Good news from Iowa

As anti-gay marriage forces keep working to overturn the state Supreme Court decision to allow same-sex couples to marry, it's nice to see that a majority of Iowans now favor marriage equality.  This seems to be a pattern: once gay marriage is allowed in a state and people see that their world hasn't turned upside down, there is a shift toward acceptance.

Here's an abridged version of the  story from KCCI-TV:

In the past 14 months, the Iowa Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriages and the Iowa Board of Pharmacy recommended that the state legalize medical marijuana. Now, a new NewsChannel 8 poll shows that a majority of Iowans support both ideas.

The survey found that 53 percent of those polled said they favor marriage rights for same-sex couples and that 41 percent are opposed.

Opponents of same-sex marriage put candidates on notice this week, delivering a petition to the statehouse that they said makes clear that the issue will be on the minds of voters.

"When folks go to the polls next week and then in November, they will in fact support candidates who understand their Constitution and who will defend marriage," said Bryan English of the Iowa Family Police Center.

He said he feels that the NewsChannel 8 poll results don't accurately reflect the feelings of most Iowans.

Justin Uebelhor of the group One Iowa said he thinks a majority of Iowans have bigger concerns.

"Iowans want their elected officials to focus on issues like jobs and education and really, those pocketbook issues, rather than focusing on divisive issues that are going to pit neighbor against neighbor," Uebelhor said.
 

Another example of religious intolerance

As you know, there are organizations in Iowa who are doing everything in their power to overrule the Iowa Supreme Court's decision to allow same-sex marriages in the state.  One of those groups is the Iowa Family Policy Center, a Christian organization led by Chuck Hurley.  (Don't you love how these groups always claim the word "family" as their own?)  Jason Hancock of the Iowa Independent has written a story that highlights yet again where the real intolerance lies in this debate.  According to Hancock:
 
Chuck Hurley (left), president of the politically influential Christian organization Iowa Family Policy Center, says any religious leader who supports legalized same-sex marriage is “confused at best and blatantly evil at worst.”

The statement comes in response to demands that Hurley retract an earlier statement calling members of the pro-marriage equity Iowa Interfaith Alliance “pseudo pastors.”

Iowa Interfaith Alliance delivered a letter to legislators during the 2010 General Assembly signed by more than 150 religious leaders in Iowa who support marriage rights for same-sex couples, which Hurley refers to as “state-sanctioned sodomy.”

“Yesterday, I said that I believe a pseudo pastor, meaning anyone who would knowingly lead their flock astray on issues of morality and spirituality, and so clearly violate the revealed Word of God, is a wolf in sheep’s clothing and a false shepherd,” Hurley said, later adding: “In my opinion, those who signed their name to the Interfaith Alliance petition in support of state sanctioned sodomy are not only wolves in sheep’s clothing, but they are blind leaders of the blind.”

He called on members of the Interfaith Alliance to “repent, turn to Christ, and join us in showing genuine concern for both the physical and the spiritual wellbeing of those caught up in the destructive sin of homosexuality.”

Connie Ryan Terrell, executive director of the Iowa Interfaith Alliance, responded immediately.

“Mr. Hurley is blatantly disrespectful of the many clergy from across Iowa who are supportive of marriage equality simply because he believes differently,” she said. “Mr. Hurley, who is not a pastor, has every right to his belief, as do the clergy who signed our letter in February and other clergy from across the state who support marriage equality.”

Terrell said Hurley has no business proclaiming who should and should not call themselves pastor.

“It is inappropriate and uncivil for Mr. Hurley to do so,” she said. “He should retract and apologize for his statement that clearly has no place in this public discussion.”

 Can't wait to read about the ensuing scandal that seems to go hand-in-hand with folks who are so irrationally and intolerantly "Christian."

Such petty meanness

Why do some of us call the anti-equality movement hate?  Perhaps because of the incredibly petty meanness apparent in stories like these, reported by O. Kay Henderson for Radio Iowa:

A state senator who opposes gay marriage is asking questions about plans to change a camping rule in the state park system. Just over a year ago the Iowa Supreme Court issued a ruling which legalized gay marriage in Iowa.

Senator Merlin Bartz (left), a Republican from Grafton, says it appears to him that the Department of Natural Resources wants to make gay couples eligible for family camping at state parks. “They’re citing the Supreme Court case and changing, you know, ‘husband and wife’ language to ’spouse,’” Bartz says.
The rates or fees for camp sites are the same, whether you’re a family or a non-family, but the state allows families to put up more than one tent on a camp site. “They’re changing their language even though the state legislature has not had a debate on this particular issue,” Bartz says.

Bartz is a member of the Legislature’s Administrative Rules Review Committee which meets on Monday. He’s asked D.N.R. officials to explain their proposal at that meeting. Bartz says he wants to be “vigilant” and keep state agencies from writing rules that extend new benefits to gay couples. “A lot of the advocates of gay marriage in Iowa have said, ‘It doesn’t affect anything. Nothing has changed,’” Bartz says. “The reality of it is that everything is changing.”

