25
   

Gay marriage: TX Attorney General advises clerks they can refuse marriage lic. on religious grounds

Forums: Politics, News, Gay Marriage, Religion, Texas
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 05:48 am
@Ionus,
Do you think that using correct legal definitions and terms (even if they are in Latin) is incorrect and/or foolish?
parados
 
  6  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 09:03 am
@Ionus,
The problem is that current law is littered with the phrases - marriage, married, spouse, etc. Unless ALL of those in every law and every regulation are changed to specifically include civil unions then there are no equal rights because any law or regulation that applies to married people can't apply to anyone not defined under marriage. If even one instance of the law or regulation is not changed then you have created a second class citizen. Every time a regulation or an instance of the law doesn't apply to a civil union it will require litigation. There are thousands if not hundreds of thousands of regulations that will need to be litigated.

The only way to make sure all of those regulations are covered is to simply redefine marriage under the law to include civil unions. It is a single piece of law and will cover every other instance under the law. Once you do that, a civil union is a marriage because every time a regulation uses the word marriage it will include civil unions. There will be no difference under the law. Marriage means civil unions.

It seems you don't understand simple basics. There is no "de facto" marriage in the US. Unless the marriage is recognized by the state where one lives, those in the relationship have no legal marriage under the law and are granted no privileges under that law.
DrewDad
 
  3  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 09:44 am
@parados,
https://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/03/texas-lawyers-threaten-file-complaint-against-paxt/

Lawyers Threaten to File Complaint Against Paxton

Quote:
Roughly 150 Texas attorneys have signed on to a letter threatening to file a complaint with the State Bar of Texas against Attorney General Ken Paxton for his response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage.

"It seems to us that your edict to encourage Texas clerks to violate a direct ruling of the United States Supreme Court violates" the State Bar's rules requiring attorneys to uphold the U.S. Constitution, the letter states.

...

“I think he could very easily be disbarred,” said Fischer, who wrote the letter sent to Paxton’s office Friday. “He violated his oath to specifically uphold the United States Constitution.”

Also on Friday, former state Rep. Glen Maxey, the Texas Democratic Party's county affairs director and the first openly gay legislator in Texas, filed a complaint against Paxton with the State Bar, calling the attorney general’s response “dishonest … and in violation of the United States Constitution.”

“For a Texas lawyer to engage in such conduct is a blatant violation of ethical duties,” Maxey wrote in his complaint.
Debra Law
 
  4  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 11:01 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

So you have learned that Ionus is basically a lier. Thats the reason I dont converse with him.


The persona "Ionus" is a caricature of the worst kind of bigots presently living on the planet, i.e., those who are eager to place an abundant amount of hate and ignorance on display for public consumption. People like him do far more to harm their cause than to help it.
Ragman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 11:40 am
@Debra Law,
Then why do people enable the behavior by constantly feeding an ignorant troll?
Debra Law
 
  2  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 11:45 am
@Debra Law,
Debra Law wrote:

RABEL222 wrote:

So you have learned that Ionus is basically a lier. Thats the reason I dont converse with him.


The persona "Ionus" is a caricature of the worst kind of bigots presently living on the planet, i.e., those who are eager to place an abundant amount of hate and ignorance on display for public consumption. People like him do far more to harm their cause than to help it.


On second thought, perhaps he is not an example of the "worst kind of bigots". Perhaps the worst kind are the bigots who allege they support the Constitution (and equal protection under the law), but nevertheless advocate for the continuation of oppression and discrimination under the guise of "religious freedom". This is certainly what the Texas Attorney General is doing when he informed other public officials (county clerks) that they may violate their oaths of office and discriminate against homosexual couples in the performance of their official duties.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  3  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 11:58 am
@Ragman,
Ragman wrote:

Then why do people enable the behavior by constantly feeding an ignorant troll?


It's one of those lessons, i.e., don't feed the troll, that I had forgotten during my long absence from discussion boards. Smile
jcboy
 
  2  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 12:01 pm
@Debra Law,
I put that bogan on ignore a long time ago but it’s been a pleasure watching you whoop his ass on the forum Cool
Debra Law
 
  4  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 12:10 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:

https://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/03/texas-lawyers-threaten-file-complaint-against-paxt/

Lawyers Threaten to File Complaint Against Paxton

Quote:
Roughly 150 Texas attorneys have signed on to a letter threatening to file a complaint with the State Bar of Texas against Attorney General Ken Paxton for his response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage.

"It seems to us that your edict to encourage Texas clerks to violate a direct ruling of the United States Supreme Court violates" the State Bar's rules requiring attorneys to uphold the U.S. Constitution, the letter states.

