Pirate 4x4 banner

1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
Hophead
Joined
·
77,608 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The Texas ban on same-sex marriages is unconstitutional, a federal judge in San Antonio ruled Wednesday.

U.S. Judge Orlando Garcia issued an injunction barring Texas from enforcing a law and constitutional amendment that prohibit same-sex couples from marrying and ban the state from recognizing same-sex marriages that were legally performed in other states.

There will be no rush to the altar in Texas, however. Garcia stayed his ruling, delaying its implementation while Texas officials appeal to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees courts in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi.

“Without a rational relation to a legitimate government purpose, state-imposed inequality can find no refuge in our United States Constitution,” Garcia, appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1994, said in a 48-page order.

Garcia joins federal judges who have voided gay-marriage bans in Utah, Oklahoma and Virginia, ruling that the prohibitions unfairly demeaned and stigmatized gay couples in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law. Those rulings also were stayed while appeals continue.

In narrower rulings along the same equal-protection lines, U.S. judges recently ordered Kentucky to recognize same-sex marriages legally performed in other jurisdictions and forced Ohio to recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages on death certificates.

Lawsuits are pending in about 20 states that ban gay marriage, including Michigan, where a federal-court trial is underway over a constitutional amendment that limits marriage to opposite-sex couples.

Seventeen states and the District of Columbia allow same-sex marriages.

In Texas, Garcia rejected arguments from state Attorney General Greg Abbott’s office, which argued that each state has the right to define marriage as best fits the traditions of its citizens, that traditional marriage best supports the state’s interest in promoting responsible procreation and child rearing, and that same-sex marriage is a recent innovation that cannot be seen as a fundamental right that must be protected by the courts.

The Texas ban on same-sex marriage, passed into law in 2003 and added to the Texas Constitution by 76 percent of voters in 2005, also is being challenged by two federal lawsuits in Austin that are in the early stages of litigation.

The San Antonio lawsuit was filed by Cleopatra De Leon and Nicole Dimetman of Austin, who want Texas to recognize their 2009 marriage in Massachusetts, and Vic Holmes and Mark Phariss of Plano, who have been together for 16 years and wish to be married in Texas.

Like the legal challenges in other states, their lawsuit relied heavily on last summer’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling that overturned the federal Defense of Marriage Act, enacted in 1996 to limit marriage, under federal law, to the union of one man and one woman.

Writing for the 5-4 majority in U.S. v. Windsor, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy said the law, known as DOMA, violated the core constitutional principle that people are entitled to equal protection under the law.

DOMA’s main purpose was to demean and stigmatize homosexuals, relegating them to second-class status and humiliating the children they are raising, Kennedy wrote, concluding that there can be no legitimate government purpose for a law intended to “disparage and to injure.”

In a blunt dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia warned that the ruling would lead to inevitable attacks on similar state laws.

“By formally declaring anyone opposed to same-sex marriage an enemy of human decency, the majority arms well every challenger to a state law restricting marriage to its traditional definition,” Scalia wrote.

The first lawsuits were filed weeks later.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
30,147 Posts
wow, Nicole studied law at UT and opened a pet sitting business. How Austin is that?

Cant find Cleopatra on FB, darn!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
69,483 Posts
Huh. A U.S. Judge is more libertarian than the state of Texas. Who woulda thunk. :confused:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
22,231 Posts
Joe_W:24343313 said:
How are "Things going to get interesting"?

A wave of new flower shops and salons?
I believe the fight has just begun
You did hear what eric holder told the state AG's in their annual meeting right?

"You should only enforce the laws that you think are constitutional"

I only saw one report on this.

Further down the toilet we go
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,611 Posts
So, is CG going to get off the porch for this?




And if so, is it to take up arms, or get a marriage? :flipoff2:
:laughing:

Interesting, though. The Civil War was fought over states' rights.

Right now states that say they won't recognize same-sex marriage are getting grief from the federal gov't.

But those that want to restrict a Constitutional Amendment get support from the federal government.
 

·
Hophead
Joined
·
77,608 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Huh. A U.S. Judge is more libertarian than the state of Texas. Who woulda thunk. :confused:
I don't think Texas ever tried to make itself out as libertarian, they are rather proud of being conservative
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,761 Posts
fixed it for ya.....
I don't think letting faggots get married will cause the breeding of more libtards.

If anything, the right should start a campaign encouraging liberals to go gay, as it should stunt the party's growth over time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,738 Posts
Why don't the federal and state fucking Gov'ts GTFO of this bullshit...it's a MOTHERFUCKING WASTE Of taxpayers money to argue, legislate and fucking give two rats ass about to two fags or dikes wanting to chow on turf or sword swallow

Only reason they are involved is not because they feel sympathetic towards either cause it is one REVENUE through taxation and licensing :shaking:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,611 Posts
I don't think Texas ever tried to make itself out as libertarian, they are rather proud of being conservative
You're forgetting the growing number of libs in Texas. Transplants from Cali and across the border.

Not too long ago there was a "Turn Texas Blue" effort or something. Either before or during the election. Shit, here's a news article from 6 hours ago...

Democrats Want to Get Wendy Davis Elected So Badly, They're Breaking the Law to Do It - PolicyMic

Yes, that Texas. The state that has had a Republican-dominated state government since 2002 and the state that hasn't voted for a Democratic president since Jimmy Carter in 1976.

Right now, there's a battle going on to turn the Lone Star state blue. Democrats are doing everything they can, including breaking election law, to get it done. If the GOP doesn't wise up, it risks losing it.

