The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

The Iowa Supreme Court ruled today that the state's statute defining marriage as being between a man and a woman, "violates the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution." As a result of the ruling, gay marriage will be legal in the state within three weeks. More, including a link to the opinion, can be found here

View all comments (8) | Leave a comment

Real American| 4.3.09 @ 11:09AM

The Iowa court members HATE traditional marriage. They HATE democracy. They HATE liberty. They should be removed immediately from their jobs and prosecuted for violating the right of Iowa voters to govern themselves. Just disgusting.

ncatty| 4.3.09 @ 12:36PM

Iowans cannot, with logic, deny the same right to marry to polygamists.

hmm_contrib| 4.3.09 @ 12:48PM

ncatty: Since polygamy isn't legal in Iowa, yes they can. The reason gay marriage is now legal in Iowa is because Iowa chose, as a state, to get into the "giving marriage licenses to male-female couples" business. Once it chose to do that, it needed to explain and justify its discrimination towards gay couples, which the Iowa Supreme Court found it could not do. Since Iowa does not offer 3-person marriage licenses, of any gender make-up, there is no discrimination. Hate to rob you of your strawman / slippery slope argument.
It's a great day for equality tho, and I know how much Republicans believe in equality for all, including gay people : they/you keep telling us so.

hmm_contrib| 4.3.09 @ 12:51PM

Real_American (snort): They hate traditional marriage so much they allowed it to be extended to those who wanted it so much they were willing to go through years of hell just to get it; they hate liberty so much they just took a restriction of liberty away from gay people (and how are straights any less free than they were this morning? they lost an ability to restrict other people's freedom?) , and they hate democracy so much they protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority. You don't know much about this country you claim to be the right example of, do you?

ncatty| 4.3.09 @ 12:53PM

Who says polygamy is illegal in Iowa? Isn't that for its Supreme Court to decide?

ncatty| 4.3.09 @ 1:13PM

I have read the Iowa statute and the Court's opinion. The same equal protection analysis used in the opinion could be used to find a similar right for polygamous marriages. Utah would be a good forum for such an argument.

Alan Brooks| 4.3.09 @ 2:56PM

so what if life is empty, you can still rut like a dog with anyone. We don't discriminate on the basis of race, creed, sexual orientation; we're just devoid of virtue.

here is your right to gay marriage or an abortion-- now go away so we can count OUR blessings!

Joseph Smith| 4.4.09 @ 7:10AM

Why do you gays think you can discriminate against us polygamists? We want equal protection too!!

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

More Blog Posts by Philip Klein

http://spectator.org/blog/2009/04/03/gay-marriage-to-be-legal-in-io

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

Special Feature

Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:

A Time for Choosing

James Piereson

The Road from Serfdom

Stephen Moore and Peter Ferrara

FLASHBACK TO: 1984

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Meet the Flukes!

F. H. Buckley | 5.25.12

The Wisconsin Turning Point

Peter Ferrara | 5.23.12

In Search of Muhammad

Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi | 5.25.12

Age and Kyl

Quin Hillyer | 5.25.12

Follow Me

Jay D. Homnick | 5.25.12

A Test of National Honor

Hal G.P. Colebatch | 5.25.12

How About the Record of DOE Capital?

William Tucker | 5.25.12

The Great Debate

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 5.24.12

ADVERTISEMENT