Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Iowa Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage set for release Friday

A long awaited and significant Iowa Supreme Court case ruling on same-sex marriage will be released tomorrow, likely at 8:30 a.m.

The case, Varnum vs. Brien, involves six same-sex Iowa couples who sued Polk County Recorder Timothy Brien in 2005, after his office denied them marriage licenses. Polk County District Judge Robert Hanson sided with the couples in a ruling last year, but he suspended his decision until the high court speaks.

The case would have consequences outside the state's borders. Iowa would become the first Midwestern state to allow same-sex marriage and the fourth in the nation if the court sides with the gay couples. Legal experts say such a decision would echo across the country and strengthen the gay rights movement.

Advocates say allowing same-sex unions is a matter of civil rights that would better allow gays and lesbians and their families protections for such matters as retirement, taxes and in medical decisions.
Advertisement

The United States General Accounting office in has listed more than 1,100 benefits the government provides to legally married couples. People in committed relationships but unable to marry are denied most of those benefits.

Opponents have long argued that allowing such marriages would further erode the institution of marriage.

Between 40 percent and 50 percent of heterosexual marriages currently end in divorce, according to various statistics produced by the U.S. Census Bureau and the National Center for Health Statistics.

Iowa law says marriage can only be between one man and one woman, which is the law being challenged.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/articl ... S/90402007

Waiting, but not hopeful

The United States General Accounting office in has listed more than 1,100 benefits the government provides to legally married couples. People in committed relationships but unable to marry are denied most of those benefits.

And there you have it folks. This is not a moral/religous/ethical issue. This is a fundamental American equality issue.

Either stop giving beneifts to married couples only or extend those benefits to same-sex couples.

danefan wrote:

The United States General Accounting office in has listed more than 1,100 benefits the government provides to legally married couples. People in committed relationships but unable to marry are denied most of those benefits.

And there you have it folks. This is not a moral/religous/ethical issue. This is a fundamental American equality issue.

Either stop giving beneifts to married couples only or extend those benefits to same-sex couples.

In the 5 years that I would have considered Rob and I "married", we paid more than $30,000 in taxes than we would have had we been able to be married.

danefan wrote:

The United States General Accounting office in has listed more than 1,100 benefits the government provides to legally married couples. People in committed relationships but unable to marry are denied most of those benefits.

And there you have it folks. This is not a moral/religous/ethical issue. This is a fundamental American equality issue.

Either stop giving beneifts to married couples only or extend those benefits to same-sex couples.

I was surprised at the 1100 number. Much larger than anything I ever would've guessed.

danefan wrote:

The United States General Accounting office in has listed more than 1,100 benefits the government provides to legally married couples. People in committed relationships but unable to marry are denied most of those benefits.

And there you have it folks. This is not a moral/religous/ethical issue. This is a fundamental American equality issue.

Either stop giving beneifts to married couples only or extend those benefits to same-sex couples.

But being gay is a choice. No one is stopping them from marrying someone of the opposite sex, they simply choose not to.

exit St. Wrong