Thursday, January 24, 2008

Impeach Judge Hanson?

The group, Everyday America, presented state lawmakers with 6,100 signatures it claims call for them to impeach Polk County Judge Robert Hanson. Last August Hanson ruled two Polk County men should be allowed to marry. The Iowa Supreme Court is now reviewing that ruling.

Everyday America believes Hanson violated the state constitution by allowing the same sex marriage, so it is urging the Iowa House of Representatives to begin impeachment proceedings to remove Hanson from office (Democratic House Speaker Pat Murphy says he has no plans to do that. And since Democrats hold the majority in the house, they decide whether any proceedings would take place).

Ben Stone, the Executive Director of the ACLU of Iowa, says today's action is just meant to be a way to intimidate judges and lawmakers.

What do you think?

94 comments:

Anonymous said...

Impeach him--are you kidding?

Anonymous said...

What exactly did the judge do wrong? Even if he did go too far, that is what we have a Supreme Court for

Anonymous said...

He is just doing his job and following the law. I believe that is how most Iowans feel anyway.

Anonymous said...

Impreach him, it was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve! We need to follow the word of God, not idiots!

Anonymous said...

Judge Hanson overstepped his job. We, as the people of Iowa, MUST have the right to vote on these issues and not leave it up to judges to do as they please. They are not elected officials. I should think the Iowa legislature would be irate that judges are trying to do the legislatures job. We must have the right to vote on this and put it into our constitution.

tmugler said...

If we start impeaching judges for upholding our Constitution and our civil rights where does that leave us? This is 2008 people, get over yourselves.
Legalizing discrimination in ANY form is WRONG! This country was founded on the belief and principle that ALL MEN are created Equal!
and for those of you that are pushing the so-called compromise of 'civil unions'...well isn't that the same thing as saying 'you can ride the bus...but ONLY if you sit in the back!' ?
with the divorce rate as high as it is, really who cares who gets married? what's so sacred about a disposable tradition?

Anonymous said...

Absolutely he should be impeached! He overstepped his bounds. Marriage is between one man and one woman PERIOD. God made man and woman, not man and man, not woman and woman. Adam and Eve were instructed by God to "multiply and fill the earth". Two men can't do that at all and two women must have medical intervention. Children need both a father's AND a mother's influence in their lives. When we deviate from God's laws, we end up in big trouble.

Anonymous said...

It's sad when man tries to undo God's law. No one has that right, even a judge.

Anonymous said...

THIS JUDGE IS TRYING TO MAKE LAW, NOT INTERPRET IT. COMMON SENSE SAYS GET RID OF HIM. A SMALL MINORITY SHOULD NOT RULE!

Anonymous said...

impeach him

Anonymous said...

DH One man one woman not he he and she she

Anonymous said...

Impeachment for doing ones job? Imagine how many thing would not get finished if that were normal!!

Anonymous said...

Impeach him! This is not under his jurisdiction, he is not a lawmaker. He was out for the recognition and kudos. Well we noticed, and he should be recognized...with his impeachment.

Anonymous said...

This judge has single-handedly put another division in the minds and hearts of people in the good state of Iowa. A decision of this sort should never rest upon one persons opinion or ruling. The people of this state have proved to be open-minded when given a voice. Let the people decide.

Anonymous said...

You go Judge! Why do so many people feel so threatened by the idea of same sex couples and the idea of them marrying? Just because it's not for them why should they get to force their religious and moral values on others? Why should their values be more important than someone elses? Why do they feel it necessary to try to limit the freedom and pursuit of happiness of others as guaranteed in our constitution especially to the point of trying to propose constitutional amendments?

Anonymous said...

He didn't interpret the law, but used his position to make new law. If the Iowa Supreme Court rules that was right, then he should stay. If they rule he went too far, then he should go.

Anonymous said...

I cannot see how the marriage of any two people of either gender threatens my own life, family, or prospects of future happiness. To advocate impeachment of the judge shows only narrow-mindedness and vindictiveness against those who would make all persons equal under Iowa law. How about starting a petition to support making same-gender marriage permanently legal?

Anonymous said...

Judge Hanson made the correct ruling. Banning same-sex marriage is blatant discrimination. This country was founded on the principles of freedom and equality. It seems that Everyday America and other groups opposed to same-sex marriages feel that equality and freedom are only for those who believe the way they do. Impeaching a judge who did his job and realized that a ban on same-sex marriage is ridiculous would be a horrible step in the wrong direction. I commend Judge Hanson and hope that state lawmakers, and federal lawmakers for that matter, see that legalizing same-sex marriage helps to secure the freedom and equality that we Americans have so much appreciation for.

Anonymous said...

Majority rule is the democratic process and a judge should not have the right to overturn the popular vote.
Our county is no longer being democratic, we have let judges and lawyers write the rules, this is not the democratic way. We the citizens of Iowa have elected people to enact rules on this and other subjects. I don't see why the judges and lawyers have the right to overturn these elected officials. This is not the democratic way.

Anonymous said...

