how ironic--i guess i can get married In Iowa

?


I made the comment on my latest blog Marriage: "i'm so glad i can't get married yet" i guess some in Iowa thought they'd show me! Sure enough homosexuals arenow allowed to marry in Iowa.

This article was sent to me by a very awesome young lady i'd like to share it with YOU!

"La
An interesting article.. I really like the way Iowa is approaching this issue. Finally, someone is actually understanding what the constitution of the United States is SUPPOSE to do.

Peace,
-Jamie"

"In Iowa Gay Marriage Ruling, Truth is the Winner

By Peter Montgomery
April 4, 2009

A new report shows that when Americans are assured that clergy aren't required to perform same-sex marriages an interesting thing happens.

Celebration in Iowa, near the capitol.

Religious Right leaders have consistently tried to build opposition to marriage equality by portraying marriage equality and religious liberty as incompatible. People For the American Way Foundation’s recent Right Wing Watch In Focus report documented the deceptive ways that Religious Right leaders blur the distinction between civil and religious marriage.

There’s power to the religious liberty argument—on the marriage equality side, that is. Two polls cited in the PFAWF report show that, when Americans who don’t initially support allowing same-sex couples to get married are asked a followup—“If the law guaranteed that no church or congregation would be required to perform marriages for same-sex couples, I would support allowing gay couples to legally marry,” support for marriage equality jumps a remarkable 12 to 14 percent. There’s a lot of public support to be gained by debunking the Religious Right on this front.

That’s why it was especially gratifying that the Iowa Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling devoted considerable space to dealing respectfully with religious objections to same-sex marriage and explaining clearly why religious beliefs about marriage cannot override the constitutional principle of equality when it comes to civil marriage. Here’s the concluding portion of the Court’s section on religion:

In the final analysis, we give respect to the views of all Iowans on the issue of same-sex marriage—religious or otherwise—by giving respect to our constitutional principles. These principles require that the state recognize both opposite-sex and same-sex civil marriage. Religious doctrine and views contrary to this principle of law are unaffected, and people can continue to associate with the religion that best reflects their views. A religious denomination can still define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and a marriage ceremony performed by a minister, priest, rabbi, or other person ordained or designated as a leader of the person’s religious faith does not lose its meaning as a sacrament or other religious institution. The sanctity of all religious marriages celebrated in the future will have the same meaning as those celebrated in the past. The only difference is civil marriage will now take on a new meaning that reflects a more complete understanding of equal protection of the law. This result is what our constitution requires.

"




If every state...well the conservative states, approached gay marriage in this non secular light more people would accept this idea. Even for me. I never understood how people can be sooo passionate against preventing love between two people. But to "clear it[gay marriage]" of religious connections to redneck churc..i mean conservative churches you essentially break down all arguments against gay marriage. THe only legit arguments left are for people are are hell bent on believe that homosexual is a "sickness" (thats a reference to Mr. Haggard.)
Cheers to all, i bet the rainbows are a flyin high!

Thanks Jamie!