Wednesday was a difficult day for The American Independent News Network, which is the larger entity that operates The Iowa Independent. Our chief executive and founder announced two of our sister sites would close and their content would be moved to The American Independent.
A recently introduced bill could have far-reaching impact on the U.S. sugar industry, including American Crystal Sugar, a farmer-owned cooperative that locked out 1,300 Midwest workers on Aug. 1.
The chairman for Herman Cain’s Iowa effort says the campaign “relied more on the word of farmers than Washington regulators” in deciding to run an ad containing claims the Environmental Protection Agency says are false.
The Iowa Senate will remain under the control of a slim 26-25 Democratic majority when it reconvenes in January 2012.
DES MOINES — Dozens of speakers lined up Monday night for and against the so-called marriage amendment, including a former three-term state senator who said his previous support for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage was misguided.
Jeff Angelo, a Republican who left the Iowa Senate in 2009, previously was a lead sponsor of legislation similar to the resolution banning same-sex marriage. “I have changed my position,” he told a packed House chamber at the public hearing on House Joint Resolution 6, which not only would ban same-sex marriage, but also deny state recognition of civil unions and other domestic partnerships.
“The purpose of our Constitution is to protect the rights of individuals, and it does so by limiting government’s powers to control the lives and properties of our citizens,” Angelo said. “The resolution before you places pro-active legislative language in our Constitution meant to limit the ability of a select group to be civilly joined in marriage. It does not restrain government intrusion in the lives of law-abiding Iowans, and therefore violates the very purpose of the Iowa Constitution.
“Let me also say that the tenor of the debate has become such that it does not serve the people of Iowa well an is not in keeping with an Iowa culture that is known nationwide for displaying both respect and generosity of spirit,” Angelo said. “This debate centers around the devaluation of the lives of a select group of people. At its worst, we are asked to believe that our gay friends are involved in a nefarious debate, the outcome of which, supposedly is the unraveling of society itself.”
In prepared remarks distributed to the media, Angelo said countries that seek to use secular law to enforce religious principle “are not free” – a contrast to the remarks of many of the amendments supporters. Some quoted Scripture from both the Old and New Testaments; others said that Iowans should simply be allowed to vote.
“Marriage is a perfect institution given to us by a perfect God,” said Jen Green, who supports the amendment. “Marriage was defined thousands of years ago by our Creator, and what’s happened to marriage is the fault of every individual who will not fight for it.
“There are 60 representatives who most likely will vote yes,” Green said. “Let me say to the other 40, I do not envy you. You are torn between party loyalty and your personal belief.”
The resolution was co-sponsored by 56 of the 60 Republicans in the Iowa House, but had no Democrat co-sponsors.
Baptist minister Randy Abell said righteousness cannot be legislated by either a governmental body or a church, but can restrain “lack of righteousness, whether it’s liquor laws, smoking, or gambling – which I call a tax on stupidity – or marriage”
“Let us not be ashamed of what righteousness is,” he said, “and let us vote to protect it.”
Several speakers described life before their marriage was legally recognized by the state, when they were unable to make medical decisions for their partners, share in community property or in other ways enjoy the rights of heterosexual married couples.
Other opponents of the resolution said those supporting it had failed to show how heterosexual marriages had been damaged by the Iowa Supreme Court’s historic 2009 Varnum vs. Brien ruling, which held that denying same-sex couples the right to marry violated the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution.
“How has this personally affected me?” said Mark Doland. “I have had to pull my kids out of public school and put them in private school, at a cost of $11,000 tuition, because an activist teacher told my child that [same sex-marriage] is normal.”
Dean Genth, who married his husband Dr. Gary Swenson in 2009 after the Varnum ruling, said the effort to undo it amounts of “civil violence,” which he said is “just as damaging as physical violence.”
“It would be less harmful to me if you would beat me up,” he said. “It would be less painful for me if you spray-painted ‘faggot’ on my garage door. Please look me in the eye and tell me why you wish to hurt me so.”
Richard Hendicks said institution of marriage in Iowa has evolved many times over the years, from a time when it was an issue of property rights favoring men over women, to the right of biracial couples to marry, to the Varnum decision, which gives the right to all Iowans to “make a commitment to someone they love.”
“All of these things have changed hundreds of times over the years in Iowa,” Hendicks said. “We are a diverse, pluralistic society. If we give into theocracy, where will it stop: Your marriage license is denied because people do not plan to procreate?”
While some supporters of the amendment cited the breakdown of traditional family values, Zach Wahls said that as a sixth-generation Iowan raised by two women, his family resembles most in Iowa, and that he hasn’t suffered as a result of the union. In fact, he said, he scored in the 99th percentile on the ACT test and owns a small business – evidence, he said, that his mothers instilled strong values.
Curtis Carroll offered “profound apologies to my homosexual friends and their families,” but said the “power of unelected men to take away my rights keeps me awake at night and makes me fear for my children.”
“We deserve to have law and order restored.”
One speaker supporting the amendment, David Selmon, said the marriage equality issue shouldn’t be regarded the same as the civil rights battles his African-American parents fought. “Civil rights were denied when my parents were denied the right to vote,” he said. “Civil rights had to go to the back of the restaurant, or when they had to sit at the back of the bus, and when they couldn’t drink from a water fountain.”
Instead, he said, “to have a special right to sin is an abomination against God.”
Other speakers said the focus on same-sex marriage is out of touch with the concerns of most Iowans.
Cindy Jones, who worked for both the Vilsack and Culver administrations, said that never in her thousands of encounters with Iowans was she asked for help in taking away another’s rights.
“I’m not sure how this has gotten out of control, but you have a responsibility to bring the focus back on what is most important: Jobs, health-care for everyone, educational opportunities for everyone and renewable energy,” Jones said.
“Jobs are the No. 1 priority for Iowans,” added Ken Sagar, president of the Iowa Federation of Labor AFL-CIO. “What doe this have to do with jobs? Iowa has a long history of standing on the cutting edge of rights of Americans – African Americans, women, labor and immigrants who left those nations because of freedom. I will not stand silently as our state is taken in the direction of the place our ancestors left.”
The night’s final speaker, Christine Manbeck, spoke in opposition to the “intolerance and injustice” she believes are inherent in the proposed marriage amendment. “I think we the people ought to be aware that just as the state can control churches, churches can control the state,” Manbeck said.
Do you know where to vote on Election Day? Do you know what to bring with you? Get comprehensive voter information for your state here.
Sign up for our email newsletter