Vote on Iowa justice seen as test for gay marriage

Oct 8, 2012 Full story: WFAA-TV Dallas 39

Iowa Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins isn't well known outside the legal community of his state, but whether he should keep his job has become one of the most fiercely contested judicial issues on the Nov.

Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1 Oct 8, 2012
They can replace every judge, but they can't overturn marriage equality (see Prop 8).

DNF

“Religious Freedom to Marry”

Since: Apr 07

Newark OH / Baltimore MD

#2 Oct 8, 2012
Contrast this to what they are claiming in their ad in Maine about a school counselor being fired over what he thinks about SSM.

If it's OK with them to try to fire people they disagree with (judges) then why isn't OK for school boards to do the same thing?

Or Professional Boards?

“IT'S TIME TO ELIMINATE”

Since: Mar 11

PROP 8 AND DOMA!!!

#3 Oct 8, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
They can replace every judge, but they can't overturn marriage equality (see Prop 8).
Exactly:-)
Junior Esquire

El Segundo, CA

#4 Oct 8, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
They can replace every judge, but they can't overturn marriage equality (see Prop 8).
The word "equality" as used by the gays in reference to marriage is a misnomer.
Take for example "Mens" and "Ladies" public restrooms. Logical people do not scream that "seperate is not equal". The reason for seperate facilities is so intuitively obvious that codification into law is superfluous.
The only way that a Mens room and a Ladies room could be unequal would be if perhaps the Mens room had toilets and the Ladies room only had holes in the floor. If that were the case, the women would be screaming for toilets, not for the right to use the Mens room.
If the gays want to equate the inequality in marriage benefits to toilets, I say give them their toilets, but don't try to redefine restrooms.
And I have never been in a public Mens restroom and heard a man protest about the absence of a bidet.

“NOW will ya give me”

Since: Sep 12

some fightin' room ? !

#5 Oct 8, 2012
High court judges should not be elected, they should be appointed just like all federal judges are appointed.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#6 Oct 8, 2012
Junior Esquire wrote:
<quoted text>
The word "equality" as used by the gays in reference to marriage is a misnomer.
Take for example "Mens" and "Ladies" public restrooms. Logical people do not scream that "seperate is not equal". The reason for seperate facilities is so intuitively obvious that codification into law is superfluous.
The only way that a Mens room and a Ladies room could be unequal would be if perhaps the Mens room had toilets and the Ladies room only had holes in the floor. If that were the case, the women would be screaming for toilets, not for the right to use the Mens room.
If the gays want to equate the inequality in marriage benefits to toilets, I say give them their toilets, but don't try to redefine restrooms.
And I have never been in a public Mens restroom and heard a man protest about the absence of a bidet.
I'd say that's a pisspoor analogy, but that's way too easy......

Denying a same-sex couples the rights & benefits of marriage afforded to opposite-sex couples IS unequal treatment.

Treating married same-sex couples different than married opposite-sex couples (i.e. state & federal rights/benefits) IS unequal treatment.

Marriage equality, coming soon to your state.......

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#7 Oct 8, 2012
All judges should be appointed, but they should NOT be lifetime appointments. I'd say 10 years is more than enough, with a mandatory 65 y/o retirement age, which ever comes first.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8 Oct 8, 2012
39 states elect their judges/justices in some manner.

12 of those states elect their justices for the state supreme court.

This is NOT a good thing. Just look at the nutjob Roy Moore running for the Chief Justice position in Alabama. Yes, that's the same person who was KICKED OFF the court for refusing to follow the orders of a federal court judge.

BAD IDEA.
Junior Esquire

El Segundo, CA

#9 Oct 8, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd say that's a pisspoor analogy, but that's way too easy......
Denying a same-sex couples the rights & benefits of marriage afforded to opposite-sex couples IS unequal treatment.
Treating married same-sex couples different than married opposite-sex couples (i.e. state & federal rights/benefits) IS unequal treatment.
Marriage equality, coming soon to your state.......
Evidently you did not read or could not comprehend my post.
In my post I referred to those "state & federal rights/benefits" as "toilets", and advocated giving gays the same "toilets", but separate "restrooms". Meaning, you can have the benefits, just find a different name for your "marriage".
Make sense now?

If not, let me try another example-
When I was young, my father asked my brother and I if we would help him rake the yard, for a dollar for each of us. When the job was done, he paid my brother with a dollar bill and me with four quarters.
Neither of us complained, because we understood that the purchasing power of each was equal.
If you gays were to be granted the same marriage benefits as the straights, but insisted on using the word "marriage", you would be acting petty, like someone who would not accept four quarters instead of a dollar bill, rediculously demanding exactness instead of accepting equivilence.

“NOW will ya give me”

Since: Sep 12

some fightin' room ? !

#13 Oct 8, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
39 states elect their judges/justices in some manner.
12 of those states elect their justices for the state supreme court.
This is NOT a good thing. Just look at the nutjob Roy Moore running for the Chief Justice position in Alabama. Yes, that's the same person who was KICKED OFF the court for refusing to follow the orders of a federal court judge.
BAD IDEA.
I agree. I remember reading about that nut. AS I said, all high court judges should be appointed just like ALL federal judges are. The Founders specifically gave judges lifetime appointment to keep politics out of teh judiciary as much as is possible.

I remember one particular judge in Nassau County, N.Y. who was an elected judge, and he was removed from the bench because of his bizarre behavior. I'll mention just one of the charges leveled against him by SEVERAL attorneys that appeared before him: If an attorney's line of questioning did not please Judge Mogil, he would call a recess and call the offending attorney into his chamber for a "conference" whereupon, according to several attorneys who signed depositions in the matter of the judge's removal, HE THREATENED THE ATTORNEYS WITH A GUN !

Google "Nassau County Judge B. Marc Mogil" if you're intereste din his other bizarre antics.

Fortunately, the voters never had to consider him in any other elections.

“NOW will ya give me”

Since: Sep 12

some fightin' room ? !

#15 Oct 8, 2012
Jedi Mind_Tricker wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah, Prop 8 has been law since 2008. Justice Scalia has made it apparent that the 18,000 so-called same sex marriage may go bye bye along with each and every one in the other 6 states. we had slavery for a season, 13 states, and the season of same-sex marriage will be over soon, 6 states.
You're obviously on bad drugs.

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#17 Oct 9, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
39 states elect their judges/justices in some manner.
12 of those states elect their justices for the state supreme court.
This is NOT a good thing. Just look at the nutjob Roy Moore running for the Chief Justice position in Alabama. Yes, that's the same person who was KICKED OFF the court for refusing to follow the orders of a federal court judge.
BAD IDEA.
I like the system we have in Missouri:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Plan

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#18 Oct 9, 2012
Judy wrote:
<quoted text>So you hate the people voting for their own representatives?
Typical fascist queer that wants queer child-molesters in our taxpayer-funded schools.
Judges & justices are not supposed to represent ANYONE. They are supposed to interpret the constitution in a non-partisan manner.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#19 Oct 9, 2012
Judy wrote:
<quoted text>What if we get some Muslim judges to agree it's constitutional to gas and exterminate queers?
Go to the collection-point, or else.
If a judge says it, it's legal and moral to exterminate all the queers.
According to the queers themselves.
Slam dunk exterminate them ASAP.
We already have republican judges who believe that, but they will always be overruled or kicked off the court like happened to Justice Moore in Alabama.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#20 Oct 9, 2012
Jedi Mind_Tricker wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah, Prop 8 has been law since 2008. Justice Scalia has made it apparent that the 18,000 so-called same sex marriage may go bye bye along with each and every one in the other 6 states. we had slavery for a season, 13 states, and the season of same-sex marriage will be over soon, 6 states.
That's gonna be hard to do since they SCOTUS is refusing to take the Prop 8 case. Once the election is over they will reject the appeal from the anti-gays and same-sex couples will be able to marry again in California.