Ridiculous, you say? Not in the mecca of Christian conservatism! Not in Cruz country! Since when has that ever stopped the Democratic Party from aggressively poaching enemy territory? I kid you not, I've heard it from the mouth of former White House Senior Advisor and Obama campaign manager David Plouffe himself at the University of Chicago: The Democrats want Texas and they want its 38 Electoral College votes bad — and they're convinced that they have a realistic chance of winning it. If they can add the Lone Star state to its win column on a regular basis ... game over for the GOP.

In fact, their efforts are already underway. Like any battleground state, the Democrats first looked at the demographic makeup of Texas. Today, Latinos make up 38% of Texas' population, while non-Hispanic whites make up 44.5%. The white electorate's dominance, however, will not last — because the Latino population's birth rates are higher, the Latino population is also still growing through immigration, and is younger (with a large population not yet at voting age). If legal Latino immigration rates stay consistent with 2000-2010 levels, Texas could be a majority Latino state by 2036.

Both parties know that Latinos are not a monolithic group, and that they are not all Democrats. But nationally, they lean Democratic (67% in 2008, 71% in 2012), and in Texas, Democrats hold only a little less sway (63% in 2008). That's because Republicans in Texas — including Governors Rick Perry and George W. Bush — have maintained strong and consistent presences within the Latino communities and have actively reached out to them more than Republicans in any other state. Indeed, when Bush was running for president, his campaign dispatched bilingual organizers in every battleground state to expand the Texas-Latino model outward.

But the Democrats see a lot of opportunities among the Latino community nationwide to boost its voter turnout way up from its 48% rate in 2012 (by contrast, the black voter turnout rate was 66% and white voter turnout rate was 64% in 2012). As illustrated many times before, Latino voting sentiments go way beyond immigration policy. According to Pew Research, 75% of Latinos say they prefer a big government which provides more services to a small one providing fewer services. By contrast, just 41% of the public-at-large voice support for more government.

Despite Obamacare's high unpopularity across the country (including among a majority of millennials — a key demographic needed for its implementation to be a success), a healthy majority of Latinos still support the health care law (61% according to Pew), predominantly because Latinos think that they can now access health insurance more easily because of it (Latinos have the highest uninsured rates of any racial or ethnic group within the U.S., according to the Office of Minority Health).

Latinos aren't the only demographic Democrats want to aggressively register more voters to win Texas with, they also want to go after women — particularly single women and especially single mothers. More than 40% of child births now occur among single mothers annually, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Single women broke Democrat by a 2 to 1 margin in 2012.

And it is women in particular that Democrats are hoping to attract with their first martyr in the effort to turn Texas blue, gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis. She's the perfect story they were looking for: a single working mother "fighting for women's rights" with her filibuster against abortion restrictions — even though it was later revealed that there were considerable embellishments made in her story.

Also leading this effort is Jeremy Bird — President Barack Obama's 2012 campaign national field director — who is in Austin working with local Democrats on Battleground Texas, "a large-scale independent group aimed at turning traditionally conservative Texas into a prime electoral battleground."

In his early 30s, Bird is major star of the Democratic Party's well-oiled and effective campaign marketing machine. As Obama's field director, he revolutionized the effectiveness of the traditional field model, registering, among a great many others, 361,000 left-leaning voters in Florida, 156,000 left-leaning voters in Colorado and 96,000 left-leaning voters in Nevada. As a reward for his 2012 successes, the former director was able to name his job and salary. Bird chose Texas, and if he spends any significant time there, it is because he really thinks he can win. Indeed, if anybody can win in Texas, it's him.

Bird is at the cutting edge of the technological strategies that helped Democrats so effectively defeat Republicans in 2008 and 2012. The Wall Street Journal described his approach as "one part data and one part emotional connection. He keeps close track of which states are making their targets each day, but also preaches the value of relationships — between the campaign and its volunteers, and between volunteers and voters."

Not only that, his data-proven successes make it highly likely that left-leaning donors will give him the budget he wants as well. Politico reports that "two sources said the contemplated budget would run into the tens of millions of dollars over several years." And those donors, of course, won't just hail from Texas: Funds will come "from outside Texas as well," Bird said. "I think what you'll see is people in New York and California and other places realizing that this is a local fight with national implications as well."

But it seems that Bird and his Battleground Texas outfit have been caught exploiting legally protected information to turn voters out in an apparent violation of state law. James O'Keefe has released a new undercover video showing Battleground Texas volunteers admitting the group uses phone numbers from voter registration forms in later efforts to boost voter turnout. Texas Election Code prohibits the use of, or even the copying of, phone numbers provided by individuals registering to vote.

In any case, Republicans better be on the lookout. In terms of Electoral College battleground territory, they're on the defense and Democrats are going for the kill in the last major state the GOP has left. There's no reason why Republicans can't be employing these same analytical tactics and data-mining to be combing through red districts in battleground states and regaining some ground. But the ideologues of the right need to get over the myth that ideology and informing the public alone will achieve the electoral results they want. The Democrats figured out a long time ago that you have to take each state on a case-by-case basis, tailor the message (and the messengers) to attract the specific demographics and communities of that state and work on out-hustling the other side's ground game when it comes to voter registration.

The longer it takes the GOP to wise up to these new GOTV strategies, the quicker they could lose the last major electoral stronghold they have left.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
69,483 Posts
You're forgetting the growing number of libs in Texas. Transplants from Cali and across the border.
Are you seriously trying to say that California-translant liberals are the ones who passed the Texas law to disenfranchise fags?:shaking:
 

·
Hophead
Joined
·
77,608 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Turn Texas Blue is very strong movement right now with the upcoming governor election
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Top