CNSNews.com - Iowa Marriage Ruling ‘Another Example of Activist Judges,’ Congressman Says

CNSNews.com

Iowa Marriage Ruling ‘Another Example of Activist Judges,’ Congressman Says
Friday, April 03, 2009
By Susan Jones, Associated Press

(CNSNews.com) – An Iowa congressman says the Iowa Supreme Court was out of line in ruling that the state’s same-sex marriage ban is unconstitutional.

The unanimous ruling strikes language from Iowa code limiting marriage to one man and one woman.

“This is an unconstitutional ruling and another example of activist judges molding the Constitution to achieve their personal political ends,” said Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) on Friday.

“If judges believe the Iowa legislature should grant same sex marriage, they should resign from their positions and run for office, not legislate from the bench.”

King says the Iowa Legislature must now pass a marriage amendment to the state constitution, clarifying that marriage is between one man and one woman.

The power that the Iowa Supreme Court has arrogated to itself must be returned to the people of Iowa, King said:

“Along with a constitutional amendment, the legislature must also enact marriage license residency requirements so that Iowa does not become the gay marriage Mecca due to the Supreme Court’s latest experiment in social engineering,” King said in a statement.

The conservative Family Research Council also condemned the Iowa Supreme Court ruling:

"Same-sex 'marriage' continues to be a movement driven by a liberal judicial elite determined to destroy not only the institution of marriage, but democracy as well. The casual dismissal of the facts of human biology and thousands of years of human history, simply to pander to a small band of social radicals, is bizarre and indefensible," said Tony Perkins, FRC president.

This is the fourth state supreme court to legalize same-sex marriage, FRC noted: So far, no state has done so democratically.

California's supreme court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage was overturned by voters last November, making Massachusetts and Connecticut the only states that currently give marriage licenses to homosexual couples.

"We urge Iowans to contact their legislators and urge them to move quickly to pass a constitutional amendment protecting marriage, joining the twenty-nine states that have already defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman in their state constitutions," Perkins said.

Under Friday’s ruling, same-sex couples may apply for marriage licenses in Iowa in about three weeks.

The following comments are posted by our readers and are not necessarily the opinions of either CNSNews.com or the story’s author. To be considered for publication, comments must adhere to the Terms of Use for posting to this Web site. Thank you.

bulletproof (10 months ago)

Let's see...the perverts know nothing but perversion so they pervert any and all things to obtain the fulfillment of their desires; whether Law, Social Psychology, Education, the use of inanimate objects, each other, you and me, our sons or daughters. If it weren't for the blatantly obvious simpletons that seem to thrive in this "moron-proof" society I would be at a loss as to how it could ever be possible for anyone to find the least bit of favor in this wholly caustic group of deviants, much less champion their cause! If I could say one thing to these self-important "Judges" it would follow along the lines that there IS a reason the Media do not shout from the rooftops that homosexuals are born this way...because aside from the ONE hopelessly flawed study that excited them about 20 years ago there has since gathered mountains of science that clearly demonstrate wanting "sex" with someone of the selfsame gender is a CHOICE; and often one made from a damaged psychological state!

Turophile (10 months ago)

Mr. Perkins is absolutely right. "Same-sex 'marriage' continues to be a movement driven by a liberal judicial elite ..." Therein lies the problem. How to punish/remove activist judges who substitute their own preferences for written law? I'm not sure about Iowa law, but the Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate the powers of the Judicial branch. Article III, Section 2 states, "In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make." With this power, the Congress can tell the Judicial branch that they cannot alter Marriage from that established by States. This would remove the Judicial threat hanging over the institution of Marriage.

moriarity (10 months ago)

The Marxists permeate our work force, our schools, our courts and of course our Government. No matter which way the people of this Nation turn, this "wall of wacko's" is standing to mangle the Constitution.

orator (10 months ago)

One problem we have is that we view marriage as a civil institution. If it is a civil instituion then we have suborned the real intention of marriage which is children and family. If we remember this, then civil courts are irrelevant and we can ignore them at will. Marriage never has been nor never should be a civil institution. Even in the ancient world marriage was more than a civil institution--at least until people started getting saturated with sex and left their spouses. St Paul mentions this in his letter to the Romans and he is right on. We are seeing the results of what he is talking about in our society. This way of thinking will bring our nation down.

MarybethLavin-com (10 months ago)

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/apr/09040301.html reported: ..."We are firmly convinced the exclusion of gay and lesbian people from the institution of civil marriage does not substantially further any important governmental objective..." but I am firmly convinced that gay marriage does not further any important moral or societal objective. I have disfavored and will continue to disfavor same sex persons from partaking of a supremely important civil institution for the justification that they would legally perform the immoral act of sodomy, for which God himself has destroyed entire cities, increase cost of the public's tax payments for Aids and HIV programs and they do not materially contribute to society by reproduction for the continued existence of the human race. There is plenty of material fact that will only support this determination. Tom Lavin, Panama City, FL 32408

pascasha (10 months ago)

Since when does a panel of judges outweigh the will of the people. I am from California and just went through this whole thing. I understand that sometimes the people can be misguided ie...outlawing interracial marriage...but eventually these laws WILL change. I am a firm believer that the government needs to get out of our lives. Instead of granting gay marriage or straight marriage the government should only be allowed to recognize legal partnerships. Leave "marriage" where it belongs: Religion!

You must be logged in to leave comments! Click here to log in.