Current Events > Iowa Republicans propose same-sex marriage ban.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/03/01/iowa-same-sex-marriage-ban-gay/

Nearly eight years after marriage equality was legalised across the United States, Republicans in Iowa have proposed an archaic ban on same-sex marriage on religious grounds.

The joint resolution, introduced on Tuesday (28 February) by eight Republicans, proposed that marriage should be defined as between one human biological male and one human biological female.

In accordance with the laws of nature and natures God, the state of Iowa recognizes the definition of marriage to be the solemnized union between one human biological male and one human biological female, the proposal read.

If adopted, the resolution would amend the states constitution, conflicting with the 2015 Supreme Court decision to legalise same-sex marriage across the United States.

It is unclear how Iowa could enforce the bill if it became law.

Using homophobia to target trans people.

A double hitter.

If MalFet were still here I wonder if he'd do is "just go to another state" bit...

Ruvan22 posted...

If MalFet were still here I wonder if he'd do is "just go to another state" bit...

Now that is a name I haven't heard in an age.

Freedom of religion and separation of church and state show that this wont hold. Cant make a law based on YOUR GOD.

iowa repugs attempting to blatantly ignore federal law. these people just get more and more deplorable

Is this just an attempt to get a case in front of the SC to overturn the 2015 ruling?

I am seriously tired of all these reactionary lawmakers.

Why'd they have to emphasize the human part? Are there people in Iowa that are marrying animals or inanimate objects?

theAteam posted...

Is this just an attempt to get a case in front of the SC to overturn the 2015 ruling?

Yes

A_Good_Boy posted...

Why'd they have to emphasize the human part? Are there people in Iowa that are marrying animals or inanimate objects?

because of the classic conservative slippery slope of "but if we allow men to marry other men, what's next? MEN MARRYING ROCKS?>!?!?>!>!!! durrurruruurdurur"

daynlokki posted...

Freedom of religion and separation of church and state show that this wont hold. Cant make a law based on YOUR GOD.

Idiot goppers: Hold my beer.

1 step forward, 2 steps back and into the dark ages. Fucking republicans. Sad part is...federal gay marriage COULD be revoked under current SC.

I remember some folks from both sides saying Republicans would never try this...just like how they'd never really go after abortion.

andel posted...

iowa repugs attempting to blatantly ignore federal law. these people just get more and more deplorable

And to them, why not? They know nobody is going to stop them. Democrats and the DOJ are a bunch of cowards and don't seem to be interested in stopping Republican awfulness.

Land of the free?

trololololol

Half of the time, these guys/gals are in the closet themselves and go extra hard on the anti-LGBTQ shit so their voters won't catch on.

Again, I'll post the nuclear take with the heat of a million suns:
If marriage is a right, why do we need a license to do it?

Not a chance this passes. Obviously unconstituional

It's been obvious for a while that the trans issue was just a stepping stone. They were never going to stop as long as they can erode LGBTQ+ rights in any way.

For as much as I was told that the issue is settled and that the GOP wouldn't try this (which was always a very obvious lie), the constant attacks and the 'groomer' rhetoric made it very clear that they were going to try it.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Again, I'll post the nuclear take with the heat of a million suns:
If marriage is a right, why do we need a license to do it?

I.. I don't understand what point you are trying to make...

Are you saying marriage is a right? Because the Republicans that proposed this definitely don't see it that way... Are you saying rights don't/shouldn't have any licensing/regulation?

Ruvan22 posted...

Are you saying marriage is a right? Because the Republicans that proposed this definitely don't see it that way... Are you saying rights don't/shouldn't have any licensing/regulation?

yes

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/3/1/5/AARixHAADMbD.jpg

So long as "marriage" is seen as "divine permission to fuck" instead of "vastly simplified probate", this will always be a problem.

I can guarantee beyond a shadow of a doubt that the inevitable lawsuit in this case will be in front of the Supreme Court in a year or two, attempting to get them to overturn the Obergefell decision.

daynlokki posted...

Freedom of religion and separation of church and state show that this wont hold. Cant make a law based on YOUR GOD.

Acting like our current Supreme Court God Emperor Legislators give a shit about the constitution. Or anything other than the R or D next to the name.

