Feature
- Do You Hate Your Partner, Too?
- California Teen Avoids Heavy Sentencing by Passing the Buck
- Wanna Buy Your Teenager a Padded Push-Up Bra?
- Vampires in Texas!
- These Guys Are As Bad As Westboro Baptist Church
- Funny Letters Sent to Women's Magazines
- Women's Ski Jumping: Still Not a 'Real' Sport
- Will the World Be Pro-Choice Soon?
- Are We Getting Too Lazy to Even Divorce?
- Forever 21's Maternity Line: Glamorizing Teen Pregnancy?
Which, I guess makes sense in a matter of speaking, being if marriage between two same-sex individuals isn’t recognized, why would you recognize the other end of the spectrum, divorce?
This seems confusing to some — namely the writers over on Broadsheet, who call it “irony,” — but it’s actually kind of valid in an insipid sort of way.
I support same-sex marriages and unions both, depending on the prerogative of the couple, but then again, I’m in no position to pass through laws regarding the state’s stance on same-sex marriages. Texas, a state known for it’s fight against people of the same gender marrying one another, is steadfast in their beliefs that no two individuals of the same sex will be married. Probably ever. They’ve just pushed that hard. I’m hoping that’s not the case, but it is what it is for right now.
So … despite the fact that the entire thing sucks as it were, would it not make sense to discourage same-sex couples from seeking a divorce in the state of Texas? If they don’t allow same-sex marriages … and they don’t recognize same-sex marriages, what in God’s name would they be doing by rescinding same-sex marriages?
The confusion over this has kind of got my mind a little boggled.
Am I correct in rationalizing this in the manner that I have? And if that is the case, this and this and this … it’s hardly news.
You Might Also Like ...
-
-
13
If they refuse to accept same sex marriage then what do they need to divorce these people for, after all in their mind (Texas) the marriage never existed and no marriage=no divorce.
It’s like asking to divorce your dog. Since you can’t marry your dog, how could you divorce it? If you don’t recognise a same-sex marriage as valid, then it seems only logical that you could not do divorces.
I would actually think that allowing divorces would give status to the marriage, since if you’re willing to legally dissolve it, you sure seem to be recognising it.
From the article:
“You heard that right — a state that has fought to prevent gay unions is now fighting to keep married same-sex couples together. Put in those terms, it seems rather ironic, doesn’t it? ”
Yes, put in those terms, it does sound ironic. but of course, those terms are not correct descriptions of what’s happening. They are doing nothing to keep people together – they are simply refusing to recognise that there exists any legal status to the union. Which I still think perfectly logical. (According to Texas’s current law – not any moral judgement.)
…You just compared gay marriage to marrying an animal, now I got your point and doubt you’re one of those people that think the world will go insane if you allow marriage but for your own safety… Flee Kai! flee while you still have a chance!
You clearly haven’t been around here long enough. I’ve often said things that are actually that provocative, not just could be misinterpreted.
I assume most people will understand that I’m making a comparison of two types of marriage equally invalid *in Texas*, without inserting my own morals. Anyone who can’t pick that up really isn’t worth my time. :D
My own views on marriage are a far more complicated thing…
I know you do trust me, but I’m feverish and was having very lucid half dreams of your horrible brutal cow involved death.
Cows? Very interesting. And tasty.
It does show a coherency in their decisions. Not that I’ll like Texas any more for it.
Based on other issues in Texas, I have repeatedly seen an excellent image come up in another blog I enjoy:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/06/texas-is-only-6000-years-old/
If they allow divorce then they will be dissolving a legal union, thereby saying that there was legal union in the first place. Any lawyer worth their salt would jump on that in a hot minute and Texas would have a big old mess on their hands.
(Please note I mean a big old mess from their point of view – I think would be a good thing, not to mention very entertaining to watch).
Well, it’s really the only logical course of action given the state’s position on same-sex marriage. My question is, what reasonably intelligent same-sex couple would even try to obtain a divorce in Texas? That’s like trying to get chicken noodle soup on the moon.
See note above. I’m granting that the folks involved are legally shrewd, and not just an unfortunate couple that moved to TX without a clue in their heads, bless their hearts… but forcing TX to dissolve the union could be pointedly undertaken to create the “big mess” that would force the state to recognize same sex unions in the first place.
It makes perfect sense. They don’t recognise gay marriage, so why would they grant a gay couple a divorce? It’s obvious.
Yeah author and comments are totally right, it’s stupid to nitpick about this. The issue here is that they don’t recognise gay marriage, the issue is not that they don’t allow gay divorce. That’s the fight that needs people’s energy. Where did these gay couples have to go to get married? Well go back there and get divorced! What’s the big deal and what could they have expected from the state that wouldn’t entertain their desire to get married in the first place?