comments_image -

Ironic that Same Sex Couples Can Marry in Cedar Rapids But Not in San Francisco

The heartland is now ahead of "the People's Republic" of California.
April 4, 2009  |  
 
Advertisement
 

On Friday, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that a ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, and the Hawk-eye State will now join Massachusetts and Connecticut in leading the nation towards marriage equality (the Vermont legislature passed a law legalizing same-sex marriages as well, but  Republican governor Jim Douglas has promised to veto it). Good on Iowa.

As in earlier civil rights movements, the nation is headed towards the right place -- although support for full marriage equality is still a minority view, the trend, as this table from ReligiousTolerance.org suggests, is clear:

Click for larger version

(click for larger version)

When it comes to general acceptance of homosexuality, the numbers are better still. Moreover, there's a huge generation-gap on the issue; in the vote that denied equality to LGBT couples in California last Fall, the exit polls told the story: folks over 65 voted for discrimination by a 57-43 margin while under-30s supported marriage equality by a 67-31 spread.

Anyway, I'd like to make a point about this that's inspired by a few paragraphs in a San Francisco Chronicle story on the Iowa ruling:

Calvin Massey, another constitutional law professor at Hastings, agreed that the ruling reflected emerging views among some state judges but said their importance shouldn't be overstated.

"I think you're likely to see more victories in judicial chambers for advocates of same-sex marriage," said Massey, who described himself as uncommitted to either side. "The judiciary in general is more liberal on this issue than the population as a whole."

It's easy to look at the polling on marriage equality and these decisions and come to the conclusion that the "judiciary in general is more liberal on this issue than the population," which of course fits nicely into the right-wing meme about  "activist judges" run amok. But the reality is very different -- the legal basis for these decisions is both sound and, in fact, extremely popular, and that renders words like "liberal" and "conservative" almost meaningless in this context.

Joshua Holland is an editor and senior writer at AlterNet.
submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: california, iowa, referendum, marriage equality
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
Republican NLRB Member Accused of Leaks to Romney Campaign Resigns

By Laura Clawson | Daily Kos Labor

 
 
Record 45% of Iraq and Afghanistan Vets Have Filed for Disability

By Muriel Kane | Raw Story

 
 
President Obama's Memorial Day Address: "Honoring Those Who Made the Ultimate Sacrifice"

By Julianne Escobedo Shepherd | AlterNet

 
 
"Tubes": What the Internet is Made Of

By Laura Miller | Salon

 
 
Students at Stuyvesant Take Issue With Sexist Dress Code

By Jill F | Feministe

 
 
Chris Hayes on Memorial Day: Glamorizing and Justifying War with the Term "Hero"

By Julianne Escobedo Shepherd | AlterNet

 
 
Cory Booker vs. Philly Mayor Michael Nutter on Mitt Romney

By BooMan | Booman Tribune

 
 
How Florida Governor Rick Scott Could Steal The Election For Mitt Romney

By Judd Legum | ThinkProgress

 
 
Renowned Economist Simon Johnson Calls for a National Safety Board for Finance Ticking Time Bomb

By Lynn Parramore | AlterNet

 
 
Veterans' Gap

By Ed Kilgore | Washington Monthly

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 1 ]