Heads22 Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/2...2/NEWS/90402007 Iowa has no residency requirements for marriage licenses, so we might see an influx. I would not be totally surprised to see it legalized here. Mildly, but not total surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 If this passes, it'll just open up the slippery slope to people marrying corn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 2, 2009 -> 12:32 PM) If this passes, it'll just open up the slippery slope to people marrying corn. Or even worse, Heads22. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoSox05 Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 So we could see one day gay marriage legal in Iowa, but not California. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted April 2, 2009 Share Posted April 2, 2009 QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Apr 2, 2009 -> 12:44 PM) So we could see one day gay marriage legal in Iowa, but not California. I'm stoked. I really hope it passes. Way to go Iowa! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 2, 2009 -> 12:32 PM) If this passes, it'll just open up the slippery slope to people marrying corn. yeah since Iowans obviously love corn in sexual ways.... Edited April 3, 2009 by WilliamTell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 (edited) I feel differently about this at the state level than I do the federal level. The feds have NO business WHATSOEVER trying to push legislation to either allow or ban this, but as far as individual states go, it's their prerogative. So if Iowa's SC bans it, I'll be disappointed, but they have every right to do it if they wanted. The only question I'm leaving here is what tax rate the feds would use for a legally married same-sex couple because I don't know. Edited April 3, 2009 by lostfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (WilliamTell @ Apr 2, 2009 -> 11:43 PM) yeah since Iowans obviously love corn in sexual ways.... Balta forgot the green. He was poking fun at certain social conservatives who try to argue against gay marriage using a bizarre slippery slope argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted April 3, 2009 Author Share Posted April 3, 2009 It's now legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (Heads22 @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 08:58 AM) It's now legal. I like Iowans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 So now are they gonna go the route California did and push for an amendment to ban it? God that would be annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 07:41 AM) Balta forgot the green. He was poking fun at certain social conservatives who try to argue against gay marriage using a bizarre slippery slope argument. Or the left wingers who use the same arguements against banning any abortion procedures... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 09:07 AM) Or the left wingers who use the same arguements against banning any abortion procedures... I don't know what that has to do with the topic, but, OK sure. I was just trying to explain Balta's post, as it seemed to confuse WilliamTell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (Heads22 @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 08:58 AM) It's now legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 boo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 09:48 AM) boo! And this affects you how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 11:05 AM) And this affects you how? The same way it affects you and me, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 10:05 AM) And this affects you how? little to none, but I disagree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 10:10 AM) little to none, but I disagree with it. Well I'm glad the SC of Iowa disagrees with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 I'm sorry I make fun of you all the time Iowa. I will refrain for at least a week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 10:10 AM) little to none, but I disagree with it. you're right, not all americans deserve the same equality. some americans are just more special than others. i'm so proud to be from Iowa right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Well said: When you take a step back and look at the basic legal argument behind these cases, the correct answer is remarkably clear. So clear, in fact, that I'm quite certain that future generations of lawyers and law students will look at these cases and wonder why it took so long for the courts to reach such an obvious conclusion, particularly in light of the extensive (and directly analogous) case law dealing with miscegenation laws and segregation. Once you accept the premise that there is nothing wrong with being gay (a premise which, I think, the vast majority of people--especially educated people like judges--accept), it becomes nearly impossible to make a principled legal argument in defense of laws that prohibit gay people from being married. It's just such an obvious and straightforward violation of equal protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 Nice work Iowa SC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 09:48 AM) boo! I am overwhelmed by the staggering profundity of your artfully crafted retort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox_Sonix Posted April 3, 2009 Share Posted April 3, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 3, 2009 -> 11:10 AM) little to none, but I disagree with it. Wow, i agree with you on something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts