Sponsored links
|
Status:The Associated Press reported that:
On 2009-APR-03, the seven justices on the Iowa Supreme Court continued this civil rights heritage when they unanimously determined that the state's ban on same-sex marriage (SSM) was unconstitutional because it violated the equal protection clause of the Iowa constitution. This clause is present in many state constitutions and in the U.S. Constitution. It requires governments to treat people equally, as far as possible. Same-sex marriages began very quickly after the ruling. A poll taken by the University of Iowa just before the court ruling sampled Iowans' opinion on the recognition of same-sex relationships: whether they should be allowed to marry, given the option of a civil union with the benefits of marriage without the name, or be treated only as roommates. Results indicated that most Iowans supported either same-sex marriage or civil unions. But only 26% support same-sex marriage. A similar poll asking adults in the states whether they were for or against SSM would probably have been about 10 percentage points or more higher. A meta-study was published in a paper by Jeffrey Lax and Justin Phillips of Columbia University. It analyzed each of the polls for all 50 states and shows the increase in percentage support for SSM. In Iowa, support was:
Support is increasing at about 1 percentage point a year. This is a fairly typical rate for major civil rights matters:
It will probably take until about 2020 before most adults in the state support SSM. On Monday, 2009-APR-27, same-sex couples across the state began obtaining marriage licenses in their county recorder offices. Some obtained judicial waiver of the normal three-day waiting period and were able to marry immediately. On election day of 2010-NOV-02, three of the seven justices on the state Supreme Court were on the ballot for retention. All were rejected by the voters. This is the first time since 1962 that an Iowa Supreme Court justice has been rejected. 3 A constitutional revision had been proposed for the 2014-NOV ballot. It was being publicized as an amendment that will prohibit future same-sex marriages and forcibly divorce currently married same-sex couples against their will. However, Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal (D) has vowed to never allow this constitutional amendment to be debated in the Senate. It appears to be a stealth amendment in that its wording would do much more than terminate same-sex marriage in Iowa. It would also prevent the legislature from creating civil unions, domestic partnerships, or any other recognition of loving, committed same-sex relationships in the future -- a provision of which most voters in the state approve. Finally it would seem to forcibly terminate common law marriages in the state. By 2013-FEB, some commentators speculate that the state Republican Party has abandoned efforts to terminate same-sex marriage in Iowa. According to the Omaha World-Herald:
With the Iowa Senate under Democratic control, the House under Republican control, the matter seems stalled for now in the Iowa Legislature. Also, when one considers that:
the outlook for ending SSM in Iowa looks weaker by the year.
Topics covered in this section:
References used:The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above menu. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
Copyright © 2007 to 2013 by Ontario Consultants on Religious
Tolerance
|
|
|
|