• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Texas judge denies marriage ceremony

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
0
0
http://www.the33tv.com/news/kdaf-lesbian-wedding-controversy-in-rural-texas-20120716,0,658864.story

GRAHAM, Texas— Graham, Texas is home to nearly 9,000 people. It's the heart of Young County, and, now, also, a big controversy.

It's all over one word: wedding.

"If they had called it something different, it probably would have been all right," Golden Elkins, of Graham.

"If two people want to stand up and pledge their love for each other, whether it has any legal standing in Texas or not, why do you get to decide that they can't do that?" said Kay Berru, of Graham.

In June, the county received an application to rent out a part of Fort Belknap. The application said it was for a wedding.

"There's been weddings out there, heterosexual weddings," said Young County Judge John Bullock.

The application was from a lesbian couple. Because Texas does not recognize marriage between same-sex couples, the 'wedding' would not have been considered a legal marriage. Even so, once Bullock found out the application was from two women, he denied the request.

"I didn't think it was in the best interest of the fort or of Young County," said Bullock.

He says he was trying to avoid a controversy, but in a 4-to-1 vote the commissioners overturned his decision.

"We all know that marriage is between one man and one woman. Even though it may say wedding, this is just a ceremonial process. It's nothing legally binding. It's just like a group of family or friends going out there, and you're denying access to public property," said commissioner Stacey Rogers.

"The court basically said, 'have whatever ceremony you want out there,'" said Bullock.

At the next commissioners meeting, Bullock submitted, for a vote, policy changes to allow the commissioners' court to restrict the use of county-owned buildings.

It said, in part, the county could deny access if the use or activity is not "legal, ethical, or practical" or "in conflict with the Constitutions of this Nation or the great State of Texas." Another policy change would require a copy of Marriage License to reserve Fort Belknap for "ceremonies involving weddings, marriages, or any other nuptial activity."

Monday, the commissioners said the proposed changes were vague, and would leave the county open to a lawsuit.

"You shouldn't create policy as law with vague terminology like that. That's why it was voted down," said Rogers.

"Anything the county judge wants, they oppose. and that's just wrong," said Elkins.

In the end, the couple decided to have their ceremony elsewhere. They asked that we not identify them for this story.
There is nothing illegal, unethical, or impractical about a lesbian wedding ceremony that the state was never asked to sanction.

Marriage ceremonies can involve lots of people, lots of drinking, and the potential for unrest... but that's true of all weddings, not just homosexual ones. The public safety argument is ridiculous, given that heterosexual weddings have been permitted in this exact same venue.
 

(sic)Klown12

Senior member
Nov 27, 2010
572
0
76
Texas has a long way to go before it enters the 21st century.
Sad, but true for most of the state. It's a little better in more populated areas, such as where I live near D/FW. Most of the people I come across here are becoming fairly socially liberal, so there's hope.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,812
192
106
Sad, but true for most of the state. It's a little better in more populated areas, such as where I live near D/FW. Most of the people I come across here are becoming fairly socially liberal, so there's hope.
Texas is so behind the times its really sad. There are still dry counties and dry cities all over the state.

If I want to buy a bottle of whiskey on sunday and attend a gay wedding, why cant I? Because the religious right says I cant.

Why am I forced to live my life as the religious right says I should?
 

RbSX

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2002
8,354
1
76
As a person who's pro same sex union I think the LBGT community trying to hijack the word "wedding" is a giant piss off. By definition the word marriage is a religious institution for people married in a church as they conform to the religious standards.

Hell, most people I know who are straight have a civil union (married by justice of the peace etc) and use the word marriage as a misnomer.

The LBGT community needs to stop fighting over a word.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
0
0
As a person who's pro same sex union I think the LBGT community trying to hijack the word "wedding" is a giant piss off. By definition the word marriage is a religious institution for people married in a church as they conform to the religious standards.

Hell, most people I know who are straight have a civil union (married by justice of the peace etc) and use the word marriage as a misnomer.

The LBGT community needs to stop fighting over a word.
The majority using the wrong word (in bold) should piss you off a lot more than the minority using the wrong word.
 

RbSX

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2002
8,354
1
76
The majority using the wrong word (in bold) should piss you off a lot more than the minority using the wrong word.
Both groups piss me off - minority/majority is not relevant, oh wait yes it is, because in my opinion when straight people do it it's a genuine misunderstanding - when the LBGT community does it - it's an intentional politicization of a word.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
0
0
Both groups piss me off - minority/majority is not relevant, oh wait yes it is, because in my opinion when straight people do it it's a genuine misunderstanding - when the LBGT community does it - it's an intentional politicization of a word.
Wrong. It is viewed more in the light of having the same things heterosexual couples do than an attempt to make political hay.

Had phrases like "we're getting civil unionized" instead of "we're getting married" been in the lexicographical history... a history that has always been vastly dominated by heterosexuals... things would be different.
 
Last edited:

AstroManLuca

Lifer
Jun 24, 2004
15,633
5
81
As a person who's pro same sex union I think the LBGT community trying to hijack the word "wedding" is a giant piss off. By definition the word marriage is a religious institution for people married in a church as they conform to the religious standards.

Hell, most people I know who are straight have a civil union (married by justice of the peace etc) and use the word marriage as a misnomer.

The LBGT community needs to stop fighting over a word.
I'm not even slightly religious and I got married in a wedding. Marriage isn't exclusively a religious institution.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,678
3,232
126
I'm not even slightly religious and I got married in a wedding. Marriage isn't exclusively a religious institution.
It would be smart to argue that marriage is religious, and thus the government cannot use it to discriminate against others. That they should have no business being involved in the first place.

To argue that is to open the door for equal treatment.
 

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
10,879
196
106
http://www.the33tv.com/news/kdaf-lesbian-wedding-controversy-in-rural-texas-20120716,0,658864.story



There is nothing illegal, unethical, or impractical about a lesbian wedding ceremony that the state was never asked to sanction.

Marriage ceremonies can involve lots of people, lots of drinking, and the potential for unrest... but that's true of all weddings, not just homosexual ones. The public safety argument is ridiculous, given that heterosexual weddings have been permitted in this exact same venue.
You missed the possibility of lightning from a wrathful God. :whiste:
 

Jaepheth

Platinum Member
Apr 29, 2006
2,571
25
91
So.... would this have been an issue if a restaurant had wanted to do a publicity stunt of finally having hamburgers and fries tying the knot (They've been living together on the menu for years; it's about time they made it official). So they book a venue and call it a wedding?

The judge would have blocked that one too right?
 

CrackRabbit

Lifer
Mar 30, 2001
16,641
57
91
Texas is so behind the times its really sad. There are still dry counties and dry cities all over the state.

If I want to buy a bottle of whiskey on sunday and attend a gay wedding, why cant I? Because the religious right says I cant.

Why am I forced to live my life as the religious right says I should?
Because, Rick Perry and a777pilot. That's why.
 
Last edited:

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
http://www.the33tv.com/news/kdaf-lesbian-wedding-controversy-in-rural-texas-20120716,0,658864.story



There is nothing illegal, unethical, or impractical about a lesbian wedding ceremony that the state was never asked to sanction.

Marriage ceremonies can involve lots of people, lots of drinking, and the potential for unrest... but that's true of all weddings, not just homosexual ones. The public safety argument is ridiculous, given that heterosexual weddings have been permitted in this exact same venue.
Who the fuck cares? I don't. Marriage is between one man and one woman....at a time. If gays want to join together in a life bound that great. But call it something else it not a marriage. Hell, call it a Pairage for all I care.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
0
0
Who the fuck cares? I don't. Marriage is between one man and one woman....at a time. If gays want to join together in a life bound that great. But call it something else it not a marriage. Hell, call it a Pairage for all I care.
Way to miss the point. Why does the state get to care what these people call it in a private ceremony?
 

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
Way to miss the point. Why does the state get to care what these people call it in a private ceremony?

With that I agree with you.

If two people love each other and want to make a declaration of that love before their friends and the rest of the world. So be it. Good for them and may God bless them.

Keep the State out of it as much as is humanly possible.


But it's not a marriage.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,876
460
126
As a person who's pro same sex union I think the LBGT community trying to hijack the word "wedding" is a giant piss off. By definition the word marriage is a religious institution for people married in a church as they conform to the religious standards.

Hell, most people I know who are straight have a civil union (married by justice of the peace etc) and use the word marriage as a misnomer.

The LBGT community needs to stop fighting over a word.
Problem is we waste considerable resources fighting over this issue, lawsuits and counter suits, laws passed pro and con. If we call gay marriage something else then the battle goes on unabated as anti-gay marriage forces attempt to gain or preserve special advantages for "real marriage" and pro-gay marriage forces attempt to gain equality or even gain special advantages for gay civil unions. It's a waste of energy.

People in general need to mind their own business and stop using the armed might of government to enforce their will and values on others. If something doesn't directly affect you, leave it alone. /Old Crow Medicine Show

Full disclosure, my wife and I were wed by a justice of the Peace and our license and certificate say marriage.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,560
0
0
With that I agree with you.

If two people love each other and want to make a declaration of that love before their friends and the rest of the world. So be it. Good for them and may God bless them.

Keep the State out of it as much as is humanly possible.

But it's not a marriage.
You may think it isn't a marriage, but why should they be denied access to public property simply because they decide to call it a marriage?
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,274
3,956
136
The LBGT community needs to stop fighting over a word.
No, YOU need to stop fighting over a word, and attempting to use the coercive power of the state to enforce your religious interpretation.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,785
1,091
126
As a person who's pro same sex union I think the LBGT community trying to hijack the word "wedding" is a giant piss off. By definition the word marriage is a religious institution for people married in a church as they conform to the religious standards.

Hell, most people I know who are straight have a civil union (married by justice of the peace etc) and use the word marriage as a misnomer.

The LBGT community needs to stop fighting over a word.
Almost certainly the JP conducted a marriage ceremony, not a civil union one. In the US very few states even have civil unions-those that do, it was usually as some sort of compromrise against gay marriage.

And, as long as states and the feds insist on seperate and unequal treatment under such things as the Defense of Marriage Act, a gay marriage or civil union will NEVER remotely come close to having all the rights of a traditional married couple. The difference is far more than one of semantics.

Ironically, it always seems to be the red states that are more than willing to limit/abolish freedom and rights-it is of absolutely no governmental interest whatsoever what those two people chose to call their ceremony.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY