It's a pretty well-written decision. Not blazingly brilliant, but rhetorically sound. And its gets the job done.

So, driving through Iowa will now be something like
corn corn corn Stuckey's gay marriage corn corn corn Stuckey's gay marriage?

don't forget the industrial hog farms. and the family owned hog farms. and the municipal hog farms. and the 4-h project hog farms. there are probably more varieties of hog farm. this reminds that i need to go up to the quad city area and visit some friends.

Change always comes; I'm glad to see it so clearly for the better.

It's great and kind of the hell out of left field. California should be ashamed at this point.

I only have time to skim it for the time being, but the bits I've read are well-constructed and well-presented. Here's hoping it becomes a template for future decisions.

"Therefore, with respect to the subject and purposes of Iowa’s marriage laws, we find that the plaintiffs are similarly situated compared to heterosexual persons. Plaintiffs are in committed and loving relationships, many raising families, just like heterosexual couples. Moreover, official recognition of their status provides an institutional basis for defining their
fundamental relational rights and responsibilities, just as it does for heterosexual couples. Society benefits, for example, from providing samesex couples a stable framework within which to raise their children and the power to make health care and end-of-life decisions for loved ones, just as it does when that framework is provided for opposite-sex couples."

That.

Wow, thanks for linking this. This is great!

Now, if only California will follow suit.

I'm very happy about this. At same time, we're all saying "Iowa? Really? And not us? WTF."

I know!
It's like the fundies and mormons had to find the MOST populated (sinful?) state CA, and have already expended all their resources and steam on prop. 8, or IA just didn't warrant/garner enough concern from them because they thought WHO is going to have gay marriage in Iowa.

Now if other unassuming states can just do the same... maybe it will build some momentum and help reverse the ruling here.

Iowa is a swing state that trends Democratic. They voted for Al Gore in 2000, Bill Clinton both times, and have a democratic statehouse. Iowa's a state that ranks consistently in the top THREE most educated states in the country, with a very literate and progressive population. Californians tend to think that the only places that progressives live are San Francisco, Boston, Chicago, and New York City.

Why not them? California may have a large number of progressives, but it also has by far the largest conservative population in the country. It's just sad that so many people are so shocked and amazed that Iowa became the third state to find their gay marriage ban unconstitutional. Because there can't be smart people in amid the corn fields, right? They can't be progressive -- oranges don't grow there.

Also, before we act too surprised, let's review who it was that granted women the right to vote first. New York? Sorry. Massachusetts? Nope. California? Guess again.

Who? WYOMING. 21 years before they became a state. But, they're all cattle ranchers! *gasp*

@Osteocephalic I didn't know that. That's good to know. I remember vaguely that Iowa was losing population and trying to get immigrants to move there.

Iowa was where my grandmother was born! I've never been, but it holds a very small part of my heart.
In my statement earlier, you really could have substituted any state for Iowa and I would have had the same reaction.

I used to live in Davenport IA. And while I am aware that IA traditionally swings blue, that doesn't make me actually like the place.

i stand by my hog farm snark. i work almost exclusively in iowa, and live ten miles away from it. however, i also really really understand the disappointment at seeing people from the midwest being painted as backwoods yokels who, if they could just be gotten rid of, would stop impeding the advent of the eternal utopia. that might sound extreme (or due to my sentence structuring might not even make sense) but i routinely see comments at places like huffpo advocating the the wiping out of the unenlightened folk who live where i do. for progress. to be fair, i hate equally the right wing news anchors and their followers that think this is "their" territory.

You can stereotype anywhere. Let's play.

San Francisco: Entirely peopled by religious Burning Man fanatics and social media marketing douchebags.

The Silicon Valley: Nothing but Indian software engineers and Circuit City strip malls.

Portland: Birkenstocks and pot-smokers.

New York City: Eh, fuck you.

Everywhere else: Hey, kids, give yer Uncle Daddy a hug fore he goes to the tavern fer th' day.

@Osteocephalic Do Texas next! Texas!

Actually, Iowa has, as Osteo has suggested, large liberal/independent-minded pockets, and a highly educated populace. I was not nearly as shocked as I made out to be.

I'm also slightly exclamatory because one of my friends, who lives in Iowa, can now make his husband an honest man.

I still find California shocking, truth be told.

@nomi:  it's not through any lack of effort from the anti-marriage people that this comes through in iowa:  it's because the court system is isolated (at least in principle) from lobbying and campaigning influences, and thus free to determine objective constitutionality.  the major difference from california in this case is that because iowa has a more conservative approach to constitutional amendments and everything, it's going to take at least two years before they'll even have a chance to overturn it at the ballot box, whereas california's favorite goddamn thing to do is fuck with its constitution based on 50.1% of people checking a box.

as a midwestern refugee (former northerly neighbor of iowa), i greet this news with a hearty "good for you!" and an under-my-breath "...bastards."  i'm still pretty bitter about prop 8.

the members of Slipknot are going to get into a fight over which one gets to marry which one now

it'll probably be minnesota next. those northern plains states kind of like to just let people do what they do and not talk too much about it. it's nice. be friendly with the neighbors but don't bother with what they do when they're not outside on their lawn.

@Osteocephalic Hey, I was promised some stereotypes, not stuff everyone ALREADY KNOWS. Get to work!

@thoughtcrime: Thanks for leading me to Wikipedia Slipknot. I found–perhaps–the worst page on the whole damn site:

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

Scroll down to "personal" and wince at the broken English.

"thinks everyone is gay once"

yeah, that's not going to be pretty when they finally decide. One will be left over, and will have to marry Chad Kroeger

those iowa kids really really took their slipknot seriously in the early 2000's. which was hilarious. i think they threatened collectively to tear fred durst limb from limb if he turned up in iowa, which while cool, doesn't excuse slipknot's existence.

man, if Slipknot didn't declare war on Fred Durst, Eminem still would've done it, as would Zakk Wylde