|
Abbott appointed a homeschooler to lead the Board of Education.
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 07:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 13:53 |
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Wichita County also said they'd issue licenses starting Monday. (It's yellow on the map.) Seriously?! Wichita, as in the heart of Texas' Congressional 13th? I'm shocked, considering it's filled with nothing but old Baptists.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
TheMaskedChemist posted:Seriously?! Wichita, as in the heart of Texas' Congressional 13th? I'm shocked, considering it's filled with nothing but old Baptists. Anything that makes those lizards at First Baptist curdle and spit is a good thing. Then again, with the air force base, it'd be one of the easier places for federal pressure to be exerted if the clerks got shirty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 08:32
|
|
|
Lamar County is in blue and Denton County is in red? Dafuq
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 13:56
|
|
|
http://gov.texas.gov/news/press-release/21131 What is Greg Abbott actually doing here? This seems completely illegal if I'm understanding it right. Also does he really not understand that the Supreme Court is allowed to determine the constitutionality of laws? Didn't they do this with the Hobby Lobby case, except that time it was swell because Republicans agreed with it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
There's so many military bases, and he's so loving off base with reality, of course the fool thinks nullification is a worthy pursuit. You're not even the goddamn president.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
Apparently he's also requiring special ed classes to be videotaped? I have some friends who are special ed teachers and they're really mad about it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Apparently he's also requiring special ed classes to be videotaped? I have some friends who are special ed teachers and they're really mad about it. Well, the legislature passed a bill requiring it and he didn't veto it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
smoobles posted:http://gov.texas.gov/news/press-release/21131 Technically it's fine, no one should be forced to marry gays against their will, just like no one should have to marry opposite sex couples against their will, but seeing as how there are plenty of churches that would be happy to marry same-sex couples and JOP marriages are just as legal as religious marriages, it's a solution with out a problem. In short, Abbot's the same idiot he's always been.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
TheMaskedChemist posted:Technically it's fine, no one should be forced to marry gays against their will, just like no one should have to marry opposite sex couples against their will, but seeing as how there are plenty of churches that would be happy to marry same-sex couples and JOP marriages are just as legal as religious marriages, it's a solution with out a problem. In short, Abbot's the same idiot he's always been. I believe the "religious freedom" we are protecting is not of pastors, but of county clerks, who can refused to give gay people a marriage license if it scares them. Which is as about as legal as them refusing to give an interracial couple a marriage license because it violates their religion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I believe the "religious freedom" we are protecting is not of pastors, but of county clerks, who can refused to give gay people a marriage license if it scares them. And yet, if someone had a deeply held religious belief against mechanical assistance, I feel Abbot would likely be upset if they dumped his rear end out of his wheelchair.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I believe the "religious freedom" we are protecting is not of pastors, but of county clerks, who can refused to give gay people a marriage license if it scares them. Isn't it still legal for pharmacists to refuse to dispense birth control medication for religious reasons or had that been changed? Because is pretty analogous to that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
Is it legal for Jehovah's Witnesses to break into the hospital and destroy the donor blood supply?
TheMaskedChemist fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
EPICAC posted:Yeah, this really surprised me as someone who grew up in Waco. Though perhaps things have changed quite a bit in the 12 years I've lived outside of Texas, most of the comments on the Waco-Trib's facebook page were supportive, and those that weren't were getting called out. Yeah. I'm finishing up my 4 years here at Baylor, and I wouldn't have pegged McClennan County to go blue on this one. Nice surprise. Although, while I can't really speak for the county at large, I've met a whole lot more progressive folks at Baylor than you might expect of the world's largest Baptist university, and I'm talking both students and faculty. Place'll never be confused for some bastion of leftist academia, but still.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
TheMaskedChemist posted:Is it legal for Jehovah's Witnesses to break into the hospital and destroy the donor blood supply? No, it is not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
tsa posted:No, it is not. Of course it's not, because forcing others to conform to your religious beliefs is wrong. I wasn't honestly asking. I was being sarcastic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
tsa posted:Isn't it still legal for pharmacists to refuse to dispense birth control medication for religious reasons or had that been changed? Because is pretty analogous to that. There's a vast difference between the county clerk and the pharm tech at walgreens that make them not analogous at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
To answer my own question, pharmacists can still refuse to in many states. While I think that is stupid, it did provide precedent for similar laws re gay marriage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:There's a vast difference between the county clerk and the pharm tech at walgreens that make them not analogous at all. Yea the pharmacy thing is a lot worse good point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
tsa posted:To answer my own question, pharmacists can still refuse to in many states. While I think that is stupid, it did provide precedent for similar laws re gay marriage. Except pharmacists aren't acting on behalf of the state. That's a huge difference. tsa posted:Yea the pharmacy thing is a lot worse good point. At least there are multiple pharmacies in most counties.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
I mean if you can't see the similarities you are being incredibly disingenuous, and it's stupid to do that. We should change both laws, but doing be an idiot!
