Iowa's 2,000 Gay Marriages Mostly from Nonresidents: The Des Moines Register

reports:

Out-of-staters made up 60 percent of same-sex couples married in Iowa since the state began allowing such unions in April 2009, officials reported Tuesday.

The new report from the Iowa Department of Public Health says 2,020 same-sex marriages were recorded in Iowa from April 27, 2009, through March 31. Only 815 of the couples were from Iowa. The newly married included 199 gay couples from Illinois, 158 from Missouri and 111 from Nebraska.

Overall, 19,904 couples were married in Iowa during the time period. Of those, 2,020 were listed as "same gender" couples, 16,869 were listed as "opposite gender" and 1,015 were listed as "not stated."

Among gay couples getting married here, 728 were two men, and 1,292 were two women. ...

Justin Uebelhor, a spokesman for the gay-rights group One Iowa, said he wasn't surprised to see that so many of the gay couples were from other states. Many of them had Iowa ties and wanted to get married at home, he said. Others lived in nearby states. "We've seen a lot of folks excited about being able to get married in a Midwestern state," he said.

more

Labels: culture, gay marriage, Iowa

posted by Imapp Staff at 8:38 PM VOTE

ILL. LAWMAKER'S ENGAGEMENT SPOTLIGHTS GAY MARRIAGE: Associated Press

reports:

Illinois lawmaker Deborah Mell is sharing some bittersweet news with her colleagues.

The sweet is that she's engaged. The bitter is that Illinois doesn't recognize gay marriage. So she plans to get married in Iowa, which does.

more

Labels: culture, gay marriage, Illinois, Iowa

posted by Eve at 9:33 PM VOTE

GAY MARRIAGE A LIKELY DRIVER IN IOWA FALL ELECTIONS: Globe-Gazette

reports:

With the Legislature moving toward adjournment, the year-long battle to overturn the Iowa Supreme Court decision establishing same-sex marriage is moving to a new venue – the campaign trail.

Party leaders insist the 2010 election will be about the economy, creating jobs and protecting Iowans’ priorities: education, health-care, safe communities.

The effort to overturn the April 3, 2009, decision legalizing same-sex marriage is unlikely to be the issue of the campaign, campaign operatives say, but it will be an issue that, in some races, may influence the outcome.

more

Labels: gay marriage, Iowa

posted by Eve at 4:11 PM VOTE

SAFE SCHOOL PROPOSAL: TWO IA LAWMAKERS WANT TO EXCLUDE GAY AND LESBIAN STUDENTS: WHOtv.com

reports:

Two Iowa legislators are getting heat from the gay community. The lawmakers want to remove protection to lesbians, gay and transgender students from the Safe Schools Law, in and effort to reverse the Iowa's Supreme Court decision to legalize same-sex marriage. ...

Last April, one of the reasons the Iowa Supreme Court pointed to for legalizing same sex marriage, were bills like the Safe Schools Act, which protects gay and lesbian students. He wants to take out the wording in the Safe Schools Act, and all Iowa legislation, so lawmakers can debate same sex marriage on the floor. ...

"People smeared paint on my locker and pushed me in the hallway and I've been made fun of for who I am. Why would lawmakers want that to continue? Why wouldn't they want to protect me and better my education and time in my community?" says gay Stephen Boatwright.

Rep. Schultz admits the bill won't go anywhere, but that's not the point. He hopes it will renew the efforts to make same sex marriage illegal here in Iowa, and start a debate on the house floor sometime this session.

more

[Eve says: I get that slopes can be slippery. And I get that maybe people can feel tricked, when they support a really basic anti-bullying bill which identifies one of the most bullied classes in our country, and then their support of that bill is played as support for gay marriage.

[What I don't get is thinking that slopes only slip one way. How can you explicitly act to remove protection from gay students without thinking this will increase abuse of gay students--which hi there, is against Biblical teaching? This whole thing is especially heartbreaking to me because I oppose gay marriage, and yet--or, I'd say, and therefore--I'm especially concerned with anti-gay bullying. It seems to me like the best example of what the theologians mean when they use the phrase, "objective counter-witness." This bill gives aid and comfort to the Enemy. And I used the capital letter on purpose.

