Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

Brain -> Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 10:05:04 PM)

When they try to fix this I hope somebody will filibuster the bill so then Texans will know how gay people feel not to be able to marry the person you love.

Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages

But the troublemaking phrase, as Radnofsky sees it, is Subsection B, which declares: This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage." Architects of the amendment included the clause to ban same-sex civil unions and domestic partnerships. But Radnofsky, who was a member of the powerhouse Vinson & Elkins law firm in Houston for 27 years until retiring in 2006, says the wording of Subsection B effectively "eliminates marriage in Texas," including common-law marriages.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/79112.html



DomKen -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 10:07:41 PM)

yeah the amendment bans all institutions identical to marriage.



luckydawg -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 10:11:52 PM)

Which would, of course, not include "marriage".

As something that is identical to "A"is not "A",but something else, which is identical to "A". Basic logic and English.


Though personally I oppose this and want Gay Marraige to be legal.





Hierodule -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 10:23:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

Which would, of course, not include "marriage".

As something that is identical to "A"is not "A",but something else, which is identical to "A". Basic logic and English.


Though personally I oppose this and want Gay Marraige to be legal.





However this still causes a problem for common law marriages.



Termyn8or -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 10:24:19 PM)

When are people going to learn to live and let live ?

Best bet would be to turn all marriages into civil unions, and with the presentment of the papers it comes out the same in business and law. Your religion is your business.

In fact make it so on job applications they can't ask if you are married, only if you are involved in a civil union. You say to put this person on my healthcare they have to do it. Forbid them from asking whether it is hetereo or homo. Shit, insurance companies should jump at that because they would likely have to pay for less childbirths.

Seems to me the world would be alot better if people just got the fuck out of each others' faces.

T



DomKen -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 10:27:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

Which would, of course, not include "marriage".

As something that is identical to "A"is not "A",but something else, which is identical to "A". Basic logic and English.


Though personally I oppose this and want Gay Marraige to be legal.

Marriage isn't identical to marriage? Since when?



Hierodule -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 10:32:46 PM)

logically speaking it isn't. You have two twins identical to one another but they are not the same person. You have twin A, and twin not A. Twin not A is identical to twin A but But twin not A  is not A and twin A is not not A.



luckydawg -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 10:36:42 PM)

There might be issues with Common law marriages, but are they really identical? I don't know enough to say.



DomKen -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 10:36:52 PM)

You're confusing terms.

The amendment bans any institution identical to marriage. This means it is a set problem.

Of the set of institutions identical to marriage, marriage is a member.



luckydawg -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 11:07:52 PM)

No I think M and things identical to M are in different sets, otherwise they would be M not identical to it.

But It will be up to the courts to decide.

What do you want to bet I am right?



DomKen -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 11:10:32 PM)

The guy who pointed this out is a candidate for attorney general of Texas. Seems likely his legal acumen exceeds yours.



BKSir -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 11:20:21 PM)

A marriage from Idaho may be identical to a marriage in Texas, but it is NOT a marriage in Texas.  So even arguing A is identical to B, but is NOT B, still means that anyone married in another state that has moved into Texas is not, nor have they ever been married.  



luckydawg -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 11:29:16 PM)

Domken

He is a her, and she is running for office.

It is just political blather, designed to rile up her base, folks like you and brain.

So if a lawyer says something it is automatically correct? Every legal issue has lawyers arguing each side. The contortions you leftists go through to try to be right is hillarious.




BK, and if the language said "identical to a marriage in Texas" you would have a point, but it doesn't so you don't.



BKSir -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/19/2009 11:36:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

Domken

He is a her, and she is running for office.

It is just political blather, designed to rile up her base, folks like you and brain.

So if a lawyer says something it is automatically correct? Every legal issue has lawyers arguing each side. The contortions you leftists go through to try to be right is hillarious.




BK, and if the language said "identical to a marriage in Texas" you would have a point, but it doesn't so you don't.


An arranged, opposite sex marriage in Mumbai is not identical to a "normal" marriage in texas either.  So are they null and void also if they moved to texas?



luckydawg -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/20/2009 1:00:55 AM)

I have no idea how international marriage works BK. and it has nothing to do with it. The law says nothing about a Texas marriage. Read the article.


If the supporters of this would act kind of rational we would get it (legal gay marriage)passed much sooner. You all acting like idiots slows it down.



susie -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/20/2009 1:09:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BKSir

A marriage from Idaho may be identical to a marriage in Texas, but it is NOT a marriage in Texas.  So even arguing A is identical to B, but is NOT B, still means that anyone married in another state that has moved into Texas is not, nor have they ever been married.  


Sorry this makes no sense to me at all. So you are saying that if married couples move to Texas they are no longer married because they did not marry in that state? Or did I not read your posting correctly?



BKSir -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/20/2009 1:12:41 AM)

I'm just attempting to clarify here, and pointing out that, no matter how the marriage was performed in another country, even if not identical, wondering if it is still recognizable.  I realize that that "identical" is the key term in this, which would make a huge huge grey area.  What looks identical to one bunch of people might look completely different to another.

And identical means that there are numerous factors involved.  Identical to what?  What are the conditions being looked at that would make something identical or different?  In and of itself it is stating that it is comparing it to marriage laws in the state of Texas.  Why would it possibly mean different?  It obviously isn't meaning "identical to marriage in Saskatchewan, or Algeria, or Hong Kong". 

While I freely admit that I find this situation to be amusing and even humourous, I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here.  Mainly since I have no reason to think that Texas will legalize it any sooner than my "wonderful" state of Utah will.  Loosely meaning, right about the time Mahatma Gandhi digs his way out of his grave and does a Vaudeville revival tour.

EDIT:  I may have to come back and pick this debate up tomorrow, but, as it is after 2am for me and I do have a ton of stuff to do tomorrow, I'm afraid I need to go to bed.



switch2please -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/20/2009 9:40:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

The contortions you leftists go through to try to be right is hillarious.



it's a good thing we're flexible [sm=ubanana.gif]



luckydawg -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/20/2009 9:43:23 AM)

I bet someone is glad you are flexible!! I would be, if we were not thousands of miles away!!!



willbeurdaddy -> RE: Texas' gay marriage ban may have banned all marriages (11/20/2009 10:49:43 AM)

It is poorly worded, since if something were identical to marriage it would be "marriage". Better wording woule be "Having identical rights and benefits as marriage". However, as written it still doesnt ban marriageas previously defined under the law, since there is clearly an intent for the "identical institution" to be one other than marriage.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125