As I’m sure you’re aware by now, the Iowa Supreme Court this morning struck down the state’s Defense of Marriage Act as a violation of the state Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection. Same sex marriages will commence there in three weeks. According to Bleeding Heartland, if the state’s Democrats maintain their backbone, and assuming that Republicans retake the legislature in 2010 (which is certainly not a done deal, considering Iowa has been trending Democratic), the soonest an amendment the state Constitution is likely to come before voters is November 2013. By that point I think and hope we can anticipate a major sea-change in public opinion, especially when voters realize that the world has not come crashing down, nor have families.
This is significant because it is indeed in America’s heartland, and not a state on the ‘fringes’ of politics. The Upper Midwest has a heritage of good government and fairness, and those of us from there should be proud to continue that it is being continued.
In June of 2008, Andy Lang, one of the Cleveland operatives, presented a paper at Andover-Newton Seminary arguing that advocacy for recognition of same-sex marriages should take place from within the perspective of being within tradition, and not against it. This is a perspective I fundamentally agree with. As Mr. Lang points out, there is a fundamental difference between the Christian conception of freedom and the liberationist discourses. The former conceives of freedom as a gift of God for His service. It is an enablement to live into His will, and included in our vocation as humans is to live in relationship as (imperfect) models of the the Holy Trinity.
The liberationist discourse of freedom instead opts for Enlightenment notions of self-liberation, claiming that the Tradition constrains the individual. The self, then, is the standard of all things. The edge of this discourse advocate for complete sexual licence.