Iowa Supreme Court Overturns Gay Marriage Ban

[mmarsh]

Honesty is now a bad reflection of character simply because an authority figure disagrees with you?

When did it become so improper for a person to engage their mind and not have to be concerned over consequences for the boldness they show in speaking for their beliefs? If she was PRO gay, or gay herself, wouldn't this admonishment be illegal under the equal rights act?

In a public forum it wouldn't be, but Miss America isn't a Public forum its a multi-million dollar business owned by Donald Trump. But when you are applying for a job in any business you should keep your mouth shut. This isn't brain surgery. I have no sympathy.

Ah, the standard of double standards. Anything said outside of the politically-correct reference warrants punishment, unless it goes against the traditional grain. At that time, it is perfectly acceptable and to hell with all the bigots that might have a difference of opinion.

Again a matter of time and place. It would equally stupid if she had had said she was pro-choice and anti-death penalty. She took a chance that her views wouldn't offend someone: They did and she paid for it. Moral of the Story: When you apply for a job, STFU about subjects other people are going to take offense to regardless of your position.

Truly, this is a pathetic case of reverse-bigotry. But it is OK, as we all know that gays make up 51% of America, vote their process, and never whine to get their way when they are the minority.

When she stated she disapproved of gay Marriage that showed the judges that SHE was a bigot. Companies don't want sponsors whom are Bigots, it makes them look bad. It would have been the same thing if she said she didn't believe in interracial marriage...or she didn't like blacks. There are an estimated 4-6 Million gay people in America, (READ: 4-6 Million potential customers) do you want to piss them all off by having a bigoted spokeswoman for the shows sponsors? If I were a CEO and my product spokesperson made a comment like that I would have fired her in a NY minute.

There is a lesson to all liberals here: keep it up, you're ruining this country just as your quasi-socialist agenda dictates you do without the discomfort of a plane ticket to Europe.

Oh please, Remind us all again which recent CONSERVATIVE president took this country into a 8 year nose-dive before lecturing the liberals of anything. And please learn what socialism is before throwing the word around. Socialism is a economic philosophy, it has nothing to do with politics or even being PC. You are so far off in left-field its not even funny. A lesson to you conservatives when you use words like "socialist" that you clearly don't understand, all you do is demonstrate that you haven't a clue of what you are talking about.

 

[Chukpike]

When she stated she disapproved of gay Marriage that showed the judges that SHE was a bigot.

big·ot
Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date:1660
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices ; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

Her remarks did not rise to the level of the definition of Bigot in the Merriam-Webster dictionary.

Apparently the so called "tolerant" liberals are just as bigoted as the rest of us.
Liberals labeling people as bigots. Because they don't accept gay marriage, even if they tolerate gays in society, would tend to show a marked level of intolerance.

And please learn what socialism is before throwing the word around. Socialism is a economic philosophy, it has nothing to do with politics or even being PC. You are so far off in left-field its not even funny. A lesson to you conservatives when you use words like "socialist" that you clearly don't understand, all you do is demonstrate that you haven't a clue of what you are talking about.

Agree he misused the definition of socialism.

Might be that we should all check definitions of words before we use them.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Just an honest question... Wouldn't the intolerance of gays getting married be considered bigotry?

 

[AB_Shorts_Momma]

Why would you consider it bigotry, Rob?

 

[AZ_Infantry]

So then you support gay marriage? Not allowing it prevents groups of people from getting married.

Inequality and perversion are different concepts.

If you want to be perverse and have consensual sex in a disgusting manner, that is your business. If you want my taxes to pay for it, then that is MY business.

I love it when peop-le cannot stick to a subject and red herring it to death with "black people" this and "gays" that.

Too funny.

Get back with me when you want to discuss the subject instead of trolling. You and Rob both.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Inequality and perversion are different concepts.

If you want to be perverse and have consensual sex in a disgusting manner, that is your business. If you want my taxes to pay for it, then that is MY business.

I love it when peop-le cannot stick to a subject and red herring it to death with "black people" this and "gays" that.

Too funny.

Get back with me when you want to discuss the subject instead of trolling. You and Rob both.