...

“I think he could very easily be disbarred,” said Fischer, who wrote the letter sent to Paxton’s office Friday. “He violated his oath to specifically uphold the United States Constitution.”

Also on Friday, former state Rep. Glen Maxey, the Texas Democratic Party's county affairs director and the first openly gay legislator in Texas, filed a complaint against Paxton with the State Bar, calling the attorney general’s response “dishonest … and in violation of the United States Constitution.”

“For a Texas lawyer to engage in such conduct is a blatant violation of ethical duties,” Maxey wrote in his complaint.



Hurrah! It is encouraging that so many Texans have come forth to protest their Attorney General's defiant call for lawlessness.
Ragman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 12:46 pm
@Debra Law,
thanks, Debra. I know it can an itch that's hard not to scratch.

As I wrote in an other thread previously, it's good to have you back.
Debra Law
 
  4  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 12:52 pm
@jcboy,
jcboy wrote:

I put that bogan on ignore a long time ago but it’s been a pleasure watching you whoop his ass on the forum Cool


My debating skills are rusty. Unfortunately, I have many friends and family members who post right-wing conservative bullshit that appears on my social media feed and it irritates me. If I dare to comment, e.g., "dear sister, recognizing that all people have the right to marry the person they love does not infringe upon the sanctity of any of the four marriages you have entered," then she becomes very emotional and calls all of our relatives to complain about how mean I am to her. ROFL Anyway, thank you for being so kind to me.
Debra Law
 
  4  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 12:56 pm
@Ragman,
Ragman wrote:

thanks, Debra. I know it can an itch that's hard not to scratch.

As I wrote in an other thread previously, it's good to have you back.


Thank you so much, Ragman.
farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 01:00 pm
@Debra Law,
Yes, It was quite enjoyable. He was like a wee mousy running faster and faster on his wheel .
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 01:20 pm
@farmerman,
What I'm still wondering about is that obviously such "advice", namely to act against a supreme court's ruling, can be given by a state's attorney general.

Here in Germany, it would be as if a state's interior ministers tells such to civil servants, who are 'clerks' in the registry office.
I'm sure, such a minister would step down immediately afterwards. (Either "forced" by his own party/government or the opposition)
If not ... according to our federal constitution, then the federal government could "take the necessary steps to compel the Land to comply with its duties".
0 Replies
 
jcboy
 
  5  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 02:13 pm
@Ionus,
KnightlyCelt? Cool

Busted!
JeffreyEqualityNewma
 
  3  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 02:23 pm
@jcboy,
That was a freebie Wink
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 02:33 pm
@Debra Law,
Sorry for the repeat...my doppelganger was at the keyboard.
Debra Law
 
  2  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 02:59 pm
Here is a link to the TX Attorney General's letter opinion dated June 28, 2015, and located on the official state website:

OPINION NO. KP-0025

What are your thoughts after reading the AG opinion in its entirety?

Here is another link and relevant content: ABOUT ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINIONS

Quote:
Although the courts have generally ruled that opinions are "advisory in nature," persons who reasonably rely on Attorney General Opinions may be protected from civil and criminal liability, even if the Attorney General has erred in his interpretation.


Scenario 1: A county clerk [as an elected county official and sworn agent of the state] refuses to provide an application for a marriage license to a homosexual couple upon their request or refuses to issue a marriage license to a homosexual couple upon their application;

Scenario 2: An employee of the county clerk's office refuses to provide an application for a marriage license to a homosexual couple upon their request or refuses to issue a marriage license to a homosexual couple upon their application.

Under Scenarios 1 & 2, do you think the county clerk or the employee have a defense based on reasonable reliance on the AG's opinion? and why?

Would your opinion be the same or different if the county clerk or employee politely kept his or her religious views to him- or herself and promptly sent another polite person to provide the government service? What if the person was so impolite or judgmental that he/she dampened what should have been a joyous occasion for the couple? What if there is no other person available who is willing to provide this vital government service to the couple and they must leave the clerk's office without a marriage license?

There are many other questions swirling in my head, but I think this is enough to don our thinking caps and to discuss the matter further.
Debra Law
 
  2  
Reply Sat 4 Jul, 2015 03:02 pm
@Ragman,
Ragman wrote:

Sorry for the repeat...my doppelganger was at the keyboard.


LOL

I think the system is very slow to post after hitting reply. On occasion I have hit the reply button twice thinking my first hit was ineffective only to get the double post warning.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Gay marriage: TX Attorney General advises clerks they can refuse marriage lic. on religious grounds
  3. » Page 6
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 08:34:27
▲ ▼