A sensible court would have pointed at amendments 9, 10, and 14, and said "go, be married", instead of the convoluted mess it actually constructed.

UnholyMudcrab posted...

I can guarantee beyond a shadow of a doubt that the inevitable lawsuit in this case will be in front of the Supreme Court in a year or two, attempting to get them to overturn the Obergefell decision.

Well you know that's the play here, and with the Federalist Society wingnuts in this court they would roll us back to pre Brown v. Board if they could.

Why can states just get away with passing laws that fly in the face of federal law (and enforce said laws until/unless they are challenged in court)?

Reminder that we aren't allowed to call the Republican Party what it is on this website.

TheOtherMike posted...

Reminder that we aren't allowed to call the Republican Party what it is on this website.

The open white nationalist party?

Taharqa_ posted...

Well you know that's the play here, and with the Federalist Society wingnuts in this court they would roll us back to pre Brown v. Board if they could.

When states start going after Korematsu, we're pretty much fucked.

It must be exhausting worrying about what other people do in the bedroom so much.

Taharqa_ posted...

The open white nationalist party?

A particular type of organization that uses and encourages violence in the interest of political goals.

Ruvan22 posted...

If MalFet were still here I wonder if he'd do is "just go to another state" bit...

Mal_Fet is gone, RebelElite is gone. Why bother going on

Good thing we're yelling at allies and LGBTQ people for buying wizard video games when our governments are literally destroying our freedom to exist. Certain actions may be the only hope of saving us. It's terrifying.

Questionmarktarius posted...

yes

I mean even rights we have NOW have some limitations (screaming fire in movie theater etc) - with marriage I'd say the same is true, so your "nuclear hot take" doesn't really help in this specific news..

Any meaningful prohibitions or limitations to marriage are already covered by something else.

hockeybub89 posted...

Good thing we're yelling at allies and LGBTQ people for buying wizard video games when our governments are literally destroying our freedom to exist. Certain actions may be the only hope of saving us. It's terrifying.

Iowans could, if they wanted to, vote for political candidates that didn't propose these pieces of legislation.

But that'd require voting for candidate based on his/her's position, not based on their gang colors.

Tom_Joad posted...

Iowans could, if they wanted to, vote for political candidates that didn't propose these pieces of legislation.

But that'd require voting for candidate based on his/her's position, not based on their gang colors.

Are there really that many people that support gay marriage voting downballot Republican?

And should liberals/leftists and LGBTQ people just be told it's their fault and they're fucked when Republicans win states they live in?

Yeah, I imagine we'll be seeing a few attempts at these laws from the truly red states in order to attempt to get something in front of the courts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxcFs_Mdx8o
According to this dude, this is just one of many future projects republicans are gonna flood their dark money owned supreme court with. You think all these fucked up laws against women are bad, imagine how disgustingly messed up they'll be violating personal rights to make sure someone is heterosexual in all prospects of their lives and worse to come, this isn't' even close to being the end, they will not stop until we're all living exactly as they want us to live in very single prospect, Desatan especially wants this, imagine that little meatball going on tangent about how much of a victory this is against the demons of wokeness

Used to be "unconstitutional" was a constraint on political behavior. Now it's a badge of honor.

hockeybub89 posted...

Are there really that many people that support gay marriage voting downballot Republican?

And should liberals/leftists and LGBTQ people just be told it's their fault and they're fucked when Republicans win states they live in?

I'm not saying it was the fault of liberals. I'm saying it's the fault of Republicans who are shocked, *shocked,* that their elected officials are doing exactly what they promised to do when they were campaigning.

Those Republicans (had they voted their own beliefs), in conjunction with liberals, would easily defeat any of the political candidates who ran on such campaign promises.

But that'd require people to vote based on campaign promises, not gang colors.

In accordance with the laws of nature and natures God, the state of Iowa

I dont even know what that means. Natures God?

Mask off

Questionmarktarius posted...

Any meaningful prohibitions or limitations to marriage are already covered by something else.

A) I'd say you are wrong, since it is still legal to be married at 14 to people over 18 if your parents agree (which is often desire)
B) So how would you claim less taxes if there was no legal definition of marriage?

Lorenzo_2003 posted...

I dont even know what that means. Natures God?

They finally submit to science??

wishful thinking