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
tsa posted:I mean if you can't see the similarities you are being incredibly disingenuous, and it's stupid to do that. We should change both laws, but doing be an idiot! Sure we should change any such laws, but you're just mistaken about the law if you think that actors on behalf of the state aren't restricted in their actions because they are acting on behalf of the state. There's only one county clerk in town, in case you weren't aware.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
TheMaskedChemist posted:Technically it's fine, no one should be forced to marry gays against their will, just like no one should have to marry opposite sex couples against their will, but seeing as how there are plenty of churches that would be happy to marry same-sex couples and JOP marriages are just as legal as religious marriages, it's a solution with out a problem. In short, Abbot's the same idiot he's always been. He's so loving stupid he can't even walk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
RACHET posted:He's so loving stupid he can't even walk. Spinal injuries aren't generally connected to mental health.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
TheMaskedChemist posted:Spinal injuries aren't generally connected to mental health. Yeah, he's so stupid he can't get out of the way of a falling tree. Then he couldn't take personal responsibility for his stupidity and sued a small business.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:36
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Except pharmacists aren't acting on behalf of the state. That's a huge difference. They don't need licensing from the state to be a pharmacist? I mean, if the state licenses me to do something and does not revoke my license when I discriminate against customers or try to enforce my religion on customers the state is de facto approving of my discrimination or of the enforcement of my religion on other citizens.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:They don't need licensing from the state to be a pharmacist? I mean, if the state licenses me to do something and does not revoke my license when I discriminate against customers or try to enforce my religion on customers the state is de facto approving of my discrimination or of the enforcement of my religion on other citizens. That's not as clear as when someone is acting as a state official. I don't think that just because Texas licenses tattoo artists that the state automatically approves of all the speech decisions of all tattoo artists, for example.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
Paxton issued a formal AG opinion saying clerks can refuse to honor SSM on the basis of their sincerely held religious beliefs. This is going to be nasty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 23:45
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Paxton issued a formal AG opinion saying clerks can refuse to honor SSM on the basis of their sincerely held religious beliefs. This is going to be nasty. also lol: quote:Paxton noted that clerks who refuse to issue licenses can expect to be sued, but added that “numerous lawyers stand ready to assist clerks defending their religious beliefs,” in many cases without charge.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:in many cases without charge. He's too gutless to even give pro bono legal services in all cases.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
ThirdPartyView posted:He's too gutless to even give pro bono legal services in all cases. More importantly, the state won't be defending them either. He knows what's up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
Obama has made his decision. Now let him enforce it. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:Paxton issued a formal AG opinion saying clerks can refuse to honor SSM on the basis of their sincerely held religious beliefs. This is going to be nasty. How is Paxton expecting this to work? Since the clerk is acting on behalf of the state of Texas, the case would be tried in a federal court. A federal judge, will just go "Yep, a clear case of criminal discrimination," and then what? Texas fines itself into poverty?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
There's something deliciously stupid about the Attorney General of a state declaring that his lawyers are at the ready to fight legal battles that they are now literally incapable of winning.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:21
|
|
|
Spiritus Nox posted:There's something deliciously stupid about the Attorney General of a state declaring that his lawyers are at the ready to fight legal battles that they are now literally incapable of winning. Didn't you notice, the AG in no way suggested the State of Texas would defend these brave citizens, just that some lawyers would probably.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
Any half rear end attorney is naming AG Paxton and TX as a party so screw you, you gutless fool. Texas still has to pay the bill for the suit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
radical meme posted:Any half rear end attorney is naming AG Paxton and TX as a party so screw you, you gutless fool. Texas still has to pay the bill for the suit. Why exactly? Paxton's opinion clearly states that individuals who fail to issue SSM licenses could face fines and lawsuits. Sure they might name them, but that doesn't mean the state will end up paying the bill for everything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Violating the law is Per Se Negligence. gently caress Paxton, file a grievance and have his law liscence revoked for malpractice. And yes Texas will be on the hook for all costs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
radical meme posted:Violating the law is Per Se Negligence. gently caress Paxton, file a grievance and have his law liscence revoked for malpractice. I mean, you can make all the claims you want, but his reading of the law isn't a violation of the law: quote:A county clerk has a statutory right to delegate a duty to a deputy clerk, including the issuance of same-sex matTiage licenses that would violate the county clerk's sincerely held religious beliefs. Regarding deputy clerks and other employees, state and federal employment laws allow them to seek reasonable accommodation for a religious objection to issuing same-sex marriage licenses. And under the Religious Freedom Restoration Acts, deputy clerks and other employees may have a claim that forcing the employee to issue same-sex marriage licenses over their religious objections is not the government's least restrictive means of ensuring a marriage license is issued, particularly when available alternatives would not impose an undue burden on the individuals seeking a license. See Slater v. Douglas Cnty., 743 F. Supp. 2d 1188, 1192-95 (D. Or. 2010) (refusing to grant summary judgment to a county that only offered to reassign an employee of a county clerk who refused on religious grounds to issue same-sex domestic partnership registrations rather than accommodating her request to not issue the registrations). Importantly, the strength of any claim under employment laws or the Religious Freedom Restoration Acts depends on the particular facts o f each case. Its really a rather smart political move. Everyone thinks he's "standing up to SCOTUS" when really, he's not doing that at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 13:53 |
|
|
Ok you defend the State of Texas and I'll represent the Plaintiffs and we'll see who gets hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:52
|
|