Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban [W:72]

[AGENT J]

Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban - The Washington Post

Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

By Reuters, Published: November 28


SAN ANTONIO — Two same-sex couples in Texas have filed a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn that state’s eight-year-old constitutional amendment barring gay marriage, their attorney said.
Arguments could be heard as early as January in a federal court in San Antonio in the case trying to nullify the 2005 amendment, which says, “Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.”
San Antonio attorney Daniel McNeel Lane Jr., the lead counsel for both couples, said current Texas law banning same-sex marriage runs counter to the U.S. Constitution and is a “badge of inferiority.”

“Just as the judicial branch protected the fundamental right to marry and established that discriminatory laws could not prevent mixed-race couples from exercising that right, the courts again must step in to protect the marriage right,” Lane said Wednesday.

The suit was filed on behalf of Cleopatra De Leon and Nicole Dimetman, two women who live in Austin and were married in Massachusetts, and Victor Holmes and Mark Phariss, two men who were denied a marriage license when they applied last month in San Antonio.

A year ago, only six states — Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, New York, Connecticut and Iowa — plus the District recognized same-sex marriage, but the number has since more than doubled.

Back-up links:
Two couples challenge Texas gay marriage ban - Your Houston News: News
2 couples challenge Texas



Yeeehaaaa!

Welcome to the fight Texas, another state added to the list of places fighting for equal rights for gays!!!

This case and two others may bring texas in to the front of the line behind Ohio (Dec) and in front of Michigan(Feb 2014) and PA(June 2014) for next state to protect equal rights and end discrimination and or bigotry.

This is one case i missed, it so hard to keep up because the landscape is changing so fast thanks to the fall of DOMA, thanks again Wolfsgirl for letting me know.

And there is a case in Texas that might be heard as early as January.
Texas Same-Sex Couples File Lawsuit To Overturn Marriage Ban

If anybody else has more up to date info let me know please and feel free to add it here:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-a...winning-equal-rights-gays-coming-soon-70.html

And there is a case in Texas that might be heard as early as January.
Texas Same-Sex Couples File Lawsuit To Overturn Marriage Ban

We may win some, we may lose some but Equal Rights is winning!!!!!


Updates in red: 11/30/2013 V1.0

16 states and DC have equal rights:

Massachusetts - May 17, 2004
Connecticut - November 12, 2008
Iowa - April 27, 2009
Vermont - September 1, 2009
New Hampshire - January 1, 2010
Washing D.C. - March 9, 2010
FALL OF DADT Dec 18, 2010
New York - July 24, 2011
Washington - December 6, 2012
Maine - December 29, 2012
Maryland - January 1, 2013
Rhode Island - August 1, 2013
FALL OD DOMA - June 26, 2013
California - June 28, 2013
Delaware - July 1, 2013
Minnesota - August 1, 2013
New Jersey - October 21, 2013
Hawaii - December 2, 2013 effective
Illinois - June 1, 2014 effective


17 more are in various stages of fighting or establishing a fight for equal rights

New Mexico – is granting equal rights for now and the SSC is going to decided on this soon

Court Case(s) in the works to establish equal rights:
Arkansas
Kentucky
Michigan (Feb 2014 Trial)
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania (June 14 Trial)
South Carolina
Texas (Jan 2014 Trial)
Utah


Court Case(s) and Legislation in the works, which ever wins first:
Arizona
Nevada
Ohio (December 2013 trial)


Legislation in the works:
Colorado
Florida
Oregon

thats 33 states that could have equal rights by 2015 and some much sooner!

 

[KevinKohler]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Two things I know about Texas...steers, and queers! And you ain't got no horns, so that kinda narrows it down...

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Why is the constitutional amendment process now ignored in favor of simply "reinterpreting" it to get the desired result? When we take bizarre steps to create constitutional "pseudo-amendments" that devalues the very document that was intended to protect those rights. We have two constitutional amendments relating to the recreational drug alcohol, one to ban it and one to undo that ban, yet none were deemed necessary to establish/remove total federal control over the various other recreational drugs. Not a single mention of marriage, "strong personal desire" or "sexual preference/orientation" exists in the constitution.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Two things I know about Texas...steers, and queers! And you ain't got no horns, so that kinda narrows it down...

well out of all the people i know that live in texas half are gay so maybe that has some truth to it.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Why is the constitutional amendment process now ignored in favor of simply "reinterpreting" it to get the desired result?
2.)When we take bizarre steps to create constitutional "pseudo-amendments" that devalues the very document that was intended to protect those rights.
3.) We have two constitutional amendments relating to the recreational drug alcohol, one to ban it and one to undo that ban, yet none were deemed necessary to establish/remove total federal control over the various other recreational drugs.
4.) Not a single mention of marriage, "strong personal desire" or "sexual preference/orientation" exists in the constitution.

