• 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' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Showdow

Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

yep when pushed this has been the decisions so far

Wrong again, at least you are consistent.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

court is scheduled in nov
they would have to move to Mass for a year before they could even ask for a divorce and who know what that does to jobs, business, family, money property, kids there etc

thats a very shortsighted and illogical assumption.

although i dont think the TEXAS SSC rules against them and they will have to push it to SCOTUS and then SCOUTUS will make it so. thats my guess. But even with that its irrational to just expect them to move without knowing anythign about them. Maybe the whole reason they are here is taking care of a sick family member or something.

Nah they should stay and fight for their equal rights.

Case started in 2009. I rest
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

no, state laws whether or not they permit ssm.

We recognize heterosexual marriages from other states and are willing divorce them why not gay marriages from other states and divorces?
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

sure, because the state of Mass (or which ever state issued the licence to the ss couple in question) granted them status.

And that status still applies on the fed level in Texas.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

Wrong again, at least you are consistent.

nope 4 SSC cases already ruled it violates equality
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

Why should they have that extra burden? Not to mention having to leave their jobs and what not.

Because they freely moved in to the state knowing the existing law. It is their burden because it was their free choice.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

Case started in 2009. I rest

yes and? you said they should do it would, not would have so you were talkign now, unless you misspoke.
Probably would take less time, energy, and money to go back to Mass and wait for residency, than this court case and subsequent appeals will take.

so currently its best to wait it out now and fight for equality, so yes, you should rest.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

We recognize heterosexual marriages from other states and are willing divorce them why not gay marriages from other states and divorces?

I don't have that answer, other to say that is what the people of Texas decided through their legislature.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

We recognize heterosexual marriages from other states and are willing divorce them why not gay marriages from other states and divorces?

"because gays are icky and we dont want them to have equal rights" lol
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

Because they freely moved in to the state knowing the existing law. It is their burden because it was their free choice.

There was and is no law against gays getting a divorce in Texas.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

yes and? you said they should do it would, not would have so you were talkign now, unless you misspoke.


so currently its best to wait it out now and fight for equality, so yes, you should rest.

kinda hard to argue undue burden when the case has been more of a burden, and do you think that the case won't be further appealed?
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

There was and is no law against gays getting a divorce in Texas.

Yea, there is an implied law.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

I don't have that answer, other to say that is what the people of Texas decided through their legislature.

It was on the ballot for I think a school board election and only 13% of the electorate showed up.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

"because gays are icky and we dont want them to have equal rights" lol

Wrong again. sweet your nearly batting a thousand!
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

kinda hard to argue undue burden when the case has been more of a burden, and do you think that the case won't be further appealed?
so you are correcting yourself and you should have said would HAVE, got it


appealed? if they win, no, its the SSC.
if they lose yes, its worht the risk to them to go to SCOTUS.

I dont think anybody thats agaisnt them wants it to go that far though
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

And that status still applies on the fed level in Texas.

Texas is irrelevant to that status, only the issuing state counts for federal purposes.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

Wrong again. sweet your nearly batting a thousand!

really? what makes me factually wrong? sorry you fail again

he started his question with "we" meaning texas and there are definitley people there that think that way

there you go again makeing stuff up, failing and losing

tell me that cool part about batting a thousand again? you are right! against you i am, you throw it in and i take it over the center field wall. thanks for playing.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

Texas is irrelevant to that status, only the issuing state counts for federal purposes.

And these guys want to dissolve their marriage. Maybe the federal government will just have to do it. Guess what that would mean....
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

Implied law? ROTFLMAO

sure there are all manner of implied laws. when you have an affirmative statement in law the opposite is implied.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

sure there are all manner of implied laws. when you have an affirmative statement in law the opposite is implied.

Okay what are these implied laws and when do they up in court?
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

And these guys want to dissolve their marriage. Maybe the federal government will just have to do it. Guess what that would mean....

They can't constitutionally as of now. Maybe they should find a state that will. As a matter of fact maybe a nearby left leaning state could waive residency rules and make some additional revenue by charging fees for providing this service! That'd be great.
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

Okay what are these implied laws and when do they up in court?

weird a couple other states saw this huge glaring hole and decided to ban gay divorce in wiring, guess they never heard of it either or they were just legally smart enough to patch the hole know a good case could bust it wide open. EVen though thats going to happen anyway
 
Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

They can't constitutionally as of now. Maybe they should find a state that will. As a matter of fact maybe a nearby left leaning state could waive residency rules and make some additional revenue by charging fees for providing this service! That'd be great.

What prevents the federal government the ones that recognize tax laws and SS benefits for married couples from granting a divorce Constitutionally?
 
Back
Top Bottom