Judges have a very different job than the legislatures. The legislature follows the whims of the masses in order to stay in office. Judges are there in order to interpret the constitutionality of laws passed by the fickle legislature, which is why Supreme Court judges are appointed, not elected. If it were not for judges making rulings in consideration of the Constitution, African Americans would not be able to marry, schools could be segregated, and you may have to pass a test in order to vote. Let him do his job.

Anonymous said...

In Judge Hansons opinion, he states and I quote, " Absent of the existing law I make my ruling...." You see we ALLREADY have a law on the books in the state of Iowa and Judge Hansons ruling goes against this. He IS LEGISLATING FROM THE BENCH by making this ruling. This whole discussion needs to be held in the Iowa Legislature. Judge Hanson has overstepped his authority and needs to be at least reminded of his place in the checks and balances system of our government.

I am not by my opinion making a statement for or against the issue of two gay people that are comitted to each other wanting some form of legal bond that gives them the same rights that married couples have. What needs to happen is some form of wording that is not called marriage. Let's face it the majority of folks in Iowa are from a Christian heritage that describes marriage as between a man and a woman. Have the legislature put wording in the law something else to call this type of a union.

Anonymous said...

Depending on your interpretation of the Bible, slavery and polygamy are acceptable.

Anonymous said...

I think that all social issues should be decided by a vote of the people. The problem is that people
don't vote issues, they vote party lines and that just does not work these days. Ask your area legislators what they think. Start with impeaching them.

Anonymous said...

IMPEACH HIM HE OVERSTEPPED THE BOUNDRIES OF HIS POSITION AND SHOVED HIS OPINION AHEAD OF THE VOTERS.HE IS NOT ABOVE CONSEQUENCES.

Anonymous said...

Honorable Judge Hanson is not playing a good role model for our children in our society.

If you read the 'Word Of God' you will find thee story of Adam & Eve.
Read it, learn it, memorize it, & recite it.

This Country has enough problems as it is. We don't need an authority figure throwing a wrench into things.

Anonymous said...

It seems after reading some of these comments that people need to learn how this government works. The legislature makes the laws, yes. The judiciary branch of the government decides if laws are constitutional or not. They interprets the laws. If the constitution itself is wrong, then they say so. This judge was not making laws, he was striking down a law that does not make sense. Therefore, he was doing his job and should not be impeached.

Anonymous said...

I thought the judicial branch was developed to help balance the two remaining truly political branches of our government system. Their decisions should continue to be separate from special interest groups and the political process. Let them to their job and quit trying to intimidate them.

Anonymous said...

Move on beyond the Adam and Eve vs Adam and Steve argument.

That is so over worked!

I hope God can forgive your prejudice.

Anonymous said...

Impeach him! It's time to send a message that we've had it with judicial abuse of power, especially when combined with such gross incompetence.

Jack said...

I just love how all you bible beating, narrowminded, prejudice loud mouths all 'comment' as 'anonymous'? ahahah
Equality is just that..EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL!
you cannot start sorting and categorizing people according to your own personal belief systems. Our country has done that, it meant slavery, segregation, genocide and hatred...have we really stepped that far back?
Who does it hurt to let them marry if they want to? With all the divorcing going on among us straight people, would someone please explain to me what exactly they are trying to 'protect'?
Commitment, love and relationships cannot be dictated by our government PERIOD!
I refuse to believe that the majority of Iowans are prejudice enough to legalize any type of discrimination!
KUDOS to Judge Hanson for doing his job...protecting the rights of ALL IOWANS.

Not Here said...

Impeach him! The people of Iowa can vote on this. Judges do not have the right to make laws and that is what has happened here.

Born a Real Woman said...

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, JUDGE HANSON SHOULD BE IMPEACHED BECAUSE HE IS A MAN AND HE SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR NOT DOING HIS PART AS A MAN FIRST TO TEACH THE YOUNG BOYS HOW TO BE A MAN INSTEAD OF CONDONING AN OBVIOUSLY CONFUSING AND CONTROVERTIAL LIFESTYLE. MAYBE THAT'S WHY OUR STATE CONSTITUTION IS WRITTEN TO PROTECT THE YOUNG BOYS AND YOUNG WOMEN FROM THE CONFUSION OF WHAT THEY REALLY WERE BORN TO BE INSTEAD OF ALLOWING THOSE WHO ARE STRUCTURING A NEW GENDER OF THEIR OWN MAKING. I AM TIRED OF MEN POSING AS WOMEN, YOU CAN'T AND NEVER WILL EXPERIENCE WHAT A REAL WOMAN EXPERIENCES, YOU ARE A MAN, STAND UP AND BE ONE! I CALL FOR ALL WOMEN TO BE FED UP WITH THESE IMPOSTERS! A WOMEN NEEDS TO REMEMBER SHE CAN ALTER HER OWN BODY BUT CAN NEVER TRULY BE A MAN NOR VISE VERSA! STOP TRYING TO CONFUSE THE YOUNGER GENERATIONS TO COME BY FIGHTING FOR YOUR SEXUAL PREFERENCE CAUSE WE WILL FIGHT BACK!

