Gordo, Tell the Whole Truth
Nathan Greene
in Iowa Marriage Issue
|
Post a Comment
By Emily Geiger
So, Gordon Fischer has an opinion column in the Register today about the “Let Us Vote” rally that is taking place today at the Capitol Building. The people participating in the rally are upset that one Polk County judge has opened the door to gay marriage in this state by declaring Iowa’s law defining marriage as between one man and one woman to be unconstitutional. These people are rallying in support of a state constitutional amendment that would define marriage in the same way that state law did. This difference is that, if there is an amendment, judges wouldn’t be able to make the claim that this definition of marriage is unconstitutional, because the definition itself would be part of the constitution.
Gordo tries to claim that these people are trying to “restrict Iowa courts from hearing these cases.” As a lawyer, Gordo knows that this is an intellectually dishonest description of what is going on. No one is saying that these cases can’t be heard. They are saying that judges should follow the law. The law, which was passed by the legislature and signed by the governor, simply defined marriage in the traditional sense. It was the judge who ignored the law (and the will of the people who supported the law) for political purposes to help advance the gay agenda.
Iowa Democrats in general are being intellectually dishonest on this issue. A few days ago, Democratic House Speaker Pat Murphy said:
“We need to let the judicial process take its process. This is before the Supreme Court. There’s no reason to overreact. The bottom line is, we need to let that progress go forward. We don’t see the courts in here trying to subvert the legislature. We shouldn’t be trying to subvert the judicial process, either.”
Let me repeat: this guy had the audacity to say, “We don’t see the courts in here trying to subvert the legislature.” THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT THE COURTS DID WHEN THEY TOSSED OUT A PERFECTLY GOOD LAW, AND DID SO WITH NO REAL CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS. If that is not the courts subverting the legislature, I don’t know what is. How stupid do these people think we are?
Advocating for a constitutional amendment is in no way interfering with an independent judiciary. It’s simply giving the judiciary a clearer basis on which it can decide the case. There is nothing wrong with this.
Gordo and Murphy keep advocating that we should let this case play out in the courts. Don’t be fooled… this is just a stalling tactic. If my understanding of the amendment process is correct, the amendment must pass the legislature by a simple majority in two consecutive general assemblies. That means there has to be an election (and therefore, some turnover in the membership of the legislature) in between votes. Then it is put to a vote of the people where a simple majority will ratify it. If this amendment is not voted on by the legislature in this session, the soonest that second legislative vote could be completed would be the 2011 legislative session. The Dems are hoping that, by that time, gay marriage in Iowa will have being going on for some time and will be more accepted by the people.
Gordo knows this and is not being honest. It’s up to us to hold Murphy’s, Puppetmaster Gronstal’s (and every other legislator’s) feet to the fire on this issue. The Dems have made a lot of promises and have gotten a lot of money from gay rights groups, and they are going to fight it every step of the way, so be ready for a battle…
Reader Comments