The most significant aspect of the ruling of the Iowa court is that it has clearly spelled out that a state can only deny equal protection if there are compelling justifications for such denial. Clearly there are none in the case of same-sex marriages. Such marriages are not life-threatening or in any other way detrimental to the citizens of Iowa. There remain plenty of heterosexual males and females for “hetero-marriages” after all homosexuals who want to get married get their knots tied.

A second significant aspect is that the court stated cogently that religious considerations may not enter into any justification to deny equal protection.

The critics of the Iowa ruling are typical cafeteria constitutionalists. They support only what they like (arms for everyone for example) but reject what they dislike.

Lastly, the ruling implies that all states which have passed a constitutional amendment “marriage is for one man and one woman only” are in violation of the US Constitution. Their amendments are null and void. Do you understand that California?

I am thrilled with this decision! Yes, there will be backlash. They always show up after a Constitutionally-overridden decision against the religious rulers. Man I want to see these decisions spread all over this country! Bravos to the judge!

14th Amendment, section 1:
Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the >>>equal protection of the laws<<<<

This is very good news indeed.