• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays[W:297]

Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

They need to face the fact it's legal and do their job to serve citizens under the law. If I was their boss or the governor I'd demand they issue the marriage certificates or be fired. It's just an expensive lawsuit waiting to happen.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

"Libertarian - Right"

You need to change that moniker to something else. While you might be right wing you are no libertarian.

Why do you say that? I have never claimed to be for, against, or indifferent to gay marriage.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Umm...no. The 10th Amendment clearly states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

And nothing whatsoever prohibits each state from defining what contracts within it are legally valid.

I would personally like a broad freedom of contract explicitly stated as a constitutional right, but it would require an amendment. Without such, the federal government has no authority to dictate this matter.

It is why the legal opinion of the SCOTUS majority in the recent ruling on same-sex marriage is valid. Prior to the decision, if an opposite sex couple married in New York and then moved to Ohio, their marriage was honored as legally binding in the State of Ohio even though that State did not issue a marriage license. However, if a same-sex couple was married in one of the 17 states where it was legal, it would NOT be honored as legal if the couple moved to Ohio.

The 14th has zero relevance here; that has been a illogical legal farce since the first time it was uttered.

At best, the court could have argued Article IV, Section I - "Full faith and credit." They didn't. So their opinion has no rational basis within the law, and all Article IV, Section I would have required if applied to the matter of marriage would be for a state to recognize the marriages performed in OTHER states. That would be a reasonable standard with a basis in the text of the Constitution.

What we have now is the abandonment of any pretense of the rule of law.

So, the ruling does not violate the 10th Amendment. Clear?

By the text of the United States Constitution, which does not grant the federal government any authority over marriage nor prohibits the states from having said authority, you are objectively wrong.

As is often the case, the various branches of the federal government are pretending that the 10th Amendment has already been repealed - they are just ignoring its very existence.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Why do you say that? I have never claimed to be for, against, or indifferent to gay marriage.

Okay fair enough. So where do you stand on it?
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

This is simply going to get the state sued, for monetary amounts, as well as these clerks. If I were them, I'd think about that before they deny any marriage licenses. The SCOTUS is not going to allow this, nor are other federal courts and it will move quickly. This is assuming that Obama and the Justice Department doesn't step in before that time.

just because they are a public employee they do not give up their 1st amendment rights one of which is free exercise of religions.
IE the government cannot force them to do something against their religious beliefs.

if anything texas will have to make reasonable accommodations for those people and find someone who will issue them.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Okay fair enough. So where do you stand on it?

Marriage and government should get a divorce.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Marriage and government should get a divorce.

No, they shouldn't. People should just do their jobs. If they can't do that fairly for all, then they need to find a new job.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

And nothing whatsoever prohibits each state from defining what contracts within it are legally valid.

I would personally like a broad freedom of contract explicitly stated as a constitutional right, but it would require an amendment. Without such, the federal government has no authority to dictate this matter.



The 14th has zero relevance here; that has been a illogical legal farce since the first time it was uttered.

At best, the court could have argued Article IV, Section I - "Full faith and credit." They didn't. So their opinion has no rational basis within the law, and all Article IV, Section I would have required if applied to the matter of marriage would be for a state to recognize the marriages performed in OTHER states. That would be a reasonable standard with a basis in the text of the Constitution.

What we have now is the abandonment of any pretense of the rule of law.



By the text of the United States Constitution, which does not grant the federal government any authority over marriage nor prohibits the states from having said authority, you are objectively wrong.

As is often the case, the various branches of the federal government are pretending that the 10th Amendment has already been repealed - they are just ignoring its very existence.

This is what I find interesting. the SCOTUS struck down the defense of marriage act because they said that the federal government did not have the power to define marriage.
so what the SCOTUS did was break their own previous ruling by ruling by defining marriage at the federal level.

I think it needs to be reargued under that argument.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

just because they are a public employee they do not give up their 1st amendment rights one of which is free exercise of religions.
IE the government cannot force them to do something against their religious beliefs.

if anything texas will have to make reasonable accommodations for those people and find someone who will issue them.

The 1st Amendment does not protect them from not having to do their job, which is to issue marriage licenses or perform marriages. If they can't do that for all, without discriminating, then they need to find a new job. Just like this guy did.

