The NPR News Blog
 
 

Iowa Judge Strikes Down Same-Sex Marriage Ban

Judging from the reaction, an Iowa county judge's decision to strike down the state's decade-old ban on same-sex marriage seems to have caught most conservatives in the state by surprise.

Only Polk County, Iowa, is affected by Judge Robert Hanson's ruling. But couples from across the state can come to the county and apply to get married. One gay couple has already applied for a marriage license and five more have made inquiries. There is a three-day approval process after the application is made.

The Associated Press reports that Hanson ruled that "the state law allowing marriage only between a man and a woman violates the constitutional rights of due process and equal protection."

"Couples, such as plaintiffs, who are otherwise qualified to marry one another may not be denied licenses to marry or certificates of marriage or in any other way prevented from entering into a civil marriage ... by reason of the fact that both person comprising such a couple are of the same sex," he said.

Polk County Attorney John Sarcone says he will appeal the decision to the Iowa Supreme Court and ask for an immediate stay of Hanson's order so no gay couples can get a marriage license.

State Republican lawmakers have vowed to take action and pass a constitutional amendment against gay marriage. They want Gov. Chet Culver to add the gay marriage debate to a special legislative session he has said he might convene to deal with the date of the Iowa caucuses. Otherwise, the lawmakers say they will take it up when the regular session starts in January.

(Update: Two men were married in Des Moines this morning after a judge waived the three-day waiting period for them. However, Hanson stayed his ruling about two hours later.)

 

Comments (Send a comment)

This subject has always seemed rather silly to me. The "moral police" that simply prohibit same-sex marriage are only winning in that their narrow definition of "family" is protected by the state. The state only wins in not having to respect that same-sex couple in fiscal terms. The same-sex couple loses hospital visitation rights, last will and testiment rights, faces possible ugly scenes with the passed on's family, etc. But, prohibited or not, same-sex couples live together all over the world. In Spain, where it has only been recently legalized, family values have not been destroyed, heterosexuals are not suddenly becoming homosexuals and those couples who wish to "marry" suddenly find themselves protected socially as any unsame-sex couple is by laws and rules. Calling it marriage is often the "rub" and calling it civil union seems to be giving in, but what is it that each interested party is looking for? And how best to answer to their interests? I just don't think prohibition is the answer.

peace,
revel.

Sent by Revel Arroway | 10:35 AM ET | 08-31-2007

Judge Robert Hanson is fighting the good fight. It's discrimination to deny same sex couples the right to marry. It's that simple. The truth will out.

Sent by michael e million | 10:55 AM ET | 08-31-2007

One of your writers is correct that this is a silly issue - because of its faddishness. Why should same-sex marriage be privileged above other sexual identities, such as a polygamous orientiation? This last has as much 'scientific' justification as homosexuality, and far more historical legitimacy. There is no benefit to society from putting homosexuality on the same level as heterosexuality, whereas I'm guessing that all the trendy gay marriage advocates owe their existences to heterosexuality. There are no 'marriage police'. There is just a very practical consideration of what is useful to the community and what is not. Really, is it necessary to explain these things to intelligent adults?

Sent by Mark Richard | 12:50 PM ET | 08-31-2007

Homosexuality is a fad?
No different than polygamy?
There are no marriage police?
Whoa...
and I thought I was on the planet earth!?
Now THAT"S silly!

Sent by michael e million | 3:34 PM ET | 08-31-2007

Good luck to all gay couples in Iowa. It's time to let people love and marry each other.

Sent by Dr. Poulos | 4:43 PM ET | 09-02-2007

The marital issue is not a fad as one reader has written, nor is it scientific in its identity. It is that identity of itself that makes one the individual that this country states to promulgate and defend, yet never at its individuality as a staking point to say, "but you don't fall within the law." The law is supposed to be ever changing and adaptive to society and its people, not what is, per se, useful to a community, or idealistic in moral. For even if it were to the idealistic in moral standpoint, it there too lacks its ground in that you then state you support discrimination on one hand, but will fight and defend anti-discrimination on the other. That would be like me saying to a baker, "bake me a cake as fast as you can so large I will never run out so i can always have it and still eat it, too." After all, we're all pressed for time and convenience, and hey, gotta have the cake and eat it too.

Sent by Reverance in Humanity | 6:25 AM ET | 09-03-2007

I say that the word marriage should be only be used inside of a religion and should be replaced in U.S with Civil union and that would end the Gay Marriage debate. Leave the word to the religious and just not use in the legal documents. That way if any two people way to have legally recognized mutual right they get a civil union and then the go to the religious institution of the choice for a Marriage. That way gays still can be banned to marry by some religions. This is a matter of church a state and if we are obviously not separate enough.

Sent by HAC'r UF | 8:10 PM ET | 09-04-2007

Send a Comment

Comments are reviewed and edited by NPR prior to display. All comments will be read, but not all will be posted.







 (privacy policy)

NPR reserves the right to read on the air and/or publish on its Web site or in any medium now known or unknown the e-mails and letters that we receive. We may edit them for clarity or brevity and identify authors by name and location. For additional information, please consult our Terms of Use.




   
   
   
null


 
E-mail this page Print this page
 
 
 
Tom Regan

Tom Regan

Blogger

 
 
 

About Us

This year's election cycle has been one of the most exciting in memory. At the NPR News Blog we'll do our best to bring you interesting, informative -- and controversial -- stories from our own reporters and bloggers, as well as the rest of the best of the Internet and blogosphere. And we hope you'll let us know what you think as well.

Want to learn more? Be sure to read our Frequently Asked Questions and our discussion guidelines.

 
 
Get My Vote promo

Share Your Story

What would it take to get your vote? Share text, audio or video.

 
 

 
 

Search the blog

 
 

Email Tom

If you would like to email Tom privately, please use our contact form.

 
 
 

Browse Topics

Services

Programs