Thursday, December 19, 2013


UPDATE:  Today in a unanimous opinion the New Mexico Supreme Court upheld the right to gay marriage.  In some counties because of confusion in the law, clerks had already been issuing marriage licenses since before today's opinion.

Click for Story

This battle is basically done - but Texas will fight to the bitter end only to lose.

When people try and regulate how a word is used, you have to know ignorance is at the source of the problem. Unless you intend to arrest grandma for introducing her gay grandson as married to another man, you are urging your point to no avail. The idea anyone believes they can regulate the use of a word speaks to the level of contempt so many Americans, and in particular Republicans truly have for liberty.

On a personal note, I favor marriage before the government got involved - irony how the Republicans call traditional marriage that defined by the government as opposed to how marriage was traditionally defined for 1000's of years.  Yet another example the Republicans are full of shit along with their followers who repeat their moronic statements like lemmings.

Historically, two people went to a religious person and married.  There was no license - no interference from the government.  But when government interference benefits the bigotry of Republicans all of a sudden Big Brother is your friend instead of your enemy.   Even in the beginning of the precursor to the license you went to the church officials for a church license, not a government licence.  Marriage other than common law marriage was always a matter for the churches and not the state.  But now the Freedom of Religion Republicans have turned it into a state issue without regard for the doctrine of the churches.  Yet another example of how the Republicans play their lemming followers with false claims of being pro religion and anti-big brother.


Last year the U.S. Supreme Court found DOMA to be unconstitutional.  It was a federal law which basically made it illegal for the federal government to recognize thousands of gay marriages.  The issue was benefits.  Since the ruling the federal government has been expanding all federal benefits to gay couples already received by straight couples.   The majority of National Guard units are federally controlled, while a handful are controlled by the state.  Texas on a temporary basis gave in to the federal mandate and has put all gay couples in the same position as straight couples in terms of benefits.

Florida instead chose to deny all benefits to spouses regardless of sexual orientation for state regulated national guard units.  All federal regulated units are receiving equal benefits regardless of sexual orientation.  Now, ask yourself - other than outright ignorance what could force a governor to say to straight couples, rather than have to give gay couples benefits we are going to cut off your benefits?

See article


This issue will be resolved by a federal judge in San Antonio.  See Article  The DOMA decision will be at the heart of the case.  Texas has a lot of benefits for veterans not available by the federal government or other states.  The Hazelwood Act provides for tuition waiver in all state universities.  The allowable credits are transferable to your spouse and children.  This means a gay veteran married to another man can give his free tuition waiver to his non-veteran husband if he so chooses.  But not in Texas.  Texas transfers property tax discounts to disabled veterans to the spouses after the veteran dies.  But not in the case of the gay surviving spouse.  The DOMA decision was pretty clear that the government cannot discriminate in benefits based on the sexual orientation of the couple.

When Senator Lucio was the final vote to put the anti-gay marriage amendment in the Texas Constitution I was asked to take the lead against him.  I said no.  It was not complex.  In exchange for his anti-gay marriage vote he got the votes for life without the possibility of parole as an alternative to the death penalty.   What Senator Lucio got was real and had an immediate impact in terms of the death penalty.  The Texas anti-gay amendment was meaningless.  It was passed to please the ignorant. 

Everyone knew that it was meaningless because it would eventually be challenged in court.  Gay marriage was not going to come to Texas without a court decision with or without the amendment.  So in my mind the ignorant Republicans got a meaningless Amendment which did nothing to change Texas law as it already existed, but those of us who oppose the death penalty got an option other than the needle.


The issue of whether gay couples married in other states seeking divorce in Texas is now before the Texas Supreme Court.  See article  If the Texas Supreme Court refuses to grant the right of divorce, they know it will go directly to the US Supreme Court. 

The end of this battle is a formality.  The sad part is while intellectually disabled children go without help and other children go hungry churches and ignorant Republicans will give money to fight a loss battle while not giving the money to help children in need.  But then of course this is what Republicans call pro family.  If you cannot see all the BS contradictions in the Republicans agenda which claims to be anti-big brother and pro family and pro church it is because your eyes are closed to your bigotry.


The chances of me meeting someone in Brownsville is pretty much non-existent.  Believe it or not I am not one to initiate a conversation for a date.  On dating I am actually quite bashful.  I have been encouraged to ask someone out at bingo, but I cannot just bring myself to do it.  Also he may be married.  He has kids, but maybe he is divorced.

But if I ever do meet the right man, I will never consent to state sponsored marriage.  We will marry in a field with family and friends present.  We will read our vows to one another while a friend guides the proceedings.  It will be that simple.  Now for legal reasons we will sign binding partnership agreements in the event things do not work out. 


Joaquin said...

You're quite the fucking moron and show your prejudice when you discuss gay marriage. If it was up to the evil conservatives, no government would have a say in marriage. Government is actually a friend to the perverts who want to normalize this abnormal behavior. If society got to decide, homosexuals would still be in the closet. In the privacy of the voting booth, most people still vote AGAINST this travesty. The courts will give you your way. But these habits will never stop disgusting the majority of us.

BobbyWC said...

The only thing you are right about is a true conservative would oppose government intervention in marriage - which is why for years I have said the same thing and that in fact Republicsna are not true conservatives - but their moronic lemming followers are too poorly educated to know.

The latest poll shows the majority of Americans favoring gay marriage - so you are wrong on that - it also shows the fake conservatives overwhelmingly against gay marriage

Don't let the facts slap you in the head on the way out.

Also where in hell in my post did I even mention the opinion of the people. My post was 100% about the legal battles in Texas with not even a reference to public opinion.

Do you think your extreme homophobic mentality got in the way of your reading skills

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Equal rights for all!

Joaquin said...

You claim not to mention public opinion as you cite a public opinion poll (Gallup) as a reference. I actually mentioned voting booths. Did the citizens of California not vote against homosexualy marriage 2 or 3 times? Did the citizens of Texas not vote against it as well? Those votes aren't public opinion, junior. Yet somehow, I'm the one with poor reading skills.

BobbyWC said...

First of all, you know nothing about public opinion and how it works. So because the people voted years ago something it means their opinion will not evolve.

Elections are not as accurate as professionally done public opinions polls. This is pretty well established.

Second, a current opinion poll reflects what the people think today.

Your argument is the people's view should be viewed as what they though years ago.

Move on - the homophopbic wild hair in your arse is showing.

And further, I just summarized that is happening and you call that biased. Show me one article which shows the articles I cited are not correct

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Keep your prejudice out of other people's private lives and you won' t have to be disgusted.