1.) what exactly do you feel i being ignored?
2.) be more specific what do you think is being devalued and what rights are or are not being protected?
3.) off topic and im not familiar so im not interested
4.) explain why you think this matters?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

1.) what exactly do you feel i being ignored?
2.) be more specific what do you think is being devalued and what rights are or are not being protected?
3.) off topic and im not familiar so im not interested
4.) explain why you think this matters?

I will address only 1 & 4, in order to keep it simple for you. What constitutional basis does one's strong personal desire have for rendering a state law discriminatory? When did this happen and why was not having SSM constitutional before "gay rights" became popular? In other words, what in the constitution declares SSM to be the (new?) law of the land?

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

1.)I will address only 1 & 4, in order to keep it simple for you.
2.) What constitutional basis does one's strong personal desire have for rendering a state law discriminatory?
3.) When did this happen and why was not having SSM constitutional before "gay rights" became popular?
4.) In other words, what in the constitution declares SSM to be the (new?) law of the land?

1.) its already simply for me but thanks for the concern
2.) it doesn't nor has that claim been made nor is this what the law suit is over.

The issue is simply about equal rights and individual rights and freedoms, banning gay marriage has been found on many occasions to violate equality and rights.

3.) again reframing the question to suit your subjective opinion doesn't really work. Its always been a violation of equal rights and discrimination just not protected, fought for and cared about as much. Same thing happen with slavery, minority rights, woman's rights and interracial marriage.

Its not like all those things i just mentioned magically became wrong they were always wrong just more people accepted it and more people became educated to that fact and more people relized the bigotry and hypocrisy they were practicing, condoning and or not fighting against.

4.) again nothing, equal rights is the issue.

where is freedom of not to be raped in the constitution, rape isnt mentioned anywhere? see how silly a statement like that is


have to focus on reality and whats actually going on.

all these same types of unsupportable arguments were brought up before with slavery, minority/womens rights and interracial marriage. They all lost because when it came down to it they were all illogical, unsupportable and rights infringements. This is true today when discriminating against sexuality and denying equal rights.

also you really didnt answer

whats being ignored
why does it matter that marriage isnt in the constitution

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Oh good God, not another Agent gay marriage thread.

:beatdeadhorse

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Oh good God, not another Agent gay marriage thread.

:beatdeadhorse

post like these are so very telling, please feel free to post anything on topic, we'd love to hear it

 

[Texmex]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

well out of all the people i know that live in texas half are gay so maybe that has some truth to it.

Does the other half have horns? :lol:

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Does the other half have horns? :lol:

thats their business and i stay out of such affairs

 

[Deuce]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

I will address only 1 & 4, in order to keep it simple for you. What constitutional basis does one's strong personal desire have for rendering a state law discriminatory? When did this happen and why was not having SSM constitutional before "gay rights" became popular? In other words, what in the constitution declares SSM to be the (new?) law of the land?

Why were interracial marriage bans constitutional until they weren't?

Equal Protection declares SSM bans to be unconstitutional. Classification on the basis of gender requires that the classification serve an important state interest, Mr. Libertarian, sir. Supporters of SSM bans have failed to provide a compelling argument for such an interest.

It's not up to me to prove why SSM should be legal. It's up to you to prove why it shouldn't. But surely you already believed that, being a libertarian and all.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Why were interracial marriage bans constitutional until they weren't?

Equal Protection declares SSM bans to be unconstitutional. Classification on the basis of gender requires that the classification serve an important state interest, Mr. Libertarian, sir. Supporters of SSM bans have failed to provide a compelling argument for such an interest.

It's not up to me to prove why SSM should be legal. It's up to you to prove why it shouldn't. But surely you already believed that, being a libertarian and all.

SSM is not a right for the same reason that polygamy is not a right; having a strong personal desire is not reason to have laws changed to accomodate that desire. The fact that business partnerships allow mutiple partners, and have no gender restrictions, does not mean that marriage prnerships must as well.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

1.)SSM is not a right for the same reason that polygamy is not a right
2.); having a strong personal desire is not reason to have laws changed to accommodate that desire.
3.) The fact that business partnerships allow multiple partners, and have no gender restrictions, does not mean that marriage prnerships must as well.

I noticed you totally dodged his questions, this seems to be a trend.

