View Full Version : In Texas I'm a second class citizen
For whatever reason the US Supreme Court has decided to let stand a TX supreme court ruling that says that just because gay people can get married it doesn't mean that they automatically should get the same government benefits that straight married people get.
http://www.newsweek.com/same-sex-couples-marriage-benefits-texas-supreme-court-730730
Republicans mock and dislike the "identity politics" of the democratic party. But they ignore the fact that the reason those identity groups even exist, and gravitate to the democrats, is because the republicans specifically create policies targeted to harm the people who are in those groups.
iris lilies
12-4-17, 11:47pm
What does it mean when SCOTUS passes on a case? It doesnt mean that they necessarily agree with the ruling of the lower court, right? Aren't they getting ready for CakeCase?
I have always wondered what causes SCOTUS to take up a case. It seems to me that there are hundreds of cases to hear and they have limited time.
What does it mean when SCOTUS passes on a case? It doesnt mean that they necessarily agree with the ruling of the lower court, right? Aren't they getting ready for CakeCase?
I have always wondered what causes SCOTUS to take up a case. It seems to me that there are hundreds of cases to hear and they have limited time.
It probably means different things in every case. In this particular case it means that they've decided not to defend a previous decision that they made. The result will undoubtedly be more cases coming their way. This case involved selfish, anti-gay tax payers that didn't want their taxes going towards providing gay married people the same benefits that their taxes pay towards straight married people. Next up will be gay married people who work for the city of houston suing the city for not providing them the same benefits their straight cis-gendered counterparts receive. Perhaps by then the US supremes will realize that they can't just punt on this issue forever. In the meantime years of unequal treatment will happen. Remind me again why gay people shouldn't be anti-republican?
Chicken lady
12-5-17, 6:50am
Because it’s better to define yourself as “pro-(something)”?
jp1, that sucks, And i’m Sorry.
Oh man, this is crap. I am always amazed at how persistant and creative people can be when they are trying to be mean. I actually thought that being able to marry was solving a lot of issues, no matter what this will take years to creep through the crap and fix.
It's not especially surprising that the Roberts court declined to take the case. After all, the chief justice was on the losing side of Obgerfell so why would he want to take a case that will broaden it. A better plan for him is to wait until there are conflicting lower court rulings and then take a case all the while hoping that republicans get to put one or two more conservative justices on the court and then do some Scalia-style jiggery pokery to claim that Obgerfell didn't really mean all of marriage.
Teacher Terry
12-5-17, 1:39pm
That's terrible!
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
That's an interesting slippery slope - if certain people legally married don't qualify for the same government benefits, I wonder how many others aspects besides gay this could be applied to? This is horrible. It sounds like rulings Loving vs. Virginia could be turned on their head: "yes, you are legally married, but..."
I wonder if we'll be seeing a case go up to see if just because you are a US citizen doesn't mean you automatically get the rights and benefits that other US citizens get.
bae, It seems this Texas Court feels some people are more equal than others. It's horrible. I don't see it improving either.
bae, It seems this Texas Court feels some people are more equal than others. It's horrible. I don't see it improving either.
I see it improving over time, as younger generations step up to leadership roles.
I see it improving over time, as younger generations step up to leadership roles.
That's about the only hope I have in these dismal times.
The texas court's behavior in this situation is also an example of why elected judges arent necessarily a good idea. They oroginally made the correct decision, then bowing to political pressure, reversed themselves.
The original article and case got me wondering a bit:
How do they define "same-sex" and "opposite-sex" marriages?
~1%-2% of the population is intersex. What would "opposite-sex" be for an intersex individual?
The original article and case got me wondering a bit:
How do they define "same-sex" and "opposite-sex" marriages?
~1%-2% of the population is intersex. What would "opposite-sex" be for an intersex individual?
And that might be a lowball figure, once they perfect DNA analysis.
The original article and case got me wondering a bit:
How do they define "same-sex" and "opposite-sex" marriages?
~1%-2% of the population is intersex. What would "opposite-sex" be for an intersex individual?
Indeed. Perhaps it depends on whether they were forced to have surgery as a kid to remove the partial penis? [/snark]
But seriously, it infuriates me to no end the psychological harm that comes from making such distinctions and from treating everyone's differences from the mainstream norm of cis/het as a defect that needs to be corrected, whether we're talking gay/lesbian/intersex/something else. A friend of mine founded the Intersex Society of North America (ISNA) a bunch of years ago. One of the things she did while she was running the organization was create a documentary that featured long group interviews of a group of intersex individuals. All of these people but one had some fairly obvious issues of self doubt, fear that they lacked self worth, confusion as to who they actually were and so forth. The one that didn't was different from the others in one key way. Her intersexness (is that a word...) was discovered by herself as a teenager, not by the adults/doctors in her life as a small child. As a result she had been able to take the time to grow comfortable with it and embrace it. And ultimately to share it with her eventual sex partners not as a defect, but as something that made her special and unique.
Indeed. Perhaps it depends on whether they were forced to have surgery as a kid to remove the partial penis? [/snark]
But seriously, it infuriates me to no end the psychological harm that comes from making such distinctions and from treating everyone's differences from the mainstream norm of cis/het as a defect that needs to be corrected, whether we're talking gay/lesbian/intersex/something else. A friend of mine founded the Intersex Society of North America (ISNA) a bunch of years ago. One of the things she did while she was running the organization was create a documentary that featured long group interviews of a group of intersex individuals. All of these people but one had some fairly obvious issues of self doubt, fear that they lacked self worth, confusion as to who they actually were and so forth. The one that didn't was different from the others in one key way. Her intersexness (is that a word...) was discovered by herself as a teenager, not by the adults/doctors in her life as a small child. As a result she had been able to take the time to grow comfortable with it and embrace it. And ultimately to share it with her eventual sex partners not as a defect, but as something that made her special and unique.
I may have seen that documentary; at any rate I did see one reporting on a nurse that tried to foster/adopt a baby before the medical establishment was able to perform an orchiectomy on him to "reassign" him. Unfortunately, doctors prevailed. We still have a long way to go.
We still have a long way to go.
People still consider aborting children who have my particular karyotype - the last study I saw, from 2011, indicated that 32% of parents informed choose to abort. It was all the rage about the time I was born.
And apparently, in Texas, my partner and I would technically have a second-class marriage.
Yay.
Reminds me of a conversation I had years ago with the most right-wing guy in our office. He said that gays should not get "special privileges" legally.
I asked if it was okay to fire someone from their job simply because they were gay. He said, No. So I asked what should they do if that happened to them, and he said, Well, they could always sue. I said, Based on what law could they sue? He just looked stunned and didn't reply.
It's not "special" if it's needed to defend yourself from homophobia.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.