[--Eve's opinion]

Labels: adolescence, children, culture, gay marriage, Iowa, religion, schools

posted by Eve at 12:56 AM VOTE

THE REAL PROBLEM WITH THE IOWA GAY MARRIAGE DECISION: Damon W. Root

at Reason:

...But none of those complaints identify the real problem with the ruling: Rather than simply requiring the state to justify its ban as a necessary and proper exercise of its police powers, the Iowa court first spent the better part of its opinion explaining why laws targeting gays deserve heightened judicial scrutiny. It's not until page 51 that the court began to examine and then reject each of the state's five flimsy justifications. In other words, the court placed the burden on individual citizens to demonstrate that their rights were worth protecting, rather than on the state to account for its discriminatory exercise of power.

more

Labels: gay marriage, Iowa

posted by Eve at 8:39 AM VOTE

"HE BROUGHT SAME-SEX MARRIAGE TO IOWA": Marc Ambinder interviews Lambda Legal's Dennis Johnson

at his Atlantic blog:

Were you surprised at how comprehensive the ruling was? Were you surprised at the State Supreme Court's unanimity?

"It was clear that the court understood the historical significance of this. Normally, you have ten minutes for arguments. They gave us each 30 minutes. And then, during argument, they said, forget about the time limits. They treated it as a very historical case. One of the reasons this case was filed in Iowa [was that the state has a] history of being, progressive, of protecting individual liberties. If you read the opinion, they make references to decisions as early as 1839 [like the one] prohibiting slavery in Iowa. They were pretty mindful of that. The fact that they were unanimous -- I wasn't completely surprised by that. I've been before these justices. They're a pretty intelligent group, and they've demonstrated in the past that they were not afraid to rule on the law the way they see it."

more

Labels: gay marriage, Iowa

posted by Eve at 1:30 AM " target="display" style="text-decoration:none;color: rgb(204,0,0);"> " target="display" style="text-decoration:none;color: rgb(204,0,0);"> VOTE

More Recent Iowa Pollage: March 2009

University of Iowa Hawkeye Poll:

...The random statewide telephone poll of 978 registered voters found that 36.7 percent of Iowans oppose recognition of gay marriage and civil unions. Overall, 26.2 percent of respondents support gay marriage and 27.9 percent oppose gay marriage but support civil unions. The poll was conducted March 23 through March 31. The margin of error is +/-3.1 percent for the full sample.

Nearly 60 percent of Iowans under age 30 support gay marriage, and three-fourths of Iowans under 30 favor some formal recognition of gay relationships. Across ages, support for gay marriage increases slightly if the Iowa Supreme Court sanctions it.

more (note that this means that 64.6% of Iowans polled oppose gay marriage)

Labels: gay marriage, Iowa

posted by Imapp Staff at 7:12 PM VOTE

Iowa Polls on Gay Marriage

from 2008:

University of Iowa Hawkeye Poll (Oct. 19-22, 2008, sample 486 Reg. Voters, MoE +/- 4.2%)

Question: "Several states like Connecticut, Massachusetts, and California have now decided that their constitutions require that same sex marriage be allowed because the right to marry is an important civil right for all people. Some states give same sex relationships rights through civil unions but do not allow gays to marry. And other states do not recognize any kind of same sex relationship. How about you, what is your position on same-sex relationships? Do you: support gay marriage, oppose gay marriage but support civil unions, or oppose both gay marriage and civil unions."

SSM: 28.1%
CU: 30.2%
No Recognition: 32.0%
Did not respond: 9.7%

Question: "The issue of gay marriage is before the Iowa Supreme Court which may rule that the Iowa Constitution requires that gays and lesbians be allowed to marry. If the state’s Supreme Court decides this, how should Iowa respond: Amend the state Constitution to ban any same-sex relationship, amend the state Constitution to ban gay marriage but allow civil unions, or accept the Supreme Court’s decision and allow gay marriage in Iowa?"

Accept SSM: 35.1%
Amend but permit CU: 26.7%
Amend to ban all SS unions: 28.7%
Don't Know/Refused: 9.5%

Topline results attached.


Des Moines Register Iowa Poll (Feb. 17-20, 2008, sample 801 adults, MoE +/- 3.5%)


[No direct link, but the Register discusses the poll results here.]


