Iowa Supreme Court Tears Down Marriage| Support HJR 6

iowa supreme court nueters marriageThe Judicial Arm at Work Again

The Iowa supreme court has inserted a sexual orientation requirement into marriage, where there wasn’t one before.

Of course, even though marriage is a social contract, no one wants to let the people vote to decide how their society is organized.

See this from Brian Brown at NOM:

“Injustice has been served today. The gay marriage movement today once again used the courts to push an untruth on unwilling Iowans: Same-sex unions are not marriages and Iowans should not be forced to treat them as such.”

“The majority of courts as well as the majority of Americans have rejected the arguments the Iowa judges imposed.” There is no more a constitutional right to gay marriage than there is a constitutional right to have your cat called a dog, because after all they are both small furry animals with four legs and a tail.”

Reading the decision is like watching another bit of the fabric of our civilization unravel:

Why do same-sex couples need marriage?  “The inability to obtain for themselves and for their children the personal and public affirmation that accompanies marriage.” Translation: “Iowans don’t think two guys pledging to a homosexual union are a marriage. So we, the guys with the fancy law school degrees and the black robes, the ones who know better than ignorant you, are going to give same-sex relationships the public affirmation the public hasn’t.”

The most heartbreaking sentence however is Footnote 26.

In Footnote 26 these justices conclude: “The traditional notion that children need a mother and a father to be raised into healthy, well-adjusted adults is based more on stereotype than anything else.”

Justices? Injustices. I hate being right about something so sad: but gay marriage really is about rejecting the natural family, the importance of bringing together the two creators of the child, the mom and the dad, to raise their baby in love together. The Iowa court ruling once again makes that connection crystal clear.

Read it and weep.

Or if you are like me, read it and rise up to fight for the truth!  Fight for justice for our children, fight for love of the core values of our own (and any decent) civilization.

Rep. Steven King in Iowa has issued a stinging rebuke to this court and a stirring call to the Iowa Democratic leaders to permit the people of Iowa to decide the future of marriage. We’ll be partnering with him and other Iowans to urge the legislature to act now to reverse this injustice.

The battle ahead is immense. This is one of the legislatures “flipped” by gay billionaire Tim Gill–exactly in anticipation of this moment. If I have your support, I know the fight is worth it!

Can you help us at this critical time by giving $50, $500, or even, if God has given you the means, $5,000 to support marriage? Can you afford to pledge even $1 a month to support marriage?

“Unlike the people of California, the people of Iowa have no direct way to get this issue on the ballot so that they can take marriage back from the courts,” notes Maggie Gallagher, president of NOM. “Once again the most undemocratic branch of government is being used to advance an agenda the majority of Americans reject. Marriage means a husband and wife. That’s not discrimination, that’s common sense.”

“Even in states like Vermont where they are pushing this issue through legislatures, gay marriage advocates are totally unwilling to let the people decide these issues directly,” agreed Brown. “They’ve just about run out of courts willing to radically redefine marriage. The next step for gay marriage advocates will be to use these new laws to push Congress to overturn the federal Defense of Marriage Act, and then use the federal courts to impose gay marriage on all 50 states.” –Brian Brown, NOM

Articles to read:

UFI: Iowa Supreme Court: Same-Sex Marriage Ban Is Unconstitutional

Americans For Truth: Iowa Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Ruling an Assault on Midwestern Values, Says AFTAH’s LaBarbera

Kingfisher: Iowa Supreme Court

What you can do:

Support HJR 6: The Iowa Marriage Amendment

Go here

Email the link to your friends in Iowa.

<>Ruby

photo by nrbelex

Advertisements

11 Comments

  1. April 3, 2009 at 9:47 am

    […] Read the summary I wrote at Beetle Babee […]

  2. Clay A. Sacramento said,

    April 3, 2009 at 12:40 pm

    > “The traditional notion that children need a mother and a father to be raised into healthy, well-adjusted adults is based more on stereotype than anything else.”

    This above statement cannot be supported by any credible research whatsoever. I am amazed it is part of any ruling. To the contrary, there is a tremendous amount of research that contradicts this statement wholheartedly.

    This is entirely about justifying the behavior. We have been foolishly duped into tolerance the last 3 decades. The guilt associated with choosing the lifestyle must be overwhelmingly crushing. This is simply a rhetorical question, but perhaps if we were to simply give in, the guilt would not really go away, and the behavior would consume itself? The “fun” of being bad would simply dissipate the thrill? Just a thought, that has some unique backwards merit? I would not suggest giving in whatsoever. But I think the majority of the gay lifestlye is no different than being a hippy in the 60’s. When it becomes common, then the allure is gone.

    Obviously the small minority of the leaders, know EXACTLY what they are doing. Destroying families, and trashing any religion that supports traditional marriage.

  3. Euripides said,

    April 3, 2009 at 1:23 pm

    Wow. Another stunning display of ignorance of constitutions by none other than the justices of a state supreme court. I suppose once one judge made up the idea of a constitutional right to marry, then all the rest have to follow precedent – whether it’s a good decision or not.

  4. April 3, 2009 at 1:42 pm

    Thanks for the write up BB. It is disappointing that this kangaroo court has attacked marriage and family in such a way.

    I agree with you Clay, the best parents are a biological married husband and wife, according to the research.

  5. Regular Guy said,

    April 4, 2009 at 9:13 am

    It never ceases to amaze me that so many so called “Christians” continue to live in a world wear their own personal bias colors their view on treating their fellow citizens equally.

    NOTHING about recent events in California, Vermont or Iowa require religious organizations to honor same-sex marriage if they choose not to. Recognition of same-sex marriage simply allows same-sex couples to receive the same federal and state benefits their heterosexual counterparts receive. As a tax-paying American citizen, I respect the rights of religious organizations and their followers to believe as they so choose. Why is it so difficult for those same individuals to recognize my right to equal treatment under the law?

  6. rubyeliot said,

    April 4, 2009 at 11:26 am

    I hadn’t seen that footnote report. It’s sort of embarrassing for the state of Iowa. At least the supreme court justices. Did they look at any research?

  7. Yours Sincerely said,

    April 4, 2009 at 2:49 pm

    We’ll do our best to help the battle!

  8. Chairm said,

    April 4, 2009 at 4:55 pm

    Regular Guy said: “Recognition of same-sex marriage simply allows same-sex couples to receive the same federal and state benefits their heterosexual counterparts receive.”

    You mixed categories.

    Same-sex and opposite-sex are comparable categories.

    But opposite-sex is NOT one and the same as “heterosexual” so your use of “heterosexual counterparts” is wrong.

    There is a large nonmarital category. It includes two-sexed kinds of arrangements and types of relationships.

    The lack of the other sex does not signify a “homosexual” category or classification.

    The Iowa Court opinion made this same fundamental error in the name of “intimacy”. They left that undefined.

    Regular Guy, what do you think they meant by “intimacy” and can you find this in the marriage statute or in the state constitution?

    Or did they just pull it out of their … hats?

  9. karisa said,

    April 4, 2009 at 6:25 pm

    Beetle Babee,
    Could you tell me which family organizations/websites you think are most important to watch? I am always up to call, write, donate if I can, but most often I get emails last minute saying, ‘The vote is today!’ or ‘tomarrow!’ call your legislators! And they are always big issues to take away the rights of families and freedoms that true Americans hold dear. And sometimes I drop everything and do it, but sometimes I feel so frustrated because I can’t and there is never any time. It’s like a well coordinated rush to push things through before America wakes up. Every time I look at my inbox there’s a something to stress about. But I’m having a hard time while raising my kids, being aware of every courtroom fight, every legislative session, in every state, for our nation, and the UN as well!!!! I’ve accepted the fact that the elite in power are trying to take away our rights and the rights of the family and far over reaching the bounds of the constitution, and I can’t just sit back and expect them to do the right thing anymore. I have to fight! But it sure would be nice to have some watchdog websites who are well informed about what is coming up. Your website is great, and CAPE is a good one for my home schooling career, but for a heads up in advance of our government’s self serving, freedom crushing agenda, are there any others you recommend? If you cannot, I’ll find them somehow, and do my best with what I can and a lot of prayer for our country.

  10. Dylan M said,

    April 9, 2009 at 12:15 pm

    “The guilt associated with choosing the lifestyle must be overwhelmingly crushing”

    This makes your ignorance blatantly obvious. It is proven that homosexuality is not a choice. Perhaps you should do the research before you make yourself look like an idiot. Here, check out some of these links so that you can help yourself become less of a narrow-minded bigot.

    http://www.sciencechatforum.com/bulletin/viewtopic.php?t=9528&sid=35639770e1a631803de3a91182bca3b6

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080705070356AAqBDWh

    This next one also says that it does not affect the development of a child to have two same-sex parents.

    http://www.youdebate.com/cgi-bin/scarecrow/topic.cgi?forum=18&topic=490

    “perhaps if we were to simply give in, the guilt would not really go away, and the behavior would consume itself?”

    Gays have been around for a very long time and they will stick around until the end of the world.

    Marriage was originally between a man and however many women he wanted, then between a white man and white woman or black man and black woman. Then it was just between a man and woman.

    The definition of marriage has been changed so many times, why are you so grudging to have it change for the better once more? Same-sex marriage is allowed in Canada and we’re fine, so stop whining as if it is the end of the world.

  11. April 13, 2009 at 9:54 am

    The Iowa supreme court has inserted a sexual orientation requirement into marriage, where there wasn’t one before.

    Of course, even though marriage is a social contract, no one wants to let the people vote to decide how their society is organized.

    You’ve made two errors. First, the Iowa Supreme Court did not insert “a sexual orientation requirement into marriage”. The government cannot disallow two people of the same sex from entering into a contract. That is discrimination based upon sex, not sexual orientation. It would be like the government only allowing women to sign contracts for being clerks as state employees while they allowed only men to sign contracts for being construction laborers. The discrimination, again, is upon sex, not sexual orientation.

    The second error is that you called marriage a “social contract”. It is a social institution, but as far as its contract status is concerned with the government, it is a secular contract. Your particular religion does not get special treatment and consideration here.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: