Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:

Another landmark date in the steady march of America
OUT of the Dark Ages of bigotry happened right here in the
nation's heartland in November, 2003... when a Sioux City,
Iowa judge granted one of America's first same-sex divorces
outside of the state of Vermont. To a lesbian couple that
had been married IN Vermont under its statute that permits
same-sex couples to have civil unions... the *equivalent* of
marriage. (And, of course, which **sensible** people regard
to BEmarriage. The RRR cult's loons can *call* it whatever
they want while they bury their heads in denial of reality,
common sense, and fairness -- but a civil union IS marriage.
People have been getting civil unions for man, many decades,
peformed by ship captains, justices of the peace, etc. They
ARE **marriages.**

And the really neat aspect of this ruling is that the judge
added to the legitimization of the human right of same-sex
marriage in one of the 37 states whose legislators had been
sufficiently idiotic and bigoted to pass one of those so-called
(and mis-named) "DOMA" laws. ("Defense of Marriage Act.")
(As IF same-sex marriage carried ANY sort of threat to marriage
whatsoever. Interracial marriage was harmless, and same-sex
marriage is EQUALLY so.)

As you will see in the excerpts from the news story, below,
one Republican Iowa legislator went ballistic. made a total
fool and ***** of himself over this, and even spouted some of
the RRR cult's party-line jargon in the process... a dead
give-away to his possessing that dysfunctional mentality.
No SENSIBLE person *whines* about a judge's or court's
"judicial activism" when the court simply is using its best
judgment to interpret things fairly when new ground is being
broken.

=!!!= I would LOVE to know what Schuerer's reaction would
have been if things had been the REVERSE. Suppose that
*Iowa* had legalized same-sex marriage, and then a judge had
REFUSED to grant a divorce to such a couple. Would HE
**then** have screeched and yowled like a scalded cat about
"judical activism?" OR would he have been a HYPOCRITE
by either remaining silent, or *commending* the judge? =!!!=

I'm BETTING that he would have been a hypocrite!

(After all -- most RRR cultists provably ARE. If they weren't,
they'd be trying to defend the quadrillion *potential* people
that are electively aborted every day at the gamete stage of
the reproductive process, worldwide, along WITH the few
*thousand* per day that they DO try to defend.)

It *also* provides further evidence that today's corrupted
manifestation of the formerly-respectable Republican Party
venue where such bigots usually are to be found, within the
American political spectrum.

Excerpts from the news item ---

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

SIOUX CITY, Iowa (AP)
Friday, Dec. 12, 2003 --

Lesbian Iowans Granted Divorce

Sioux City judge gives gay couple united
in Vermont first dissolution in state

Iowa law dosn't recognize homosexual marriages, but a
Woodbury County district judge has approved a divorce for
two lesbians who were united in a civil union last year in
Vermont.

Judge Jeffrey Neary said he routinely signs divorces
without checking the particpants' gender. When he discov-
ered what had happened, he said to Dennis Ringgenberg,
attorney for Kimberly Brown: "Dennis, these are two
females."

"He said, 'yes,' and proceeded to expain the situation,"
Neary said. "I said this is probably going to be a contro-
versial matter at some point in time, and he smiled and
said, 'You're right.'"

State Senator Neal Schuerer, R-Amana, a critic of same-
sex marriage, accused Neury on Thursday of "judicial
activism at its worst."

"The judge was wrong. He should have backed away
and sent them back to Vermont," Schuerer said. "If judges
want to flaunt the law like this, I can guarantee you we
will move to recall them."

The women, Brown, 31, and Jenifer S. Perez, 26, who
have Sioux City addresses, were joined in a civil union
March 25, 2002, in Bolton, Vt.

Legal authorities say the divorce, approved last month,
raises a range of questions, including whether it has legal
standing ...

"You can go to Vermont and have a civil union, but you
can't, until now, go to another state and have a civil union
divorce," said University of Iowa law professor Ann Estin.

Estin said judges in Texas and Connecticut have rejected
requests for civil union divorces.

Proudparenting, a gay and lesbian rights organization,
says a West Virginia judge, however, granted a divorce in
a Vermont civil union.

[ ... ]

"History is moving faster than the law," said Estin, who
teaches family law. "there are so many unknowns here. This
is at the early stage in the process of soerting all this out in
court."

[ ... ] <divorce settlement details omitted; irrelevant>

Neary, who was appointed in January by Gov. Tom Vilsack,
said he had the opportunity to change his mind about the
decree but decide not to. He said the divorce was permis-
sable under the legal concept of full faith and credit, which is
a constitutional clause that requires states to recognize laws
of other states.

[ ... ]

Daniel Bray, an Iowa City lawyer and chairman of the
Family Law Section of the Iowa State Bar Association, said...
"The issue here is that our law must constantly adapt to
change in the family. Iowa has been a forerunner in making
legal adaptations to legal challenges involving the family.

Bray said, "Neary acted appropriately."

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Today, I am prouder than ever of my more-than-once-
adopted home state, Iowa! It's heartening to see fair-minded
and strong strides away from mindless bigotry being initiated
here in the Midwest, instead of on the coasts, where they
usually originate!

As for State Senator Schuerer... to paraphrase his own
statement, let's say THIS: "If legislators want to flaunt our
personal liberties and right to privacy by passing such
repressive legislation as 'DOMA,' as you did, I can guaran-
tee you that WE, you constituents, will either move to recall
*you*, or send you packing on your next go-'round for
re-election. Whichever comes first!." And hopefully, we'll
*have* the necessary numbers to do it.

Wow. Snitchbitches will have a field day with you.
Dont worry though. It's the same tired old field day
experience. sorta like a bad f*ck.

(oops, this got crossposted - fasten yer seat-belts)