RTS CNG Command Posted November 27, 2009 Share #1 Posted November 27, 2009 (Newser) – The geniuses who wrote Texas’ gay marriage ban may have accidentally banned all marriage in the state, according to one Houston lawyer. Subsection B of the ban, a constitutional amendment ratified in 2005, states, “This state…may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.” The intent was to prevent even civil unions for gay couples—but it doesn’t actually specify the “gay” part. The wording essentially “eliminates marriage in Texas,” Barbara Ann Radnofsky, the Democratic candidate for state attorney general tells the McClatchy Papers. “You do not have to have a fancy law degree to read this and understand what it plainly says.” Conservatives scoffed at Radnofsky’s tactics. “It’s a silly argument,” said the head of an organization that helped draft the amendment. A lawsuit based on it would have “about one chance in a trillion” of succeeding. http://www.newser.com/story/74400/texas-accidentally-bans-straight-marriage.html Got this news from a friend. Funniest thing I've heard all month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted November 27, 2009 Share #2 Posted November 27, 2009 Bible thumpers...gotta love 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted November 27, 2009 Share #3 Posted November 27, 2009 I don't have a fancy law degree and I know from reading it that it doesn't ban marriages. "may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage." The key words are "Identical" and "Similar". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted November 27, 2009 Share #4 Posted November 27, 2009 Bible thumpers...gotta love 'em. Jesus freaks are singing! Who's seen ? (You gotta link to Youtube to watch but it's worth it) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRsPA45MsLA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted November 27, 2009 Share #5 Posted November 27, 2009 Hey this works from me, marriage is a loosing agrement anyway. You can't stand her, she gets half you stuff, she cheats on you, she gets half your stuff. I think Texas has a really good idea with this one and I'm not joking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted November 27, 2009 Share #6 Posted November 27, 2009 Hey this works from me, marriage is a loosing agrement anyway. You can't stand her, she gets half you stuff, she cheats on you, she gets half your stuff. I think Texas has a really good idea with this one and I'm not joking. Best post evar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RokuSix Posted November 27, 2009 Share #7 Posted November 27, 2009 I genuinely just laughed out loud. Funny how these morons don't think homosexuals have the right to marry. In that case, stupid people should be barred from marriage too! Some people just aren't meant to procreate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoSpectacular Posted November 27, 2009 Share #8 Posted November 27, 2009 I lol'ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbanfortitude Posted November 27, 2009 Share #9 Posted November 27, 2009 This is funny. No matter what the clause actually means, the thought of all marraiges banned by accident in a state is just hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted November 27, 2009 Share #10 Posted November 27, 2009 Best post evar. +1 - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Louis Car 09 Posted November 28, 2009 Share #11 Posted November 28, 2009 Men and women who are about to get married and have cold feet may rejoice now:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted November 28, 2009 Share #12 Posted November 28, 2009 You'll find biased/ignorant/bigoted views everywhere. Everyone has them no matter how tolerant the person may seem on the outside. Those Texan lawmakers simply chose to express their views by forcing them on all their fellow Texans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Julio Posted November 28, 2009 Share #13 Posted November 28, 2009 You'll find biased/ignorant/bigoted views everywhere. Everyone has them no matter how tolerant the person may seem on the outside. Those Texan lawmakers simply chose to express their views by forcing them on all their fellow Texans. The United States of America is a Republic and not a Democracy. A Democracy is a form of government in which the people decide policy matters directly--through town hall meetings or by voting on ballot initiatives and referendums. A Republic, on the other hand, is a system in which the people choose representatives who, in turn, make policy decisions on their behalf. By the Texans voting for their representatives, they are indirectly adopting those views, not being forced it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted November 28, 2009 Share #14 Posted November 28, 2009 Well said, looks like someone stayed awake in history class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted November 28, 2009 Share #15 Posted November 28, 2009 Meh...religious nut job bastards still suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INDman Posted November 28, 2009 Share #16 Posted November 28, 2009 Meh...religious nut job bastards still suck. Well thats what happens when you live in a Christian country. Anyone who has doubts that America is a Christian country should open a history book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted November 28, 2009 Share #17 Posted November 28, 2009 I prefer to take the view that America was founded by those who were persecuted religiously who established freedom of religion. Those damn intolerant Bible Thumpers can go to hell like the Islamic Fundamentalists who do the same thing with a different religion that they claim to despise so much. No religion = the best religion. Who says you need religion to believe in a god or a supreme being anyway? God does not ask for your money...but organized religion does.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeystoneRegional Posted November 28, 2009 Share #18 Posted November 28, 2009 Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted November 28, 2009 Share #19 Posted November 28, 2009 +1 - A Whoa, you and I agreeing on something. That's a hell of a feat right there. B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted November 28, 2009 Share #20 Posted November 28, 2009 Hey this works from me, marriage is a loosing agrement anyway. You can't stand her, she gets half you stuff, she cheats on you, she gets half your stuff. I think Texas has a really good idea with this one and I'm not joking. Maybe they should have a written contract where should there be a divorce, the husband will get to keep certain items [reasonable and not outrageous] and if the wife does not approve, then they should not bother to get married. B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted November 28, 2009 Share #21 Posted November 28, 2009 Whoa, you and I agreeing on something. That's a hell of a feat right there. B) Not that hard to agree on common sense. :cool: Constantine started all of this marry one person man + woman stuff, before that there was the simple marriage = man + woman, not as in "oh em gee you can't deviate from man + woman", a theologian from Israel said it best when he explained that part of the old testament that defines marriage was simply to help people understand to not marry a donkey or camel etc, basic guidelines for early civilization, not to be taken as "if not do this go to hell". It's hard to understand old testament/Judaism because people try to interpret it literally, it's not meant to be taken literally, and christians who take it literally, especially adam & eve and 6 days creation etc are missing the point of the core of the belief system. The faith part for them is not trying to sell the 6 days and adam and eve, the faith part is believing in afterlife, creator etc. It seems this is lost on modern folks. Moving into the new testament, you have "jesus made the blind see" and whatnot, these are also taken too literally, people run off the end of the earth "jesus heals", what jesus' teachings were meant to do, was remind the jews under roman rule that the way to salvation is not acquired by earthly possessions in the form of offerings etc, but in internal faith and belief one true god and such. That inner peace is found within ourselves, and not by paying a fee to access the afterlife in heaven. I personally don't believe there is a god, and that jesus was a smart and brave man who stood up to the corrupt system back then, but just a man. However i do think the bible has some valuable lessons that ring true today, all you gotta do is think like they thought thousands of years ago, they didn't have it figured out back then, the world was a complete mystery, and they only tried to have some semblance of order, which is all religion/spirituality is. Being married in reality is/was a way to keep track of land ownership, rights to things and so on, it really had little to do with anything else. Again, this was to instill some sense of order. I personally think it's outdated and taken far, far too seriously. As long as we are not having relations & kids with our immediate family & close relatives i don't see what the big deal is with having more than one partner or more than one life partner. Romans often had more than one wife, this was the way things were all over the world for a very long time. Why try to print a wall of books in the way of human nature? You love whom you love, and are attracted to whomever you are attracted to, simple as that. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.