Posts
Defining marriage as between a man and a woman will be a hot topic at the statehouse this week. Republicans want to debate the bill, while Democratic leadership is saying there are other more important issues to discuss.
A poll done by the Des Moines Register shows that 62% of Iowans believe that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. The same poll also shows that 55% of Iowans are in favor of civil unions.
The question of amending Iowa's constitution is a statistical tie...
The Register's poll shows that 48 percent of adults favor changing the Iowa Constitution to ban gay marriage, while 47 percent were opposed and 5 percent were unsure.
2 comments:
That 48% statistic is the one that matters. Legislators have already tried to pass a law against it gay marriage, but as I'm sure everyone knows, this law has been ruled unconstitutional by Robert Hanson.
If the Sup. Ct affirms Hanson's ruling(for an argument that they will, see:
http://cornucopiathehornofplenty.blogspot.com/2007/09/gay-marriage-and-awesome-defensive-line.html )
then it seems to me like nothing short of a constitutional amendment would stop Iowa from being the next gay marriage state.
To do this they'll need, among other things, a straight majority vote from the people. That's why that 48% is the most important figure in that poll.
Looks pretty promising overall.
It is not quit clear to me why so many right-wing conservatives are completely against gay marriage. They are essentially trying to convince people that mutually respectful relationships are not beneficial to the couple or the society around them. In addition, Democrats that favor civil unions over marriage rights are opening the door to straight couples entering into civil unions so that they can get the benefits alloted, without actually getting married. Civil unions, then , will actually lower the overall marriage rate. Who is to stop two straight “friends” from filing for a civil union in order to get work-related benefits in a state. Legalizing gay marriage would raise the overall marriage rates and civil unions would lower it. This is perhaps the goal of both political parties. Civil unions means no access to Social Security, whereas marriage does give access.
I’m a legally married gay man in Massachusetts, and because there is no federal recognition of our marriage, we will not contribute to the bankruptcy of Social Security because we will not have access to the money that we pay for legally married straight couples who tap into the Social Security Benefits of his/her spouse. Civil Unions may have nothing to do with gay rights, but rather may be a way of keeping money available in Social Security.
Jos76
http://www.jos76.wordpress.com
Post a Comment