Anonymous said...

Bible aside, a couple can't file a tax return as married unless they are a man and a woman. That should have given Hanson a clue as to how he should have ruled in this case.

Anonymous said...

Judge Hansen was appointed to uphold our state constitution not recreate it. If he does not know the difference he should step down and save the state the cost of impeaching him.

Anonymous said...

All 3 branches of the government exist to represent we the people. Maybe this is a good case to find out just who is in the majority. I vote for impeachment.

santiago said...

IMPEACH HIM, HE NEEDS TO LEARN A LESSON THAT THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS, MAN AND WOMEN, NOW IMPOSTERS. MAY GOD FORGIVE ALL YOU LIBERALS WHO WANT TO OPEN YOUR MIND SO BROADLY THAT NOTHING STAYS IN IT! IF YOU WANT TO LIVE WITH IMPOSTERS, YOU SUPPORT THEM AND HOUSE THEM, INSURE THEM AND LIVE EQUALLY WITH THEM BUT DON'T EXPECT EVERYONE ELSE TO ACCEPT THEM JUST BECAUSE YOU DO! IF JUDGE HANSON WANTS TO RULE FOR THEM LET HIM HAVE TO FIGHT JUST LIKE ALL THE REST OF THE PEOPLES WHO WERE BORN AS MAN AND WOMAN AND WHO DON'T WANT A CHANGE OF LIFESTYLE. CALL IT WHAT YOU WANT, BUT THERE IS MORE THAN YOUR AGENDA AT STAKE. IT IS THE FUTURE OF THE UNBORN.

Dave said...

Hi Jack, I am Dave, an European American. See, it doesn't hurt at all to not be "Anonymous".

But I digress. I am sick and tired of small, noisy, minority groups using the media and brain dead bleeding heart liberal idiots, combined with the "American Civil Liars Union" (a group who wants to "lead" us if there ever was one) to shove their stances or positions or ideas down my throat. Whatever the perversions floating around, this is supposed to be a Democracy, where the majority rules, for whatever reason the majority wants to base it's decision on. Certainly, this judge should be not only impeached, but tried, convicted, fired, and possibly disbarred. I guess we can't get enough people up for tarring and feathering.

Kate said...

Personally, I'm just excited that the local sanctimonious busybodies are pooling their resources for an important purpose instead of, you know, urging their representatives to do something about the far less pressing threat of a recession or our foreign relations problems. After all, if we start treating gays like real people with rights, we might have to re-think our stances on other groups we don't like! It's a slippery slope! Soon, we'll be living in a world in which women, racial minorities and religious minorities are treated with respect! It's a good idea to nip all of this nonsense in the bud with a firm misunderstanding of our country's government and CAPSLOCK.

Jill said...

Judge Hanson has a job description and he has stepped outside the bounds of his job description--impeach him. If you or I didn't do our job, we would be fired--what's the difference?

To those who say same sex marriage should be a part of the freedom and equality this country was founded on--LEARN YOUR HISTORY PEOPLE. Our founding fathers based our country's principles of freedom and equality on those found in the Bible. To say "anything goes" means we stand for nothing.

Jack said...

Dave
glad to see you stand up for what you believe, but why should YOU be allowed to cram your beliefs down the throats of what you called 'small, noisy, minority groups using the media and brain dead bleeding heart liberal idiots, " ??
I mean if YOU have the right to your opinions, beliefs, lifestyle then why should you have MORE rights than anyone else?
whose next? you gonna put the jews, buddhists and tao's in lock down next cuz their beliefs don't match yours?
this country was founded on EQUALITY FOR ALL, and well Dave, that does mean ALL.
This judge's job is to PROTECT AND UPHOLD the Constitution, WHICH HE DID!
no one, not even our government has the right to dictate WHO has freedom, equality and the right to pursue happiness...our Constitution grants that right to ALL.

Jack said...

Jill
perhaps it is YOU that should learn your history! This country was founded for the purpose of FREEDOM OF RELIGION! the whole reason people came here was due to the English parliament cramming its religion of the day down everyone's throats.
Freedom of Religion is NOT limited to YOUR interpretation of Christianity or any other 'religion'.

Anonymous said...

As adults we need to look at the future of our children, if we allow this action to stand, what message and future are we giving our children? This issue needs to send a strong message to Judge Hanson and others who do not feel the word of our God and founders of this country gave us to follow. This is a hit to the core of our Christian beliefs and an assualt to our religion as Christians. May Jesus Christ render his decision on those who choose not to follow his rules and guides as He has given them to us to follow. And for those of you who try to use this as a ploy to cut down the Christian beliefs, your day of judgement is coming also. The supreme king, Jesus Christ will seperate the believers from the non-believers as it is said in the Bible when Jesus returns.

