Discussion for article #237994
Monitor all the states that have so beautifully shown their anti-American illegal intentions…
4 Likes
Ah, TX AG merely suggests clerks may be covered if they don’t want to issue licences! What a pandering coward. Pretend it’s OK to violate civil rights, but keep enough cover so that it’s the clerks who would be liable for violating civil rights.
How the hell do RWers put up with this sort of Russian Roulette from their officials?
7 Likes
Picky point: it’s called a marriage license, not a gay marriage license.
5 Likes
LOL
They were monitoring the army during Jade Helm. Now they can monitor THIS.
1 Like
“Will judges be able to argue that they should not recognize or authorize divorces if it offends their religious sensibilities? Could a judge refuse to send a defendant to the death penalty under his or her belief that ‘thou shalt not kill’ means just that?”
All of these are excellent questions. Also with the DOJ involved, instead of waiting for someone to file a civil lawsuit forcing implementation of the law, the DOJ can just bring up these fucks on federal charges for obstructing justice involving a Constitutional right, which obviously is being denied. Civil suits can follow for pain and suffering, since a couple’s constitutional rights are being violated. Play nice, follow the law, or pay up mightily by way of legal fines imposed by the Justice Department. That’s what I’d like to see happen should Texass persist in this buffoonery.
9 Likes
Interesting how people in high office get desperate to hold onto their prejudices when show their beliefs are antiquated drivel.
2 Likes
TX State Sen Rodney Ellis has been fighting the good fight as a (D) in the TX Lege for a loooooooong time.
Every so often he sticks a spanner-in-the-®-works.
Good timing Sen Ellis.
Think I’ll ship him another spanner.
jw1
3 Likes
Hmm. The headline says “Texas Dem Calls on DOJ To Monitor State’s Gay Marriage Implementation” but the article says “a state Democratic lawmaker is calling on the Department of Justice to monitor Texas’ implementation of the Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.”
So, is Texas implementing a Supreme Court decision, or are they implementing gay marriage? If it’s the latter, there are probably a few straights down there that will balk at at the Lone Star State forcing them to be gay-married.
1 Like
To be fair, Texas officials have been dragging their feet on implementation of equal rights for ALL minorities-- 150 years and counting on former slaves-- so foot dragging is their forte.
So they read this: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” to mean state officials may enact their own personal laws to do what the Constitution prohibits. Hence any governing official in Texas may avoid the effect of the 1st Amendment by simply appointing bullying religious officials at every level of government. NOT.
1 Like
And then there are those of us longtime married straights here in Texas who enjoy good fun.
Half-a-marriage-ago-- on our way to being job-transferred to the Bay Area-- my extremely better-half and I-- flew her best friend to Vegas-- to witness/bridesmaid as we were married by (Fat) Elvis at the Graceland Wedding Chapel-- in renewing our vows.
Elvis very well mighta’ been gay.
We just didn’t think to ask.
jw1
The DOJ might want to create a Texas Division dedicated to monitoring all the miscreants in state government all the time, every day, all year.
2 Likes
150 years and counting on former slaves-
It was recently the 150th anniversary of “Juneteenth”, June 21, 1865, when Union soldiers landing at Galveston notified the slaves in Texas they’d been freed two years earlier in 1863. Texas is beyond analysis or understanding.
1 Like
Not so picky at all. That’s why it’s a matter of equal protection.
FIFY.
Myself.
1 Like