(13) comments Back to story

Gary Miller

Social conservatives were the main drivers for gay marrige bans. They are also responcible for courts overturning the bans.
I remember when it was proposed to pass domestic partnership laws that would have provided the same legal standing for gays as marrige for hetrosexuals.
Social conservatives fought against domestic partnerships. What they won is gay marrige.
The problem with social conservatives is 'principle' ends up being a different way to spell stipid.
For them 'principle' is more important than America's future. They are the voters most likely to not vote because there is no perfect candidate.
The last perfect candidate died on the cross 2100 years ago.

GW Cornelius

Bout time!!!!!!

Eric Kemp

What about when put to a vote and it overwhelmingly passes? That's not the state making it illegal, that is the will of the majority people.

Steve Fouga

The majority of Texans... but maybe not the majority of Americans. That would be an interesting vote.

Carol Voight

Well said Mr. Taylor![beam]

Gary Miller

Liberals own the courts.
Same sex marrage wil be the norm all across America and Social Conservatives are responcible.
They blindly vote their "principles" without concern for the end result.
Some years ago Queers wanted "domestic partnerships" with the same priveledges as marrage. Social Conservatives said no way you dirty gays get anything you want.
Now the courts are giving them weddings because Social Conservatives voted their inflexible principles.
Gays are citizens who deserve all the rights of citizens including the right to vote.
Genetic defects doesn't disqualify any rights under the constitution.

Island Bred

That's pretty offensive. Name calling - is it really that hard to believe that man would prefer you over me???? Good grief IHOG - BTW we don't "vote" civil rights - we all know what a disaster that would be. Our rights are not up for "votes". They are RIGHTS. Civil, Social, and Human. If liberals owned the courts Texas wouldn't be the biggest (next to LA) lodging for minority men on long term sentences over non violent charges. Met a guy once that had 30 years on hot checks. Really???? That is who we are???? I think not and once the courts reflect the people and not some private company making money off of poor people with public defenders - we will be much better off

Mike Leahy

"Essentially, the newspaper’s opposition boiled down to a belief that government should stay out of the private lives of private people. The government has no legitimate business there."

The premise above is fundamentally flawed. Legalizing gay marriage is only inviting government INTO the private lives of the individuals involved.

That is why heterosexuals of my generation (must be close to yours too, Heber?) struggled against archaic co-habitation laws that made it illegal for men and women to live together outside marriage. We did not want to invite the government into our bedrooms then, and I am completely mystified why gay people want to invite the government into their bedrooms now. I hope they will all enjoy divorce laws as much as the rest of us have.

Centerpointe Moderator

IHOG said this in the vernacular, but I suspect that there is a lot of truth in it:

"Some years ago Queers wanted "domestic partnerships" with the same priveledges as marrage. Social Conservatives said no way you dirty gays get anything you want.
Now the courts are giving them weddings because Social Conservatives voted their inflexible principles."

Essentially, yes. Folks wonder why the sudden social about-face on gay rights, and I suspect this is a big part of it. The conservatives NOT ONLY wanted to bar them from marriage, but also from any provision that might even remotely approximate equal treatment under law. Chronicle published this summary a few days ago:

The law, in Article 1, Section 32 of the Texas Constitution, reads: “Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman… This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.”

"May not create or recognize any legal status"? Holy crap!! I think THAT is the part that finally snapped average Americans out of their collective apathy. Suddenly they realized - whoa, whoa, whoa - this is truly evil! Now it's been laid bare and it's plain to see that it's not about "protecting" marriage - it's about the larger goal of a categorical denial of rights to a minority group.

Anyway, I'm glad to see this issue evolving positively, and for once I'm in full agreement with everything Mr. Taylor said in an editorial.

Centerpointe Moderator

Miceal: "I am completely mystified why gay people want to invite the government into their bedrooms now."

Because the issue is nowhere near constrained to the bedroom. Taxation, parental rights, inheritance, Social Security benefits, and other issues are all thoroughly entrained.

Chris Gimenez

"It’s the same argument U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia of San Antonio used Wednesday in striking down the state’s ban. As he put it, the ban has no “rational relation to a legitimate government purpose.”

Well, if I'm reading what happened correctly, the ban is still in place while it's being appealed by the state.

Houston Chronicle 2/27/14
"On Wednesday, Garcia issued a preliminary injunction against the ban — only to suspend his own ruling to allow the state to appeal."

Maybe Hubris needs to bring his newspaper article current with the facts.

Gary Miller

If the path of Gay marrage is taced across America, Social Conservatives caused it by not respecting our national constitution which doesn't divide us into groups.
Polls of Americans for over 50 years report Conservatives out number Liberals by 2 to 0ne. 50% to 25 % with independents being the other 25% and half the independents say they are center right.
If true no liberal should be able to be elected. But they are and how can the be?
Social Conservatives are a third of the 50% who claim to be Conservative but are almost 100 % of conservatives who don't vote. If a candidate isn't pure enough they stay home. And liberals are elected.
When Social Conservatives realise liberals, not secular conservatives, are why they can't have policies they want and vote for any conservative, even if not pure, liberals will be eliminated.
Secular conservatives are much more likely to support policies Social Conservatives want than any liberal.

I think Social conservatives are some of America's best people but just slow learners in politics.

Jim Forsythe

Both parties are owned by special interest and they are very good at dividing the nation so they can maintain control.
And yet somehow Democrats have won the popular vote for President in 5 of the last 6 elections, and in 2012 more Americans voted for the Democrats in the Presidential, Senate and House races.
Republicans need to get their act together. If they don’t, they will be left in the wake of a Democrat vote Tsunami.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.