Jack said...

actually the 'bible' does NOT say Jesus is the 'supreme king' nor does it say Jesus will be the one passing judgement..I do believe that job is reserved for GOD himself.
And while Christianity is important to many Americans it is NOT the only religion of America and thus should not bestow MORE rights to its followers than any other.
Being an American in itself GRANTS US ALL EQUALITY, whether or not we particularly like a specific person, group of persons etc.
No where in our Constitution des it say 'All Men are Created Equal..provided they believe in ONLY the following....'

Anonymous said...

Impeach him. It is one thing for the judge to disagree with existing laws and and recommend the state legislature address the matter as was done by the Supreme Judicial Court of
Massachusetts. However Judge Hanson took it upon himself to begin to immediately allow same sex marriages to take place in Iowa even though he knew his ruling would be challenged in court which would most certainly result in stay halting same sex marriages until things could be worked out. To allow same sex marriages for such a short time was simply poor judgment on Judge Hanson's part.

If marriage laws are to be changed people need to work to get their legislatures to approve and enact the new changes.

The backers of same sex marriages don't seem to care if laws are followed or not. A few years back the mayor of San Fransisco illegally decided for himself that his city would allow same sex marriages even though his state's citizens had recently and overwhelmingly passed Proposition 22 which banned same sex marriages. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom action was blatantly illegal yet he was never held accountable by the liberal left. Imagine their outcry if a mayor of a large city decided by himself that his city would now make it illegal to conduct partial birth abortions within the city limits?

The question is if the government can and should decide what constitutes a legal marriage or is it more a matter of religious ceremony and beliefs? Our government bans the marriage of minors with out parental consent. We have polygamy laws banning multiple wives and husbands. Why not allow multiple spouses? Should we allow marriages between first cousins or siblings?

There are all sorts of folks with all sorts of beliefs. Must we accept and allow everyone's beliefs to become legally recognized by the state which then causes problems with other states laws when people move? Who should decide what is proper or improper? A single judge or the citizens of the state via their elected officials?

Anonymous said...

The role of a judge is to interpret the law - NOT MAKE IT!!! In no constitution in this land is there a law that promotes that!! Marriage is between a man and a woman - PERIOD!! If he cannot abide by his job, he should go!! And we should send him!!

Jack said...

yep a judge is to 'interpret' the law AND prevent it from infringing on the civil rights and liberties of the people! THAT IS what he did! He chose to PROTECT ALL citizens, which IS his job

Miguel E. Zapata said...

Apparently, many people do not understand the U.S. political system. This is not a "majority rule" type of situation. The Constitution is not intended for the mainstream and privledged. It is intended to protect the minorities. Following "majority rule" leads to things like genocide. If instead of homosexuality, we were saying that people with blue eyes can't get married, there would be outrage. Judge Hanson is part of the checks and balances. His job is to make sure that laws passed by the legislature (popular opinion) do not infringe on the rights of those not represented by the majority. When they do infringe upon those rights, judges do exactly what Hanson did, declare them unconstitutional. It's not "legislating from the bench," it's doing their job.
I also notice many people mentioning the good of our children. Seeing young people raised in these bigoted homes reminds me of seeing children at KKK rallies. I would much rather have my child raised in a community that values people on their qualities and contributions rather than pigeon-holed into some fascist catch phrase.

Anonymous said...

Simply believing a marriage is between a man and a woman does not make a person a bigot. Isn't that the same as a Mormon saying a person who is against having multiple wives is a bigot?

If the government can not ban same sex marriages then how can they ban polygamy?

Marriage started out as a religious custom that later was accepted, promoted and to a degree regulated by the governments of most civilized countries. It was only in the last 20 years during the push by gay rights groups has this suddenly become an issue. Now a vocal minority pushes for the majority to alter their beliefs and customs to satisfy the wishes of the minority.

The government is not saying gays can not live together as couples or have homosexual relations. They simply saying that the thousands of years old custom of marriage is something between a man and women not between two men or two women.

There have been cases where male immigrants to the United States have wished to marry a female minor child as is a normal custom in their home land yet we have not changed our century old customs to accommodate the wishes of the new minority. Why is it gays feel they are above the other minorities that would also like to see their wishes granted?

NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) is a group that promotes sexual relationships between men and boys. If the ACLU goes to court to allow man/boy marriages does it mean all who oppose it would be bigots? Does the Constitution give them the same rights and protections that will help a judge like Hanson rule in their favor.

I'm not against gays or gays having life long mates but simply prefer they be called civil unions or what ever and keep "marriage" as it has always been. A ceremony celebrating the union of a man and a woman.

Curious just where some folks would draw the line on what can or should be allowed when it comes to marriage?

Multiple wives or husbands? Marriage between relatives? What age is old enough to get married?

Anonymous said...

He and other activist judges need to be impeached. Judges Like him are not ruling on law, they are createing law. I believe our constitution says it is the legislative branch that makes law, NOT the Judicial branch.

Anonymous said...

THE JUDGE IS DOING HIS JOB.

Betty said...

Betty says, it is time for the legislatures to listen to the people who voted them into office. Pass that petition around I can get a whole lot more to sign that those guys missed.

anonamous said...

Although I do not think that same sex marriages should be a part of the Amercian way, I can't see how anyone would think that impeaching a judge for doing his job of interpreting the law would be the answer either. I have to congratulate him for stepping up the plate and trying to do what he is getting paid for!

Anonymous said...

ONE NATION UNDER GOD. WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?

Anonymous said...

to JACK,
You talk about the people who believe this judge should be impeached as "wanting to cram their beliefs" onto the rest of us.What about the Judge who cramed his ruling down our throats by ordering the immeadiate issuing of liscences while Knowing that his decision whould be appealed? Doesn't that show some type of personal agenda? He didn't just rule and let there be time for debate or time for an appeal. Because of his actions, we now have the current judical mess we are in. Why didn't he let the Supreme court have a chance of ruling on this before he forced (crammed) this upon us all?

Stephen, Grinnell said...

How can letting two people who love each other get married and have the same rights as every other married couple be so wrong. Isn't the idea of equal rights and equal responsibilities what this nation was founded on.

Steve F said...

If your afraid of same sex marriage, I suggest you don't enter into one.

I'm actually delighted to read the rants and raves of the ill informed. They are only driving the average Iowan away from their thinking.

Madison County said...

The man was only interpreting the law as it is written. I am concerned that the conservatives in this country are intent upon destroying the judicial branch of our government. Ever since Bush coined the phrase "activist judges" it has become the mantra for those that disagree with any judicial ruling.

Anonymous said...

Marriage was meant to be a covenant between a man and woman. The thought of it being anything else makes me sick to my stomach. You know the yuckkkk factor. Let the people of the state of Iowa vote on this not just the decision of one man. Iowans will vote the idea down.
Leon
Oskaloosa

Anonymous said...

Impeach him. Prevent further decaying of America.

Anonymous said...

He interpreted the law as he saw it. We can't silence everyone we disagree with. He should not be impeached.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if you know just how many workers at chanel 13 at least 1/4
but you are the chanel that makes such a big deal over Gay people getting married or getting equal rights, other news stations dont report such a negitive results.. look in your own back yard. I bet you wont air this!!!

Jack said...

well dear anonymous (the one who addressed me) That judge did NOT cram his belief down your throat, he is NOT forcing you to enter into a same sex marriage is he?
The fact he allowed others to did NOT force anything on you! But when you legalize discrimination in this country you are then in FACT forcing your beliefs of prejudice onto others.
As for the comment someone made about NAMBLA and the ACLU, you really need to get your facts straight!! The ACLU is NOT going to court so a man can legally molest a child! The ACLU is merely fighting for their right to 'say' they want to. Freedom of speech whether we agree with the words or not is a RIGHT that belongs to EVERYONE.
I personally think everyone in NAMBLA should be castrated and shot, but you can't prosecute someone on the 'words' they use, only by their actions. The ACLU is NOT defending any actions by NAMBLA members.
All you prejudice, hateful, bigoted, narrow-minded, self-centered people should at least take the time to HAVE THE FACTS before you start twisting things to your favor.
and if you think CALLING IT a CIVIL UNION is ok then you probably think letting the black ride the bus, but as long as they sat in the back was fine too!!
2008 and still so far behind.

Katie B said...

Don't get me wrong, I am a religious person, but we need to realize that America is a land of freedoms. This is why we cannot use religion as a reason to impeach this judge. We all have the freedom to believe our own beliefs and that SHOULD mean that I can practice my own beliefs without pressure from others to do differently. When we start mixing religion with politics we are moving backwards, not FORWARD! Someday we will look back on this issue just the way we look back on slavery, women's right to vote, segregation, and other issues of civil liberties. And if this is a "religious" issue, aren't we all created equally? This judge is trying to maintain that belief. If he would be impeached, I certainly hope it would be for reasons other than people getting upset that their day to day life is changing. This issue REALLY wouldn't affect MOST people anyways! The people it affects just want to be treated just as everyone else, and I am glad to finally see someone trying to uphold the values I was taught growing up "religiously".

Jen said...

Do NOT impeach a person for making a decision in HIS job...Judge Hanson is not coming to YOUR job telling you how to do it. What is wrong with America to want to impeach someone for not coming up with a decision they wanted to hear? It is you people who sue others for serving you hot coffee. Why is it your decision who gets married and who doesnt? Gays want to get married for the same reason everyone else does...because they love someone; why should you take that away from them?

Anonymous said...

Impeach !! What have we become as a nation? A society obsessed with "sex" now a judge who allows same sex marriage in the great state of IA. oh my how far we have come. Our kids are blasted with sex. Do what you want to do in your own home with consenting adults, just don`t shove it in my face. Time to get rid of him, we elect people to follow the law not make their own as they go.

Stephen, Grinnell said...

The idea that marriage is supposed to be only between 1 man and 1 woman is based on religious belief. The US constitution and the Bill of rights states that the the government can not make any low establishing a state religion and that all Americans have the freedom of religion. Imposing government sanctioned discrimination against any group of people based on a religious belief is unconstitutional. I praise this judge in doing his job.

Jack said...

Stephen, grinnell...VERY WELL SAID INDEED!!
I invite you to post that very comment on my blog where we have this very subject being debated.
I think you have said it the best!
Kudos to you

Anonymous said...

I love the comments about activist judges. Activist judges have done amazing things like give George Bush the Presidency and deciding Brown vs. Board of Education. We shouldn’t be impeaching judges for a simple ruling we didn’t agree with. We need these activist judges to keep the country moving forward, and I think Judge Hanson did the right thing.

Anonymous said...

In after CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL, Adam and Steve, and people not understanding the Constitution.

United States Constitution Amendment XIV Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

If you hold that states can grant marriages, then what this judge did was right. That being said, marriage is a religious ceremony in which the State should not be involved in at all (see Amendment I.) The State should only grant civil unions-for any combination of men or women.

Abortions for some, tiny American flags for others.

/thread

Anonymous said...

As I said earlier, I'm not upset with the judge's ruling but how he went about it allowing for a small window of time for one male/male couple to quickly marry. The judge knew this would quickly be appealed and a stay would be granted. In fact it was Judge Hanson himself who agreed to a request by Polk County Atty. John Sarcone to stay his ruling only a day later. The judge should simply stated his opinion and advised the state legislature to reconsider and address this issue. He knew full well that by allowing such small window of time for gays to marry he would create a large legal mess. In fact there were 20 other gay couples who had already obtained a marriage license by the time Hanson granted the stay leaving them in limbo. Why would Hanson grant a stay on his own ruling if he felt so strongly on the issue? Could it be he simply wanted to make it possible for at least one gay couple to wed before he granted the stay so as to promote an issue he feels strongly about? If so is it proper for a judge to mold his decisions so as to better enhance his own personal agenda? Should not justice be blind and not have a horse in the race?

What becomes of the lone couple that did marry in time only because they were allowed to have the normal three day waiting period waved allowing them to marry just hours before Hanson stayed his own ruling? What happens if higher courts disagree with Hanson or if Iowa passes a state constitutional amendments that bans same sex marriage? What happens if the lone married couple decide they want a divorce in the future and the state does not even recognize their marriage? How can Hanson allow gay marriages only in Polk county while the other 98 counties are not included? I simply feel it was very poor way to go about it for Hanson.

I'm still hoping to hear from those who favor gay marriages on just what they feel should be allowed. Should the state allow multiple wives or husbands? If not, why not? Should the state allow siblings or minors from marrying?

I'm a little worried about Rev. Mark Stringer the man who performed the lone gay wedding in Iowa. "It was a very quick decision for me to say 'yes' to them because for so many years, I've performed same-sex union ceremonies without the piece of paper." He appears to be another pro-gay activist similar to San Francisco Mayor Newsom who openly violated the laws on the books simply because he felt his beliefs were more important than the current laws of the land passed by the state's citizens. It bothers me that most in the gay lobby have no problem with this as long as the law breakers go in their favor. How long can a country remain a civilized democracy when individuals can openly disobey the current laws with no recourse? Will it be alright if a mayor in a state that allows gay marriages decides for himself that his city will no longer allow gay marriages?

There is proper way to go about changing laws yet the gay lobby feels they are not required to follow the proper channels like the rest of society has to.

I'm also growing tired of those he complain about bible thumpers pushing they views on the rest of society and calling everyone who disagrees with them a bigot. I for one am not a religious person, bible reader or even a church goer. I simply believe that marriage should remain as it has for thousands of years, a union between a man and a woman. And don't say that it has no bearing on the rest of us if a gay couple marries. Tax payers dollars will be spent on insurance for a gay partner if one of them is employed by the state or the federal government. People's churches will be forced to recognize and perform gay marriages no matter if they agree with them or not. Betting you will soon see churches being sued if they refuse to conduct gay marriages.

Anonymous said...

Judge Hanson needs to be impeached. If same sex marriages are to be allowed, how do we explain that to our kids in sex education class?

Anonymous said...

The ACLU spokesman had it dead on, it's an attempt to intimidate the judge. Darn right it is, the judiciary in this country has gotten so used to being above the law and untouchable that they think their word is law. It's time the people in this state and this country teach the judges that there is a check and balance on them too and that they are accountable to someone if they overstep, just like the governor and legislature will be voted out of office if they overstep the law, so should judges. This was not just overstepping bounds it was a direct and deliberate violation of both the constitution of the state and the country. The right and responsibility to write or change laws is sole jurisdiction of the legislative branch only, and they should hold that responsibility dear and enforce the law about it. Rather then allowing judges to take over that position with impunity because the legislators don't want to risk political suicide by doing pushing stuff that is against the wishes of the voters in the state.
Any legislator that is not immediately on this and voting for it needs to be re-examined as to fitness for the job for not representing the people of this state.

Anonymous said...

I belive the judge is paid to have an opinion. Let him have his.

jd green said...

