

In a unanimous ruling issued Friday, the court upheld a 2007 Polk County District Court judge's ruling that the law was unconstitutional.

The case stems from a 2005 lawsuit filed by Lambda Legal, a New York-based gay rights organization. The group filed a lawsuit on behalf of six gay and lesbian Iowa couples who were denied marriage licenses.

The suit named then-Polk County recorder and registrar Timothy Brien.

The Polk County attorney's office claimed that Hanson's ruling violated the separation of powers and the issue should be left to the Legislature.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Iowa
KEYWORDS: gay; gaymarriage; gaystapo; homobama; homosexualagenda; iowa; ruling
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last
To: RicocheT

We are fools if we think that God’s judgment will not come to this land. Fools.

I wonder how many so-called “Christians” in Iowa vote for Dems? Many I would guess. Well this is what you get. Elected Democrats appointing liberal judges. We reap what we sow.


41 posted on 04/03/2009 8:07:36 AM PDT by bella1 (Remember; it took four years of Carter to give us eight years of Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

This is how we end up with RINOs for presidential candidates. Let’s let a conservative state guide our primaries!


42 posted on 04/03/2009 8:07:40 AM PDT by Aggie Mama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DTogo

If marriage is not exactly the institution designed by G-d for one man and one woman to be joined for the purposes of raising childeren.....

.....Then marriage is absolutely anything you want it to be.

Oedipus can now marry his mommy.


43 posted on 04/03/2009 8:08:09 AM PDT by Uncle Miltie (A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you are talking about Zimbabwe money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ElectricStrawberry

if that is the case this is being set up for a full faith and credit fight.

Folks this course of arguments is comming from the ABA. Not a conspiracy but the left leaning lawyers that convene there just exchange information and ideas.

IOW conventions for left wing principles are allowed for networking but CAPITALIS FOR PRIFIT conventions are not allowed networking opportutnity.


44 posted on 04/03/2009 8:08:37 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

.

America is such a gay country now.

.

45 posted on 04/03/2009 8:08:49 AM PDT by polymuser ("We have a right to debate and disagree with any administration!" (HRC))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie

The Aristocrats!


46 posted on 04/03/2009 8:09:25 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD
Regarding the Soviet Unions agricultural failures after it became an atheistic state, I don't think I need to post a chart. That's common knowledge. Before 1922 the (then) Russian Empire was exporting food. After 1922, when the atheists took over and attacked religion, ag yields plunged. I remember back in the 1970s the US selling the USSR huge amounts of grain.
47 posted on 04/03/2009 8:09:53 AM PDT by seatrout (I wouldn't know most "American Idol" winners if I tripped over them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: JAKraig

— I’m not saying that it is time to get out the guns,—

If now is not the time, that time will soon be at hand.


48 posted on 04/03/2009 8:10:55 AM PDT by seatrout (I wouldn't know most "American Idol" winners if I tripped over them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

At least in this case, it was based upon the state constitution.

Typically, state supreme courts have deferred to federal courts for the federal Constitution......doesn’t mean that always happens though.


49 posted on 04/03/2009 8:11:11 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mquinn
IOWA? IOWA? Nothing comes from Iowa except steers and queers.


50 posted on 04/03/2009 8:12:43 AM PDT by USS Alaska (Nuke the terrorist savages - In Honor of Standing Wolf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Miltie

there is no need for a religious argument.

This is about society. The left is seeking to destroy the family unit and unity in existing families.

Marriage benefits society NOT the individual. Society rewards the institution not the individual.

Right now domestic relations law (divorce law) is transitioning to clauses which state children are just accessories to the marriage. IOW the issue of children is seperate from the divorce and child custody and support is decided as if the parties are not married. (thanks model law code)

Homosexual based marriage provides NOTHING to the benefit of society. ZIP nada. They cost, and do not contribute. This is why homosexuals use the anecdotal homosexuals with families every time a prop 8 comes to bear.

If it is true this was laughably decided on the federal constitution then those lawyers on the bench were trying to prevent a prop 8 scendario because they know their rulings day is numbered otherwise.

BTW a RECORD NUMBER OF LAW SCHOOLS NOW EXIST AND MORE (yes MORE) are SOON TO OPEN!!! (not a joke)


51 posted on 04/03/2009 8:16:52 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: JAKraig
"Why is it that if the majority of people are against queer marriage (I refuse to call it gay) how is it that we put up with it."

Most people are not against legal protection for gays and some form of legal union. What people object to is that they want to strip the word marriage of it's Biblical meaning.

That is the entire point of the commies pushing this. They are basically trampling on the rights of Christians and other religions to determine what their scriptures mean.

The goal is to take away legitimacy from religion and place all authority in the hands of the state. They have to discredit faith in a higher power to do that and crush any organizations that might cause opposition.

52 posted on 04/03/2009 8:18:29 AM PDT by Earthdweller (Socialism makes you feel better about oppressing people.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: JAKraig
Why is it that if the majority of people are against queer marriage (I refuse to call it gay) how is it that we put up with it.

All it takes is an amendment to the state constitution. But, with the both houses of the legislature and the governor being Democrats, that won't happen anytime soon.

Just like the rest of the USSA, Iowans are getting exactly what they voted for.

53 posted on 04/03/2009 8:19:59 AM PDT by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

There are many arguments against gay marriage, and you and I have recited a couple of them.

To emphasize your point:

If you consider that liberals’ goal is the Destruction of Western Civilization, then every one of their acts makes sense, thereby proving the motive.


54 posted on 04/03/2009 8:23:16 AM PDT by Uncle Miltie (A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you are talking about Zimbabwe money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

I’ve known a couple of judges over the years. They are part of the club. Government employees, college educated dunces and egomaniacs both in and out of court.


55 posted on 04/03/2009 8:26:43 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: seatrout

I was just curious to see if you had been tracking things like this.


56 posted on 04/03/2009 8:27:14 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

This also increases the likelihood that the US will be a target of Muslim terrorism. The Muslims (correctly) see homosexuality as an abomination. They won’t take kindly to rulings like this.


57 posted on 04/03/2009 8:37:10 AM PDT by seatrout (I wouldn't know most "American Idol" winners if I tripped over them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zakeet

Well, they can’t get what they want through the legislature, even when it’s controlled by Democrats, so they have to take it through the judiciary. The back door, if you will.


58 posted on 04/03/2009 8:47:09 AM PDT by xjcsa (Currently shouting "I told you so" about Michael Steele on my profile page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldArmy52

This entire mess illustrates why the concept of judicial review is a curse. Why do we tolerate a doctrine which impinges so cruelly upon the will of the masses; this will being the very foundation of a representative republic.


59 posted on 04/03/2009 8:57:29 AM PDT by seatrout (I wouldn't know most "American Idol" winners if I tripped over them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mquinn

As Iowa goes, so goes South Dakota.
But seriously, this ruling, and if the house and senate pass an open marriage law, will shame (or at least that’s the excuse they will give) Wisconsin, Illinois, and Minnesota into similar laws. The dominoes are falling, the wolf is inside the gates, and I’m filling up my glass again. Ah, sweet vodka, where is thy sting?


60 posted on 04/03/2009 9:11:51 AM PDT by BlueStateBlues (Blue State for business, Red State at heart.........2012--can't come soon enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson