world

Iowa Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage

24 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

24 Comments
Login to comment

Disgusting! This has nothing to do with "rights". Making a victim class based on perversion has nothing to do with "rights".

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Good for the people of Iowa. It is indeed a right, and one that stems from biological make up, so if homosexuals want to marry, they should be able to. If they are not allowed, then marriage should rightly go the way of the dinosaurs. People don't understand that this can help SAVE marriage, as well.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

ummm... marriage by definition is a union of a man and a woman leading to matrimony. By using the word marriage to describe this fraud, you are effectively destroying the whole concept of marriage. But that is the REAL goal, isn't it? Using the term marriage to describe what has never been, what is not, and cannot possibly be marriage is pyschotic. I will not subjugate my kids to this. I will demean, insult, antagonoze and generally do whatever I can to fight this. Homophobic? No! Perverts shall never control my life.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

WOW!!! Marriage by definition is changing. Three states have changed the definition in their states. I'm surprised that it was a unanimous decision. I'd have expected at least one vote against. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyone here congratulating the "people of Iowa" didn't read the article.

In fact, anyone praising the "people of Iowa" didn't even read (or can't understand...) the headline.

A group of activist judges has legalized gay marriage in Iowa.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

telepromter - Besides your post, does the article say activist judges? I know I heard Shawn Hannity and Michael Savage screaming activits judges today. Hell I didn't even know Iowa had gay activists that controlled the State Supreme Court.

But like I said, not a single nay vote. That's more then acvtivists, that's called equality. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ah, anything that gets the flat-earthers and the latent homosexuals in a tizz has to be good news.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The whole issue is a result of a definition problem. There are no gay and lesbian people, there are a lot of people with sexual identity disorders. This is a mental condition that can and should be treated, not something to legalize. Next thing you know they will be legalizing incest just because people say it is a sexual preference. If you look back through history at other civilizations that permitted same sex promiscuity, you can see that this was the final stage in the collapse of those civilizations. Somebody needs to wake up and smell the coffee. Wrong is wrong, no matter who makes it legal.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"This is a mental condition that can and should be treated"

I think your talking about the latent homosexuels. Y'know, the one's that are that petrified of their own darkest thoughts so they say and do everything they can to prevent homosexuals have equal rights....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Not at all...I'm talking about same sex attraction disorder, and sexual identity disorder. These are treatable illnesses, not something that you give rights to. Guess the rest of my comments meet with your approval since that is the only point you object to.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

teleprompter: I guess it was a group of activist judges that legalized interracial marriages as well (shame on them!)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Man, one more thing to piss off the right winged extremists. I for one don't really give a hoot about gays getting married or not. Gay marriage legalized, fine, whatever. Gay marriage not legalized, no skin off of my nose. If you disagree with this, it is your right as an american to voice your opinion. However, as the old saying goes, if you don't like it, then get the hell out. Just don't live in Iowa. There are plenty of other places that are hard pressed to pass this type of judgement. cough the south cough I am from the south and I know first hand that a law like this isn't likely to be passed there.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

teleprompter: I said it's good for the people of Iowa, which it is, except for the blatant homophobes, of course. Where did I congratulate them? But hey, since you mentioned it, I congratulate them! For the judges are where they are as the result of those around them. And as has been said, not a single 'nay' vote among the judges!

sharky: Actually, it seems to be you who has the treatable problem, not homosexuals. In fact, a simple highschool biology film can point you out to the fact that 1 in 10 people are homosexuals, and that it's entirely biological, and exists in species other than humans as well. It's no more 'treatable' than actually and biologically 'treating' a person's gender through gene therapy -- and by that I mean 100% gene therapy. But then, you might well be talking about the kind of therapy where they have to wear pink stars on them to highlight who in the camps are gay... you never know when it comes to pure hatred.

Dubya: "Marriage by definition is a union of a man and a woman leading to matrimony."

I suppose you subscribe to the Christian definition of marriage... the same definition preached by priests before they go off to sodomize the choir boys again, or by people who screw around, etc. That definition has proven to be untrue in the sense of what marriage really 'means', and is very very outdated -- which is why many countries, and states within countries, are changing the definition of marriage.

"Homophobic? No! Perverts shall never control my life."

Nah, just bigotry and the belief that the earth is flat.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Smith in japan---that study has not been established. Was just waiting for someone to dig up that tidbit of misinformation. As far as homophobia, desiring to treat and help people with these disorders is certainly not out of fear. Just another fad word that you want to throw around. Get some facts and make a valid point please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sharky1 - I knew you'd throw that one in. But I haven't ever heard any gay activist, supporter or legal definition of gay include incest in it's discussion or discription. Only from those who disapprove of gay sex or marriages.

Next thing you know they will be legalizing incest just because people say it is a sexual preference.

Homophobic - Just another fad word that you want to throw around.

No not a fad word. It's always been a phobia. But as long as the gays stayed behind doors and didn't show themselves or ask for rights, the gays weren't seen or heard from; so the condition stayed under wraps. But as soon as gays came out from closets and dark places, these homophobic people showed their faces more.

IcingDeath - To read into and paraphrase your post, respectfully; In a way that's how it should be. It should just be just another right of humankind and we deal with important things. For those who don't support it move or just look the other way.

It's just like equality for all races. It'll become the law of the land, equality for all including gays. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

teleprompter at 01:47 PM JST - 4th April A group of activist judges has legalized gay marriage in Iowa.

DES MOINES, Iowa — Iowa’s Supreme Court legalized gay marriage

I love it, every time the religious right and the far right republicans lose a court battle over anything that has to do with civil rights they claim that the Judges are "activist Judges".

They would never say that maybe the legal argument was won correctly. But instead start throwing out accusations, how sad. Court cases are won and lost not on what you want but on what is right.

plasticmonkey at 09:51 PM JST - 4th April teleprompter: I guess it was a group of activist judges that legalized interracial marriages as well (shame on them!)

Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), "Racial Integrity Act of 1924"

Today the thought of banning interracial marriage sounds barbaric to many of us (some would like to see it, but most of those are really far right wingers).

In 40 years our kids will look back at this period and wonder why the Republicans and their religious far righter tried to do that.

Those people back then were bigots, same as the people today.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Heh....like I said - those protesting gay marriage can only come up with bogus claims that homosexuality is an issue that can be medicaly treated.

It's the latent's that need, and can benefit from treatment, heh, but that means they'd have to embrace their true nature. Gay's make up a huge proportion of the worlds population. Deal with it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sharky: You're a homophobe, plain and simple. And yes, homosexuality is biological; the nuts who told you ever-so-long-ago that it was a lifestyle choice were and are still wrong. If you think it's so, where's your proof?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Gay is sad

0 ( +0 / -0 )

marriage by definition is a union of a man and a woman leading to matrimony

marriage is a wide term, covers all kinds of arrangements, polygamy for example. things change, if you don't like it tough

I will not subjugate my kids to this. I will demean, insult, antagonoze and generally do whatever I can to fight this. Homophobic? No! Perverts shall never control my life.

I wonder what you'll do if one of your kids is gay? nooooo, would never happen right? perverts? hahahaha no, not a homophobe at all, you're just absolutely terrified by them, scared senseless admit it. no-one is controlling your life with this decision, it has nothing to do with you except stoke your fears and give you a boost of misplaced moral indignation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Haha, Sharky is sad. All out of homophobic ammo. Good on Iowa.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dubya, telepromter, sharky- What exactly would happen if gays and lesbians have the right to marry? Would it destroy your own marriages? What would possibly happen that would affect you? You can't just say "because I said so", there should be some reason. Oh and it has to affect you and your freedoms none of this "it's better for them" crap.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Not something that will affect me in the slightest – and indeed can only affect gay people in Iowa, and I must assume in a positive way. What is the fuss all about?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Gay is sad"

Being a latent homosexual wishing to deny others rights becaue of one's own fears is worse, bud.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites