Connect with us

Iowa

Published

on

roger kuhle polk county assist att. 

Child-raising: If marriage provides the optimal environment for children denying it harms the children of same sex unions. Essential right to know biological parent. No dispute that it’s better for a child to have two parents. Judge: Is it your argument that they will be harmed if we honor? State has an intertest in  marriage. By fostering dss marr will harm and could defeat its vital purpose. State will be teaching marriage is not necessary. child of current ss marr = stigma. Judge they claim more than that. Tangible benefits can be obtained legally. argu are hypiothetical. Could not provide evidence example of anyone turned away from a hospital or will contested. Perceived harms are not real. Difference treatment not substantial. How does a man terach a girl to be a woman, vice versa. Judge: Maybe dual marriage gender optimal. We allow sex offenderds and felons and deadbeat dads to get marriaed. If sex offender or alcoholic marries they do not destroy fabric of marriage. JHudge: can we allow felons to not get married. Lawyer would violate their rights. Judge Is a view of morality sufficient to allow legislative opinion. Scalia yes oconnor no. “Morality is our culture”. Judge: Challenge may be to balance individual rights vs. moral argument. Lawyer Not merely a question of morality. Marriage cannot bhe proven to have just a procreative value. Procretion is a feature not a function. Judge: Hoew excluding glbt interferes with this purpiose of procreation? Lawyer: Does state’s concern with procret marrige further marrige? “quibble” on gender. In a generation or two of ss marr the state is saying you do not bneed a mother or father. Judge If stab is the goal then by denying ss vouples arent you going against your argument. L: Undoubtlyu thats possible. Law doesnt have to be a perfect fit. 

Judge: Heightened scrutiny: one’s orientation/gender does not affect abiltiy to operdform in society. You admit there has been disc of glbt. lawyer: Equal protection not valid. “Loving is based on race” 

Procreation: If priomary basis, how does recog of ss marriage result in less child born. “IUt doesn’t. but it could. Legitamte fear is when state encour ss marr teaches that marriafe ios no longer abt procreation, says pro not important. Judg; how is this having real purpose. more child born out of wedlock. Nofault divorce is a problem . ss marr defriving child of right of child to know theuir parents. J: Happends in borth couples, issue odf allowing artificial birthing. Judge: Is sealing of adopt records against state law? next week we could be opening iup polygamy.

History: Four thousand years

Equal protection:

“There is no ban there is no exclus to ss marr.” to reach the con that ss marr is bigoty flies in the face of 

 

Dennis Johnson: plaintiffs

firstwords of iowa constitution all men and women are crerated equal. 1857 free and indep changed to free and equal. 

If there were studies that showed there were problems with ss marriage those studies would be in the records. If there were good evidence they would be in the record. 

Its clear diff sex couples will have children. Its est policy in this state that says gl are valid parents.

concern about limiting marr between 2 people. Polygamy would require new array of statutes and laws. 

Attribute of right not who historicasllty exercises it. 

Mariage bundle of legal rights and responsibilities, morte than just procreation, intimate combining opf two lives forever, most revered institution in our socuiety. You dont grow up thinking about the financial rights you think about the intimate rights. 

Dual gender parenting: socioliogical evidence most imp is for child to have 2 partents good relationship with primary, then secondary giver, then financial. There is no evidence to suggest 

By allowing same sex couples to adot court has est that ss parents are sufficient. 

we will allow convicted pedofiles to get married without blinking an eye. optimal environment: 

Is glbt suspect class? politically powerless. 

Marriage is declining, less personal responsibility, cortrossive effect:

“no basis in fact. sheer speculation.” No interest in maintaining ss exclusion. all the reasons of marriage are right. quesrtion is why is glbt excluded. not been able to articulate rerason to say why excluded. Marriage is changing. I dont know how barring ss marr wouold have an effect on what diff sex couples are doing in their lives. No plausible credible reason for exclusion. Religious notions of marriage shouldn not be examined. Trad is no just to continue discrimination. weve been dis for so long that we should be able to continue. Marr is ultimate statement about committ,. civil union is badge of second class. Turn argument on yourself. 

Brown vs boe: Would hurt their hearts andf minds in weay they mifght never recover. 

 

——

 

Plaint taken prob of disc of homo sex. 

B/c homo not criminal they are no lionger minority. 

Goiung to knock down the inst og marr to gain equality.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Fox News Host Suggests Trump ‘Force’ Court to Throw Him in Jail – by Quoting Him

Published

on

The Fox News host who targeted a juror serving on Donald Trump’s criminal New York trial is now suggesting the ex-president should violate his gag order and “force” the court to throw him in jail, by quoting the Fox News host.

Jesse Watters came under fire earlier this week for profiling juror number two, sharing possibly identifying information published by a myriad of reporters but then using that information to pass judgment on her ability to serve.

“I’m not so sure about juror number two,” Watters concluded on Fox News.

Jurors, at the judge’s direction, were to remain anonymous, for their protection and the protection of the trial.

The judge excused her, after she said she felt she was not able to be impartial because friends and family were calling her asking if she had been chosen to serve on the Trump trial, after the media blitz.

New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan admonished the press for reporting the information, but some news outlets appeared to ignore his warning.

Watters on Wednesday “did a segment with a jury consultant, revealing details about people who had been seated on the jury and questioning whether some were ‘stealth liberals’ who would be out to convict Trump,” the Associated Press reported.

READ MORE: Gaetz: ‘Corrupt’ Republicans Could ‘Take a Bribe’ and Throw House to Dems, Blocking Trump Run

Trump later posted Watters’ quote on his Truth Social platform, leading some, including New York prosecutors, to ask the judge to cite him for allegedly breaking his gag order.

Judge Merchan ordered Trump to not mention witnesses, jurors, prosecutors, court staff, or the family members of prosecutors and court staff, CNN has reported.

New York prosecutors told Juge Merchan Trump has violated the gag order at least ten times.

“Prosecutor Christopher Conroy described the ‘most disturbing’ example as a social media message Trump posted on Wednesday evening quoting a Fox News host as saying, ‘They are catching undercover Liberal Activists lying to the Judge in order to get on the Trump Jury,'” Politico reports.

That host was Jesse Watters.

RELATED: ‘Afraid and Intimidated’: Trump Trial Juror Targeted by Fox News Dismissed

Friday afternoon, Watters appeared to egg Trump on, urging the ex-president to violate the gag order.

“I would make them put me in jail,” Watters said on Fox News. “I would have a tweet about something perhaps I said on ‘The Five’ or ‘Jesse Watters Primetime,’ and I would force them to throw me in jail.”

Watch Watters’ remark below or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

News

Gaetz: ‘Corrupt’ Republicans Could ‘Take a Bribe’ and Throw House to Dems, Blocking Trump Run

Published

on

U.S. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) says some of his fellow House Republicans would “take a bribe” to throw the razor-thin GOP majority to the Democrats if a far-right faction calls up a motion to oust Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, allowing Democrats to hand the gavel to the Minority Leader, Hakeem Jeffries. he warned if that happens, Democrats would immediately declare Trump ineligible to be President, pack the U.S. Supreme Court, and pass numerous laws like the American Rescue Plan.

“I do believe in a one seat majority there could be one or two or three of my colleagues who would take a bribe in one form or another in order to deprive the Republicans of a majority at all,” Gaetz said Friday on his podcast (video below.)

He added, “the risk that one or two of my corrupt Republican colleagues might take a bribe, take a walk, feign an ailment and flip this thing to the Democrats is a risk that is too high for me at this time.”

Gaetz’s fellow far-right Florida Republican member of Congress, Anna Paulina Luna, told listeners, “I heard that when, if and when the motion vacate is introduced, that there will be immediate resignations of a couple of more moderate members of Congress. And in the event that that happens, that ultimately means it does go to a Democrat speaker.”

RELATED: Jeffries Vows Democrats Will Ensure Ukraine Aid Passes as Johnson Defectors Grow

U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) last month filed a “motion to vacate,” which she can use at any time to force a vote to oust the GOP Speaker, Mike Johnson. U.S. Rep. Tim Massie (R-KY) and just today, U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) has signed on as co-sponsors.

Congressman Gaetz told listeners if Democrats do take the House through a force vote to remove Johnson, Democrats would “be declaring Donald Trump an insurrectionist and setting up a barrier to him being able to become the president United States.”

“That’ll be their leadoff hitter, and then the chaser to that shot will be a massive spending package that looks a lot more like the American Rescue Plan. They will blow past every concept of every cap ever imagined. You’ll be looking at Universal Basic Income, you could be looking at packing the Supreme Court.”

Watch a short clip of Gaetz’s remarks below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Stop Bringing Up Nazis and Hitler’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Smacked Down by Democrats

Continue Reading

News

Jeffries Vows Democrats Will Ensure Ukraine Aid Passes as Johnson Defectors Grow

Published

on

Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries vowed Friday the majority of Democrats will support Republicans’ Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and Gaza foreign aid legislation as Republican Speaker Mike Johnson lost support of another member of his conference to a faction determined to oust him.

“Democrats will provide a majority of our majority as it relates to funding Israel, humanitarian assistance, Ukraine, and our allies in the Indo Pacific,” Minority Leader Jeffries said. “It remains to be seen what Republicans will do in terms of meeting the national security needs of the American people, but it was important for House Democrats to ensure that the national security bills are going to be considered.”

Despite Republicans having a one-vote majority, more Democrats on Friday voted to move the critical and long-awaited foreign aid bills forward than did Republicans.

READ MORE: ‘Stop Bringing Up Nazis and Hitler’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Smacked Down by Democrats

The 316-94 vote included 165 Democrats and 151 Republicans voting yes, and 55 Republicans and 39 Democrats voting no.

Axios’ Juliegrace Brufke posted the list of Republicans voting against their party’s legislation.

Calling it a “rare” moment in modern congressional history to have to rely on opposition party votes to pass legislation, BBC News reports Speaker Johnson’s “hold on power is tenuous, and the legislators who oppose him – and his bid to provide aid to Ukraine – occupy some key positions within the House’s power structure.”

Amid the procedural vote to move the foreign aid funding bills forward, U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar, a far-right Republican of Arizona, announced he is joining Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), and Congressman Tim Massie (R-KY) in formally announcing their will vote to oust Speaker Johnson.

Gosar, like Greene, is reportedly a Christian nationalist. In 2022 CNN reported his “lengthy ties to White nationalists, [a] pro-Nazi blogger and far-right fringe received little pushback for years.”

RELATED: ‘Repercussions’: Democrats and Republicans Stand Against ‘Pro-Putin’ House GOP Faction

“We’ve been very honest in our assessment of the situation from the beginning,” Jeffries on Friday also declared. “At the appropriate time as House Democrats, we will have a conversation about how to deal with any hypothetical motion to vacate.”

“Moscow Marjorie Taylor Greene, Massie, and Gosar are quite a group. But central to our conversation is to make sure that the national security legislation in totality is passed by the House of Representatives.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.