Bartz concedes the D.N.R. might be sued if they fail to ensure “family” policies for camping apply to gay couples, although Bartz says the state may be sued by gay marriage opponents if the rule is changed. The proposed rule will be formally presented to Bartz and the rest of the legislative panel on May10th, but the final draft won’t be up for a committee vote until later this summer.  At that point the Administrative Rules Review Committee has several options to delay implementation, including a move which would delay a decision on family camping policies until 2011 so the full legislature could make the decision.

All of this over the permission to put up two pop tents rather than one?  Yup.  I think that's hate.

Good news from New Hampshire and Iowa

Attempts to block equal marriage in both New Hampshire and Iowa have failed, at least for now.

According to SeacoastOnline.com, "a House committee that deadlocked a year ago over legalizing gay marriage voted Tuesday against repealing New Hampshire's five-week-old law allowing the unions.

The Judiciary Committee also voted to recommend that the House kill a proposed constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman."

The vote was 12-8, more or less along party lines, with the Democrats opposing the repeal.  Gay marriage opponents recognize that passing a repeal this year is highly unlikely, but according to SeacoastOnline.com, "they want to keep the issue before voters in hopes Republicans will regain control of the Statehouse from Democrats in November and succeed then in banning gay marriage."

The Chicago Tribune is reporting that Republicans have failed in their effort to "start the process of amending the Iowa Constitution to ban gay marriage -- meaning it will likely be 2014 at the earliest before voters could decide on the issue."

Because it is nearly certain that the measure to amend the Iowa Constitution to ban same-sex marriage will fail this year, the earliest voters could decide on the issue would be in 2014.  Iowa requires passage of an amendment in two consecutive legislative sessions.  Republicans have vowed to unseat Democrats in November who voted against repeal.

The situation in Iowa is very similar to the situation in Massachusetts shortly after the Supreme Judicial Court declared that denying marriage to same-sex couples was unconstitutional.  The process for amending the constitution in Massachusetts is like the process in Iowa, requiring two consecutive legislative votes.  Republicans in Massachusetts vowed to oust Democrats who supported same-sex marriage.  Instead, even with Mitt Romney's pledge of financial resources to Republican candidates, not one Democratic legislator lost reelection.

Even Scott Brown, once a vehement opponent of same-sex marriage, declared the marriage issue "settled" during his campaign for senator.

Luv, luv, luv

Luv, luv, luv.  Sort of reminds you of the 60's doesn't it?  Of "Hair."  Of being kind to your neighbor and all that.

It doesn't mean that now.

A group opposed to marriage equality, Let Us Vote, has named themselves LUV.  Now let's be clear.  Let us vote actually means "Let us vote against same-sex marriage."

So now they are calling themselves "Luv"?  The exact opposite of what they are fostering?  The world is getting more Orwellian every day.

It will take some time for this group to bring the question to the ballot.  It must pass the Iowa legislature two years in a row before becomes a referendum.  But the "LUV" group has already thrown down the gauntlet, ready to use their money to oust any legislator who upholds the Iowa Supreme Court decision.

I've asked this before but it makes sense to ask it again.  Why would people devote their lives to stop two other citizens from marrying?  Are they that insecure in their own marriages?  I'm not sure.  But I do know that it has nothing at all to do with luv.

I've already visited the web page of Luv Iowa and written a respectful yet clear message on their email/comment page.  If you'd like to do the same, here's the address: http://www.luviowa.com/contact.php

News bits

1. The Daily Monitor is reporting that Uganda’s President, Mr. Museveni, has informed the U.S. State Department that if the anit-gay legislation which includes the death penalty passes, he will veto the legislation.  Some Republican congressmen have also written a letter urging the Ugandan Parliament not to pass the law.  Let's be real here: none of this would have happened without intense pressure and great reporting by some in the media, especially Rachel Maddow (above).  Without the pressure, members of Congress and Rick Warren would have remained silent.

2. Officials from Washington, DC have filed a request that the court throw out a suit to make the recent same-sex marriage vote in the city a referendum question.  The Board of Elections and Ethics already ruled that the matter could not be put on the ballot because it involves a civil rights issue.  It's nice to see the government working on our side, for once.

3. The anti-marriage equality people in Iowa are working to take away same-sex marriage rights by trying to put the issue on the ballot.  The process is lengthy, however, and requires two legislative votes in two consecutive years before a referendum can reach the voters. Lets hope by the time a referendum is possible that enough hearts and minds will have changed to defeat it.


4. The Roman Catholic Church is petitioning the courts for a referendum in Mexico City to overturn the council's vote for same-sex marriage. Meanwhile, the Vatican has not uttered one word about the death penalty law being discussed in Uganda. What does that mean?


5. Studio bosses are drinking double time over Robert Downey Jr.'s suggestion on David Letterman that Sherlock Holmes, Downey's latest role, might be gay.  Apparently, some studio executives are not too pleased with Downey's appearance on Letterman.  One publicist said that they didn't want the movie to become Brokeback Mountain 2.  It wasn't the first time Downey has hinted at his character's sexual orientation.  Earlier he had said that the movie was about "two men who happen to be room-mates, wrestle a lot and share a bed." 


6.  This has nothing to do with gay anything, but liberal icons Susan Sarandon and Tim Robbins have split and this makes me surprisingly sad.