Judge hears challenge of Texas' gay marriage ban

Feb 12, 2014 Read more: KLKN 11

Republican Sen. Rand Paul and a tea-party backed group are suing the Obama administration over the National Security Agency's phone record collection policies.

Read more

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#1 Feb 12, 2014
Quote: "Neel Lane, an attorney for the two couples, dismissed the state's argument that their rights were not violated because they are free to marry members of the opposite sex. He said that's like holding someone's head underwater and saying the person is free to breathe, just not air."

Touche! It's amazing the way that arguments against same sex marriage are so being so easily, practically, and even humorously, decimated in courts across the nation.

I wonder how long it will be before Texas' closet-case-in-chief starts making noises about succession ...?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#2 Feb 12, 2014
So we wait for a decision in Texas & Virginia, which could come any day now.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#3 Feb 12, 2014
Considering how all these ruling are going against them, the anti-gays might want to consider NOT appealing and just suck up the losses.

At least that way they may be able to keep a couple of states for a few more years.

Maybe we should offer a deal- give us the other 48 states now without further court cases, and you can have Alabama & Mississippi until 2030- at which point the overwhelming majority of anti-gays will be dead anyways.

Hmmmmm.....

Nah, we'll just take all 50 states round about 2016.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#4 Feb 12, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Considering how all these ruling are going against them, the anti-gays might want to consider NOT appealing and just suck up the losses.
At least that way they may be able to keep a couple of states for a few more years.
Maybe we should offer a deal- give us the other 48 states now without further court cases, and you can have Alabama & Mississippi until 2030- at which point the overwhelming majority of anti-gays will be dead anyways.
Hmmmmm.....
Nah, we'll just take all 50 states round about 2016.
Well I WAS having a little trouble with winter chest congestion, but that post just cleared it all right out.

ROFL !!!

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#5 Feb 12, 2014
"In his comments from the bench, Garcia mentioned key civil rights laws passed after the end of the Civil War and pointed out that racial segregation and bans on interracial marriage were part of American tradition until federal judges declared them unconstitutional."

Nuff said. This sure as hell sounds like a done deal!

Since: Jan 08

Thailand

#6 Feb 12, 2014
"to promote responsible procreation" What a hoot! Then they ought to ban marriage between couples unable or unwilling to have children and while they're at it, ban divorce to save those "chillin'". What a bunch of idiots, and time will prove it.
Sir Andrew

Honolulu, HI

#7 Feb 12, 2014
Dubya wrote:
"to promote responsible procreation" What a hoot! Then they ought to ban marriage between couples unable or unwilling to have children and while they're at it, ban divorce to save those "chillin'". What a bunch of idiots, and time will prove it.
And what exactly is "responsible procreation"? Octomom? Kate and her brood? That family with 19 and counting? Can we look back now and say that Governor Perry's parents engaged in responsible procreation? Or Bush the elder and Barbara? Hitler's mommy and daddy?

And how does denying marriage to gays in fact "Promote responsible procreation"? After the ban in Texas was originally passed did straight couples suddenly rush to responsibly procreate? Is that how it works?

These arguments are so tired and worn out. There's not a one that hasn't been tossed out of consideration by several different judges in several different circuits. If only these Texas morons knew how to use the Interwebs, they'd be able to figure out that they're beating a dead horse and call it quits. Meanwhile, it sure is fun to watch them sit on their thumbs and spin.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#8 Feb 13, 2014
The only question is how long before she issues her ruling overturning Texas' ban.

Then we're off to the 5th circuit appeals court.

Giddyup!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#9 Feb 13, 2014
Sir Andrew wrote:
<quoted text>
And what exactly is "responsible procreation"? Octomom? Kate and her brood? That family with 19 and counting? Can we look back now and say that Governor Perry's parents engaged in responsible procreation? Or Bush the elder and Barbara? Hitler's mommy and daddy?
And how does denying marriage to gays in fact "Promote responsible procreation"? After the ban in Texas was originally passed did straight couples suddenly rush to responsibly procreate? Is that how it works?
These arguments are so tired and worn out. There's not a one that hasn't been tossed out of consideration by several different judges in several different circuits. If only these Texas morons knew how to use the Interwebs, they'd be able to figure out that they're beating a dead horse and call it quits. Meanwhile, it sure is fun to watch them sit on their thumbs and spin.
Well let's hope they don't figure out just how ineffective their arguments are! They'll continue to blame their losses on "activist liberal judges", even when the ruling against them comes from a conservative Bush appointed McConnell recommended judge like in Kentucky.

For the record though, the anti-gays DID get one victory in federal court- in Nevada. But that was pre-Windsor, and will be overturned by the 9th circuit shortly.
heartandmind

Moline, IL

#10 Feb 13, 2014
greg abbott will appeal if the results are against his and his party's point of view.

on the other hand, greg is in a race for governor. so here's hoping he'll be too busy to appeal. LOL.

as a person living in texas - i'm glad to see that the cases have finally moved.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#11 Feb 13, 2014
Dubya wrote:
"to promote responsible procreation" What a hoot! Then they ought to ban marriage between couples unable or unwilling to have children and while they're at it, ban divorce to save those "chillin'". What a bunch of idiots, and time will prove it.
Sounds just like "KiMare"s cant, doesn't it?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Giddings Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Election Who do you support for State Board of Education... (Oct '10) 8 hr Fart 629
Election Who do you support for State Board of Education... (Oct '10) 12 hr Farter 785
Where is Charlie brown ? 15 hr subdude1 23
Election Who do you support for U.S. House in Texas (Dis... (Oct '10) Thu Brandy 50
News Richmond teacher accused of distributing anti-M... Apr 15 BinFartin 20
News Texas senate panel to take up in-state tuition law Apr 15 Quirky 6
only women should be nude, pregnant and barefoot Apr 13 yummiest femalefood 1
More from around the web

Giddings People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]