1.) SSM =/= to polygamy the legality is not the same BUT if polygamist would like to fight for that i support them
2.) good thing this has nothing to do with the discussion at hand and this straw man was already shown to be a failure
3.) another strawman

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

post like these are so very telling, please feel free to post anything on topic, we'd love to hear it

Is there anything that hasn't been said on this subject? YAAAAWN

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Is there anything that hasn't been said on this subject? YAAAAWN

again let us know when you have anything on topic otherwise move on lol

 

[Lursa]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Why is the constitutional amendment process now ignored in favor of simply "reinterpreting" it to get the desired result? When we take bizarre steps to create constitutional "pseudo-amendments" that devalues the very document that was intended to protect those rights. We have two constitutional amendments relating to the recreational drug alcohol, one to ban it and one to undo that ban, yet none were deemed necessary to establish/remove total federal control over the various other recreational drugs. Not a single mention of marriage, "strong personal desire" or "sexual preference/orientation" exists in the constitution.

Really? I've been told on other forums that TX's state constitution specifically prohibits SSM. Same for Michigan.

Of course, I told those folks that posted that that if the feds recognize gays as a protected class, that particular amendment wont stand up to state challenges.

 

[Perotista]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Really? I've been told on other forums that TX's state constitution specifically prohibits SSM. Same for Michigan.

Of course, I told those folks that posted that that if the feds recognize gays as a protected class, that particular amendment wont stand up to state challenges.

A protected class?

 

[Perotista]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban - The Washington Post



Back-up links:
Two couples challenge Texas gay marriage ban - Your Houston News: News
2 couples challenge Texas



Yeeehaaaa!

Welcome to the fight Texas, another state added to the list of places fighting for equal rights for gays!!!

This case and two others may bring texas in to the front of the line behind Ohio (Dec) and in front of Michigan(Feb 2014) and PA(June 2014) for next state to protect equal rights and end discrimination and or bigotry.

This is one case i missed, it so hard to keep up because the landscape is changing so fast thanks to the fall of DOMA, thanks again Wolfsgirl for letting me know.


If anybody else has more up to date info let me know please and feel free to add it here:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-a...winning-equal-rights-gays-coming-soon-70.html



We may win some, we may lose some but Equal Rights is winning!!!!!


Updates in red: 11/30/2013 V1.0

16 states and DC have equal rights:

Massachusetts - May 17, 2004
Connecticut - November 12, 2008
Iowa - April 27, 2009
Vermont - September 1, 2009
New Hampshire - January 1, 2010
Washing D.C. - March 9, 2010
FALL OF DADT Dec 18, 2010
New York - July 24, 2011
Washington - December 6, 2012
Maine - December 29, 2012
Maryland - January 1, 2013
Rhode Island - August 1, 2013
FALL OD DOMA - June 26, 2013
California - June 28, 2013
Delaware - July 1, 2013
Minnesota - August 1, 2013
New Jersey - October 21, 2013
Hawaii - December 2, 2013 effective
Illinois - June 1, 2014 effective


17 more are in various stages of fighting or establishing a fight for equal rights

New Mexico – is granting equal rights for now and the SSC is going to decided on this soon

Court Case(s) in the works to establish equal rights:
Arkansas
Kentucky
Michigan (Feb 2014 Trial)
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania (June 14 Trial)
South Carolina
Texas (Jan 2014 Trial)
Utah


Court Case(s) and Legislation in the works, which ever wins first:
Arizona
Nevada
Ohio (December 2013 trial)


Legislation in the works:
Colorado
Florida
Oregon

thats 33 states that could have equal rights by 2015 and some much sooner!

I think it will be interesting to see how this goes. I know everyone seems to think these court cases will go their way, but one never knows on what part of the constitution that will end up deciding a case like this. Is it who has control of marriage? States issue the licenses, so it is probably the states. Is it an equal opportunity or equal rights case? Most think so, but the courts have ruled on things so many times that made no sense to me I think I will just have to wait and see.

 

[Lursa]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

A protected class?

Yes, like race or gender. Some states already recognize sexual orientation as a protected class that may not be discriminated against. That is not the case yet at the federal level.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

1.)I think it will be interesting to see how this goes. I know everyone seems to think these court cases will go their way
2.) but one never knows on what part of the constitution that will end up deciding a case like this.
3.) Is it who has control of marriage? States issue the licenses, so it is probably the states.
4.) Is it an equal opportunity or equal rights case? Most think so, but the courts have ruled on things so many times that made no sense to me I think I will just have to wait and see.

1.) i agree, im actually anticipating a loss or 2.
Texas will be interesting IMO also

2.) if the US Constitution is used i dont really see any other part to use besides equality, my guess would be if equal rights for gays fails the US Constitution will NOT be mentioned at all by the judges.

3.) States are PARTIALLY in control just like anything that involves individual rights

4.) well if factually is has other SSCs have already proven and again my "guess" is if equal rights fails equality again wont be mentioned by the judges they will avoid it.

We alway have to wait and see but it still makes me happy that the fight is takign place, people fighting for equal rights is awesome and while some battle may be lost in the end equal rights for gays will be national the writing is on the wall at this point its only the time frame we dont know.

 

[Perotista]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

Yes, like race or gender. Some states already recognize sexual orientation as a protected class that may not be discriminated against. That is not the case yet at the federal level.

Supposedly discrimination is illegal in any form against any one.

 

[beerftw]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

1.) its already simply for me but thanks for the concern
2.) it doesn't nor has that claim been made nor is this what the law suit is over.

The issue is simply about equal rights and individual rights and freedoms, banning gay marriage has been found on many occasions to violate equality and rights.

3.) again reframing the question to suit your subjective opinion doesn't really work. Its always been a violation of equal rights and discrimination just not protected, fought for and cared about as much. Same thing happen with slavery, minority rights, woman's rights and interracial marriage.

Its not like all those things i just mentioned magically became wrong they were always wrong just more people accepted it and more people became educated to that fact and more people relized the bigotry and hypocrisy they were practicing, condoning and or not fighting against.

4.) again nothing, equal rights is the issue.

where is freedom of not to be raped in the constitution, rape isnt mentioned anywhere? see how silly a statement like that is


have to focus on reality and whats actually going on.

all these same types of unsupportable arguments were brought up before with slavery, minority/womens rights and interracial marriage. They all lost because when it came down to it they were all illogical, unsupportable and rights infringements. This is true today when discriminating against sexuality and denying equal rights.

also you really didnt answer

whats being ignored
why does it matter that marriage isnt in the constitution

to throw your world upside down,the constitution never once grants right of marriage,nor recognizes it.when the constitution was written,marriage was to be a religious ceremony,not recognized by the federal govt.meaning they left it to the 10th amendment,and that states were to choose their own laws.

the 14th amendment if i remember correct prohibits inequality,which would mean that they had to discriminate against all,or none.this in turn would mean legally by the constitution if the state of texas refused to recognize marriage at all,it would revert to churches and local comunities to aknowledge them,and no govt force could intervene,which would also mean the local religions would decide whether gay marriage was ok or not,depending on the religion or even specific place of worship,would depend on a yes or no answer.

 

[Perotista]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

1.) i agree, im actually anticipating a loss or 2.
Texas will be interesting IMO also

2.) if the US Constitution is used i dont really see any other part to use besides equality, my guess would be if equal rights for gays fails the US Constitution will NOT be mentioned at all by the judges.

3.) States are PARTIALLY in control just like anything that involves individual rights

4.) well if factually is has other SSCs have already proven and again my "guess" is if equal rights fails equality again wont be mentioned by the judges they will avoid it.

We alway have to wait and see but it still makes me happy that the fight is takign place, people fighting for equal rights is awesome and while some battle may be lost in the end equal rights for gays will be national the writing is on the wall at this point its only the time frame we dont know.

Exactly, I also see what you mean by mentioning equal rights or not. If the courts decides it is the states who control marriage then it, equal rights had little to nothing to do with the court's ruling. Or so I take that is what you meant. If it is equal rights, then the court will cite that and the provision of the constitution for which it applies. I think I got you.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Two couples file federal suit to overturn Texas same-sex marriage ban

1.)to throw your world upside down,the constitution never once grants right of marriage,nor recognizes it.when the constitution was written,marriage was to be a religious ceremony,not recognized by the federal govt.meaning they left it to the 10th amendment,and that states were to choose their own laws.

2.) the 14th amendment if i remember correct prohibits inequality,which would mean that they had to discriminate against all,or none.this in turn would mean legally by the constitution if the state of texas refused to recognize marriage at all,it would revert to churches and local comunities to aknowledge them,and no govt force could intervene,which would also mean the local religions would decide whether gay marriage was ok or not,depending on the religion or even specific place of worship,would depend on a yes or no answer.

1.) this does nothing to my world since i never claimed the constitution grants marriage rights, please try more failed strawmen though

2.) this cant happen since this too would also infringe on rights, another failed strawman


look at that, my world is still right side up :shrug: please continue you rant though it was entertaining