Do you believe marriage should be only between one man and one woman, or do you think same-sex marriages should be allowed in Iowa?
One man, one woman: 62%
SSM: 32%
Not sure: 6%With civil unions, partners could get health insurance coverage and could make medical decisions for one another, as married couples are able to do. Would you favor or oppose Iowa allowing civil unions for same-sex couples?
Favor: 55%
Oppose: 41%
Not sure: 4%
I'm going to mention a few more proposals under consideration by the state Legislature. For each, please tell me if you favor or oppose the proposal. Changing the Iowa Constitution to ban gay marriage.Favor: 48%
Oppose: 47%
Not sure: 5%

For each of the following issues that may come before the state Legislature, please tell me whether you consider this very important for the Legislature to act on this term, somewhat important, or not that important. Clarifying Iowa law on gay marriage.
Very important: 43%
Somewhat important: 28%
Not that important: 26%
Not sure: 3%

Labels: gay marriage, Iowa

posted by Imapp Staff at 5:13 PM VOTE

The Fundamental Dishonesty of an Antidemocratic Movement: Justin Katz

blogs:

...Consider for a moment who has been excluded from the interpretation of equal protection's "'true' principle": the judges' personal views don't apply, the relevant legislators' personal views don't apply, the people's personal views (as expressed democratically) don't apply, and certainly the personal views of those who penned the Fourteenth Amendment back in 1868 don't apply. So from whence — by whom — is it determined that the true meaning of the equal protection clause requires that the true meaning of marriage be something other than what it has always been understood to be — a relationship between men and women?

Ah, there's the nub. The reality is that, like the interstate process of bouncing judicial rulings, the whole thing is a performance to enact the preferences of an elite class as written into the "hunches" of judges.

more

Labels: courts, gay marriage, Iowa

posted by Imapp Staff at 4:59 PM VOTE

In a First for the Heartland, Iowa Legalizes Gay Marriage: NYTimes

reports:

..."Go get married!" Dennis Johnson, a Des Moines lawyer who helped represent the gay and lesbian couples in the case, told the gathering at the hotel. "Live happily ever after. Live the American dream." ...

In contrast to states that have barred the marriages with voter-led ballot measures, Iowa voters cannot directly initiate constitutional amendments. Instead, an amendment requires approval by state lawmakers during two legislative sessions and then approval by voters. That means the earliest a prospective ban could take effect would be 2012.

Same-sex marriage opponents want state lawmakers, who are a few weeks from finishing their annual session, to begin the process now. But the idea seemed to have no backing among legislative leaders.

"We're just going to say no to amending our constitution and putting discrimination into our constitution," said Michael Gronstal, a Democrat and state Senate leader.

Gronstal noted that such an amendment failed in the Senate several years ago, even before the suit that led to Friday's ruling. ...

"The gay marriage movement has once again used the power of the courts to push an untruth on unwilling Iowans," said Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, a group formed in 2007 to preserve traditional marriage.

more

Labels: gay marriage, Iowa, NOM

posted by Imapp Staff at 4:47 PM VOTE

IOWA SUPREME COURT RULES GAY COUPLES CAN WED: Washington Blade

reports:

In an historic ruling, justices in the Iowa Supreme Court on Friday unanimously granted marriage rights to gay couples living in the state.

The decision is the fourth time that a state Supreme Court has determination that a state constitution should marriage rights to gay couples living in the state. Same-sex marriage was previously available in Massachusetts and Connecticut, and briefly in California.

In the opinion, justices determined the statutory ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional because Polk County “has been unable to identify a constitutionally adequate justification for excluding plaintiffs from the institution of civil marriage.”

“Consequently, the language ... limiting civil marriage to a man and a woman must be stricken from the statute, and the remaining statutory language must be interpreted and applied in a manner allowing gay and lesbian people full access to the institution of civil marriage,” the opinion states.

Justices also ruled that a separate institution, such as civil unions, that would offer relationship recognition but not marriage to same-sex couples would be “equally suspect and difficult to square with the fundamental principles of equal protection embodied in our constitution.”

“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 opinion says. “The legislature has excluded a historically disfavored class of persons from a supremely important civil institution without a constitutionally sufficient justification.” ...

The timing was awkward for state lawmakers who are on track to end the legislative session in coming weeks.

Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, D-Council Bluffs, told reporters that it’s “exceedingly unlikely” the Legislature would deal with the gay marriage issue this year, regardless of the court’s ruling.

more (click here to read the decision in PDF)

Labels: gay marriage, Iowa

posted by Eve at 10:51 AM VOTE

Iowa Supreme Court to Release Gay Marriage Decision Tomorrow Morning

You'll be able to find it here around 8:15 AM Central time.

Labels: gay marriage, Iowa

posted by Imapp Staff at 4:32 PM VOTE