Gay marriage now legal in Iowa

  • News
  • Thread starter Coin
  • Start date
  • #1
560
1

Main Question or Discussion Point

The http://pamshouseblend.com/diary/10218/the-iowa-supreme-court-decision [Broken] has just unanimously ruled that the equal protection clause of the state constitution requires marriage equality for same-sex couples. As of April 24 when the ruling takes effect, Iowa will join Massachusetts and Connecticut as the only U.S. states where same-sex marriage is currently considered legal.

This happened just one day after the Vermont state legislature approved a measure that would legalize same-sex marriage there without any judicial prompting (the bill is not law yet, and the Republican governor has pledged to veto, but this may not matter as the bill passed with a veto-proof majority in the Senate and just three or four votes shy of a veto-proof majority in the House); and two days after the Parliament of Sweden passed a bill legalizing same-sex marriage there.

I am happy with how this month is going so far :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
mgb_phys
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
7,774
12
quote from wiki
Iowa's population is among the best-educated and Iowa is one of the safest states.
 
  • #3
167
3
sign0072.gif


Eh, close enough.
 
  • #4
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,213
174
So I guess this means that Iowans can expect a dramatic decrease in gay sex.
 
  • #5
turbo
Gold Member
3,077
45
So I guess this means that Iowans can expect a dramatic decrease in gay sex.
No. Once they are married, the frequency and quality of sex will fall off, based on who forgot to do the laundry or neglected to put the cap back on the toothpaste.
 
  • #6
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,213
174
No. Once they are married, the frequency and quality of sex will fall off, based on who forgot to do the laundry or neglected to put the cap back on the toothpaste.
Gotcha! I said "decrease". :biggrin:
 
  • #7
turbo
Gold Member
3,077
45
  • #8
Moonbear
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
11,490
51
I'm especially glad to see states beyond New England supporting gay rights. It sets an even stronger precedent to show it's not just a regional trend, but simply the right thing to do nationally.
 
  • #9
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,213
174
I think that our founding fathers had more faith in human morality than what has turned out to be reality. If only they could have see the future. The Constitution might have been more specific on certain points.
I'm sure Ben Franklin would agree.
 
  • #10
10
3
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090404/ap_on_re_us/iowa_gay_marriage [Broken]
In the meantime, same-sex marriage opponents may try to enact residency requirements for marriage so that gays and lesbians from across the country could not travel to Iowa to wed.
This pisses me off. I'm not gay, so I'd better be able to decide where I get to marry someday! They better be careful how they word their law on this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,213
174
Is that sarcasm? Post a quote, I'm curious.
Among those who ran away from the intolerant orthodoxy of Boston was Franklin. He ended up in Philadelphia, a place unlike much of the world. There were Lutherans and Moravians and Quakers and even Jews, as well as Calvinists, living side by side in what became known as the City of Brotherly Love. Franklin helped formulate the creed that they would all be better off, personally and economically, if they embraced an attitude of tolerance.

...He also wrote parodies that poked fun at Puritan intolerance...
http://www.time.com/time/2003/franklin/bffranklin7.html [Broken]

And he liked his women.
http://books.google.com/books?id=H1ImhvDsaJEC&pg=PA67&lpg=PA67&dq="Benjamin+Franklin"+sex&source=bl&ots=SrL0Q1EUZd&sig=0Ir7NNzXLEgDevZ-Dvj0ZNCZKNA&hl=en&ei=MXjXSc7EBZWSswPr6o2uCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8#PPA68,M1

Jefferson, on the other hand, produced children with his slave, Sally Hemings.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,213
174
...The Founding Fathers also operated in a strikingly similar media climate - the 1790s was perhaps the last time the media poured forth so many sex scandals before a relative silence that would endure well into the mid-20th century. And the 1790s was not so unusual for the 18th century. Despite what you may have learned in school, people actually had sex in the colonial era -- and more importantly they talked and wrote about it. And not just about women. Sex was an important part of masculinity...

...The shocking engraving -- a rarity in early American newspapers -- depicted one Freemason penetrating another with a wooden peg commonly used in ship-building. It enraged the Freemasons, who subsequently boycotted the newspaper and lobbied the government to punish the printer...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/11/12/INGTTM5DU41.DTL
 
  • #13
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,213
174
There is nothing new under the sun. Don't live with your head in the clouds.
 
  • #14
1,838
7
Looks like Europe http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6200005.stm" [Broken]when it comes to debating these sorts of issues in a rational way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
Hootenanny
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
9,622
6
Well, I will give you that it was a rather ridiculous and possibly inconsiderate analogy to draw, however, on forums like these, just saying "I dont agree with gay marriage" wouldnt really get your point across effectively would it?
Why not?

In any case, such a statement would not have been tolerated if it where made about any other group of people. For example, if someone where to make a similar comment regarding interracial marriages, there would have been an outcry. Equally, if someone had compared interracial sex to bestiality would you have been so quick to jump to their defence?
 
  • #16
turbo
Gold Member
3,077
45
This thread is going way off-topic. The issue under consideration is if gay couples can receive legal recognition of their relationships and qualify for things some married people seem to take for granted. Little things like joint-ownership of property, the ability to have belongings, real estate, and financial accounts roll seamlessly to the survivor instead of having to endure probate and will-challenges from disaffected relatives, and the ability to enjoy benefits normally extended to spouses, like family health insurance coverage, more favorable taxation rates, etc.

The arguments against gay marriage often take the form of "where will this lead?" and "what will happen to our society?" Let's see... fairness and equity for people in same-sex relationships, abolition of legal penalties (restricted rights, restricted access to legal protections) against people in same-sex relationships... I could go on, but you get the point. The world is not going to cease to exist if gay people get the same rights that the rest of us take for granted. At worst, some moral absolutists will have to seek treatment for depression after their attempts to derail a long-overdue recognition of the value of the lives of homosexuals fail to overturn the court's decision.
 
  • #17
1,838
7
At worst, some moral absolutists will have to seek treatment for depression...
Or, they could ask for asylum in Saudi Arabia...
 
  • #18
230
0
Woo, good!
 
  • #19
turbo
Gold Member
3,077
45
  • #20
142
0
In any case, such a statement would not have been tolerated if it where made about any other group of people. For example, if someone where to make a similar comment regarding interracial marriages, there would have been an outcry. Equally, if someone had compared interracial sex to bestiality would you have been so quick to jump to their defence?
Your point being...? The whole issue here is that some people feel gay marriage is immoral... Apparently by today's standards its not so outlandish to speak out against it. Similarly, some people still feel interracial marriage is wrong. Are their opinions correct? Neither yes or no, an opinion is an opinion. Does the vast majority always agree with someones opinion? No. Are opinions always moral/reasonable/sensible? No. They are opinions nonetheless.

I was not standing up for what D said to clear things up (because apparently there is some misunderstanding). I was respecting his right to an opinion as opposed to (What I felt was blindly) bashing him like some people did. Were his words very very harsh look back, yes they were.

To Cristo-

"Of course, that might be just my liberal [sic] part of the world."
- good use of unnecessary non-liberal bashing.

"Regardless, as I said above, the argument is pretty moot, since gay sex is not the issue being discussed here! "

-I still dont understand your logic of thinking the statement didnt apply at all to the argument. Its NOT about specifics, its about where we draw the line between immoral and moral...
 
  • #21
142
0
The arguments against gay marriage often take the form of "where will this lead?" and "what will happen to our society?" Let's see... fairness and equity for people in same-sex relationships, abolition of legal penalties (restricted rights, restricted access to legal protections) against people in same-sex relationships... I could go on, but you get the point. The world is not going to cease to exist if gay people get the same rights that the rest of us take for granted. At worst, some moral absolutists will have to seek treatment for depression after their attempts to derail a long-overdue recognition of the value of the lives of homosexuals fail to overturn the court's decision.

Turbo, thank you for the breathe of fresh air :smile:. All good points.
 
  • #22
siddharth
Homework Helper
Gold Member
1,127
0
Your point being...? The whole issue here is that some people feel gay marriage is immoral... Apparently by today's standards its not so outlandish to speak out against it. Similarly, some people still feel interracial marriage is wrong. Are their opinions correct? Neither yes or no, an opinion is an opinion.
Um... no. Not all opinions have equal value.

Some are based on logical reasoning and rationality, and some are based on flawed reasoning, which are clearly incorrect.
 
  • #23
Hootenanny
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
9,622
6
Um... no. Not all opinions have equal value.

Some are based on logical reasoning and rationality, and some are based on flawed reasoning, which are clearly incorrect.
My point exactly. Well said siddharth! :approve:
 
  • #24
arildno
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
9,970
131
Having a public recognition of one's own "significant others" do have implications beyond merely economic concerns.

To take one example:

At the heights of the AIDS epidemic, the rational hospital rules restricting patient access primarily to spouse and family members had a particularly tragic side-effect in that a longtime companion were denied access to their dying lover. Because he could not be considered a "spouse" to the dying man, or that the previously estranged family of the victim did not want him to be there.

Now, as I said, I do think the hospital rules concerning patient access is basically sound.

Thus, I would not like to see the rules gone, and with officially recognized partners, the scenario sketched above will not occur to the extent that it did before.
 
  • #25
142
0
Um... no. Not all opinions have equal value.

Some are based on logical reasoning and rationality, and some are based on flawed reasoning, which are clearly incorrect.
Im not out to start a fire-storm here, but im gonna have to disagree with that statement because everyone defines logic as well as rationality different... What might seem logical and rational to you might be pure gibberish to someone else... You cant just say that something is not logical when it comes to a matter of pure opinion such as this.

If something is a set in stone fact, then yes, there can be a wrong opinion or belief about it, but for open ended things like this, the same can not be said....

flawed reasoning?? Err you reason based on your personal rationality and personal logic when it comes to matters that dont contain fact and are OPINION based... So something could be perfectly reasonable to someone that isnt reasonable to another.
 

Related Threads for: Gay marriage now legal in Iowa

Replies
19
Views
4K
Replies
24
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • Last Post
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
77
Views
8K
Top