Louisiana justice who refused interracial marriage resigns - CNN.com
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Marriage and government should get a divorce.

What ever and pigs should be able to sing:roll:
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

No, they shouldn't. People should just do their jobs. If they can't do that fairly for all, then they need to find a new job.

Yes they should. Why should marriage require a license? Why should someone need to ask permission from the government to get married? How does that make sense at all?

Why do people get benefits for being married anyway? That makes zero sense.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Yes they should. Why should marriage require a license? Why should someone need to ask permission from the government to get married? How does that make sense at all?

Why do people get benefits for being married anyway? That makes zero sense.

Absofreakinglutely.

Marriage licenses should not be a thing.

Regardless of that, I agree with your point that this violation of the 10th Amendment is inexcusable.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

What ever and pigs should be able to sing:roll:

Its pigs should be able to fly. Get it right.

And government should get out of marriage. If they are going to do anything all it should be is to protect people from being forced into marriages. That's it.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Yes they should. Why should marriage require a license? Why should someone need to ask permission from the government to get married? How does that make sense at all?

Why do people get benefits for being married anyway? That makes zero sense.

You don't need permission to be with someone or be involved in a private marriage. You do need "permission" or rather recognition though if you want benefits, rights, protections for that legal kinship. Just as you need to go through the proper channels to adopt a child, to establish a legal kinship with a child that isn't yours. And unless you want to face or have your child face some serious problems in the future, you also need to file for a birth certificate to establish that legal kinship as well.

We value familial relationships and encourage them, as well as protect those with such relationships. Spouse is a familial relationship, hence the benefits associated with it. There is much more as well, but I don't feel like going into it again.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Now we get to see if a SCOTUS decision to expand one group's rights actually trumps an enumerated right that has been protected since the 1st amendment was created. This is when things get interesting.

Failing to perform your duties is not a constitutionally protected right.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

You don't need permission to be with someone or be involved in a private marriage. You do need "permission" or rather recognition though if you want benefits, rights, protections for that legal kinship. Just as you need to go through the proper channels to adopt a child, to establish a legal kinship with a child that isn't yours. And unless you want to face or have your child face some serious problems in the future, you also need to file for a birth certificate to establish that legal kinship as well.

We value familial relationships and encourage them, as well as protect those with such relationships. Spouse is a familial relationship, hence the benefits associated with it. There is much more as well, but I don't feel like going into it again.

Why should the government encourage relationships? That seems like a pretty dated idea to me.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

The authority of the states and the authority of the people of each state to set policy within their state on those matters in which the U.S. Constitution are silent, per the 10th Amendment, has absolutely been violated.

Incorrect. The 14th amendment requires equal protection under the law. Any authority the states have under the 10th amendment is still subject to such.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Incorrect. The 14th amendment requires equal protection under the law. Any authority the states have under the 10th amendment is still subject to such.

Only if the courts say so. Otherwise, not so much.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

For whatever value x, the assertion is wrong on its face x number of times.

The Constitution does not say "marriage is a right," not in those words, not in any words. If you say otherwise, you're lying.

If you want to prove you're not lying, cite the text within the U.S. Constitution that says "marriage is a right." You can't do so, in fact.

The 9th amendment.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

Only if the courts say so. Otherwise, not so much.

... huh, I could have sworn I heard something about this on the news the other day...
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

The 9th amendment.

Which has diddly to do with government marriage.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

The 9th amendment.

That same 9th Amendment that guarantees my right as a citizen to come into your house and **** on your bed?

I mean, it totally does, of course. At least as much as it says anything about marriage.

You just have to get out decoder glasses. And take just the right amount of LSD. :roll:
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

And nothing whatsoever prohibits each state from defining what contracts within it are legally valid.

Unequal protection under the law is a power specifically prohibited.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

... huh, I could have sworn I heard something about this on the news the other day...

Yeah, that's because they decided it was one of those cases where it applied. The whole thing is arbitrary really.
 
Re: Texas AG Says Workers Can Refuse Marriage Licenses to Gays

This is what I find interesting. the SCOTUS struck down the defense of marriage act because they said that the federal government did not have the power to define marriage.
so what the SCOTUS did was break their own previous ruling by ruling by defining marriage at the federal level.

I think it needs to be reargued under that argument.
No, the Supreme court has not defined marriage.
 
Back
Top Bottom