Comments on: Texas judge clears way for gay divorce

By: James M. Martin

James M. Martin — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:16:23 +0000

Why is it that whenever bigots don’t like a court ruling, they label it “judicial activist” but when conservative justices really do it, it’s called “sound judicial thinking” re: Bush v. Gore?

By: vanndean

vanndean — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 03:07:52 +0000

The Attorney General of the State of Texas is not telling the “rest of the story” when he states that “Today’s ruling purports to strike down that constitutional definition – despite the fact that it was recently adopted by 75 percent of Texas voters.” The part of the story which he is not telling is that he is referencing a bit of “fuzzy” math since the amendment to the constitution of the State of Texas was approved in an off year election in which less than 27 percent of eligible voters in the state even bothered to go to the polls and cast a ballot. While it may be true that 75 percent of THOSE voters did approve the question it does not mean, by any stretch of the imagination that Texans approve of the constitutional amendment denying marriage equality to its citizens. As a person voting against the amendment, I am appalled at the “white lies” told about the large percentage of people in Texas who approved the amendment. The truth of the matter is that the amendment was approved and installed into the constitution by 75 percent of 27 percent of eligible voters. Is it possible that the august Attorney General of the State of Texas is another liar for Jeeezus?

By: DaveW

DaveW — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 18:25:06 +0000

Ms. Hutchison pledges to defend the sanctity of marriage. I thought we had separation of church and state (I know, how naive I am….).

I would not want my governor or any public official defending the sanctity of anything…its illegal.

I wish these public figures would get a backbone and pledge to defend the sanctity of the constitution, if they want to get all sanctimonious on us.

Sancitity and marriage do not belong in the same sentance unless you are talking about church (the way I understand how that word is used). We need to start talking about defending civil marriage from sanctity!

By: Stuff Queer People Need To Know

Stuff Queer People Need To Know — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:00:03 +0000

“Ban on same-sex marriage violates the constitutional guarantee to equal protection under the law.”

Such sweet words to hear, but where is the action?

http://stuffqueerpeopleneedtoknow.wordpress.com

By: Raymond H. Clark

Raymond H. Clark — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:24:17 +0000

Won’t it be ironic if this case joins Lawrence et al. v. Texas as one of the biggest gay equality cases in history?

Sooner or later, Full Faith and Credit is either going to have to be enforced or repealed. It cannot be applied selectively.

By: JC

JC — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 16:09:21 +0000

Hah. Who would have ever thought that opponents of gay marriage would be working to keep gay marriages intact?

By: Jessica K

Jessica K — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:08:38 +0000

So Texas, which doesn’t allow gay marriage, is having a problem making sure that two men are not married? WTF!?!