Judge Hansen did what we pay judges to do. Whether we agree with that decision or not, we need to let the Courts do their job. That's what the appeal process is all about. Let's give the system time to work.

Anonymous said...

For those of you who feel this could lead to alternative marriages between adults & children (NAMBLA) or animals...

From my understanding, marriage is a written contract between two CONSENTING ADULTS. A minor cannot enter into a contract, and when was the last time you met a goat that could sign its name?

Anonymous said...

I attend a Christian church where same-sex ceremonies are permitted and celebrated. Why doesn't the government support my religious beliefs?

Anonymous said...

With all the problems in this world, it is very sad that we are spending this much time on trying to keep people who love eachother apart.

For those of you who keep using God as your justification for espousing hatred, didn't you learn "God is love" in Sunday School. Do you really think God wants to discourage love???

Anonymous said...

Well then, lets just leave slavery as it has been for thousands of years.
I am not gay. I support gay marriage. If you don't want it to be called marriage, have the state grant civil unions to everyone. Have the church grant marriages. It's legal for me to marry my dog, but not legal to marry a man.

If we start limiting who can marry, lets make sure that only people with college degrees are given that right. Have a doctor perform an exam to determine if a woman is still a virgin. If not, no marriage. Since the historical purpose for marriage is to reproduce, lets sterilize people with an IQ below 115.

If we were mentioning any of these topics, everyone would be outraged. You are talking about limiting constitutional rights. The government provides benefits for people who are married that are not provided to singles. By not providing a pathway for that equal treatment, a segment of our population is being punished. That is descrimination.

Pondering Pastor said...

The Christian Right is still trying to legislate and intimidate others into their own particular bigoted, narrow interpretation of who God is. Get real!! America is made up of people of many faiths, and they have the right to live their faith accordingly. That is constitutional!! Not what these people are trying to do. The Judge should be applauded for upholding the constitution of our country!!!

Anonymous said...

I did not vote for the ACLU but I did vote for the representatives in the State House. I suggest they listen to the voters because after all we have the option to take them out of office - that's the issue; the last I knew, petitions are the voice of the voters. It's not "what" Judge Hansen decided on but that he is not in office to make law - any law.

Jack said...

You state "...Why would Hanson grant a stay on his own ruling if he felt so strongly on the issue? Could it be he simply wanted to make it possible for at least one gay couple to wed before he granted the stay so as to promote an issue he feels strongly about?..."
well IF that were true he would NOT have granted the stay.
"...How can Hanson allow gay marriages only in Polk county while the other 98 counties are not included?..."
Because Polk county was the ONLY issue before him.
You are also insinuating that Rev.Stringer broke some law, there is NO law that says a 'civil-union', 'marriage' or other commitment ceremony MUST be accompanied by a legal binding document in order to occur. The law only state a 'marriage' is not recognized by the law without it.
so NO law was broken here!
Then you go on to say "..There is proper way to go about changing laws yet the gay lobby feels they are not required to follow the proper channels like the rest of society has to."
well if the law violates ones civil rights then it must be overturned by a judge! which is exactly what happened here.
When the blacks were segregated from white classrooms, a judge overturned that 'law' because it violated civil rights. It was not a popular decision, and I am sure many wanted to 'impeach' that judge as well...but it was still the RIGHT thing to do.
and for your statement of "..Tax payers dollars will be spent on insurance for a gay partner if one of them is employed by the state or the federal government.."
well perhaps we should then NOT allow my tax dollars to pay for the insurance of a man's wife cuz I don't like her dang shoes!
You and I pay the insurance and wages of lots of people we don't like, didnt want in office, never voted for etc... so why should gays be treated differently??
as for churches being sued if they don't marry gays, well all I can say to that is IF those same churches don't allow African-Americans to join, or the disabled YOu would certainly have a different view! and guess what...many years ago churchs, government organizations and individual citizens were allowed to discriminate against those groups..now they can't...BECAUSE ITS WRONG!
Equal rights belong to everyone. I have no idea why so many have such a hard time with that. What gives you or any one the right to say that YOU being an American is more important than someone else being an American?? Why should straights get more rights? It makes NO sense to me.
and for your other statement "...I'm still hoping to hear from those who favor gay marriages on just what they feel should be allowed. Should the state allow multiple wives or husbands? If not, why not? Should the state allow siblings or minors from marrying?.."
If the state is NOT allowing multiple wives based solely on a 'religous' belief then the state is WRONG. If some stupid woman wants to lower herself to sharing her man, who am I to say she can't?
As for siblings, well due to the genetic ramifications I dont believe that is illegal due to anyone 'religious' beliefs.
and minors? well it use to be the 'norm', so it wouldn't surprise me if it went back to that.
The only time a law should not be law is if it is based upon a 'religious' belief. Because our constitution SAYS SO!
If no one is getting 'hurt' by it, I truly don't see the issue. Gay Marriage HURTS NO ONE!
and regardless who your 'god' is, Mine ACCEPTS AND LOVES ALL PEOPLE, and in America THAT IS ALLOWED.

raak said...

Yeah you know what's going on with a little law breaking? It's called civil disobedience. If you believe a law is unjust, then it is alright to break it. i believe Ghandi did that maybe Martin Luther King Jr. as well and some other people like Samuel Adams, George Washington, and a few others that I'm sure you can name yourself. They all broke laws they felt were unjust and then either changed them or made their own government. Justice for all people. And freedom for everyone. thanks for reading this. And may God bless you all no matter who you are.

Sharon said...

Hi, my name is Sharon. I am a lesbian, and I AM a Christian. Am I going to Hell? The answer is no, for the Bible tells me so in John 3:16.."WHOSOEVER believes in him..."
What happened to separation between church and state? Same sex marriage/civil union is a moral issue and should be legal. Abortion isn't moral but it is legal. People are either for it or against it, but it is legal.
For all of you that are so worried about our children and future generations, I think there are so many more serious problems in this world than who I am in love with and want to spend my life with.
Gay people are not going away. You would think the lawyers would jump at the opportunity to make same sex unions legal.. then there would be more divorces and more money for them.
Let us get married, give us the same access to spouse benefits, give us the right to live our lives as we see fit. And let us worry whether or not we are going to Hell.
And leave the judge alone.

Anonymous said...

Impeach Judge Hansen as he is very smart and knew exactly what he was doing.

Anonymous said...

I can not believe with all the stuff we have going on in this world that people are getting so upset about 2 people getting married. We have people dying over seas, children being abused, drunk drivers being put back on the streets to drive again and the price of everything we buy going sky high. But for some reason people think it is important to raise hell for something this small but when it comes to big things all of those people who signed keep their mouths shut.

I'm disappointed to see another waistless time of energy, money & time of our legal system when there is so many more important issues out there.

Anonymous said...

Yes, the jusge over-stepped his authority. But impeach? Don't we get to vote yes/no on judges at election time? Let the activists keep track and let us know when he is up for re-election.

Anonymous said...

Yes, he should be impeached. Even if this is 2008--even if it is 1908--marriage is for one man and one woman as God decreed. This judge must think he is higher than God! Election for him might be too far off--he needs to be out NOW.

Ed said...

Because Hanson is such a dedicated Liberal, he was rewarded by former Gov. Vilseck with an appointment to the Judicial Bench. He never earned the right to sit in judgement of good people, or issues. He is there because Iowans foolishly elected Massaachusetts and California (San Francisco) type politicians (Vilseck and Culver) to be Govenors and now we suffer their judicial appointments. Do you think State Senator McCoy would vote to Impeach Hansen? Time for citizens of Iowa to get out and vote, and vote wisely. Then there will not be the problems with Judge Hansen or his type of functionary.

HAZARIC said...

This is a good example of why Iowa
no longer deserves a first in the nation caucus. First we give the Rep. victory to a religious radical
now we want to impeach a judge for doing his job. This is an outrage!
Iowa we should be ashamed that we can even find 6,000 people to find such hate filled sludge!

Anonymous said...

Personally I don't believe upholding the Constitution is a waste of time. Judges are paid not to make law; our State Reps are paid to do that and should do that by representing the wishes of the voters. Judge Hansen was making law in his decision and should be held accountable. What the subject matter of his decision was makes no difference - he stepped over his responsibility as a paid Judge - paid by the people of Iowa.
If a Petition has been presented to our representatives, it is their duty to act on it - even though it is an election year. They seem to have time for much more trivial things than this. Marriage between this, that and the other thing (man, woman, animal or bird) is not the issue - the issue is that we cannot have the Judicial system taking upon themselves more power than we the people. THAT IS THE ISSUE....

Anonymous said...

Jack, there is a difference with your example of blacks riding in the back of the bus. Blacks were not giving the option to ride in the front of the bus. Everyone is given the option to get married. It's just that some choose not marry someone from the opposite sex which is what marriage has always been defined as. They now want to change the laws. I say great. Just do through elected legislatures not single individuals appointed by a single person.

Jack said...

that is NO different. Blacks were NOT given the option to ride in the front and gays are NOT given the option to legally marry!
riding the bus was 'always' define as a white priviledge so does that mean it shouldn't have been changed? uhm what was your point again?
and this judge did NOT make a law, he overturned one...big difference. His job is to overturn ANY law that infringes upon the civil rights of any American Citizen, that is EXACTLY what he did. He is within his job, and the law. This is EXACTLY how segregation was ended, women got the right to vote, bi-racial marriages were allowed etc.
I think ya'll need some history lessons.
anyone who would like to continue this awesome debate feel free to leave comments on my blog as well.

Mary said...

I was delighted with his ruling, and am saddened by the vitriol of the detractors of his decision. I believe that individuals have the right of choice as to partners.

Anonymous said...

I'm all for Judge Hanson making new law. I'm waiting for him to raise the legal age to 35 and the voting age to 45. Then will we voters decide to stop him?