I won't belabor it, but last week during the Card/Pournelle/Duesberg post, I said that it is an inevitable fact that this country will one day have equal marriage right for everyone. Iowa's Supreme Court just struck down its state's anti-gay-marriage law, in a unanimous ruling. I don't ever tune into the extra-chromo right-wing-o-sphere anymore, but I assume the buzz word today is "judicial activism." Funny how it's judicial activism only when the ruling doesn't go their way.
Related Articles :
4 comments:
I so look forward to the day when a person gender choice, Sexual orientation, their political views, religious beliefs and the color of their skin is treated the same way their hair color is today...
Just me or is this not getting the media attention it deserves? I've been disconnected more than usual. Maybe in our new Obamaverse, this is business as usual (disconnected and dreaming...).
It seems to have not rated a TON of media attention, though I bet they are foaming at the mouth over it in the right-wing media. But I wouldn't know because I have no plan ever of tuning into Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity again in my life. Now that you mention it, I seem to recall that the same decision in Connecticut last year passed with little comment, as if it just wasn't controversial there, which it may not have been being that they are next door to Massachussetts where it's been a reality for five or six years already. What will make a lot of news which ever way it goes is California because their court is going to rule on the legality of prop 8 in a couple months.
I don't consider what they did to be judicial activism. They looked at the state constitution, as it was written, and decided that discrimination was indeed going on. It is a fair decision, especially considering that 3 of the 5 judges were appointed by a republican governor.
Judicial activism is ignoring the constitution to suit their own personal agenda. That was not done here. We will now see how the current administration, all democrats from the gov to the house, decide to enact the change in the current laws.
Post a Comment