"I think we have to be very respectful of the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution," said Culver. "This court, in a unanimous decision, has stated that it is discriminatory to deny people rights they are given under the constitution.
There has been a proposed ban on out of state people coming to Iowa in order to get a marriage. There is a fear associated with this that Iowa will have a increase in population, especially amongst gays and lesbians. I am actually kind of in favor over something like this because it will allow them to stay in other states and get active in their states. Activism is the one way that we are going to be able to make gay marriage legal in all of the US not just in the handleful of states that allow it now. If people become active then their government is forced to respond. This kind of reminds me of the sixties. The sixties was a decade of protest and calling for change throughout all of the United States. The initial gay rights movement was in fact started off in the sixties and it died down after things like the Equal Rights Act of 1965 happened which garuanteed gays the right against discrimination in the workplace because of sexuality. We need an active movement to make the world a liberal place like it was in the sixties. If we push the issue enough we will be allowed gay marriage in the United States by 2020. I feel that United States is on the verge of some major reform and protest movement because of all of the tension that is building now days. We are in the middle of a war that is almost as unpopular and useless as Vietnam was, we have the largest debt ever in US history and there is no end of it in site and we have this issue of gay marriage. It feels like the time period after the Great Depression of WWII again and that feeling caused the uproars of the babyboomers generation. Who knows what the children of the new millenium have in store for us, but it promises to be something great.
2 comments:
I actually thought that what Culver said, when compared past statements in which he made it clear that marriage is between a man and a woman, was positive. I mean, he obviously wasn't excited about the ruling, but he wasn't totally against it, either. He appeared to have thought long and hard about gay marriage's prospects. And that's a victory.
Good post.
He says that he is reluctant to change constitution but he will support the Iowa Supreme Court's decision
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090407/NEWS/90407035/-1/SPORTS12
Post a Comment