Public Employees in Texas Who Issue Gay Marriage Licenses Are in for a Major Punishment if This Bill

Where_r_my_Keys

Gold Member
Jan 19, 2014
15,272
1,848
280
becomes law.

"The list of states accepting gay marriage continues to grow, but the battle is nowhere near over in Texas, where there’s a recently proposed bill in the state legislature that, if adopted, would profoundly penalize any government employee who issues future gay marriage licenses.

House Bill 623, also known as the Preservation of Sovereignty and Marriage Act, would, in fact, take away the salary of any official who crossed this line, the Christian Post reported.

Text of the bill, which was filed January 7, not only makes it clear that state and local taxpayer dollars cannot be used to support or license gay matrimony, but it also extends this rule to preclude the use of government officials’ salaries for this purpose.

“A state or local governmental employee officially may not recognize, grant, or enforce a same-sex marriage license,” text of the bill reads. “If an employee violates this subsection, the employee may not continue to receive salary, pension, or other employee benefit at the expense of the taxpayers of this State.”

Introduced by Republican state Rep. Cecil Bell, the bill, if adopted, would amend Texas Family Code to ensure that gay marriage does not become legal in the state, the Texas Observer reported.

Bell said in a statement that he is acting on his commitment to constituents to fight for traditional values and defend their constitutional rights.

“Texas is a sovereign state and our citizens have the right to define marriage. We as Texans voted in 2005 to define marriage as being solely between a man and a woman,” he said, according to the Observer. “In Texas marriage is sacred and traditional families are recognized as the fabric of our society.”

It’s no surprise that Bell’s bill is being opposed by gay and lesbian rights activists. ..."





Public Employees in Texas Who Issue Gay Marriage Licenses Are in for a Major Punishment if This Bill Becomes Law TheBlaze.com
 
Texas isn't thinking this through. As regardless of what law they pass, they still have to recognize gay marriage as valid. The reciprocity of contracts between states is constitutionally required.
 
:lmao:

What's going on in the Lone Neuron state now? This is pathetic. Gay marriage is already prohibited in Texas. This is political masturbation, nothing more.

Also, in the event that Texas' prohibition against gay marriage were overturned (I don't see that happening, but of the sake of argument), this bill would be highly unconstitutional. You cannot simply negate a person's salary.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #5
And whall we at it, we heah bah declahuh awl marges must be betwixt too peoples of the same race. YEEEEEEE-HAAWWWWWWW!!!

ROFL!

Delusion is SO cool to see when its expressed in writing!

Now let's follow the reasoning here...

Because people who of distinct races can be married, that AXIOMATICALLY means that marriage can have absolutely NO Standards. Mom's can marry daughters, Dad's can wed their sons... An entire city block can betroth itself to one another and join in marriage, all 557 of 'em.

And all because a black guy fell in love with a white girl and wanted to marry her and someone said... 'why not?'.

Hysterical...
 
And whall we at it, we heah bah declahuh awl marges must be betwixt too peoples of the same race. YEEEEEEE-HAAWWWWWWW!!!
you sound like Howard Dean at a campain stop.
 
And whall we at it, we heah bah declahuh awl marges must be betwixt too peoples of the same race. YEEEEEEE-HAAWWWWWWW!!!

ROFL!

Delusion is SO cool to see when its expressed in writing!

Now let's follow the reasoning here...

Because people who of distinct races can be married, that AXIOMATICALLY means that marriage can have absolutely NO Standards. Mom's can marry daughters, Dad's can wed their sons... An entire city block can betroth itself to one another and join in marriage, all 557 of 'em.

And all because a black guy fell in love with a white girl and wanted to marry her and someone said... 'why not?'.

Hysterical...

^^^Delusion expressed in writing^^^
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #8
:lmao:

What's going on in the Lone Neuron state now? This is pathetic. Gay marriage is already prohibited in Texas. This is political masturbation, nothing more.

Also, in the event that Texas' prohibition against gay marriage were overturned (I don't see that happening, but of the sake of argument), this bill would be highly unconstitutional. You cannot simply negate a person's salary.

Well sure ya can... That's how Republics work. The Legislature decides what is spent where and they have exclusive authority over how that is done. (That's why it was SO important for the Progressives in the GOP to pass the Cromnibus last year.... to fund obamacare out for a full year. If they had not, the new congress would have just stopped paying for that. See how that works?)
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
And whall we at it, we heah bah declahuh awl marges must be betwixt too peoples of the same race. YEEEEEEE-HAAWWWWWWW!!!

ROFL!

Delusion is SO cool to see when its expressed in writing!

Now let's follow the reasoning here...

Because people who of distinct races can be married, that AXIOMATICALLY means that marriage can have absolutely NO Standards. Mom's can marry daughters, Dad's can wed their sons... An entire city block can betroth itself to one another and join in marriage, all 557 of 'em.

And all because a black guy fell in love with a white girl and wanted to marry her and someone said... 'why not?'.

Hysterical...

^^^Delusion expressed in writing^^^

OH! Now isn't that PRECIOUS?

Mimicry... that's SO flattering.
 
Because people who of distinct races can be married, that AXIOMATICALLY means that marriage can have absolutely NO Standards. Mom's can marry daughters, Dad's can wed their sons... An entire city block can betroth itself to one another and join in marriage, all 557 of 'em.

More accurately, once we establish that state marriage laws are subject to certain constitutional guarantees, then those constitutional guarantees are extended to all citizens.
 
:lmao:

What's going on in the Lone Neuron state now? This is pathetic. Gay marriage is already prohibited in Texas. This is political masturbation, nothing more.

Also, in the event that Texas' prohibition against gay marriage were overturned (I don't see that happening, but of the sake of argument), this bill would be highly unconstitutional. You cannot simply negate a person's salary.

Well sure ya can... That's how Republics work. The Legislature decides what is spent where and they have exclusive authority over how that is done. (That's why it was SO important for the Progressives in the GOP to pass the Cromnibus last year.... to fund obamacare out for a full year. If they had not, the new congress would have just stopped paying for that. See how that works?)

But they don't have exclusive authority. Those state marriage laws are subject to constitutional gguarantees As both the Loving and Windsor decision made clear. So if those state marriage laws violate those constitutional guarantees, the laws are invalid.
 
Well sure ya can... That's how Republics work. The Legislature decides what is spent where and they have exclusive authority over how that is done. (That's why it was SO important for the Progressives in the GOP to pass the Cromnibus last year.... to fund obamacare out for a full year. If they had not, the new congress would have just stopped paying for that. See how that works?)

No, it would not hold. Federal law mandates that people be compensated by their employers for work. This would be a legislative action by the state contradicting federal law, and thus violate the supremacy clause.
 
becomes law.

"The list of states accepting gay marriage continues to grow, but the battle is nowhere near over in Texas, where there’s a recently proposed bill in the state legislature that, if adopted, would profoundly penalize any government employee who issues future gay marriage licenses.

House Bill 623, also known as the Preservation of Sovereignty and Marriage Act, would, in fact, take away the salary of any official who crossed this line, the Christian Post reported.
Well, the courts are going to toss that one in about 30 seconds, when the time is right that is.
 
Well sure ya can... That's how Republics work. The Legislature decides what is spent where and they have exclusive authority over how that is done. (That's why it was SO important for the Progressives in the GOP to pass the Cromnibus last year.... to fund obamacare out for a full year. If they had not, the new congress would have just stopped paying for that. See how that works?)

No, it would not hold. Federal law mandates that people be compensated by their employers for work. This would be a legislative action by the state contradicting federal law, and thus violate the supremacy clause.

Yeah, you can fire an employee. But you can't deprive them of a wage.
 
Well sure ya can... That's how Republics work. The Legislature decides what is spent where and they have exclusive authority over how that is done. (That's why it was SO important for the Progressives in the GOP to pass the Cromnibus last year.... to fund obamacare out for a full year. If they had not, the new congress would have just stopped paying for that. See how that works?)

No, it would not hold. Federal law mandates that people be compensated by their employers for work. This would be a legislative action by the state contradicting federal law, and thus violate the supremacy clause.

Yes it would.

It doesn't seem like you quite see what's happening here. Texas is telling the US Judiciary to stick it where the sun don't shine. And that Texas Progressives should go find a job other than Texas Government... .

It's amazing how quickly, under those circumstances, that Progressivism dries right up, isn't it?
 
Well sure ya can... That's how Republics work. The Legislature decides what is spent where and they have exclusive authority over how that is done. (That's why it was SO important for the Progressives in the GOP to pass the Cromnibus last year.... to fund obamacare out for a full year. If they had not, the new congress would have just stopped paying for that. See how that works?)

No, it would not hold. Federal law mandates that people be compensated by their employers for work. This would be a legislative action by the state contradicting federal law, and thus violate the supremacy clause.

Yes it would.

don't think you quite see what's happening here. Texas is telling the US Judiciary to stick it where the sun don't shine. And Texas Progressives to go find a job other than Texas Government... .

It's amazing how quickly, under those circumstances, that Progressivism dries right up, isn't it?

So Texas knows that their law is expressly unconstitutional? Where did they indicate as much?
 

Forum List

Back
Top