04 April, 2009

Another State Where the LGBT Community Will Now Be Allowed to Suffer the Joys of Marriage

On the one hand, it's awesome to see same-sex couples get their civil rights. On the other hand, I can't help but be a little sad for them. I mean, marriage - bah, humbug:
In Iowa, consenting adults can now get legally married, regardless of their sexual orientation.

The Iowa Supreme Court this morning struck down a 1998 state law that limits marriage to one man and one woman.

The ruling is viewed as a victory for the gay rights movement in Iowa and elsewhere, and a setback for social conservatives who wanted to protect traditional families.

The decision makes Iowa the first Midwestern state, and the fourth nationwide, to allow same-sex marriages. Lawyers for Lambda Legal, a gay rights group that financed the court battle and represented the couples, had hoped to use a court victory to demonstrate acceptance of same-sex marriage in heartland America.

The server is a little overwhelmed this morning, but the state Supreme Court's ruling, which was unanimous, is online.

Looks like it's only a matter of time before same-sex couples get to suffer right alongside the straights in every state. I just hope it happens here in Washington state soon - I've got a set of friends with an infant son who are prime candidates for a nice official wedding. I've got another gay friend who's single but desperately wants to meet the right man and get married, complete with actual picket fence. I'm sure they're not the only ones. Let them eat cake, I say - preferably a chocolate-vanilla marble one with about ten thousand tiers.

Besides, I'd kind of like to see Mecca, and according to Rep. King, I wouldn't even have to travel:

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) reacted with fury to the Court’s decision, calling the ruling “unconstitutional” and denigrating the “activist judges” who decided it. He called for an constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and pressed for immediate action to prevent Iowa from becoming a “Mecca” for gay couples:

Now it is the Iowa legislature’s responsibility to pass the Marriage Amendment to the Iowa Constitution, clarifying that marriage is between one man and one woman, to give the power that the Supreme Court has arrogated to itself back to the people of Iowa. Along with a constitutional amendment, the legislature must also enact marriage license residency requirements so that Iowa does not become the gay marriage Mecca due to the Supreme Court’s latest experiment in social engineering.

King is so upset that he’s using rhetoric that combines what may be his two worst fears: gay people and Muslims.

I know psychologists sometimes treat phobias by exposing people to what they fear. Any gay Muslims in the audience want to volunteer to go visit Steve? It's either that or watch him die of dehydration due to uncontrolled foaming.

You know what's even worse for people like Steve? This:

In recent years, four state Supreme Courts have ruled in support of same sex-marriage.

In Massachusetts, the ruling was written by Justice Margaret Marshall.

In California, the ruling was written by Justice Ronald George.

In Connecticut, the ruling was written by Justice Richard Palmer.

And in Iowa, the ruling was written by Justice Mark Cady.

And what do all four have in common? Each was appointed to their respective state Supreme Court by a Republican governor.

That's gotta sting.

I think it's short, sharp shock time. Fuck this incremental bullshit. Legalize same-sex marriage nationwide, all in one fell swoop. If we're lucky, the shock will give every right winger irreversible apoplexy, and the rest of the country can get on with letting people enjoy basic civil rights.


John Pieret said...

In a fifth state, New Jersey, the court did not find a fundamental right to same-sex "marriage" but found that gays had a fundamental right to all the same rights and benefits that went with marriage and told the legislature to either expand marriage or create a parallel and identical civil union.

The interesting thing is that this hair-splitting was done by a judge appointed by Governor James E. McGreevey, a then-closeted gay man.

Cujo359 said...

What I find extraordinary is that, on the one hand, one state supreme court wouldn't recognize this right (at least, not as marriage), but OTOH, another supreme court could agree unamimously that this was a right.