Now on ScienceBlogs: The Future - And Present - of Maternal and Infant Health Care.

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Greg Laden's Blog

Evolution, Life Sciences, Science Education, Human Evolution, and Stuff

Hornbill170.jpg Looking for stuff about birds?

Darwing_Face.jpg Learn more about Charles Darwin and his work.

Lion_mane170.jpg Lean more about lions

Congo_sidebar.jpg An archaeological expedition to the Congo


The Skeptical Search Engine


Nature Blog Network
Climate Defense Fund


The contents of Greg Laden's Blog are copyrighted by Greg Laden.

Recent Comments

Search

Profile


Click on "About" for the big picture, and "Archives" for the details.


Recent Posts

Blogroll

If you don't see yourself on my blogroll, just drop me a line and let me know. I'll add you.*
*Assuming that I'm on your blogroll, of course!

Archives

« JPEG vs PNG | Main | Creationist-Kootied Origin Comes to the Twin Cities »

LOL Texans! You banned all marriage, dudes!

Posted on: November 20, 2009 10:27 AM, by Greg Laden

All marriage was accidentally banned in Texas when Texas banned "Gay Marriage." What a bunch of morons.

Details here.

Share on Facebook
Share on StumbleUpon
Share on Facebook

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/125152

Comments

1

Oh man, that is too good.

Posted by: Emma | November 20, 2009 11:04 AM

2

I think one of the first things that will happen is that health insurance companies won't recognize Texas marriages as sufficient to grant health insurance to spouses. Probably not in Texas because there are too many and there would be too much of a stink, but in states other than Texas.

This is just another excuse to deny coverage. It is money in the bank for health insurance companies so of course they will use it. Even if it only delays things, the delay is money in the bank too. They already have a zillion lawyers on staff, it costs the insurance companies nothing to delay stuff this way.

I think that states other than Texas will be sympathetic to these arguments, because Texas use this in an attempt to not recognize legal marriages performed in other states.

Posted by: daedalus2u | November 20, 2009 11:15 AM

3

Well, my wife sure won't be happy to hear about this.

Posted by: Scott Simmons | November 20, 2009 11:23 AM

4

That's priceless.

Posted by: Joshua Zelinsky | November 20, 2009 11:47 AM

5

I can't wait for the "But that's not what they meant!" argument.

Posted by: Jim Ernst | November 20, 2009 11:55 AM

6

What? You have a problem with that? ;-)

Posted by: Russell | November 20, 2009 11:59 AM

7

Well, I suppose this means all marriages are no longer valid...

Posted by: Jared | November 20, 2009 12:02 PM

8

All those illegitimate Texas children. Deport them to Mexico!

Posted by: MikeMa | November 20, 2009 12:27 PM

9
Well, I suppose this means all marriages are no longer valid...

I think only the ones registered since the amendment passed.

And what about those people who have (supposedly) married and then divorced since then. Since the marriages were never legal, they were never divorced. What are the implications for alimony and child support payments (does child support differ depending on whether the parents are married?)?

Can't wait for the this one to hit the supreme court.

Posted by: Equisetum | November 20, 2009 1:07 PM

10

Maybe we meant do do that.
Quick, look over there: http://thinkprogress.org/2009/11/20/utah-senator-shove-throat/
Ha ha, those Utah-ites shore are dumbasses, huh?

Posted by: noel | November 20, 2009 2:19 PM

12

Now imagine that due to being a minority in a state where you have consistently voted against the bigoted theocrats, your marriage is declared null and void, and you and your spouse face federal tax penalties, loss of health benefits, legal rights, etc.

Through no fault of your own.

Is it really such a laughing matter?

Posted by: Bob | November 20, 2009 4:37 PM

13

If it was the first step in recognizing marriage as a religious ritual in which the state has no interest provided it's consensual and doesn't harm anybody or anything and distinctly different from a legal contract of domestic partership, then it would be a good move. Unfortunately it's probably not.

Posted by: doug l | November 20, 2009 6:24 PM

14

Bob, laughing doesn't mean it doesn't hurt.

Posted by: Stephanie Z | November 20, 2009 6:48 PM

15

Ah, but the best part.... All of those God fearing Christian types who voted this through to stop all of those homos from doing the nasty under the umbrella of marriage...

Are living in sin.

Just think of all those poor "married" Texans, tricked into extramarital sex. Now they're eternally screwed. Welcome to Hell, Texans! Ha, ha!

Posted by: John | November 20, 2009 10:39 PM

16
Bob, laughing doesn't mean it doesn't hurt.

Greg's misplaced schadenfreude makes him seem like a giant asshole. I'll reiterate: if some gay Texan had the shit beat out of him just for being gay and in Texas, would it be appropriate to laugh and call the guy a dumbass for living in Texas? What response would "Sucks to be you." get?

In the 1950s and 1960s when the lynchings and beatings and shootings and church-burnings were going on in the South, was the reaction to laugh at blacks and their supporters for being so stupid as to live under a conservative racist regime, shrug, and say "Sucks to be you?"

Seriously, when Greg flippantly calls out his readership as racists, or frets about that ambulatory mass of Final Net called Norm Coleman or that third-runner-up in the Eva Braun lookalike contest at the Minnesota State Fair called Michele Bachmann, I have to ask why I should give two shits about good government, progress, and justice in his neck of the woods when he and many others are so willing to throw under a bus millions of people fucked over in Texas, people that in all likelihood share the same core values, but by reasons of job, friends, family, or sheer accident are in Texas.

Why is this acceptable? If people outside Texas spent as much time and effort helping those in Texas oust the miserable ignorant hateful and obscenely well-funded and well-organized right-wing psychopaths that run the place as they do giving their countrymen the "Sucks to be you" treatment, maybe we wouldn't see so many stories like this.

Stephanie, I'd hope you could talk a little sense into Greg. I'm tired of expecting any humanity or compassion or action out of the complacent northern secular community. If this was the first cheap laugh and overgeneralization at others' expense Greg's posted, I wouldn't have wasted the time writing this. But this bullshit has been going on for a while. And really, it's got to stop.

Posted by: Bob | November 20, 2009 10:40 PM

17

Bob, you should absolutely be giving the people of Michel Bachmann's district a hard time. They voted her in place, they re-elected her once, and the dumbasses will probably re-elect them again. Same for those who voted for Coleman.

Your assertions regarding gay bashing and lynching are absurd and anyone who reads this blog understands that, and understand that you have some sort of bug up your ass that you are probably not telling us about.

Why is this acceptable? If people outside Texas spent as much time and effort helping those in Texas oust the miserable ignorant hateful and obscenely well-funded and well-organized right-wing psychopaths that run the place as they do giving their countrymen the "Sucks to be you" treatment, maybe we wouldn't see so many stories like this.

You mean like keeping up the discussion at ALL levels, being members of and contributing to organizations like the NCSE and the ACLU which are continuously spending valuable resources on saving Texas from itself, highlighting and contributing to progressive candidates in Texas, and so on and so forth? Shall we stop doing that because you are in a snit?


I wouldn't have wasted the time writing this. But this bullshit has been going on for a while. And really, it's got to stop.

OK, whatever you say, I'll stop. I mean, after all, I'm not doing it like bob wants me to do it, I just needed him to come by and tell me.

Happy now?

(Oh, and no, you don't actually command my voice or determine my point of view.)


Posted by: Greg Laden | November 20, 2009 10:59 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

© 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.