Same-Sex Marriage Ban Ruled Unconstitutional in Iowa

Iowa 3rd State To Allow Same-Sex Marriage

This came as a surprise to me. I think Same-Sex Marriage and I don't think of states like Iowa. Getting 47 more states on board is going to be a long road though.

Here is what the Supreme court said in their ruling.
"We are firmly convinced the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from the institution of civil marriage does not substantially further any important governmental objective," the Supreme Court wrote.
I agree with those sentiments 100%. There is absolutely no reason why a gay couple should not be recognized under the law as being married. Iowa is a fairly conservative state and I don't think this kind of positive change in social policy would have been approved by voters. However, as time goes by, I hope that more people in this country become enlightened and seek greater changes that will allow every group the freedom to live their lives as they see fit.

I think when the people of Iowa see that this hasn't changed their daily life in any matter they won't care anymore.

paul87920 wrote:

I think when the people of Iowa see that this hasn't changed their daily life in any matter they won't care anymore.

Unfortunately, the religious right is going to pounce on this issue of individual rights and use it to try to rebuild political support. I would urge you to bookmark this site,Theocracy Watch, study it and share it with your friends. Here is a short excerpt from it that talks about what some Republicans in Texas found when they decided to become involved with their local Republicans.
They were appalled by what they found. The party apparatus had been taken over by religious activists intent on bringing "biblical principles" to government: outlawing abortion, ostracizing homosexuals and teaching creationism in public schools, among other things. "We honest to goodness felt like we had fallen through a time warp into a Nazi brown-shirt meeting," Martin said.

Don't underestimate the level of ignorance,hate and intolerance that still exists in this country. I am very hopeful that your generation will be the one starts to changes attitudes in this country towards inclusion rather than exclusion.

Paul, I agree with you.

Sparks - People hate/fear what they don't understand. Unfortunately the LBGT community has been misrepresented not only in movies, but also in pride parades. There will always be a level of intolerance, but I sincerely believe that this can reduce intolerance in Iowa. It does have the potential to stir up intolerance, but I think Iowa can handle it.

paul87920 wrote:

Sparks - People hate/fear what they don't understand. Unfortunately the LBGT community has been misrepresented not only in movies, but also in pride parades. There will always be a level of intolerance, but I sincerely believe that this can reduce intolerance in Iowa. It does have the potential to stir up intolerance, but I think Iowa can handle it.

The LBGT community spends a tremendous amount of energy battling intolerance and fighting for rights that straight people take for granted. In order to create lasting change in this country, the LBGT community must change the way intolerance is perceived. Actions such as gay bashing, ostracizing family members for being gay and discrimination against gays need to be viewed by society as a whole as "socially deviant" behavior. When the LBGT community achieves that change in beliefs, the battle for acceptance will be won and this country will be a better place to live in.

I, for one, could care less what a persons' sexual orientation is; however, the "in your face" type of behaviour that many activists use to draw attention does create a backlash.
Rather than "celebrating" the sometimes outlandish differences the similiarities should be expounded upon.
To many people, their only experience with the "lbgt" community is what they see on television, i.e., the gay pride parade.
I have known gay people that don't care for that image, and as a straight person I would be offended by the same behaviour from straight couples as well.
I always love the line "battling intolerance," reminds me of the line "we cannot tolerate intolerance" I wish I knew where it came from.

Bill B wrote:

I, for one, could care less what a persons' sexual orientation is; however, the "in your face" type of behaviour that many activists use to draw attention does create a backlash.
Rather than "celebrating" the sometimes outlandish differences the similiarities should be expounded upon.
To many people, their only experience with the "lbgt" community is what they see on television, i.e., the gay pride parade.
I have known gay people that don't care for that image, and as a straight person I would be offended by the same behaviour from straight couples as well.
I always love the line "battling intolerance," reminds me of the line "we cannot tolerate intolerance" I wish I knew where it came from.

Why do you feel that a parade on TV is an "in your face" type of behavior? You are free to change channels and watch whatever you choose. The kind of behavior you are talking about is not commonplace at all.Most people come in contact with the LBGT community on a daily basis and aren't even aware of their sexual orientation.

