fuck texas

Nov 08, 2005 21:51

Texas voters just passed a constitutional amendment making "gay ( Read more... )

politics

Leave a comment

Comments 24

forioscribe November 9 2005, 08:31:19 UTC
Texas is the enlightened place where they execute more criminals than any other state, while at the same time people like Bush and his Neo-con bible thumping fans call an embryo a person and abortion a crime, because life--all life, even cellular--is sacred. The crime here is that not many of those shit-kickers see the hipocrisy in it.

Reply

anamacha November 10 2005, 07:40:01 UTC
heh! good point. Quite honestly I'd rather see them treat the life we already have better, rather than worrying about people that aren't even here yet ... same as wondering why we fight so many foreign wars when people on our own soil so desperately need our help.

Reply


_stormwolf_ November 9 2005, 15:17:47 UTC
" It's almost as if they're trying to legislate who a person can love. I know that wasn't part of the wording of the amendment, but it's implied. Sometimes people just don't have a choice in who they are called to love."

I totally agree.

Reply

anamacha November 10 2005, 07:41:36 UTC
and it's not my place to judge that calling ... nor should it be anyone else's place, aside from those directly involved.

Reply


wardellen November 9 2005, 15:31:31 UTC
I feel very badly that I didn't vote. I went to City Hall, but they didn't have voting set up there, and I couldn't find another site before my lunch hour ran out.

OTOH, I've been told that the way the bill was worded, they've actually managed to outlaw all marriages by passing the damn thing. Someone left out a word or two, so the bill really bans all forms of marriage, gay or otherwise. I don't know if the State Legislature can amend that without a state-wide vote or not; hopefully they'll have to bring it before the people again, and we'll get a better turn out.

As for Gina's erstwhile ex- I know in Ohio it used to be that you could file for divorce by abandonment after something like 7 years. Since it would be considered uncontested, there were no fees other than the filing fees and court costs. Back home you didn't even need a lawyer to file it for you. Something to look into.

Reply

anamacha November 10 2005, 04:56:12 UTC
This is the way the bill was worded, from the Secretary of State website ( ... )

Reply

wardellen November 10 2005, 14:23:12 UTC
Ballot Language
"The constitutional amendment providing that marriage in this state consists only of the union of one man and one woman and prohibiting this state or a political subdivision of this state from creating or recognizing any legal status identical or similar to marriage."

But they forgot the "other than as described as a man and woman" at the very end. It says that the state is prhoibited from recognizing any leagl status identical or similar to marriage. end. so all marriages, gay or otherwise, are now illegal. ...which could come in handy for me if I ever get my mind made up about my own marriage!

Reply

anamacha November 11 2005, 01:35:37 UTC
lol! interesting point; I wonder if the initial "marriage consists only of the union of one man ..." counts, and would make what you're describing redundant.

Reply


janezanaddict November 9 2005, 17:00:08 UTC
Texas sucks for that! Not to offend, but I thought Texas sucked period, that is why I am now back in Arkansas! But it does have a TON of groovy people! Appearantly A LOT of groovy people who didn't get out and vote! Or maybe we are back to that old adage about votes not really counting. The "man" is just letting us think we have a say!

Reply

anamacha November 10 2005, 02:05:36 UTC
heh, I wouldn't be surprised. But TX is a generally consiervative state -- Austin is the liberal jewel in the buckle of the bible belt.

*sigh*

Reply


In Austin........ benson3 November 9 2005, 19:22:31 UTC
In Austin the vote was 68% pro gay marriage....let's keep all of our ducks in a row......If we all left when the going got hard the Republican fuckheads would win by default!.......We need more freaks not less.........

Reply

Re: In Austin........ anamacha November 10 2005, 01:08:40 UTC
oh, it was? Cool! Where did you get that stat from? That's very good to know.

You do have a point, though -- we do need more freaks, not less. Don't want to let those basards win, anyway ... still, there is something to be said for 'voting with your feet'.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up