O Pinions!

I support Iowa's decision to uphold Human Rights.

I was shocked by the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court of Iowa to uphold the rights of individuals to marry any other consenting adult they choose.

Their decision was clear, eloquent and emphatic.

Summary of the Supreme court decision:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/assets/pdf/D213209143.PDF

They did not pander to interpretations of morality or religious definitions of marriage; instead, they focused on equality, fairness, and justice and the interest of the State of Iowa to uphold those principles.

They did not get side-tracked by liberal or conservative popular opinions, focusing on Law, Human Rights and the Constitution.

They listed the criteria that pertained and addressed each one emphatically.

Not everyone will agree of course. Here at Writing.Com there are many opposed to the decision.

Carolina Blue is one of my Blogvillian friends who disagrees with the decision arrived at in Iowa. He is one of the few, however, to state it! We Americans are in serious trouble if we feel intimidated to talk about important social issues. My long response to a short comment he made in my blog:

Thanks for mentioning the pink elephant most everyone is too polite to point at.

The decision in Iowa could prove to be a key component in this national debate ... or just another side-show. However, I read the summary and I must say I find it rational and reasonable.

If the government objective is to label a group of people and ostracize them then is the court mistaken to deny the government that privilege? We all like to have a scapegoat to kick ... right? Unless it is explicitly encoded in a Bill of Rights, the splitters and literalists interpret any broadening of terms as suspect, preferring to refer to tradition as if language and culture never change. "My granddaddy hated them %^&&*#s, so I have the right to hate them too!" isn't said in public only because it is politically incorrect. But many people believe it. On the other hand, many have moved forward.

Human rights as such are constantly redefined in a culture ... but the Supreme Court referred to the Constitution of Iowa, explicitly denying that an important aspect of culture i.e. religion was taken into account in their unanimous decision. They based it on fairness, equality, justice.

I suggest that the Christian-Right and/or Conservatives will not be able to fight this in a rational way. I expect more fear-mongering and attempts to limit the franchise of marriage in other ways. I suspect that unless supporters of this decision are vigilant, the nay-sayers may win. However, past attempts have come off as being mean and shrill and in comparison to the courts rational decision are not going to find support unless people really want to establish the Christian Federated Republics (each denomination gets a state. The Catholics get RI; the LDS gets UT; the Southern Baptists, OK ... etc.). That is always a distinct possibility.

So ... yes, I support the decision in Iowa as you do not. (But that's okay with me. )

That said, I do disagree with you when you say that yours is the minority opinion around here. Very few blogs mention the Iowa decision. Comments here ignore any discussion of it. People are either oblivious and just don't care (wrapped up in Paris, Brittany, getting drunk, laid, or searching for the TV remote) or feel that politics, religion, opinions should never be discussed in blogs. Also, knowing how I feel, they may not want to offend, so they say nothing!

But sincerely, I think the Iowa decision has very little passionate support around Blogville or WDC in general, mostly because people aren't passionate about much of anything anymore (especially the self-absorbed younger generation; their response is ).

Hopefully you'll be able to do one of your researched articles, that you write so well, on this topic. An historical perspective would be most enlightening.

So, again, thanks for commenting. The pink elephant (he was feeling neglected) thanks you too.

Now ... anyone reading this is welcome to leave their opinion as a comment. You do not have to be in agreement with me. Politeness doesn't mean much at the guillotine.