Texas Supreme Court: Gay Couples Have No Inherent Right To Marriage Benefits

Image result for Gay Couples Have No Inherent Right To Marriage Benefits


“The Texas Supreme Court’s decision this morning is a warning shot..."


The Texas Supreme Court ruled unanimously Friday that gay couples have no inherent right to government-funded spousal benefits.

The all-Republican nine-member court ruled that while the U.S. Supreme Court in 2015 legalized same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges, the “reach and ramifications” of the rights of gay couples are still up in the air.

The nation’s highest court legalized same-sex marriage, but did not detail what additional rights are guaranteed to such couples, according to the Texas court.

Conservative groups applauded the decision, calling it a ruling that protects traditional marriage.

Supporters of gay marriage said the Texas court got it wrong, arguing that the Supreme Court clearly stated that all marriages, traditional and same-sex, must be treated equally.

“The Texas Supreme Court’s decision this morning is a warning shot to all LGBTQ Americans that the war on marriage equality is ever-evolving, and anti-LGBTQ activists will do anything possible to discriminate against our families,” said Sarah Kate Ellis, president of the LGBT advocacy group GLAAD.

The case stemmed from a dispute in 2013, when then-Houston Mayor Annise Parker, the city’s first openly gay mayor, was sued by two local taxpayers for her decision to grant government-subsidized spousal benefits to gay couples who were married in other states.

The two taxpayers, a pastor and a CPA, sued Parker, arguing that no city employees had a “fundamental right” to receive government-funded spousal benefits and that it was “perfectly constitutional” to grant benefits to traditionally married couples and deny them to same-sex couples.

The case appeared to be dead in the water when the state of Texas began extending spousal benefits to same-sex couples after the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage in 2015.

But conservative groups continued to press their case. Pressure by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Attorney General Ken Paxton led the state’s Supreme Court to re-hear the case in March.

The state court ruling sends the issue back to a Harris County district court, which must consider whether the city of Houston is required to provide spousal benefits to same-sex couples.

“Pidgeon and the mayor, like many other litigants throughout the country, must now assist the courts in fully exploring Obergefell’s reach and ramifications, and are entitled to the opportunity to do so,” Justice Jeffrey Boyd wrote in the Texas court’s decision. “We reverse the court of appeals’ judgment, vacate the trial court’s temporary injunction order.”

Supporters of gay marriage say they will appeal the ruling.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/texas-supreme-court-gay-couples-no...

Image result for bible against gay marriage quotes

Views: 77

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Aaaannnnnnd—  Just    where   is   the   L A W  that  legalizes same sex marriage?

Where........does the court......have ...legal  jurisdiction  to  write  law????

I'm so sorry, maybe the Constitution was ripped to shreds, in order to make this happen and I missed the whole thing. Because it sure CAN'T happen. No matter WHAT they say, they cannot violate the Law of Nature and Nature's God, PLUS, there IS NO LAW.

But, damnit, there IS DOMA, still in effect. And that pesky 10th A. Oh, well, there is that pesky Art. 1 and that pesky Art. II. Maybe I just don't read write, right?

DUH duh DUH  duh  DUH

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY???

"WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY???"

That list is soooooooooooo long these days...

Related image

so true, and getting longer and more confusing to the dufuses.

Not so confusing to us, though....

and how did I leave out Art. III, where, no matter how hard I look, I see no jurisdiction for marriage. One way or the other.

Gee.............I wonder why.  Could it be our government has corrupted the Constitution, not to mention the Bible......?

Image result for detective presentermedia animation

Can they really be as ignorant as they seem?

It really does NOT take that long to learn the spirit of the Constitution, or the phrases between each set of commas, kind of like the Bible.

I only read 18 authorized jurisdictions, can they count that high, or WHAT?!

Speaking of ignorant...   This is how dumb some of our high school and/or college kids are.  After heading home from a client one night this week, I decided to stop at Sonic Drive In on the way home and get a burger and onion rings.  When the carhop takes my money, part of my change would have been a dime, and she couldn't get the dimes to come out of the money changer.  And she asks "is it okay if I short you ten cents?  My dimes aren't working".  Course I didn't give a damn about the dime, but I said "You know.....two nickels would equal ten cents".  She stands there thinking about it a minute and then "Oh....uh....yeah, that's right, that works too huh?"        DUH

THAT'S how dumb the future generations are...

Image result for dunce

I remember giving one carhop a bunch of change including pennies. I remember her looking at all of the change, and asking, "Is this exact?"

She had no idea of how to count it.

I have had students in college (community college/2 yr) who did not know how to read a ruler. They said they had never been taught. I kid you not.

I absolutely believe it....after all, many of them aren't teaching cursive anymore, or American history.  Washington Univiersity in it's infinite lack of wisdom and patriotism has decided that history majors don't need to take American History classes...........................HUH?  So how can they be a "major"?

And, I forget who, but I think a guest on Tucker said he had to fight to get the local school board to teach European history. They didn't know jacksquat about England or France.

Not knowing anything about anything leaves them all ripe for takeover.

...........Looking for that instigating culprit?

OH Frank!   I think you've outdone yourself....

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

ALERT ALERT

Clinton Donor And Tax Cheat Tied To Russia

“Do as we say, not as we do.”

