"Homosexual voters rally against Texas marriage amendment" 
Posted on 06/25/2005 1:23:26 PM PDT by Crackingham
Bruce Smith and and Tony Carroll have been together for 10 years. They've been married for two.
"We were as married as people could be," Carroll said, so they didn't expect their relationship to change once they tied the knot in Canada. "But it did feel different having the validation of a whole country."
In November, Texas voters will be asked to validate the opposite idea as they consider a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage. Smith and Carroll plan to be active in the campaign against the amendment. And Houston is emerging as a focal point for both sides.
Carroll said the amendment could interfere with the legally documented partnership he and Smith spent tens of thousands of dollars creating to replicate a marriage. Supporters say such relationships are an assault on the institution of marriage. In last November's election, measures against same-sex marriage were on the ballots of 11 states, and all passed.
Texas already has a law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. And a 2003 law prohibits the recognition of same-sex unions. But Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, who sponsored the amendment measure during this year's regular session, said he doesn't think that's enough.
The constitutional amendment on November's ballot defines marriage as the union of one man with one woman, and prohibits the state or any political subdivision from creating or recognizing "any legal status identical or similar to marriage."
Supporters of the amendment say it's needed because Texas laws regarding same-sex marriage could be challenged in state court if the language is not placed in the constitution.
Texas is among 15 states that ban same-sex marriage by law or constitutional provision. Massachusetts recognizes same-sex marriages, and Vermont and Connecticut allow same-sex civil unions. Opponents of the amendment acknowledge there is little chance of defeating it in Texas. They're centering their efforts in Houston in hopes that a close vote in the city might narrow the statewide margin.
"We have to look beyond traditional win-loss definitions," said Tammi Wallace, president of the newly-created Houston Equal Rights Alliance.
Supporters of the amendment say it's needed because Texas laws regarding same-sex marriage could be challenged in state court if the language is not placed in the constitution.
This is definitely true. It's interesting what the court will overturn nowadays (and what they won't too).
I meant like bread in the oven, you know pregnant. Which I am happy to say my is 6 months along.
I meant like bread in the oven, you know pregnant. Which I am happy to say my is 6 months along.
I know what you meant:) I was making a double pun with the word anal if you know what I mean. But I guess that is a bit off-color. Congrats on the little one!!! I can't wait until I have a kid of my own.
The whole country wasn't validating you. The Libranos in Canada have forced this legilation on a population which is bitterly divided."Validation" is the dearest wish of every gay "couple," hence the attacks on the next generation and the church, because deep down in their heart of hearts, they know their actions are against God.
"Homosexual voters rally against Texas marriage amendment"
Very telling that their "relationships" require outside validation to be meaningful.
Since government has perverted the original intent of the law and now forces the people to get governments PERMISSION (a.k.a. license) in order to be *legally* married, I fear your professor is right.
Thanks and when the time comes you'll be ready. At that time those were the words that came to mind.
I'd tell them to put a sock in it, but it appears the rifice is already full!
Rally? Two people is a rally? What horrible journalism.
Two people can be a rally if one hits a home run.
Rally? Two people is a rally? What horrible journalism.
Two people can be a rally if one hits a home run.
So, my wife and I aren't married since she had to have a historectomy in her youth? Use whatever arguments you want, but that one applies to my hetero relationship too.
No, and you know that isn't what I meant.
Men and women are bonded together through God's gift. A blessing of that wonderful union is children, as the Creator intended. The man in this article said he and his homosexual partner were married in every sense of the word. Their inability to have children (by virtue of the fact that they are both men for crying out loud) negates his statement and his argument.
Sorry about your wife's inability to have children. Many couples who are happily married do not have children, and of course their marriages are valid. The homosexual in this article tried to build a straw argument by his statement, and it could be blown over with a whispered breath.
Hey, thanks. I wasn't really offended, since I knew what you meant, but I did want to show you how your argument could be misinterpreted and easily dismissed.
The proposition will pass overwhelmingly if it is put on the November ballot, but very few voters may participate in the election.
I think you are absolutely right: the statewide bans will be legally meaningless in this court-dominated nation.
Not anymore... Federal Court overturned it... ha ha...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.