Texas attorney general: 'ban on same-sex marriage promotes childbirth'
Source: Associated Press
Texas attorney general: 'ban on same-sex marriage promotes childbirth'
Greg Abbott enters fray of contested ban by filing brief that says opposite-sex marriage better supports children
Associated Press in Dallas
theguardian.com, Tuesday 29 July 2014 15.51 EDT
Texas ban on same-sex marriage allows the state to promote the birth and upbringing of children in stable, lasting relationships, the states attorney general argued Tuesday while asking a federal appeals court to reinstate the ban.
Attorney general Greg Abbott, the Republican nominee for governor, said the views of ban opponents could be considered rational. But he argued that Texas voters have the right under the US constitutions equal protection clause, the same amendment often cited by ban opponents, to define marriage in a way that best supports children.
There are good, well-meaning people on both sides, he wrote to the fifth US circuit court of appeals, echoing previous sentiments in the case. But he argued that opposite-sex couples are better suited to have and raise children, and thus help reduce societal costs.
Because same-sex relationships do not naturally produce children, recognizing same-sex marriage does not further these goals to the same extent that recognizing opposite-sex marriage does, the brief said.
Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/29/texas-same-sex-marriage-abbott-children-appeal
Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)
notadmblnd This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to notadmblnd (Reply #1)
TygrBright This message was self-deleted by its author.
Judi Lynn
(160,416 posts)This DU'er got there at the time I was changing the article.
My fault.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)I really don't know how I landed here.
Judi Lynn
(160,416 posts)That story was already posted by elleng, so I tried to quickly replace my dupe with another article, crunched your post in the meantime.
The story regarding Detroit's mayor regaining control of Detroit's water is with the original poster, elleng.
Thanks.
TygrBright
(20,753 posts)I'm trying to figure out how preventing gay people from marrying accomplishes higher birth rates.
This was the best I could come up with.
Of course, there's also this one "Darn, I can't marry the woman of my dreams. Guess I'll have to marry some guy who will impregnate me after all."
Neither of these makes sense to me.
WTF?!?
baffledly,
Bright
Judi Lynn
(160,416 posts)TygrBright
(20,753 posts)A little basic physiology review might be in order.
wearily,
Bright
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)1. sterile
2. not planning on having children
3. over the age of child bearing
cannot be married either.
Right?
I'm sure Abbott is too stupid to understand that that's the logical conclusion of his argument.
christx30
(6,241 posts)from having another child with my wife is if gay marriage is legal. Keeping it banned stops she and I from leaving each other for partners of the same sex. With it banned, we are forced to be together and have kids. Damn ban.
Kelvin Mace
(17,469 posts)"Show your work."
leftyladyfrommo
(18,864 posts)They make absolutely no sense to me. Nothing they say goes together.
CTyankee
(63,883 posts)leftyladyfrommo
(18,864 posts)I always read this stuff several times and it's kind of like falling down the rabbit hole. The whole front end of the sentences don't go with the back end.
Kind of like the stuff Ted Nugent says. I can't make heads or tails out of it. Except that it's nasty and stupid. That man belongs in a mental institution.
Judi Lynn
(160,416 posts)AG Greg Abbott filed appeal to uphold Texas ban on same-sex marriage
By Brittney Martin
bmartin@dallasnews.com
11:49 am on July 29, 2014
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott filed an appeal with the U.S. 5th Circuit Monday regarding the states same-sex marriage ban, which was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge in February.
According to the brief, Abbott said Texas can ban same-sex marriage based on the States interest in procreation.
The State contends that marriage between a man and a woman increases the likelihood that they will produce and raise their children in stable, lasting relationships.
Because same-sex relationships do not naturally produce children, recognizing same-sex marriage does not further these goals to the same extent that recognizing opposite-sex marriage does, the brief reads. That is enough to supply a rational basis for Texass marriage laws.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia in San Antonio in February struck down Texas ban on same-sex marriage, but Garcia stayed the ruling from taking effect pending appeal.
In 2005, Texas voters approved a constitutional amendment that defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and said the state would not recognize same-sex marriages.
http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2014/07/ag-greg-abbott-files-appeal-to-uphold-texas-ban-on-same-sex-marriage.html/
tom_kelly
(957 posts)kentauros
(29,414 posts)There! I fixed it for you!
lululu
(301 posts)when the world is so overpopulated?
Splain yerself, Greggie.
QuestForSense
(653 posts)Only in theory. Check the divorce rate.
aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)He must be using some type of archaic form that sounds like gibberish.
shenmue
(38,506 posts)There, that should fix it.
elleng
(130,709 posts)because we're about to run out of babies, right???
Tetris_Iguana
(501 posts)whatever that is.
Judi Lynn
(160,416 posts)Whatever would happen if this country runs out of Republicans?
elleng
(130,709 posts)my family has recently added 2 white babies, NOT in Texas, and NOT likely to be repugs!!!
jmowreader
(50,528 posts)LoisB
(7,170 posts)make more babies. Right?
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)them the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness???
Shoonra
(518 posts)Does this mean that he will support same-sex marriage for people who are too old to have children, or who have some medical condition that precludes their having children. In other words if at least one party to marriage has a condition that makes it impossible for either sire or bear children in a hetero marriage, then that person can legally be in a same-sex marriage.
So we could legally have same-sex marriages between women who are menopausal or other infertile, and similarly have same-sex marriages between men who are infertile? How about pairs who have both decided that they don't want children even if they could have them in a hetero coupling?
Seems like there might be some wiggle room there.
Mz Pip
(27,430 posts)We really don't need to be promoting childbirth.
I'm not sure what Abbott is implying here. How does denying Gays the right to marry promote childbirth? Will straight people stop having kids if Gay people are allowed to marry? Will Gay people stop having kids if they can't get married? Seriously, WTF is he talking about?
kickitup
(355 posts)And that a federal judge slapped down?
cynzke
(1,254 posts)In thousands of households tonight couples are saying....."Ya know hon, Abbott says gays can't marry. Lets have a baby!"
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)So let me get this clear.....
By preventing Adam and Steve and Eve and Ruth from marrying, the state of Florida promotes Bob and Mary and Harry and Sally to get pregnant and bring up their children in stable lasting relationships?
The facts don't seem to support your assertion. First of all 50% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce. Serial monogamy is all the rage among heterosexuals it appears. I doubt Adam and Steve's nuptials have anything to do with the popularity of divorce among heterosexual couples. I doubt Bob sees Adam and Steve getting married, imagines them getting it on and decides to divorce Mary and go on his own "man" hunt.
The assertions are so ludicrous. If the right case comes before the Supreme Court with the same silly arguments against marriage equality, a FAIR and IMPARTIAL SCOTUS would have no problem in upholding marriage equality as a right.
The problem is we don't have a FAIR and IMPARTIAL SCOTUS. We have at least 5 men on the court who appear to follow their faith rather than the law. If the Catholic church is opposed to same-gender marriage they will vote against giving hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans equal rights with respect to marriage and the attendant benefits and obligations.
I was just a child at the time but I remember Kennedy having to convince Americans his Catholicism would not interfere with his loyalty to the U.S. first. The Kennedy family, while deeply, Catholic, appears to have been consistent in separating their personal religious views from the secular duties of governing. The same questions should have been asked of the 5 Catholic men sitting on the high court. They would probably have lied just to be confirmed but the question should have been asked.
Gothmog
(144,884 posts)This brief is really stupid even for Greg
dembotoz
(16,784 posts)i would assume it would be someone around my age.
THANK GOD i do not think i would need to worry much about pregnancy.
since procreation is not an option wouldn't it be true that marriage would be banned.
and if younger wouldn't any couple who considered getting married have to undergo fertility tests
i mean --love can not be true if one is sterile
IronLionZion
(45,380 posts)forcing them to get caught up in all sorts of scandalous stuff instead of making enough babies.
You know who already have naturally produced children? Poor people! But the pro-lifers say those folks are "breeding like rabbits" and shouldn't have those children using up all our tax dollars on unecessary luxuries like food and medicine. Assholes.
Gay people are the least likely to have abortions or use food stamps. Just saying...
Lost In America
(51 posts)The tragic reports of all those straight people in the 19 states where gay marriage is legal have all stopped having children, right?
Gays can get married so straights won't have children anymore. That's what he's saying, isn't it?
hamsterjill
(15,220 posts)THIS is why Wendy needs to win. We have got to vote and bring others to the poles!
DiverDave
(4,886 posts)old news I guess.
Aerows
(39,961 posts)Raise your hand if you know people that are in stable homosexual relationships and are raising their kids together because their heterosexual relationships were train wrecks?
:raises hand:
Trillo
(9,154 posts)a future taxpayer. The viewpoint is primarily about property and ownership.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)...if Perry is to complete the ritual that opens the gate to R'lyeh.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)...because of the stupid bigotry like this that stands in the way of other families. Self-fulfilling.