If that's the case, I can not want my taxes to go to you because of anything personal of yours... It doesn't make sense... Judge not, lest ye be judged... Golden Rule and all that. Anyone can judge you negatively at any time for any thing... Why should you be exempt from it? Are you in some way superior to someone for a choice they made?




Momma... Treating members of a group with intolerance specifically because of the reason they are in that group and not for a personal reason with an individual is bigotry.

 

[senojekips]

Just an honest question... Wouldn't the intolerance of gays getting married be considered bigotry?

Definitely not, no more than dislike of any socially unacceptable choice makes one a bigot. You know we've been through all this before Rob, yet you keep asking the same questions over and over expecting a different answer.

This tactic of simply wearing down peoples patience with endless repetition is not going to get you the answer you want, as even if they stop debating the subject they still dislike selfish people with socially unacceptable habits, possibly even more so.

It all comes back to the old, "People who pick their nose and eat it argument" Homosexuality is a socially unacceptable choice, you may as well get used to the fact.

 

[AZ_Infantry]

If that's the case, I can not want my taxes to go to you because of anything personal of yours... It doesn't make sense... Judge not, lest ye be judged... Golden Rule and all that. Anyone can judge you negatively at any time for any thing... Why should you be exempt from it? Are you in some way superior to someone for a choice they made?




Momma... Treating members of a group with intolerance specifically because of the reason they are in that group and not for a personal reason with an individual is bigotry.

EXCUSE me? Your taxes, if you pay a dime at all, do nothing for me. I am not married, and my tax bracket is 37% as self-employed. I pay more in taxes than you make, most likely.

But you want to take away my guns. Now I know why. You want a new Europe.

Many, many people here have refuted your arguments with viable, credible FACTS, and all you can come up with is that you have gay friends, guns were made to kill, and you're a liberal arts major.

As Seno opines, you're just touting the same things in spite of the evidence proving you wrong. That is a fool's stance, and I don't think you're a fool. But you definitely need to grow up before you think about getting into the Army, for 99% of real soldiers disagree with you and will not tolerate what the TOS here demand we tolerate.

You need to think about the reality of things, where the evidence lies. Homosexuality is a PROVEN detriment to society whether you are prepared to accept and acknowledge that fact or not. As is gun control. As is atheism.

But you're a young man full of your own truths, which is really a shame. I have many authors I'd like to introduce you to, but you wouldn't get any of the message in your bias.

I keep hoping that one day you'll wake up and realize that life is about fact and not feel-good. I'll remain your friend either way, but my words fall on deaf ears when you and a bunch of perverts kiss and hug and talk about denouncing the Constitution in the name of peaceful feel-me-good principles that, time and time again, history has massacred. I can't change history and neither can you. One of us learns from it, and one of us continues to deny it.

 

[mmarsh]

Inequality and perversion are different concepts.

If you want to be perverse and have consensual sex in a disgusting manner, that is your business. If you want my taxes to pay for it, then that is MY business.

I love it when peop-le cannot stick to a subject and red herring it to death with "black people" this and "gays" that.

Too funny.

Get back with me when you want to discuss the subject instead of trolling. You and Rob both.

Oh because we don't agree with you that makes us Trolls? How truly sad.

Rob and I only responded to someone else's comment. You haven't been reading your own posts have you? You're the one who keeps firing the Off-topic one-liners. First socialism, then how libs are ruining America, now taxes. So whose really being the troll? Next time practice what you preach before standing on your podium.

The reason I oppose a gay marriage ban isnt because of gays. Its because I cannot stand a bunch of self-righteous busybodies sticking their nose in other peoples business as if their own s*** dont stink. What do you care if gays marry, it doesnt concern you in the slightest. I tend to my own business, unless someone else lifestyle has a direct impact on my life.

 

[AB_Shorts_Momma]

I think the whole idea of gay marriages includes more than just "I agree, I disagree".

At the moment, a gay couple cannot insure the other one. With the legalization of marriage, the cost of insurance will mostlikely rise higher. That effects all of us.

Although gays are "comming out of the closet", not all of them are. You can argue why, but it is still not well accepted in MOST of the US. The majority of America still is not thrilled about the gay lifestyle. Look at the popularity drop for many actors who "come out of the closet". (Yes I know some have over come it too, but for more, it has been akin to career suicide).