That seems to be the slogan for Hillary Clinton and her political allies, and it’s especially apt in light of new information about one of Clinton’s largest campaign donors.

While the left is still trying to attack President Trump and his family over unproven business dealings and largely debunked connections to Russia, a new report indicates that it was Hillary Clinton’s team who were doing those exact things.

“Fox News has learned that one of the top donors to the ‘Hillary Victory Fund’ (HVF) in 2016 was a Los Angeles-based attorney who is alleged to have misused company funds to create his own $22 million real estate portfolio,” that outlet reported on Thursday.

“He has also been considered by California to be one of the state’s biggest tax cheats, and allegedly has ties to the (Russian) Kremlin,” Fox continued.

The man’s name is Edgar Sargsyan. His deep pockets greatly benefited Clinton’s campaign, with contributions of at least $250,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund in 2016.

He was also in charge of an elite fundraising dinner to benefit Clinton, where donors paid $100,000 per couple just to attend the ritzy event. But in true Clinton fashion, the money apparently went missing.

Sargsyan is now “being sued by his former company for allegedly diverting those funds to start his own real estate company,” according to Fox.

Now, people are asking hard questions about Clinton’s buddy Sargsyan, including whether his contributions were part of a pay-to-play scheme and if he had shady connections to foreign governments.

“Nobody gave to the Hillary Victory Fund out of the goodness of their heart or some generalized desire to help 33 random state parties,” pointed out attorney Dan Backer from the Committee to Defend the President.

“They did so to buy access and curry influence — something the Clintons have been selling for nearly three decades in and out of government,” he continued.

Trying to buy political influence is sadly common, especially when it comes to the Clintons. What is raising more red flags than normal, however, is the evidence that Sargsyan is no run-of-the-mill campaign donor.

“The really scary question is, what did this particular donor with this strange web of connections hope to buy for his quarter-million dollars?” Backer asked Fox News.

That web of connections is strange indeed.

The Committee to Defend the President is now alleging that SBK, a major Sargsyan-linked company “is an investment firm that is affiliated with United Arab Emirates president, Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, and its international affiliate has business interests in Russia,” according to Fox.

“Among its dealings was a bid to finance $850 million for a major bridge project to connect Crimea with Russia,” the group claims.

“He worked for SBK, and SBK appears to have bid on some Crimean/Russian bridge project,” Backer said. “That’s usually an indicator of political favor and connections.”

It raises several chilling questions: Was Sargsyan paying a quarter million dollars to Clinton for political favors, and — more disturbingly — was that money actually from sources in Russia in order to smooth the way for its construction plans?

Nobody knows for sure. What is clear, however, is that there is a pattern of dirty money surrounding the Clintons, with the “Uranium One” and “Clinton Foundation” scandals just two of the most well-known examples.

“It reinforces how fast and loose the Clinton machine was when it came to ‘Hoovering up’ these megadonor checks, not just from questionable Hollywood and Wall Street elites but potentially from foreign influence peddlers using who knows what money,” Backer told Fox News.

“It reinforces the need to take a long hard look at not just the unlawful money laundering process, but the way in which they were solicited as well,” he continued. “The Clintons have never shown a great deal of concern for whomever it was cutting the checks — whether it’s foreign influence peddlers or Hollywood smut peddlers like Harvey Weinstein.”

If those claims are even partially true, then America dodged a bullet in November of 2016 — and it’s worth keeping the pile of foreign-connected Clinton scandals in mind the next time the left tries desperately to tie Donald Trump to Russia. Perhaps they should look in the mirror.

SLAVEHOLDER??

Washington Post Compares
Jeff Sessions To Slaveholder’

The Washington Post compared Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “slaveholders” after he quoted the Bible on Thursday while discussing his department’s policy of prosecuting all illegal immigrants who cross the border.

Sessions made the statement during a speech to law enforcement officers in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

WaPo ran a story entitled “Sessions cites Bible passage used to defend slavery in defense of separating immigrant families” by general assignment editor Keith McMillan and religion reporter Julie Zauzmer on Friday.

Rather than detailing the statistics Sessions cited in the speech that explain the immigration policy, the story quoted John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College in Pennsylvania.

“This is the same argument that Southern slaveholders and the advocates of a Southern way of life made,” Fea said.

Sessions spent much of the speech discussing the numbers behind current immigration policy, including separating families at the Southwest border.

“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes,” Sessions said.

“Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves. Consistent and fair application of the law is in itself a good and moral thing, and that protects the weak and protects the lawful.”

“The previous administration wouldn’t prosecute aliens if they came with children,” Sessions said.

“It was de-facto open borders if you came with children. The results were unsurprising. More and more illegal aliens started showing up at the border with children.”

Sessions laid out the numbers in the speech.

“In 2013, fewer than 15,000 family units were apprehended crossing our border illegally between ports of entry in dangerous areas of the country,” he said.

“Five years later, it was more than 75,000, a five-fold increase in five years. It didn’t even have to be their child that was brought, it could be anyone. You can imagine that this created a lot of danger.”

The U.S. has the “opportunity” to fix its broken immigration system now, Sessions said.

“I believe that’s it’s moral, right, just and decent that we have a lawful system of immigration,” he said. “The American people have been asking for it.”

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service