The Iowa Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling Friday finding that the state's same-sex marriage ban violates the constitutional rights of gay and lesbian couples, making Iowa the third state where marriage is legal.Why shouldn't popular opinion matter? Look at Prop 8, even the Californians could strike down gay marriage with a simple majority. This issue should be decided by the majority in ballot initiatives, not by judicial fiat. At least that's what should be done in conservative states where over 51% of people are against gay marriage. If that number dips below 50%, then its up to a conservative judge or legislature or governor to get the job done.
In its decision, the court upheld a 2007 district court judge's ruling that the law violates the state constitution. It strikes the language from Iowa code limiting marriage to only between a man a woman.
"The court reaffirmed that a statute inconsistent with the Iowa constitution must be declared void even though it may be supported by strong and deep-seated traditional beliefs and popular opinion," said a summary of the ruling issued by the court.
The only argument for gay marriage is that the lack of it somehow infringes on their constitutional rights. But where does it say in the Constitution that gays can get married? No where, that's where. Given that I destroyed their only argument in one sentence, you'd think a judge could see that and decide accordingly.
But its so much worse to have gay marriage, which I will describe in detail in a list directly below this sentence.
1. What will we tell our children? My lady and I are childless due to my low sperm motility, but we have several nieces and nephews, some of which are very young and thus susceptible to gay indoctrination. I can just imagine by 3rd youngest nephew Ty Ty coming up to me and asking me about two men getting married or two woman holding hands in the park. I would just be stumped about what to say and would probably go into a biblical tirade, letting my temper get the best of me. And that is not good for anyone. Ty Ty would start crying and I'd have to explain myself at the family BBQ again. Not everyone in my family is a good Christian. Some of them actually voted for Barak Hussain Obama!! So I am sometimes outnumbered at family gatherings and have to tone down my sermons. Either way it goes, little Ty Ty would just get more confused and may decide its okay to become gay. Then he goes to school and some liberal teacher says its okay, then BAM, he becomes gay himself. That is just how it happens and this Iowa ruling DIRECTLY leads to what I just described.
2. All the gays will flood into Iowa and any other state that adopts gay marriage. As the very smart Iowa Republican Steve King recently stated:
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.That is so right, and an excellent analogy with Islamic pilgramage to Mecca. Gays traveling to a state that permits unholy marriage is exactly like radical Moslims marching to their holy land to praise Allah for tricking Americans into voting for their fellow Moslim Barak Hussain Obama. So this is what that Iowa judge did, I hope he is happy. Pretty soon their will be jihadist gays blowing themselves up in a crowded market in downtown Des Moines. Steve King is just plain smart, you should call or email him to thank him for his concise rebuttal of the activist Iowa judges. Here's good ole Steve holding his hand on the Bible (not the Koran like Obama was going to use) and expressing a subtle disdain for having to stand next to Nancy Pelosi and her San Francisco values.
3. God will not look kindly upon Iowans if they fail to reverse this (see post title). For the sake of their souls, this must be overturned.
4. This will hurt Iowa's economy. There are no economic benefits to gays getting married whatsoever. Move along.
5. The judges ruling is disputed by the dictionary. As always, Don Surber hits the nail on the head.
The state Supreme Court unanimously rules that gays can marry, even though the dictionary defines marriage as being between a man and a woman.I had not thought of this before, but maybe that is why Don Surber is the number two blog in the world. He is just plain smart. The first and third definition is "marriage=union between man and woman". Who cares if the fourth definition mentions gay marriage, the first and third trump that easily. Saying that the definition supports gay marriage over traditional marraige is like saying the 09 Baltimore Ravens are better than the 09 Pittsburgh Steelers and the 09 Philadelphia Eagles combined. That is just silly.
Isn’t the law based on language? If the common definition of a word is one way, how can the state Supreme Court in Iowa interpret it another way? They have taken the fourth definition of marriage and concocted out of whole cloth a “right” which is not stated in the Iowa constitution.
Don also makes the point that the courts should have no say in this, it should be the legislature's duty. As described in my point number two, another real smart man, Steve King, makes the same recommendation. I disagree with this as I laid all out in the beginning of this post. The Iowa legislature might not have enough smart people in their current session. Given the numbers at this site, only 47 members of the Iowa House and 20 members of the Senate can be assured to be smart and most certainly moral. There may be enough of the other kind who can be forced to vote smart, assuming that they are appropriately scared into the prospect of an election loss in 2010.
One other good point about the dictionary is how concerned I have been about the liberal bias secretely inserted into the dictionary by the latte-sipping elites at American Heritage and Merriam-Webster. Bernie Goldberg laid it all out on O'Reilly's show. O'Reilly is a straight down the middle moderate so you know the amount of liberal bias must be huge for Bernie to say that on his show. I could go on and on how typical dictionary's are so biased to the liberals, but that is maybe a topic for another post. Luckily, we now have a good dictionary at Dictionary.com, which was cited by good ole Don Surber.