PDA

View Full Version : Ruling makes Iowa gay marriage destination




disorderlyvision
04-02-2010, 04:23 PM
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-43006-Quincy-Libertarian-Examiner~y2010m4d2-Ruling-makes-Iowa-gay-marriage-destination


WGEM has a news blurb discussing how a 2009 decision has led to Iowa becoming a wedding destination for gay couples.

The article states:

"That April 3, 2009, decision, followed weeks later by the issuing of marriage licenses, led to 1,783 weddings between same-sex couple by the end of the year. Of those, 1,044 of the couples were from outside Iowa.

Same-sex couples came from more than a dozen states to get married in Iowa. The top state was Illinois, with 172 couples. Minnesota was second with 100 couples. Other top states include Missouri, Nebraska and Kansas."

I wonder how much those thousand couples, plus their friends and family, contributed to the economy of Iowa?

The article also says that some are proposing an amendment to the state constitution, though it is opposed by democrats and the earliest it could be put on the ballot is 2014. So, there is at least 4 more years of contractual freedom in the state of Iowa.

The constitution gives unlimited right to contract in Article I, Section 10, clause I (known as the Contract Clause), which states:

"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."

Marriage is essentially a contract between two people (and the state as you currently have to obtain a marriage license, another area the government has no business in) . The government has no authority to regulate, legislate, or otherwise interfere in contracts. The banning of gay marriage is a gross violation of the Contract Clause.

Even if you do not personally support gay marriage, the citizens of Iowa need to band together and protect their right to contract. If governments can ban your right to contract in this arena where will they go next?

DAFTEK
04-02-2010, 04:31 PM
Are the Iowa cows included? Can someone more educated in homogenize explain to me who is the husband and who is the wife when two guys hitch and get that contract? do they flip a coin? :D

Bruno
04-02-2010, 04:35 PM
Are the Iowa cows included? Can someone more educated in homogenize explain to me who is the husband and who is the wife when two guys hitch and get that contract? do they flip a coin? :D

Wife and wife, husband and husband, I believe is commonly used.

Some friends of mine were marrired 10 years ago in a marriage unrecognized by the state, and remarried last year which was legally recognized.

DAFTEK
04-02-2010, 05:15 PM
How about wife and wife and husband? would these contracts be recognized? Its only fair man, just saying... :D

AlexMerced
04-02-2010, 05:17 PM
How about wife and wife and husband? would these contracts be recognized? Its only fair man, just saying... :D

I'd be fine with polygamy, I'm not sure why that was ever an issue, it's still voluntary and not hurting anyone else.

LibertyWorker
04-02-2010, 05:27 PM
good for Iowa... I'm sure it will help them generate some extra revenue.

What I can't figure out is why anybody would want the blessings of the state for anything.

disorderlyvision
04-03-2010, 02:45 PM
I'd be fine with polygamy, I'm not sure why that was ever an issue, it's still voluntary and not hurting anyone else.
agreed, i don't know why everyone gets their panties in a twist over polygamy. it is still a voluntary association. people can have more than one boyfriend/girlfriend, why would calling it a "marriage" change anything. Hugh Hefner is a prime of example of a polygamist with out the marriage contract. what makes him any different than a mormon in utah, other than a piece of paper?

KCIndy
04-03-2010, 03:30 PM
How about wife and wife and husband? would these contracts be recognized? Its only fair man, just saying... :D


Hello??

Hello?? Bill?

Bill O'Reilly? Is that you?

Your questions sound like the same old tired arguments that O'Reilly makes.... :rolleyes:

Bruno
04-03-2010, 05:38 PM
How about wife and wife and husband? would these contracts be recognized? Its only fair man, just saying... :D

I don't believe the government should be in the marriage business at all. It should be for churches to decide. Why should a man and woman get tax benefits for sleeping together that a man and a man or a woman and a man don't get?

I also don't care if a man has 10 wives, or a woman has 10 husbands, or a wife or man sleeps with dozens of people of any sex. Who cares, its not any of my business. Should they receive tax credits and other government benefits because of who or how many people they either have sex with or choose to commit their life to (before 50% of them divorce of course)? No.

Last year, at my friends' request, I went online and became ordained so that I could marry them. It took me about 60 seconds to become recognized in the state of Iowa to perform a legal wedding ceremony. They did not belong to a church, and wanted to be legally recognized by the state, but mostly in front of their family and friends to share their commitment to each other. 150 people attended the ceremony, and it was recognized by the state of Iowa as a legal marriage. This is the sanctity of marriage that everyone is all concerned about?

jrkotrla
04-03-2010, 08:09 PM
Can someone more educated in homogenize explain to me who is the husband and who is the wife when two guys hitch and get that contract? do they flip a coin? :D

If you spent more time actually thinking about the situation instead of trying to poke fun you would realize that your narrow, archaic gender stereotypes to not apply to these people.

/just doing my part to feed the trolls.

DAFTEK
04-05-2010, 06:45 AM
If you spent more time actually thinking about the situation instead of trying to poke fun you would realize that your narrow, archaic gender stereotypes to not apply to these people.

/just doing my part to feed the trolls.

Its not about feeding trolls dumb-ass and look at my status and posts before you blabber your keyboard away like a douche.. :rolleyes:


Bruno hit the nail on the head and was the only one who gave the best answer and got my twisted point. :p

jrkotrla
04-05-2010, 08:43 PM
xx

JosephTheLibertarian
04-05-2010, 08:56 PM
How about wife and wife and husband? would these contracts be recognized? Its only fair man, just saying... :D

I'd like a marriage like that.