CBS News: Oops: Did Texas Ban Marriage?

[dibo]

Suck shit Texas.

CBS News: Oops: Did Texas Ban Marriage?

Texas lawmakers wanted to make sure gay people couldn't be married. Instead, it seems, they may have made sure no one can.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram has the story. Here's what happened: In 2005, Texas voters and the state Legislature approved a Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

But the amendment included the following clause, which was reportedly designed to ban civil unions and domestic partnerships: "This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage."

One thing that is "identicalto marriage," of course, is marriage. And Texas Attorney General candidate Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Democrat, is arguing that the current Attorney General, Republican Greg Abbott, made a "massive mistake" in allowing the language.

"You do not have to have a fancy law degree to read this and understand what it plainly says," she said, according to the Star-Telegram. She called on Abbott to acknowledge the error and consider apologizing.

Abbott says the clause isn't a problem. His spokesman declined to directly address Radnofsky's charges but said the statute is Constitutional. A representative of the group that helped draft the amendment, meanwhile, said a lawsuit based on the wording had little chance of being successful.

But Radnofsky suggested the language clearly bans all marriage.

"Whoever vetted the language in [the clause] must have been asleep at the wheel," she said.

 

[MagpieMariner]

Only in America!

 

[Omni]

Given people have been getting married in TX since 2005 I don't think that's actually what's happened. I haven't seen the bill so I don't know the wording.

At the very least I don't think I have anything to worry about.

 

[dibo]

The point is that any marriage can't be recognised by the state. This is fine by me, I'm at my most libertarian when it comes to this stuff - keep government out of people's personal relationships except so far as is required to allow recognition that relationships exist for purposes of tax, super and the like. Otherwise it simply shouldn't matter to anyone but the people involved.

I don't get the 'I want my government small, just small enough to fit in your bedroom' bit.

 

[Omni]

I agree Dibo - did you just say Libertarian? Nice!

 

[midfielder]

Just re read that article I pissed myself they have banned marriage...

I agree with Dibo on this sorta of stuff ... however the funnier than funnier ... even more than the Scum getting the spoon a second year .... in an attempt to ban gay marriage they banned all marriages....

I love this kinda stuff and local gov lawyer (trumped up clerk) going for promotion has totally fooked this up...

This is what is says .... """ state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage." it soooooooooooooo fuuuuuuuuuuuunnnnnyyyyyy.. IDENTICAL is the word that did it .... what a arse wip the legal  writer must be or a guy who wrote it quitely in protest.

Sorry I spend a bit of my time arguing with the trumped up clerks and they are so full of what it is meant to mean....but mate it actually says...


Dibo .. thanks for posting this ... FOOK me will sent this on to heaps...

 

[midfielder]

Dibo Dibo how you have made my day TBH I find these things very very very funny ... in an attempt to fix in their eyes a small problem..... they create a mega problem ... every marriage from when they put the law in is illegal ... how funny is that... piss off the voters big time...

Now in the land of suing for anything imagine this OHHHHHH its beautiful (thank God for Governments f**kwits) A couple are getting a divorce partner one says we were never married so your settlement is much less then that partner sues the Gov or someones sues the gov because they had sex before marriage and the effect it is having on their mind to have broken Gods and Church Law

In tax we have a huge statue to Paul Keating and his 85 changes FBT, Superannuation, Capital Gains Tax, etc .. before PK 85 % of taxpayers did their own Tax Return within two year 80% of tax payers paid an Accountant Another big statute to Peter C and his GST & Bas statements, with a small one for Meg from the Demos for her changes to GST that just made it confusing

The guy that wrote this law a massive statute .