Dear Friends of IFPC Action,
Our friends at Family Research Council Action and the National Organization for Marriage are joining IFPC Action for a road trip here in Iowa!
Starting next Monday, October 25th at 9:00 AM at the State Capitol, U.S. Rep. Steve King, FRC Action President Tony Perkins, IFPC Action President Chuck Hurley, and several other leaders will encourage voters across the State to vote “no retention” on activist judges who think One Man – One Woman Marriage is unconstitutional.
Go to www.judgebus.com for a list of stops closest to you. The tour will be hitting 45 of Iowa’s 99 counties. The last stop of the “Judge Bus” tour will be a rally on Thursday, October 28th at 5:00 PM at the Iowa Supreme Court building.
Please pass this info on to your family and friends!
~~~
As the 2010 General Election absentee ballots are being sent out, many of you are calling us with questions about judges on the ballot.
By now, most Iowans are aware of the 3 Iowa Supreme Court judges who are on the ballot this November 2nd. Those Iowa Supreme Court judges said last year that One Man – One Woman Marriage is unconstitutional, and are now asking We the People of Iowa to re-hire them for another term at over $1,400,000.00 each.
But what about the lower court judges who are up for retention as well? Are any of them worthy of retaining? Is there any information available on their judicial philosophy and method of interpretation?
Just speaking for myself, I will pray for righteous judges, and will be voting no on all of them, because:
1) I’ve not heard any of them repudiate what the Iowa Supreme Court judges did, and some are actively defending them.
2) When we sent questionnaires to judges in the past, they’ve followed the Iowa Supreme Court’s advice to not answer them. This leaves us with what the U.S. Supreme Court has called “state-imposed voter ignorance.” Since I am being asked whether to re-hire someone with my own tax dollars, I won’t hire him or her without knowledge of motivation, experience, and philosophy; especially when, as a group, judges have refused in the past to answer our respectful questions about those issues.
3) If some judges are defeated because of their ties to the Iowa Supreme Court judges, it will strengthen our ability to get them to answer future questionnaires on their judicial philosophies and methods of constitutional interpretation.
4) I don’t know any of them well enough personally to be sure that they hold to the original intent of the U.S. and Iowa Constitutions.
For other information on the judges or the retention races, you may want to check out www.iowaforfreedom.com or www.judgepedia.com
Thanks for standing with IFPC Action!
Encourage all of your friends and family to get informed and make their voices heard at the polls!
Sincerely,
Chuck Hurley, JD
President, Iowa Family Policy Center ACTION
Not nasty, I promise. I am a Christian and on the issue of marriage, I have personal beliefs. I also have a strong belief of the separation of church and State. To protect the State and especially to protect the Church. Unfortunately there is much in the Constitution left for interpretation. I do not have a problem with the State allowing Gays to marry. I do have a problem if the State forces Churches to perform the ceremony, sanction, or bless the Union. It should be up to the individual Church. I do respect you belief. My husband feels differently than me. But we repect the other's view. God Bless you on your day and I love your blog.
ReplyDeleteKonnie,
ReplyDeleteI have my own beliefs about the state of marriage, and like I stated, they are not what is influencing the decision to urge people to vote out the current judges in our state. Unfortunately, there are other matters that are being just as poorly treated. What is wrong is the tendency to act on their personal beliefs, rather than trying to accurately interpret the law. I agree a lot is left up to interpretation, and unfortunately many are making this very much about the marriage issue. I think it is actually hurting their cause by making it so focused on that one issue, but what my issue is simply that there are three sections of the ruling body that are supposed to keep each other in check, and that body is currently horribly out of balance. New "blood" needs to come into place in order to restore what has fallen out of balance due to ambivalence on the part of people for far too long.
Thank you for your thoughts...
I just wanted to reiterate that I am *not* pushing this cause for the sake of marriage for anyone, but rather because I feel my rights are in jeopardy if proper balance is not maintained.
God bless you, as well :)
Yes I understand. I guess it is that I am very happy with the other two branches and don't feel a need for a change at this time. But I do understand your point of view and respect it very much.
ReplyDelete