As far as California goes, the article mentioned that the gay marriage issue would be decided by the California Supreme Court by June. I don't see how their Supreme Court could over rule what the people have voted on. The population of California has made their voice heard, and that population has said they do NOT want gay marriage. It seems pretty clear to me.

On a personal note, I have a family member who is gay. It doesn't make me love that person less, and I even like that person's partner. It also did not change my views about gay marriage.

 

[AZ_Infantry]

Oh because we don't agree with you that makes us Trolls? How truly sad.

Rob and I only responded to someone else's comment. You haven't been reading your own posts have you? You're the one who keeps firing the Off-topic one-liners. First socialism, then how libs are ruining America, now taxes. So whose really being the troll? Next time practice what you preach before standing on your podium.

The reason I oppose a gay marriage ban isnt because of gays. Its because I cannot stand a bunch of self-righteous busybodies sticking their nose in other peoples business as if their own s*** dont stink. What do you care if gays marry, it doesnt concern you in the slightest. I tend to my own business, unless someone else lifestyle has a direct impact on my life.

Trolling and being a troll are hardly the same thing, and I've little doubt you are aware of that enough that further explanation would be demeaning and condescending.

I've explained in detail my opposition to gay marriage and supported it with evidence that it does indeed affect me, my family and kids, and even my heritage as an American and all this country does and should stand for. No one thus far has been capable of refuting that allowing them to marry will likely increase taxes, health care costs, and pave the way for self-interest groups to petition for anything and everything they view as their "cause" as they proselytize my so-called "bigotry" just because I disagree with them. That you and Rob choose to ignore these facts simply because you cannot dispute them makes them no less relevant or factual. The entire argument that it doesn't affect me is a lie, be it an intentional one or otherwise.

As AB posted just above, I have had gay friends that I got along with very well - they were not the radical types I am accosted with daily over every media outlet incorrectly assuming that my opposition to their desire makes me a bigot against their choice in sexual partner. They did not change my views on gay marriage, nor did they try; unlike so many gays, they understood that I had a right to my opinion just as they had a right to theirs. More-so, they understood the tax increase and the legal precedent that most gays ignore and refuse to account for.

The entire "it's none of your business as it doesn't affect you" is BS. As a citizen of this nation, and especially as a veteran, ANY legal precedent affects me, and never more than when lawmakers are willing to override the will of the people they are sworn to represent. When our government is allowed to ignore the wishes of the masses, it ceases to be "for the people."

Don't tell me that that little tidbit doesn't affect me, sir. It affects all of us. That a minority sect disagrees with the majority is not a case to be overturned by special interest groups lining the pockets of politicians with money.

I, for one, and sick and tired of being led by crooks that will sell me out for a few extra bucks.

 

[Rob Henderson]

EXCUSE me? Your taxes, if you pay a dime at all, do nothing for me. I am not married, and my tax bracket is 37% as self-employed. I pay more in taxes than you make, most likely.

I pay plenty... I work for the city. But I wasn't referring to JUST me... Anyone in the United States who pays taxes could say something because I'd be willing to bet that someone's taxes are going to back to you in refund check form. The point I'm trying to make here is that just because you pay taxes doesn't automatically give you the right to say who can and can't get married... It'd be different if you were personally giving the money directly to the people wanting to get married and you had absolutely no say in the matter... It'd probably take a lot of figuring, but I wonder how much money you actually give to marriages.... It's probably something like 50 cents. There are a lot of people in the United States. You're chunk to the marriage fund is NOT any bigger than mine or anyone else's.

But you want to take away my guns. Now I know why. You want a new Europe.

Yes, that's it... I'm tired of living here, but I don't want to leave... That makes sense... The only reason you're saying the things you're saying (and you is NOT generic here...)is that you don't want to accept that times are changing. It's what being a conservative is all about. Denying any type of progress because "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"... The part you're missing is that there is PLENTY of stuff broken in this country... Like the fact that people who make millions of dollars a year are paying the same amount of taxes as someone who makes 5 times LESS than them. Like the fact that people who are genuinely poor in this country can't afford insurance, and therefore, can't afford proper medical treatment when they need it. Like the fact that some people think we need access to the same guns and other weapons technology because Big Bad US Government (who takes care of you in ways you probably don't even know of) is going to come and take over the country. Like the fact that a person can say "I don't think you two should be allowed to get married." "Why?" "Because my personal opinion doesn't think it's normal."

Many, many people here have refuted your arguments with viable, credible FACTS, and all you can come up with is that you have gay friends, guns were made to kill, and you're a liberal arts major.

You've missed a lot, I see... Must be the male selective hearing gene at work... Or have you just turned your ears on what I have to say because YOU don't want to hear it? Clearly if you think that's all I've come up with, then you HAVEN'T been reading my posts thoroughly enough.

As Seno opines, you're just touting the same things in spite of the evidence proving you wrong. That is a fool's stance, and I don't think you're a fool. But you definitely need to grow up before you think about getting into the Army, for 99% of real soldiers disagree with you and will not tolerate what the TOS here demand we tolerate.

Have you read anything that would lead you to me getting into the Army? And why WOULDN'T 99% of soldiers disagree with me? They're as red as you are!

You need to think about the reality of things, where the evidence lies. Homosexuality is a PROVEN detriment to society whether you are prepared to accept and acknowledge that fact or not. As is gun control. As is atheism.

Sources. Show me the hard and fast EVIDENCE, factual evidence (not someone with a Ph.D's opinion, I want graphs) that say homosexuality is a detriment to society. As far as gun control goes, all things in moderation... I've never once said I'm for the banning of guns in their entirety. I've said (countless times now, but you still don't seem to want to hear what I have to say) that there is no need for large scale weapons in civilian homes. As far as atheism goes... I'll let your good buddy Senojekips show you how wrong you are there.

But you're a young man full of your own truths, which is really a shame. I have many authors I'd like to introduce you to, but you wouldn't get any of the message in your bias.

Just like you haven't been able to read anything of mine with comprehension through the red-colored lenses.

I keep hoping that one day you'll wake up and realize that life is about fact and not feel-good. I'll remain your friend either way, but my words fall on deaf ears when you and a bunch of perverts kiss and hug and talk about denouncing the Constitution in the name of peaceful feel-me-good principles that, time and time again, history has massacred. I can't change history and neither can you. One of us learns from it, and one of us continues to deny it.

So we should just give up and bunker down for the rest of time? I REFUSE to believe that God would give us this life and not want us to try and better it. I refuse to believe that He wouldn't want us to try and coexist more peacefully. It was Eve's fault that we didn't live in Eutopia, but does that mean we should just accept it and live a crappy life? No. We should try to get as close to perfect as possible. There is no reason to live a bad life, AZ, why would you?

 

[AZ_Infantry]

Rob, I don't live a bad life or an angry one. I want for everyone what I want for myself, but with common sense limitations. Yes, the conservative mandate does reflect a good deal of traditional roots. The liberal believes in change that is progressive. The libertarian believes only in the people defining what changes, if any, should be implemented. I am a conservative. When I turned 17, I signed the paperwork to defend this nation as a soldier - the nation I knew, not the nation others wanted.

Brother, let's not bicker about this. You have your thoughts on the matter, and I have mine; we are free not to be influenced to conform to each others'.

I have no ill feeling about gay people. That is their choice, just as it is my choice to insane amounts of large guns that scare liberals. I respect their freedom of choice. I ask to be respected in return.

Call me obstinate, a bigot, or label me with whatever stereotype that fits your bill - but the liberals want special rights for gays as they take away my rights to own an assault rifle.

That is not equality, and it is not fair.

Until the marriage movement can understand and demand true equality, I will be opposed to anything they hypocritically represent.

Doesn't mean we can't be friends and enjoy our discussions and debates. :drunkb:

 

[Chukpike]

Just an honest question... Wouldn't the intolerance of gays getting married be considered bigotry?

No.
Please try and at least look up the definition for your self. Not agreeing with one issue gays and lesbians have, does not make a person a bigot.

Like being in favor of gun control except for conceal carry weapons.
Tolerance is one thing, being forced to accept something you feel is inherently wrong is another.

