tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post628797257807855751..comments2023-12-21T04:43:12.366-06:00Comments on Price of Politics, Etc.: Impeach Judge Hanson?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger94125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-27239435476074809172008-01-26T09:55:00.000-06:002008-01-26T09:55:00.000-06:00I'm all for Judge Hanson making new law. I'm waiti...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?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-29457764122841840272008-01-25T19:52:00.000-06:002008-01-25T19:52:00.000-06:00I was delighted with his ruling, and am saddened b...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-22519850379757954542008-01-25T19:38:00.000-06:002008-01-25T19:38:00.000-06:00that is NO different. Blacks were NOT given the op...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! <BR/>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?<BR/>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.<BR/>I think ya'll need some history lessons.<BR/>anyone who would like to continue this awesome debate feel free to leave comments on my blog as well.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04926405649108026512noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-63895278757282762582008-01-25T18:59:00.000-06:002008-01-25T18:59:00.000-06:00Jack, there is a difference with your example of b...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-73520208397428434042008-01-25T16:31:00.000-06:002008-01-25T16:31:00.000-06:00Personally I don't believe upholding the Constitut...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. <BR/>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....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-81163869204694966102008-01-25T15:18:00.000-06:002008-01-25T15:18:00.000-06:00This is a good example of why Iowano longer deserv...This is a good example of why Iowa<BR/>no longer deserves a first in the nation caucus. First we give the Rep. victory to a religious radical<BR/>now we want to impeach a judge for doing his job. This is an outrage!<BR/>Iowa we should be ashamed that we can even find 6,000 people to find such hate filled sludge!HAZARIChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07365647118189530165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-40086731337323123492008-01-25T14:13:00.000-06:002008-01-25T14:13:00.000-06:00Because Hanson is such a dedicated Liberal, he was...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-52037406938696552592008-01-25T13:37:00.000-06:002008-01-25T13:37:00.000-06:00Yes, he should be impeached. Even if this is 2008...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-77366090511669293522008-01-25T13:25:00.000-06:002008-01-25T13:25:00.000-06:00Yes, the jusge over-stepped his authority. But im...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-60712499446929692812008-01-25T13:05:00.000-06:002008-01-25T13:05:00.000-06:00I can not believe with all the stuff we have going...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. <BR/><BR/>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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-76097508067886949602008-01-25T12:57:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:57:00.000-06:00Impeach Judge Hansen as he is very smart and knew ...Impeach Judge Hansen as he is very smart and knew exactly what he was doing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-24952228352839399952008-01-25T12:56:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:56:00.000-06:00Hi, my name is Sharon. I am a lesbian, and I AM a ...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..." <BR/>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. <BR/>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.<BR/>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. <BR/>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. <BR/>And leave the judge alone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-50418731100267789702008-01-25T12:50:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:50:00.000-06:00Yeah you know what's going on with a little law br...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-80801599130836195552008-01-25T12:42:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:42:00.000-06:00You state "...Why would Hanson grant a stay on his...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?..."<BR/>well IF that were true he would NOT have granted the stay.<BR/>"...How can Hanson allow gay marriages only in Polk county while the other 98 counties are not included?..."<BR/>Because Polk county was the ONLY issue before him.<BR/>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.<BR/>so NO law was broken here!<BR/>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."<BR/>well if the law violates ones civil rights then it must be overturned by a judge! which is exactly what happened here.<BR/>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.<BR/>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.."<BR/>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!<BR/>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??<BR/>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!<BR/>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.<BR/>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?.."<BR/>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? <BR/>As for siblings, well due to the genetic ramifications I dont believe that is illegal due to anyone 'religious' beliefs. <BR/>and minors? well it use to be the 'norm', so it wouldn't surprise me if it went back to that. <BR/>The only time a law should not be law is if it is based upon a 'religious' belief. Because our constitution SAYS SO!<BR/>If no one is getting 'hurt' by it, I truly don't see the issue. Gay Marriage HURTS NO ONE!<BR/>and regardless who your 'god' is, Mine ACCEPTS AND LOVES ALL PEOPLE, and in America THAT IS ALLOWED.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04926405649108026512noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-48252600723070759622008-01-25T12:32:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:32:00.000-06:00I did not vote for the ACLU but I did vote for the...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-46310360007435118912008-01-25T12:29:00.001-06:002008-01-25T12:29:00.001-06:00The Christian Right is still trying to legislate a...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!!!Pondering Pastorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15336439211065631337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-4778996683085575822008-01-25T12:29:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:29:00.000-06:00Well then, lets just leave slavery as it has been ...Well then, lets just leave slavery as it has been for thousands of years.<BR/>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.<BR/><BR/>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.<BR/><BR/>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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-4743897305154150062008-01-25T12:28:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:28:00.000-06:00With all the problems in this world, it is very sa...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. <BR/><BR/>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???Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-86261217154748503482008-01-25T12:27:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:27:00.000-06:00I attend a Christian church where same-sex ceremon...I attend a Christian church where same-sex ceremonies are permitted and celebrated. Why doesn't the government support my religious beliefs?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-56696641642976361092008-01-25T12:26:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:26:00.000-06:00For those of you who feel this could lead to alter...For those of you who feel this could lead to alternative marriages between adults & children (NAMBLA) or animals...<BR/><BR/>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?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-78751447958905536642008-01-25T12:25:00.001-06:002008-01-25T12:25:00.001-06:00Judge Hansen did what we pay judges to do. Whethe...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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-45979817748561098392008-01-25T12:25:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:25:00.000-06:00I belive the judge is paid to have an opinion. Let...I belive the judge is paid to have an opinion. Let him have his.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-60748975271064614972008-01-25T12:23:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:23:00.000-06:00The ACLU spokesman had it dead on, it's an attempt...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.<BR/>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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-16093784227841874452008-01-25T12:20:00.000-06:002008-01-25T12:20:00.000-06:00Judge Hanson needs to be impeached. If same sex ma...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?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24926524.post-55766818083709159272008-01-25T11:07:00.000-06:002008-01-25T11:07:00.000-06:00As I said earlier, I'm not upset with the judge's ...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?<BR/><BR/>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. <BR/><BR/>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?<BR/><BR/>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?<BR/><BR/>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. <BR/><BR/>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.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com