Posted on 10/03/2009 7:12:27 AM PDT by broken_arrow1
A Dallas judge ruled Thursday that Texas' ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional as she cleared the way for two gay men to divorce, the Dallas Morning News reported.
State District Judge Tena Callahan said the state’s bans on same-sex marriage violates the constitutional guarantee to equal protection under the law.
While the Texas attorney general had stepped into the case to say that because a gay marriage isn’t recognized in Texas, a Texas court can’t dissolve one through divorce, Tena denied the intervention.
The two Dallas men in the case married three years ago in Massachusetts, the first state to allow gays to marry.
"This is the first time that a same-sex marriage is allowed to be divorced in the state of Texas, which is big," said Pete Schulte, the attorney who represents one of the men.
Schulte said Texas was the only place where they could file for divorce because they live in the state and have established residency.
"I have a feeling there are going to be opponents who say this is going to allow the floodgates of gay marriage to open, and I disagree with that," he said. "Gay marriage and gay divorce are two seperate things."
Attorney General Greg Abbott released a statement saying that he will appeal the ruling.
“The laws and constitution of the State of Texas define marriage as an institution involving one man and one woman. Today's ruling purports to strike down that constitutional definition -- despite the fact that it was recently adopted by 75 percent of Texas voters,” he said.
Lashard Williams, a supporter of gay marriage, said he believes the judge's ruling is a step in the right direction.
"One day, I might decide to get married, and I'm born and raised here in Dallas, and I'd like to do it here in Texas," he said.
I refuse to use the PC word "gay". Just wait for mandatory lesson plans in public schools to teach our kids that this is normal behavior.
"Secede"!
Respect" for Marriage Act of 2009, HR3567
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/you_call_this_respect.html
It's called the "Respect" for Marriage Act of 2009, but -- like most bills backed and driven by the far fringe of the Democratic party -- even the name is a lie. HR3567, whatever you want to call it, is a bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (which protects every state's right to recognize only marriage between one man and one woman.) Moreover, it provides federal recognition for any marriage recognized in any state.
A district judge who feels she is more powerful than states Constitution. She needs to be impeached now.
District court judges in Texas are elected. She is up for re-election next year. There is a way to take care of her, once and for all, for attempting to impose her individual will on the people of the State of Texas. VOTE HER OFF THE BENCH.
So how long before this gets to the Texas Supreme Court? And the Federal courts?
Time for some “frontier justice”!
I don’t think this will stand. The state Constitution bans it.
There is nothing equal about “gay marriage”. It is not marriage. This is just an outgrowth of indistinct fuzzy thinking. This judge should be removed from office. The constitution state or federal is not his to rewrite.
I’m no scholar - but if its in the constitution, how can it be unconstitutional? If the constitution bans gay marriage - isn’t gay marriage unconstitutional.
This court is clearly out of touch with the will of the people and its rulings need discarded.
Need a new button “Just SYS”
Sue Your State.
Since you pay one tax rate different then someone else, that is unConstitutional. You don’t get free medical like someone else SYS, you don’t get free education - SYS, you don’t get free house - SYS.
If all the taxpayers sued you would be surprised how fast it would change.
That's just it - she shouldn't. This is a state judge, not a federal judge. She's governed by the state constitution and that bans same sex marriages. Her decision should be rapidly overturned.
This is such a pernicious lie. They are NOT married; not in Texas. There is NO compulsion by ANY government where they live to bind them to any obligations of "marriage" - they can just walk away as if they are former friends.
"I have a feeling there are going to be opponents who say this is going to allow the floodgates of gay marriage to open, and I disagree with that," he said. "Gay marriage and gay divorce are two seperate things."
Again, Schulte is lying through his teeth. This has everything to do with what the left wants to impose as "marriage" - where it is recognized, its validity across state lines, etc. What a lying sack of sch*t.
I agree, she needs to go. But, the question is who will replace her? She is apparently in a very leftist, democratic district. I can remember this local election in 2006 - all the local liberal rags were ecstatic that so many benches were filled by democratic judges. As bad as she is, it could be worse. There are slew of democratic lawyers waiting in the wings who have absolutely no regard for the Constitution.
“Her decision should be rapidly overturned.”
The fact that we are at a point in our apparent moral, intlellectual de-evolution wherein a “judge” can reach a conclusion without ANY BASIS IN LAW AND IN FACT COUNTER TO ACTUAL WRITTEN LAW indicates to even the stones in the street that we are going down hill without any brakes. The system isn’t headed toward trouble....it’s BROKEN.
....This is such a pernicious lie. They are NOT married; not in Texas. There is NO compulsion by ANY government where they live to bind them to any obligations of “marriage” - they can just walk away as if they are former friends.....
You mean this might all be about forcing an AGENDA??????
If banning gay marriage is unconstitutional, Barry and the Dems imposing their version of universal healthcare is likewise unconstitutional, agreed judge?
“The two Dallas men in the case married three years ago in Massachusetts, the first state to allow gays to marry.”
A question:The Massachusetts constitution did not allow marriage to two people if they lived in a state where the marriage would not be recognized.(Under Cadillac Deval,it has since been changed).Were they Massachusetts citizens at the time of their “marriage”?
If the state where they were “married” does not also consent to “divorce” them now, their beef is with that state.
That would require a special session of the legislature, because the next 140 day regular session starts in 2011.
“Secede,” Hell! We’re not the ones who should leave.
I listened to a federal judge some years ago say that his lifetime appointment made him completely autonomous, almost sovereign... and incidentally, we should view every event partly in terms of race and racism.... As far as I know, that jerk is still dispensing Bountiful Stuff (what Beck calls BS) from his bench. And, I can see no *legal* way to kick him off the bench. So...?
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.