 

[AB_Shorts_Momma]

Let me give an example:

One of my best friends is playing "Patty cake" with her ex-husband. No one's business, right?

Now factor in her 3 adult children who are upset about this. Not their business, right?

This guy was physically abusive to her. To the point he had a gun and planned on doing a murder suicide when she left him.

The kids are to the point they don't talk to her much. So? Why not just text her if they don't want to talk to her? She changed her signature for texting to something about loving him.

She is old enough to make her own decisions and we can do nothing about them. On the other hand, she has made it even harder on us by shoving her decision in our faces.

That's about how I feel about gay marriage.

I imagine this will wind up at the US Supreme Court. I still think it is for the voters to decide upon it, not a court.

 

[tomtom22]

Everybody please stick to the subject which is: "Iowa Supreme Court Overturns Gay Marriage Ban"

Not Taxes, not gun control, not Bush administration or not anything else!

 

[mmarsh]

No.
Please try and at least look up the definition for your self. Not agreeing with one issue gays and lesbians have, does not make a person a bigot.

Like being in favor of gun control except for conceal carry weapons.
Tolerance is one thing, being forced to accept something you feel is inherently wrong is another.

Not agreeing with gays or their lifestyle doesn't make one a bigot, people are entitled to their beliefs. But attempting to deny them their civil rights absolutely does make you a bigot. And therein lies the difference.

Declaration of Independence states "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness".

Furthermore the 14th Amendment requires that states to guerentee equal protection under the law.

Therefore if all men are created equally as stated in the DoI and that entitled to equal protection as stated in the 14th Amendment that means that nobody has the right to tell gays that cannot marry, because to do so would automatically suggest that gays are inferior to hetrosexuals.

And this was EXACTLY the reasoning that the Iowa court overturned the Marriage Ban -on the grounds that such a ban violated a persons right to equal protection.

AZ_Infantry

Yes the is a difference one is a noun the other a verb. But still doesn't change the fact that disagreeing with you is not "trolling", nor that we are being "trolls" because we strongly disagree with you.

Regardless...

So far you made a lot of accusations on alot of subject but provided no evidence. I too, would like to see a verifiable source about gays being a proven detriment to society from a trustworthy source and not some radical wingnut website. Same goes of how how two gay man getting married will magically and negatively affect your family, daughter, dog, heath insurence, taxes and whatever else you mentioned but failed to actually prove. All you have stated are theories...not facts, and some pretty wild theories ones at that.

(Pst...There is a gay married guy at my office, that must explain my sudden craving for bottled water, leather pants and Village People music. You know I think your're right -I must be turning gay. Its the GAY PLOT! I must tell my fiancee that I cannot marry her because Gays are using telepathy to assimilate me into gay collective .

 

[AB_Shorts_Momma]

Homosexuality has been around for a long time, even noted in the Old Testimate (used as a reference in time, not validity of God). Therefore, I do not see the arguement that All men are created equal standing up, or even being used in a court case. The argument in court will be is a same-sex marriage legal. Not can same-sex live toghether, is it right or wrong, etc.

Imho, the arguement will have to be made as to WHY gay marriages should be recognized. Based on the ballet issue votes, the majority of people do not want it recognized.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Why SHOULDN'T they be recognized?

 

[mmarsh]

Homosexuality has been around for a long time, even noted in the Old Testimate (used as a reference in time, not validity of God). Therefore, I do not see the arguement that All men are created equal standing up, or even being used in a court case. The argument in court will be is a same-sex marriage legal. Not can same-sex live toghether, is it right or wrong, etc.

Imho, the arguement will have to be made as to WHY gay marriages should be recognized. Based on the ballet issue votes, the majority of people do not want it recognized.

In 1953 most people didn't want segregation ended either...but it was by the SCOTUS and not by popular choice either. And BTW many of the segregationists used the very same arguement against blacks that the homophobes use against the gays.

But our Constitution isn't based on the old testament (a good thing, as the old testament has some rather nasty ideas in it). We have a secular system of government not a religious theocracy. Therefore the old testament is worth exactly zilch when it comes to American governing society and rule of law. What we use are what the founding fathers gave us and nothing else.