• 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."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Texas judge denies marriage ceremony

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,243
3,914
136
Keep the State out of it as much as is humanly possible.
Yes.


But it's not a marriage.
With the coercive power of the state kept out of this, your opinion matters as much as my opinion of you does, as far as real life consequences go.

Shut up and die!
I love your new quote, but fervently wish you would take your own advice. Do the first part; omit the second. It's overkill (pun intended.) ;)
 

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
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?
They were not denied access. That judge was over ruled. So what's your complaint?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,876
460
126
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.
Yes, Tennessee has no civil union ceremony, only a marriage ceremony.

Both sides are in love with using the armed might of government to change others' behavior to something they prefer. The right hits harder at fewer people; the left hits more people (e.g. limiting the size of soft drinks) but luckily for us, hits like a little girl. ;)
 

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
Yes.




With the coercive power of the state kept out of this, your opinion matters as much as my opinion of you does, as far as real life consequences go.



I love your new quote, but fervently wish you would take your own advice. Do the first part; omit the second. It's overkill (pun intended.) ;)

That's not a quote from some other person. That is what I tell myself every morning I fuck'un wake up. I got real close once but the dumb fuckers took be to the hospital for an open hear surgery.

It was called suicide by death. I stopped all my meds. Stopped exercising. Ate as much of what I wanted (bacon!). It was fun. If it hadn't been for some stupid dumb fuck, my wife, seeing me go down it would have worked.

Now I get to start all over again. If I can piss off as many people as I can as I go, more power to me. It just makes it fun.
 
Last edited:

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
At least in terms of conferring powerful legal rights and obligation, especially in the case of a heterosexual couple, the word marriage, is exclusively granted by governments, be they counties, State, Countries, and such are by in large international in scope. Its why you have to apply for as wedding license, meet certain age, health, and time restrictions, and thereafter, the signed marriage certificate is usually stored by the county court where you got married. l Think about it, in event of divorce, if marriage was not State, National and often international, one or the other parties to the marriage could simply leave the State, or their nation and get legally married again without the bother of getting a divorce. And its absurd to think that a church has any force of law to protect the legal rights of the abandoned partner in any marriage or their children.

Maybe some religions have the right to deny the wedding ceremony within their church, but they still can't prevent two people from being married outside of their church. The Roman Catholic church often denies remarriages to a divorced catholic, without a papal permission, and could then deny the married couple permission to worship in their church.

But, still, its why US courts traditionally dislike the term civil union for gay and Lesbian couples. Because it too similar to the other Jim Crowe law term of separate but equal education. In short, its either a marriage that confers all the legal rights and obligations in a marriage or its a sham. With the other problem being, if a gay or Lesbian couple get married in another State where such marriages are legal, how can Texas deny them the same legal rights? When Texas can't do the same with any legally married heterosexual couple.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,243
3,914
136
That's not a quote from some other person. That is what I tell myself every morning I fuck'un wake up. I got real close once but the dumb fuckers took be to the hospital for an open hear surgery.

It was called suicide by death. I stopped all my meds. Stopped exercising. Ate as much of what I wanted (bacon!). It was fun. If it hadn't been for some stupid dumb fuck, my wife, seeing me go down it would have worked.

Now I get to start all over again. If I can piss off as many people as I can as I go, more power to me. It just makes it fun.
Your whiney self indulgence isn't funny, it's pathetic. At base, it's cowardly.

If one of your biggest sources of pleasure in life is pissing off others, then less power to you. You have forsaken your integrity and lost your center, your heart. That muscle may still be beating, but for all intents and purposes, you're a corpse now anyway -- roadkill on the public thoroughfare. And you have begun to smell.

Life is a gift. Aim higher. Do better. Make your contribution to the general welfare, the one unique to you, that only you can provide. Despite what some here appear to believe, we are all in this together.

Sure, it will take more effort than trolling and reflexively spewing the bile erupting from whatever personal disappointment you harbor within you, but none of us were ever promised a rose garden.

Man up.

I believe you have it within you to do so. :thumbsup:
 

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,193
632
126
Judge is a moron. The County Judge is just the chief of a County Commissioners Court. Thus he likely has zero legal education/doesn't know what hes fucking talking about. Its a good thing the Commissioners Court overruled them. Or the county would have likely been paying a settlement.
 
Last edited:

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,876
460
126
At least in terms of conferring powerful legal rights and obligation, especially in the case of a heterosexual couple, the word marriage, is exclusively granted by governments, be they counties, State, Countries, and such are by in large international in scope. Its why you have to apply for as wedding license, meet certain age, health, and time restrictions, and thereafter, the signed marriage certificate is usually stored by the county court where you got married. l Think about it, in event of divorce, if marriage was not State, National and often international, one or the other parties to the marriage could simply leave the State, or their nation and get legally married again without the bother of getting a divorce. And its absurd to think that a church has any force of law to protect the legal rights of the abandoned partner in any marriage or their children.

Maybe some religions have the right to deny the wedding ceremony within their church, but they still can't prevent two people from being married outside of their church. The Roman Catholic church often denies remarriages to a divorced catholic, without a papal permission, and could then deny the married couple permission to worship in their church.

But, still, its why US courts traditionally dislike the term civil union for gay and Lesbian couples. Because it too similar to the other Jim Crowe law term of separate but equal education. In short, its either a marriage that confers all the legal rights and obligations in a marriage or its a sham. With the other problem being, if a gay or Lesbian couple get married in another State where such marriages are legal, how can Texas deny them the same legal rights? When Texas can't do the same with any legally married heterosexual couple.
Jim Crowe is to me the crux of the matter. Separate but equal is never equal, else there'd be no reason for it to be separate.
 

tweaker2

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
11,699
2,923
136
Tradition. What a problematic word that is sometimes.

Tradition, Religion, Constitution, Bill of Rights.....what a tangled web we weave.

So does change = evolution, or corruption?

I guess time will tell.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY