Texas High Court Judge Wants to Deny Houston Gay Couples Marriage Benefits

[TexasTowelie]

Texas Supreme Court Justice John Devine is among the judges who refuse to give up on trying to discredit Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark U.S. Supreme Court case granting same-sex couples the right to marry.

Instead of just accepting the ruling and moving on like the vast majority of Americans and legal leaders, Devine appears to prefer to nitpick at Obergefell to find other ways to discriminate against gay people; namely, by trying to deny them marriage benefits.

In a dissenting opinion released last week, Devine argues that his Supreme Court colleagues made a mistake when, on the basis of Obergefell, they declined to hear a case in which two Houston taxpayers sued the city for paying marriage benefits to its gay married employees; the taxpayers argued it was a waste of their money. The lawsuit was actually filed before Obergefell was handed down last June. Instead, it was a response to Houston's decision in November 2013, under Mayor Annise Parker, to start offering marriage benefits to same-sex couples who were married in other states.

After Obergefell, however, a lower court threw out the lawsuit in 2015. But still, these two taxpayers — Larry Hicks and Jack Pidgeon, who is a senior pastor at West Christian Center — didn't want to give up, appealing to the high court. And Devine apparently was willing to humor them just one last time.

Read more: http://www.houstonpress.com/news/texas-high-court-judge-wants-to-deny-houston-gay-couples-marriage-benefits-8744089

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

1. For christ's sake.

What total bullshit.

Some years ago a right wing religious conservative friend of mine expressed the opinion that same sex couples cost too much. I suggested to her that she should encourage her children not to marry because of the societal cost. Needless to say, she didn't take that advice very well.

Here's the essential thing: anyone in a long term relationship ought to legitimize it. I've had this conversation many times, mostly with heterosexual couples, mainly because those are the kinds of people I tend to know, but it applies equally to same sex couples. First of all, legitimizing your relationship is a good thing. Second is to think in the long term. Social Security, especially.

I had a close relative, a brother in law, who was in a committed relationship, which lasted about ten years. They never married. He often said to her, "I'll take care of you, I promise." Well, when he died, she was left hanging. No legal paperwork of any kind. And there was an inheritance (his family was rather well off) that she did not benefit from. Nor could she collect Social Security on his account. I've long since lost track of her, but I long felt that she was totally screwed. But if they'd gotten married, it would have been a lot different.

And that applies equally to same sex couples. The gender isn't important. The relationship is.

[TexasTowelie]

2. But, but, but

the judge wants to encourage procreation.