Bill B wrote:

I, for one, could care less what a persons' sexual orientation is; however, the "in your face" type of behaviour that many activists use to draw attention does create a backlash.
Rather than "celebrating" the sometimes outlandish differences the similiarities should be expounded upon.
To many people, their only experience with the "lbgt" community is what they see on television, i.e., the gay pride parade.
I have known gay people that don't care for that image, and as a straight person I would be offended by the same behaviour from straight couples as well.
I always love the line "battling intolerance," reminds me of the line "we cannot tolerate intolerance" I wish I knew where it came from.

I have to agree with you Bill. The "in your face" behavior is real annoying.

Good to see you back, Jack.

happy jack wrote:

I agree – the great majority of gays do not act in a manner that would reveal their sexual orientation. But if gays wish to be accepted by mainstream society, they had either better figure out a way to rein in their rogue spokespersons, or quit complaining.

I don't really feel strongly one way or another about the Gay Pride parade issue. I don't know if they are actually hurting their own cause, or if it's mostly perceived as just another goofy parade, sort of like Mardi Gras. I agree that it's a bit over the top, but I certainly don't expect gays to stop "acting in a manner that would reveal their sexual orientation." Isn't that what "coming out of the closet" was all about in the first place? Are you saying that they should hide their sexual orientation? Or just that they shouldn't flaunt it?

Heretic - Arms in the air smiley for you too.

Bill: I agree with your statement, but out of curiosity I wonder what you consider to be "in your face"?

Sparks: I can't explain what Bill means myself, but personally I find what is on TV downright offensive. I believe it reinforces very negative and very hurtful stereotypes. I honestly don't think people take the movement seriously.

Party: Same question to you as I had for Bill. What do you consider to be "in your face"?

happy: Like Scorpion said, great to have you back. I agree 100% with you saying that the LGBT community needs to rein in rogue spokespeople especially considering what just happened in Iowa.

Scorpion: Iowa presents a great opportunity to open up some dialogue between LBGT groups and the mainstream. I think the mainstream would be more accepting of someone that they can identify with.


Everyone: Additionally I believe the enforcement of the negative stereotypes is very counterproductive to the movement. I can imagine it scares people enough to stay in the closet when they are under the assumption that they are expected to act that way. I especially think it hurts the family unit. There are so many loving gay couples willing to adopt and I can understand a reluctance to hand over a child to a homosexual when they believe all gays are behaving in the ways that they behave in those parades.

This whole thing is absolutely ridiculous. Why in the heck are bedroom activities warranting a special protective class of people?

paul87920 wrote:

Everyone: Additionally I believe the enforcement of the negative stereotypes is very counterproductive to the movement. I can imagine it scares people enough to stay in the closet when they are under the assumption that they are expected to act that way. I especially think it hurts the family unit. There are so many loving gay couples willing to adopt and I can understand a reluctance to hand over a child to a homosexual when they believe all gays are behaving in the ways that they behave in those parades.

Paul,IMO the problem is that the media always focuses on the most flamboyant people in those parades,instead of the overwhelming majority that look and act just like everyone else.

Tiger1 wrote:

This whole thing is absolutely ridiculous. Why in the heck are bedroom activities warranting a special protective class of people?

That probably should have been asked of the government when it stuck its nose into heterosexual marriage years ago...

Paul, to answer your question about "in your face" behavior. I guess I have a problem with gay women dressing like men, wearing very short hair, and trying to look like a dude when you know darn well they are women. Obviously I would also have a problem with men dressing in drag as they call it. Why can't these people be gay without making theirselves stick out like a sore thumb?

party42 wrote:

Why can't these people be gay without making theirselves stick out like a sore thumb?

Biology, mostly. A female with a lot of testosterone in her system will look masculine regardless of any dress or makeup she may be wearing, and they feel more comfortable fitting into the opposite gender role.

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

Paul,IMO the problem is that the media always focuses on the most flamboyant people in those parades,instead of the overwhelming majority that look and act just like everyone else.

As the expression goes, if there are two houses next to each other and one of them is on fire, the media would have no reason to focus on the house that isn't burning.

Which proves my point.

happy jack wrote:

Parades are made up almost solely of flamboyant people.
By its very definition, the purpose of a parade is to put oneself on display.
If you don't want attention drawn to the negative aspects of your lifestyle, then don't put them on display.
Simple, isn't it?

Have you ever actually attended one?

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

Have you ever actually attended one?

Yes, I've been to countless parades, mainly on the Fourth of July.
Why do you ask?

I was referring to a gay pride parade. Ever attend one?