Homosexual marriage has now dramatically leapfrogged from just two predictably-liberal New England states to a once-bedrock conservative Midwest state, Iowa.  As widely reported in the news media, the Iowa Supreme Court has ordered the legalization of homosexual marriage by overturning the statutory ban passed by the state legislature.  Starting April 24th, Iowa homosexuals won't be the only gays lining up for a marriage license.  Iowa law does not require residency for a license, so out-of-state gays will be allowed to marry in Iowa, return to their home state and demand legal recognition nationwide.

This brazen usurpation of legislative power by the judicial branch forces a fundamental redefinition on the people of Iowa that they had obviously rejected through their duly-elected representatives. This development turns democracy on its head by imposing government from the top down.  A reversal of this violation of the separation of powers will be difficult to achieve in Iowa.  The legislature has already failed once to pass and place on the ballot a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, a move that, if ultimately successful, would now overrule the state supreme court's order.  With an unprincipled legislature, the citizens of Iowa have little recourse, because the state's constitution provides no initiative process for voters to bypass the legislature and directly place an amendment measure on the ballot.

The Iowa Supreme Court attempted to justify its ruling by claiming the statutory ban on gay marriage violated the state constitution's "equal protection under the law" clause.  In the days ahead, it may become painfully obvious that this rationale opens a Pandora's Box for other redefinitions of marriage.  If a ban on gay marriage violates equal protection, doesn't a ban on bigamy do likewise?  What about group marriage, which features one certificate with three or more names?  What about incestuous marriage?  What about pedophilic marriage?  What about bestial marriage?  What about marriage for a person and an inanimate object, such as a car?

As ridiculous as some of these possibilities sound, a legal crusade to eliminate all of these vestiges of "equal protection" violations could decimate marriage as we have known it and reduce it to a joke.  Marriage becomes whatever you want it to be.  Then it really becomes nothing at all, except arrogant rebellion against God's created order.  So go ahead, travel to Iowa, get a lawyer, sue to marry your beloved toaster and demand your equal protection under the law.  The democracy-violating Supreme Court will probably oblige you.