Scalia is just one moron on a court of 9. Luckily the other 8 are a bit more sane.

Just another reason for Scalia to hurry up & die........

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#21 Oct 9, 2012
RalphB wrote:
<quoted text>
I like the system we have in Missouri:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Plan
That's basically the system in place in Iowa.

I do NOT agree with judges/justices standing for a popular election; not even a retention election.

Imagine if that system was applied to the SCOTUS. Do we really want voters deciding whether or not to keep a justice based on how they voted on the healthcare lawsuit or the Citizens United or the coming DOMA or abortion or voting rights cases?

Do we really want judges making decisions based on the latest polls?

Every state (and the federal govt) has criteria for removing a judge/justice for misconduct.

“IT'S TIME TO ELIMINATE”

Since: Mar 11

PROP 8 AND DOMA!!!

#22 Oct 9, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
That's gonna be hard to do since they SCOTUS is refusing to take the Prop 8 case. Once the election is over they will reject the appeal from the anti-gays and same-sex couples will be able to marry again in California.
Scalia is just one moron on a court of 9. Luckily the other 8 are a bit more sane.
Just another reason for Scalia to hurry up & die........
That's the lie the anti-gay folks like to tell.......and it simply is not going to happen!!!

They believe that SCOTUS will not only deny the States to define marriage as they see fit, but that somehow the Justices are going to nullify every Same-Sex Couple's marriage over the last 8 years......and it's simply not going to happen!!!!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#23 Oct 9, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the lie the anti-gay folks like to tell.......and it simply is not going to happen!!!
They believe that SCOTUS will not only deny the States to define marriage as they see fit, but that somehow the Justices are going to nullify every Same-Sex Couple's marriage over the last 8 years......and it's simply not going to happen!!!!
I know, it just shows how out of touch with reality the anti-gays are. It's no wonder they scream "judicial activism" all the time; they don't even know how the judiciary works.

On a related subject, overturning DOMA will likely mean the New Jersey court will order the state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The anti-gays argument is that civil unions provide all the rights & benefits of marriage; that will no longer be the case.

“IT'S TIME TO ELIMINATE”

Since: Mar 11

PROP 8 AND DOMA!!!

#24 Oct 9, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
I know, it just shows how out of touch with reality the anti-gays are. It's no wonder they scream "judicial activism" all the time; they don't even know how the judiciary works.
On a related subject, overturning DOMA will likely mean the New Jersey court will order the state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The anti-gays argument is that civil unions provide all the rights & benefits of marriage; that will no longer be the case.
It's the same argument everywhere else as well......Civil Unions are fine, but they really aren't!!!

“Equality First”

Since: Jan 09

St. Louis, MO

#29 Oct 9, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
That's basically the system in place in Iowa.
I do NOT agree with judges/justices standing for a popular election; not even a retention election.
Imagine if that system was applied to the SCOTUS. Do we really want voters deciding whether or not to keep a justice based on how they voted on the healthcare lawsuit or the Citizens United or the coming DOMA or abortion or voting rights cases?
Do we really want judges making decisions based on the latest polls?
Every state (and the federal govt) has criteria for removing a judge/justice for misconduct.
I said I liked the system we have. I did not say it was perfect. I would not object to a little tweaking of the system to dis-allow public votes on retaining judges, but I would want the assurance that any system to remove a judge be very well thought out before implementation.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? 3 min Reverend Alan 2,217
Allowing Blood Donations From Gay Men Could Hel... 3 min WeTheSheeple 269
Gay marriage cases await early Supreme Court de... 7 min DebraE 618
Gay Marriage and the Limits of Tradition 7 min WeTheSheeple 966
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 10 min have faith 50,010
Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 12 min The_Box 3,445
US judge upholds state same-sex marriage ban, r... 17 min KiMare 987
Board member opposes teaching definition of gay 19 min TomInElPaso 96
State of Alaska defends gay-marriage ban 42 min Frankie Rizzo 72

Gay/Lesbian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE