Back to mobile

Texas Woman Denied Driver’s License Over Same-Sex Marriage

by Published on
Connie Wilson
Provided by Connie Wilson
Aimee Wilson (center) and Connie Wilson (right) with their son Aidyn.

A woman who recently relocated from California says the Texas Department of Public Safety refused to issue her an accurate driver’s license because her last name was changed through a same-sex marriage.

After Connie Wilson married her partner of nine years in California last year, she took her wife’s last name, Wilson, which now appears on both her California driver’s license and her Social Security card, in addition to all of the couple’s financial and medical records.

This summer, the couple relocated to the Houston area with their three children for work. With her California driver’s license nearing expiration, Wilson took her documents to a DPS office in Katy last week to obtain a Texas driver’s license. When a DPS employee noticed that Wilson’s name didn’t match her birth certificate, she produced the couple’s California marriage license identifying her spouse as Aimee Wilson.

“Her only words to me were, ‘Is this same-[sex]?'” Connie Wilson recalled. “I remember hesitating for probably 10 seconds. I didn’t know how to answer. I didn’t want to lie, but I knew I was in trouble because I wasn’t going to be able to get a license.”

Wilson eventually responded that although California doesn’t differentiate, she happened to be married to a woman.

“She immediately told me, ‘You can’t use this to get your license. This doesn’t validate your last name. Do you have anything else?’” Wilson said. “She told me I would never get a license with my current name, that the name doesn’t belong to me.”

Texas has both a state statute and a constitutional amendment prohibiting recognition of same-sex marriages from other states. However, Wilson contends she isn’t asking DPS to recognize her marriage, but rather trying to obtain an accurate driver’s license reflecting her legal name according to the state of California and the U.S. government.

“I’ve been deprived the freedom to drive a vehicle once my current California driver’s license expires,” Wilson said. “I’m further being deprived the freedom to use air travel, make purchases that require a valid photo identification, seek medical attention for myself or my children, as well as other situations that would require proving who I am legally as an individual.”

Wilson said the DPS employee, who turned out to be a supervisor, suggested that she should apply for a driver’s license using her maiden name. However, Wilson said she lacks the necessary documentation to do so.

The DPS supervisor later told her she could apply for a Texas license if she obtains an order from a state court changing her name to Wilson. But Wilson said obtaining such an order would cost at least $500 and there’s no guarantee the petition would be successful.

“My name is already legally Wilson,” she said. “I don’t know if a judge will even grant me a name change from Wilson to Wilson.”

In response to inquiries from the Observer, DPS confirmed that people moving to Texas from other states can’t obtain driver’s licenses listing their married names using same-sex marriage licenses.

“To receive a Texas Driver License or Identification Card reflecting a name change from a same-sex marriage, a court order is required,” a DPS spokesman said in a statement.

Among other things, Wilson said the pending expiration of her California license has threatened her family’s ability to close on a house in Texas. It could also jeopardize the couple’s ability to obtain disability benefits for one of their children, who has both autism and Down syndrome.

“I still can’t believe I’m being met with all the roadblocks that I am,” Wilson said. “For the first time in my life, I in a minuscule way know what it feels like for a person who is undocumented, how terrifying it must be to function in day-to-day life. It terrifies me—I’m a U.S. citizen—the fact that I can’t get something that I’ve had all my life, that I assume is my right. My right was taken away.”

Wilson has contacted Equality Texas, which is now working with Houston Sen. Sylvia Garcia’s office on the issue.

“This is a disappointing incident and certainly not reflective of Texas hospitality or values,” Equality Texas field organizer Daniel Williams told the Observer this week. “Equality Texas is working to resolve this matter quickly.”

By Friday, however, it appeared DPS was digging in its heels. Paul Townsend, general counsel for Sen. Garcia, said he was waiting for a written explanation of the agency’s position before issuing a formal response.

“It’s frustrating because I don’t know what exactly’s going on and DPS is not really being responsive,” Townsend said.

Townsend noted the DPS website says existing Texas residents can’t use same-sex marriage licenses from others states to update their licenses. However, he said there is no posted policy regarding new Texas residents whose names have already been changed.

“If nothing else, it seems like they’re doing a bad job of being transparent and providing that information to people up front,” he said.

Wilson vowed to obtain an accurate Texas driver’s license one way or another, and said she now plans to file a lawsuit against DPS.

“I don’t want any other person to go through what I have experienced over this,” she said.

  • Mike Scott

    I don’t know why Republicans keep fighting us on this. It’s just a matter of time before the Supreme Court calls it like it is…discrimination.

    • 1bimbo

      so what you’re saying is it’s like a ‘rape victim’.. we christians and moralists should just lie back and enjoy it?

      • Paul Cutlip

        Don’t assume all Christians agree with you on this issue and are you really REALLY comparing yourself to a rape victim here??

      • Kathy Brady

        Please do not speak for all Christians. I am one and believe treating gay people like this is very ungodly. Jesus does not support this kind of discrimination or judgment. Read His words in the bible and you will find you have no support for this kind of hatred and pouting. If you don’t believe in gay marriage, don’t enter into one.

        • 1bimbo

          you are a fraud if you claim to be a ‘Christian’ and advocate for homosexual ‘marriage’ and adoption

          • Kathy Brady

            Nope. Look in the mirror, dude. “Judge, lest not ye be judged.” Know what those words mean? Means you’re the fraud, not me.

          • 1bimbo

            God will judge their sexually-dyfunctional relationship.. not me nor you.. but that’s only if they subscribe to the christian faith.. otherwise they can bee-bop along living in ‘sin’ all they want

          • Kathy Brady

            Last time I checked, you’re not God, SO BACK OFF! STOP HATING!

          • 1bimbo

            you don’t get to give the FREE SPEECH orders, captain, so you back off

          • KLSiegel

            Listen, love – if YOU get to say what you think, WE get to say what we think of what you think. That’s how free speech works.

            And since what I think is that you’re a self-righteous bigot poking her nose into things that are none of her business – I am free to tell you so. If you don’t want to be told – go where your views are not seen as stupid. Otherwise, prepare to listen to what other people think. Pretty simple…

          • 1bimbo

            oh it’s my business all right what the texas DPS does, they’re funded by my taxpayer dollars.. and yes the vast majority of us here in the lone star state are very happy with the work they do

          • KLSiegel

            Thereby proving my fundamental argument that we ought to have simply allowed Texas to secede.

          • silentnonrev

            your ignorance will lead to your extinction and that of your ilk. Glad to see that evolution will take care of those who don’t believe in it

          • 1bimbo

            everyone one of us have two, three, four children who grow up conservative.. our whole families are conservatives.. as the saying goes.. if you’re 20 and not a liberal you have no heart, but if you’re 30 and not a conservative, you have no brain

          • splashy79

            That saying is put out by conservatives, but is totally wrong. People become MORE liberal as they age and find out life is not so simple:
            http://www.gwern.net/docs/2007-danigelis.pdf

          • DCSDparent

            I agree with this. Despite my strong views on marriage equality, I still identify as a Republican, but was a much stronger one when I was in my teens, twenties and even thirties. The older I get, the more compassionate I get, and I realize some of my strong anti-tax and anti-welfare opinions came from my own selfishness.

          • Dot McFarlane

            Another person’s marriage is none of your concern.

          • Phyxius

            Public Service Announcement:

            The right to free speech means the government can’t arrest you for what you say. It doesn’t mean that anyone ELSE has to listen to your bullsh**, or host you while you share it.

            The 1st Amendment doesn’t shield you from criticism or consequences. If you’re yelled at, boycotted, have your show cancelled, or get banned from an internet community, your free speech rights haven’t been violated.

            It’s just that the people listening thing you’re an ***hole, and they’re showing you the door.

          • Dot McFarlane

            God’s not going to judge them for being the way He made them. People do NOT choose to be gay. No one would ever choose to be bullied, tortured, ostracized, imprisoned, disowned by family, evicted from a home, refused service at a business or access to a dying loved one in the hospital, fired from a job or even murdered strictly because of sexual orientation. A man in Uganda was burned alive just for being gay. Matthew Shepard was beaten, tortured and left to die tied to a fence just for being gay. A 23-year veteran police chief with an impeccable record was fired just for being a lesbian. A good friend of mine was severely beaten in public school just for being gay. Need I go on?!?!

          • rozlee

            Does that mean that such prominent Christians such as the Rev. John Hagee will go to hell because they committed adultery? He divorced his wife and remarried his organist. Jesus said that any man that put aside his wife and remarried was an adulterer and caused his wife to become an adulteress as well. 1Corinthians 6:9 says adulterers will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

          • silentnonrev

            *you* are a fraud if you claim to be a Christian, period

          • Dot McFarlane

            I’m an evangelical Christian who fully supports people who are LGBTQ. I practice unconditional love just like Jesus did.

          • Dot McFarlane

            The original Hebrew and Greek texts from which the Bible is VERY loosely translated do NOT condemn homosexuality in any way, shape or form. The word ‘homosexual’ wasn’t even invented until the latter part of the 19th century and didn’t appear in the first Bible until 1946. Also, the King James Bible was named after a homosexual. He’s buried between two of his favourite male lovers in Westminster Abbey.

          • yrusostupid

            AND YOU ARE AN IDIOT. YOU DO REALIZE THAT THE BOOK YOU TAKE ALL OF YOUR ANTI-HOMOSEXUAL SLURS FROM (THE OLD TESTAMENT) DOES NOT ACTUALLY SAY ANYTHING ABOUT IT IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, RIGHT? ASK A RABBI IF YOU DONT BELIEVE ME… IT WAS ADDED IN LATER, JUST LIKE THE PASSAGE REGARDING WITCHES WHICH ORIGINALLY READ POISONER… AND THE NEW TESTAMENT DOESNT SAY ANYTHING AT ALL ON THE SUBJECT.. YOU BELIEVE IN LIES.

          • Robyn Ann

            you are the serpents tounge the bible warned us about

      • DesertSun59

        Perfect logic fail. Just like a Christian.

      • Cassandra Nancy Lea

        I would suggest that you wouldn’t know Christ if he walked up to you and introduced himself, and I doubt He would recognise YOU as a follower of His teachings. Did you miss the part about “love one another” or do you just prefer to ignore it? I despair of the people who insist on calling themselves “Christians” when they lead lives and have a mindset so far-removed from His teachings.

      • Chris

        Way to offend gays, christians, and rape victims at the same time with the same tone deaf, offensive comment. You should see if you can get a job with the NFL crafting press releases about domestic violence.

        • 1bimbo

          your politcally correct horsesh*t doesn’t fly in the lone star state.. we take free speech seriously here.. if it hurts your feelings, go suck your thumb.. there is no ‘right’ not to be offended

          • Chris

            I wager I’ve been living in Texas longer than you have bimbo, not that your outsized sense of Texas pride matters in the least. And I never said you don’t have the right to speak your jackass mind all you want. Go right ahead. Knock yourself out. But FYI using the word “we” doesn’t really translate to you having any sort of majority opinion. But if you really want to have a debate about the issue, maybe you could try to articulate exactly how this woman’s sexual orientation in any way impacts her ability to drive a car.

          • 1bimbo

            don’t fool yourself.. my views represent the common thinking of a vast majority of people in the crimson red state of texas

          • Chris

            Sure thing bimbo, if that makes you feel better. Too bad having a majority opinion has exactly zero to do with being correct about anything. Was a time when ideas like keeping human slaves and the earth being flat were defended much the same way and with about the same amount of intellectual rigor. I’ll invite you again to explain how exactly this woman’s sexual orientation impacts her ability to drive a car. Not that I expect you to take me up on it.

          • 1bimbo

            it doesn’t but texas law takes proper identification seriously.. her ‘gay married’ name is only ‘recognized’ in 13 or so states. the lone star state calls anything other than a legal name an alias. proper ID then.. simple

          • Chris

            Hmmm. Not so sure how that argument works out for you bimbo. Seems pretty clear to me that if her name now appears with the new married name on her Federally issued and recognized Social Security card that it’s less at matter of whether Texas recognizes gay marriage as legal or that it is only recognized in 13 states, and more a matter of whether Texas should have to accept the legal documents she supplies. If the name change was obtained legally in the jurisdiction where the change was made, and the Feds recognize that fact and have issued her a matching Social Security card, then I’m not sure I understand what the basis is to deny her the license. I don’t really see anywhere in the article that the State of Texas is actually questioning the authenticity of her documents. So if it’s not that, then what is it? If it’s because she is in a gay marriage, then I have to ask again how does her gayness negatively impact her driving skills?

          • 1bimbo

            texas does not sanction nor recognize homosexual ‘marriage’..

          • Chris

            But I thought you said before it was because Texas takes proper identification seriously. Why aren’t they honoring her legal documents then? The feds already recognized her legal name change and issued her a Social Security card in that name. That would seem to expand the legal standing of the name change well beyond your “13 states” argument. So if the feds recognize it then it would seem her ID would be proper well beyond any documents specifically citing the manner by which she came by the name change. Nobody is claiming that she has tried to submit fake documents. It hardly matters whether the name change is the result of a marriage or not. People can legally change their names for a fee simply because they want to do it. So, if she has legal identification based on the new name, what basis does the State of Texas have for not honoring those documents? And if it’s because she’s gay then I’m still not sure how that impairs her ability to drive a car.

          • Dot McFarlane

            Marriage existed long before Christianity. By the way, early Christians practiced same-sex marriage.

          • Dot McFarlane

            Lose the quotes. She’s LEGALLY married!!

          • rozlee

            “Vast majority” is an exaggeration. It reflects the views of the teabaggers. And you are quickly becoming a minority as Texas youth tilts toward a minority/majority and leans liberal. Texas Latino youth approves gay marriage by 72%, the same rate that youth in general does. For the first time last year, there were more brown babies born than white babies in Texas and their views are definitely going to trend liberal. And hate to break this to you, but projections are that Texas is going to go purple in another two or three presidential elections as the older, reliably conservative voters go tits up or dodder into nursing homes and more liberal, minority voters take to the polls.

          • KLSiegel

            You know, you’re right – there IS no right not to be offended. So you – who want to eliminate what offends you – are just as guilty. Lord, why do I feel like I’m having a battle of wits with an unarmed woman?

          • 1bimbo

            homosexuality advocacy is about way way more than being ‘offended’.. it’s a morality issue, a health issue, a social and mental issue as well as a constitutional rights issue

          • rtknight

            Slight problem with your argument. The government should never try to regulate morality, kind of proved that with prohibition, not to mention the “war on drugs”, basically it’s a losing battle, and one which our separation of church and state should have ended awhile ago. As far as a health issue, seriously? A social issue, yea I can actually agree with this one, but I’m on the opposite end of it. People love who they love, you have no right to tell anyone that they can’t get married as long as both partners are consenting adults. Mental issue… the DSM ruled that out years ago, seriously if you don’t know anything about psychology don’t even try you’ll just make yourself sound like even more of an idiot than you apparently are. Constitutional rights issue, once again you’re correct, but the problem is you’re once again on the wrong side of the argument, post civil war it was made clear that the federal government has the ability and the right to override any laws from the states that disregarded the federal laws, meaning that when the federal government stated that homosexual marriage was legal, any states that hold out are in violation of that law, and since federal law is greater than states rights, guess who wins that argument.
            The facts of the matter clearly allude you, so I am simply forced to come to the conclusion that you are either a really good troll (note the lack of an actual name), or simply stupid.

          • splashy79

            Health issue? You do know that lesbians are healthier than straights are, don’t you? It’s the men that tend to spread diseases around, because they are often symptomless and refuse to get regular checkups.

          • 1bimbo

            ‘….Domestic violence occurs more frequently among same-sex couples than opposite-sex couples, according to a new review from Northwestern University.

            Sometimes called intimate partner violence, domestic violence is physical, sexual, or psychological harm occurring between current or former intimate partners…..’

            http://www.universityherald.com/articles/11475/20140919/same-sex-couples-may-experience-more-domestic-violence.htm

          • Dot McFarlane

            Homosexuality isn’t a mental disorder nor is it a disease. The American Psychiatric Association debunked that myth many years ago.

          • silentnonrev

            who’s we, you got a rat in your pocket, or is that deekhead perry?

          • vanceco

            “there is no ‘right’ not to be offended…”
            I’ll remember that the next time some christian nutjob gets offended when they hear me saying “Happy Holidays”

          • rozlee

            ‘We take free speech seriously here?’ Since when? Only if it’s conservative approved. Many teabaggers are trying to pass laws to keep Spanish from being spoken in many businesses and on school campuses here in Texas.

      • Osowoofy

        It’s not hurting your sorry ass anyways, Toots.

      • marcusgresham

        No, we’re just saying you should shut the hell up and mind your own business because what these two people do is of no harm or consequence to you, your cronies, or your antediluvian mythology.

      • KLSiegel

        You know what? You can believe whatever you want to. You can think whatever you want to.

        What you CANNOT do and SHOULD NOT do is try to make ME believe what you do, and think what you do. Nobody is taking your damn rights away. You can continue to be a bigot if you want – and this woman getting her driver’s license DOES NOT IMPACT YOU in any way, any more than her marriage does.

        You don’t believe in same-sex marriage? Then I recommend you not marry a person of the same sex. Beyond that – you can keep your nose out of other people’s bedrooms and mind your own goddamned business.

        • 1bimbo

          what we need to do is keep the sexually dysfunctional from having adoption access to children

          • KLSiegel

            What part of “mind your own business” do you not understand?

          • 1bimbo

            oh it’s everyone’s business when their children interact with everyone else’s children in society

          • KLSiegel

            Yeah, and we all have to interact in society with your mother’s children, too, much as we might wish we didn’t.

            Their children interact with other’s children – fine. What difference does it make? You think somehow their gayness is catching and their children are carriers? Or are you afraid you might have to treat them like human beings and not poke your nose into their private business – which is only what you ought to be doing with anybody.

          • 1bimbo

            if the sexually dysfunctional want special rights like say the disabled, autistic people and the like, then so be it.. but there’s no place for special privileges

          • johnnyboyjohn

            Sorry, not special rights, just the exactly the same rights. It’s going to happen nation-wide, this fall, and all your strutting and flapping is going to have zero effect. The lawsuits will simply keep happening until people like you are dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century where all humans are treated equally. You’re welcome.

          • EdisonAlum

            How does the marriage of two strangers and their adoption of children violate anyone else’s religious liberty and free speech?

          • silentnonrev

            yep, most child abusers are heterosexual, probably repressed like you

          • 1bimbo

            statistics don’t back you up.. the lbgtERs are abusing each other more than normal people http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/if-youre-not-stragiht-youre-at-higher-risk-for-domestic-violence-180949988/?no-ist

            ‘…In 2013, the CDC released the results of a 2010 study on victimization by sexual orientation, and admitted that “little is known about the national prevalence of intimate partner violence, sexual violence, and stalking among lesbian, gay, and bisexual women and men in the United States.” The report found that bisexual women had an overwhelming prevalence of violent partners in their lives: 75 percent had been with a violent partner, as opposed to 46 percent of lesbian women and 43 percent of straight women. For bisexual men, that number was 47 percent. For gay men, it was 40 percent, and 21 percent for straight men….’

          • johnnyboyjohn

            You conflate spousal abuse with child abuse? Odd. And even your own quote states “little is known”. That makes the figures suspect and many of these “studies” are skewed to reflect the opinions of those who fund them. Sorry, big time fail, there, bimbo.

          • 1bimbo

            ‘..The researchers report that the rates of child sexual abuse for gay- or bisexual-identified men are significantly higher than those found among heterosexually-identified men. They write that the rates for heterosexual men are usually “less than 10%,” and state that in five studies that compared the two groups, the men who have sex with men are “at least three times more likely to report CSA, however defined, than heterosexual men.” (12) This finding is reiterated in their conclusion: “Rates for MSM are 15% to 25% in the best designed studies, which is at least triple the rates reported among heterosexual men.” (13)…’

            http://www.citizenlink.com/2010/06/17/childhood-sexual-abuse-and-male-homosexuality/?skip_splash=1

          • rozlee

            You’re cherry picking. That study included opposite sex partners that they had had relationships with before ‘coming out’ and heterosexual marriages. Read the entire report.

          • EdisonAlum

            Experts disagree. First, homosexuality isn’t “dysfunction”. Second, the American Academy of Pediatrics recognizes that sexual orientation has no bearing on ability to parent, and approves of adoption by same sex couples. Every study of children raised in households headed by same sex couples shows that they are just as well adjusted, healthy and happy as children raised by opposite sex couples, despite the bigoted assumptions of people like “bimbo”.

            (Note that studies the religious extremists like to use as “proof” that kids need “a mother and a father” compared children raised in “traditional” households to kids raised by single parents, NOT by same sex couples. Proving only that, in general, 2 parents are better than one, NOT that the two parents must be of opposite sexes.).

          • 1bimbo

            is that the same pediatric organization that had to back track after they claimed pedophilia really isn’t that bad for children?

          • http://www.monster-island.net/ kushibo

            Do you have a link to what you’re referring to?

          • 1bimbo

            http://www.narth.org/docs/pedophNEW.html

            ‘….The authors’ conclusion? That childhood sexual abuse is on average, only slightly associated with psychological harm–and that the harm may not be due to the sexual experience, but to the negative family factors in the children’s backgrounds. When the sexual contact is not coerced, especially when it is experienced by a boy and is remembered positively, it may not be harmful at all.

            The authors of the article propose that psychologists stop using judgmental terms like “child abuse,” “molestation,” and “victims,” using instead neutral, value-free terms like “adult-child sex.” Similarly, they say we should not talk about the “the severity of the abuse,” but instead refer to “the level of sexual intimacy.”

          • EdisonAlum

            This is completely irrelevant to the subject of same sex marriage and adoption. There is a huge difference between adults in a consensual relationship and a minor who doesn’t have the mental capacity required for consent.

          • rozlee

            NARTH is an organization known for promoting junk science. They have been debunked by the AMA and psychiatric associations. They have even been sued by clients for having caused mental and emotional harm.

          • EdisonAlum

            I believe you’re thinking of the American Psychiatric Association, not the American Academy of Pediatrics.
            Even so, please provide evidence that they ever said “pedophilia really isn’t that bad for children”. A link to the actual report please, so we can see it in context, not a link to the Free Republic’s commentary about it.

          • Dot McFarlane

            Oh, so you’d rather see children waiting for years to be part of a loving family?! You’d rather see children being raised by abusive straight parents rather than by loving same-sex ones?!

          • yrusostupid

            AND THE MENTALLY RETARDED, AS WELL… SO GIVE YOURS UP IF YOU HAVE ‘EM.

      • silentnonrev

        what is Christian or moral about what you are saying?

        • 1bimbo

          my faith does not support homosexuality advocacy.. doing so is immoral

          • http://blog.zboog.com zboog

            A) Your bible doesn’t say anything about women having sex with other women. B) Your bible does say you aren’t allowed to eat shellfish or pigs.

            If you are going to fight tooth and nail to prevent other people from having a life you don’t like, are you willing to stand up and defend Leviticus with conviction?

          • 1bimbo

            you don’t have to be a biblical scholar to prove how toxic homosexuality is.. why do you think blood banks don’t accept homosexual blood. it’s too dangerous a health risk for society.. in massachusetts the health department partners with the lbgtERs to teach middle school student how ‘healthy’ a n a l sex is.. homosexuality advocates promote brainwashing and exposing children to inappropriate discussions about s e x and sexuality to confuse them about their sexual orientation and recruit them to support their own perversions

          • http://www.monster-island.net/ kushibo

            Actually, the Red Cross does not forbid lesbian women from donating blood. This is an article about a woman who is unable to get her legal name put on her drivers license in Texas, not about your strawman gay male couple who abuse their children, were abused himself, and spread AIDS to everyone. If your argument against allowing this woman to get her last name on her drivers license depends on stereotypes of gay men, it makes no sense.

          • 1bimbo

            just follow the law.. if her name was legally changed in CA, then provide texas with the document.. it’s not complicated

          • http://blog.zboog.com zboog

            It’s great that you have so much conviction about your beliefs, just don’t attribute them to the bible, unless you’re willing to admit that you’re picking and choosing the “important” parts.

            Besides, where in the bible does it say anything about lesbians?

          • rozlee

            It forbid me from donating blood too for a long time because of my status as a Gulf War vet. I guess I was too dangerous a health risk to society and too toxic. I might have confused them and recruited them into the army.

          • EdisonAlum

            Then don’t advocate for them. I doubt your faith supports trolling Internet comment sections insulting them, either.

      • dontpayforcable

        Are you SERIOUSLY saying that by the state recognizing same-sex relationships, Christians and moralists are BEING RAPED? REALLY??? Seek professional help you HATEFUL, NASTY, ROTTEN piece of human garbage!

        • 1bimbo

          you’re intolerant.. a christophobe.. and verbally abusive.. do you talk that way to people who don’t agree with you in general? or just family members and anonymous people on commenting threads.. you are aware how vile you are, right?

          • rtknight

            Says someone with the name “1bimbo”, also weren’t you just commenting about first amendment rights. You don’t have the right to not be offended.
            On that note, 1bimbo you’re an idiotic basket case, you deserve to die in a hole, you deserve to be skull f****d by a coyote, you don’t deserve to live on this world anymore, you should be shot in the face repeatedly until even your inbreed children couldn’t identify you.
            Also, your god is fake. Christ sucks a big D**K. Your false man god got nailed to a pole! You’re probably just jealous that you can’t get a pickle in your own p o o p e r (as you put it).
            There I think I have been suitably offensive. Too bad, you don’t have the right to not be offended…. idiot.

          • 1bimbo

            rtknight, a psychopathic poet.. how sweet

      • Robyn Ann

        yore not being raped,,, get off the victim act,,, you’re not a victim

  • Meri Justus

    Wow that is insanity.let the woman have her drivers licence

  • Tricky Rick

    Republicans – Making Hate a Family Value since 1980. And they hide behind the Bible to do it. These fake Christians will be the ruin of us all. Since the zealots have perverted Christianity, its easier to understand why Romans fed them to the lions.

    • Baltimatt

      The Texas Republican platform from 2010 called for their little boy to be taken from them, and they would not be able to see him unless they had court-ordered, supervised visitation. Homosexual parents were to be treated as though they were child molesters. Fortunately, that language was dropped in 2012.

    • DesertSun59

      They are not FAKE. They are real Christians. To wit: Matthew 10:34.

      • Dustin Sandage

        That is not a passage saying hate is good. He is saying that following him will cause strife and discord among people. You know… because he was advocating things that were not the accepted religious tradition? Things like love and forgiveness? Tolerance? Following him in those teachings will cause the religious traditional and legalistic to despise you. Alternatively, you can pander to the conservative establishment, abandon the cause of Jesus Christ… and keep on keepin on just like you are!

        • 1bimbo

          your ‘tolerance’ generalities are not a catch-all to advocate for immoral, unethical or non-biblical behavior

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Your religion is not a catch all to advocate for taking away people’s basic rights.

          • 1bimbo

            neither marriage nor homosexuality advocacy is a civil right in the constitution.. religion is

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Religion isn’t even in the constitution… There is to be no favored religion. Big difference.

            And you know as well as I do that that’s simply not the case, that Christianity has a preference. I mean, do you think if someone put up a pentagram at the local courthouse it wouldn’t even make the news before it was gone? And yet the ten commandments have shown up and people have fought to keep them there..

            And what does that even have to do with denying someone as basic as an ID? I’d like to think that if she was being denied it because she was black you’d be upset.

            And no, I’m pretty sure if it was a choice I wouldn’t have struggled with the fact I’m bi for 15 years or so.

          • 1bimbo

            thenconstitution of the united states of america, amendmentI: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… yeah it’s in there all right

            and not interested in your sexual dysfunction

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            So does that mean if I’m an Aztec I can sacrifice you to my gods? That is part of traditional Aztec religion, you know? There are some things that that trumps, like it or not.

            My religion says we should treat all people with kindness and respect. How dare you violate my beliefs.

            And of course, I have something that refutes your point, time to ignore it rather than entertain the fact you could be wrong.

            Mark 12:31…

          • 1bimbo

            have your azteckian fake religion all you want.. your right ends where it impedes on mine and vice versa

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Of course, Don’t discriminate against me, all I’m saying is god hates you. That makes it totally OK, right?

            Hint. No it doesn’t.

          • 1bimbo

            you’re not an aztec.. you are a liar

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Do you know what “hypothetical” means?

            I know it’s a big word, so I’ll tell you. It means “I never said I was.. but if I was would it be OK?”

            But of course, it proves my point so it’s time to call me a liar so you can ignore the question.

          • Phyxius

            You had it right on the first reply. Then you had to go and stick your foot down your throat.

          • Ramona Salden

            you don’t speak for any god, if you hear voices seek a psychiatrist’s help and medication.
            .

          • Philip Thomas

            Ok, true, but by that belief, then no one of another religion than Christianity can be saved. Just because I am not of a Race, Origin, or Religious Belief doesn’t mean I cannot change to that belief. You act like Christianity has always been a religion. Before Christ died there was no Christianity, it is about just a little over 2000 years old that is it! What about Hinduism, it can be traced back at least 5000 years.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Well that’s the devil’s work obviously.. (sarcasm)

          • http://saltykittyenterprises.com Larry Patrick Conkright Ripley

            and you are a cunt

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Do not call her that. It will only make her think she’s important enough to matter.

          • george the sceptical

            Look at her history.
            It’s truly frightening.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Like I said, I pity her. In part because choosing to live your life with that much hate has to lead to a stressful and hate filled life.

            And in part because I know it’ll tick her off.. ;)

          • EdisonAlum

            I’m beginning to wonder whether she is really an advocate for gay and lesbian rights, going about it in a strange way. She makes her side look so foolish and hateful, it’s bound to turn people off.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Visit http://www.godhatesfags.com, realize that’s not satire and then get back to me.

          • george the sceptical

            So if I were to claim that you’re a f*cking idiot, would that make me a liar?
            Or is it all just opinion?

          • Nicko Thime

            You appear to be genuinely stupid.

          • Lisa

            Just one point: Freedom of religion only extends as far (note: freedom, not enforcement) as to not infringe on others’ rights. So, Aztec sacrifice would not be valid as it impedes on others’ rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. However, one would still be allowed to worship the gods in ways that do not impede others rights.

            So, Christianity is OK and protected as a freedom of religion… but it shouldn’t be when it starts overtaking other people’s rights (as in the prohibition of same-sex marriage)

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            That’s actually exactly my point. “it’s my religion” is not an acceptable reason for many things.

            I was hoping that the hyperbolic nature of that claim would be obvious.. but of course Bimbo apparently thought I was claiming I was Aztec…

          • Kalib Butler

            Every religion has validity unless you can prove that it’s fake. I can prove Christianity fake just as easily, so don’t be spewing that.

          • Jed

            awesome. now back and read your first post again.

          • Philip Thomas

            YOU GOT IT BIMBO! THIS IS WHAT THE POINT IS! BUT CHRISTIANITY IS IMPEDING ON GAYS!!! THAT IS IT. We are not trying to get you to say it is right, tell everyone how much you dislike it, tell them that it is a sin, tell them they are going to hell, teach your kids to be little bigots, but your religion has no right to tell me I cannot do something as long as it is does not affect you, and I am sorry, me marrying my partner has zero affect on you, your life, or your livelihood. If the cards were turned and muslims took over and started telling your that you needed to cover your head if you walked out our your house you would be all pissed off saying your religion cannot tell me what to do. The same thing applies!

          • 1bimbo

            homosexuality advocates want ‘marriage’ to force people to accept the homosexual lifestyle.. when you can already enter into a contract right now without declaring yourself married and have all the legal rights the two parties agree upon

          • Kay Burk

            Let me educate you on something, we can not enter into a contract in all states because of the bigots like you. We are not asking anyone to accept anything, because being an ignorant bigot is your right under the Constitution, we are only asking for the right to marry the person we want to spend the rest of our life with!!! My partner and i have been together for 10 years and i have several straight friends who support us and love us both. OMG AND THEY ARE CHRISTIAN!!!! MY MAMA IS A CHRISTIAN AND SHE ACCEPTS US!!! See i don’t need your approval, and if you want to give an opinion about my life, i will send you the payment books for my house and vehicles, have my electric, water, sewer, cable, trash and phone bills all set up on your accounts and you can pay my bills, until you are willing to do this don’t impede on my rights!!!

          • 1bimbo

            if you’re so content then why the heck are you on here whining about it.. by the way marriage is not a ‘right’.. homosexuality advocates want it to be a right.. then do it the right way, the way our constitution works.. advocate for a law, an act or an amendment to the constitution.. that keeps both of us from denying true rights from one another when our elected legislators and our executive branch create these laws

          • Heywood Jablowme

            How does allowing two people to marry force anyone to accept their lifestyle? You don’t have to accept it, you just have to realize that it exists. You can still yell about it all you want.

          • TrollopeReader

            gee, if that’s the case, where’s the DPS license?

          • 1bimbo

            where the CA proof of name change document? and if it’s changed because of ‘gay marry’, it’s invalid in texas.. but if it’s changed because she applied for a name change in the same way a texan would apply for a name change withot ‘gay marry’, then texas will honor it

          • Nicko Thime

            Exactly what “force” are they using?
            Do they come to your door and threaten you?

          • Celeste Swaim

            Ahh, bibmimbo, if my gayness is affecting you that badly, then you must really be on shaky hetero ground. Better do some looking at the man in the mirror honey!

          • 1bimbo

            ‘gayness’ doesn’t bother me.. homosexuality advocates demanding government mandated acceptance of their lifestyle should bother everyone who cares about healthy childhood development, public health and a functional society

          • Gary Teer

            God forbid we teach our children tolerance and understanding. It seems like I have read about that in a real old book some people read on Sunday, but chunk on Monday. Help me out everyone… What book is that? Hmm, the title is on the tip of my tongue… Starts with a B, I think… darn it, I just had it. A little help anyone?

          • 1bimbo

            doesn’t matter how pretentious and self righteous you think you are, you don’t decide what faith anyone chooses and you sure as heck don’t determine whether they’re ‘christian’ enough

          • Guest

            No, that’s your job. Mind is to defend those that pervert that which we hold dear. The individual right of self determination. That is what this is about. The state has no business in telling any couple how to define themselves. I did not spend my time in the Military so some zealot grab the microphone and tell the rest of us how to live.
            “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” E. Burke
            If you don’t like same sex marriage, don’t get one. Otherwise, leave people alone!

          • 1bimbo

            disgusting how anyone could pervert the constitution and the reason our military fights and dies for us.. it isn’t the right to proclaim how you ‘love’.. they fight for freedom.. and that means freedom for you to accept faith or not and also freedom to protect our families from the dysfunctional and damaging actions of others

          • Sagleo1216

            bimbo (names require capitalization, adjectives don’t), nor do you have the right to choose who is “christian enough”!

          • Gary Teer

            Lol, that is a pretty desperate statement since I could not care less how much, or even if you are Christian. I am Wiccan,or maybe Buddhist, or maybe Vohto. Maybe I none of the above, but what I am is
            American. I expect to have any and all the same privileges of any other American,
            regardless what your dead man on a stick says. So if you have a non-religious
            argument as to why Marriage is being defined by a 2000 year old religious book
            then make it, otherwise just admit your are a bigot and move on.

          • Nikki Travis

            Gay couples raise healthy children every day. You can’t catch it like the flu! SMDH Being gay is not a public health threat. Gay people are a part of functioning society everywhere whether you want to admit it or not! You are denying them rights because it hurts your sensibilities. Seems as if bimbo (Awesome name choice btw, it is rare to find someone so honest about themselves) needs to learn to live and let live. Recognizing that the LGBTQ community has rights afforded by this great nation does not impede your ability to be a bigoted christian. Your right to practice your religious ideology does not trump their rights as citizens first! Please crawl back under your bridge Troll!

          • 1bimbo

            why don’t we hear from those kids as grownups ever.. you know why? because they don’t wish anyone being forced against their will to live that way

          • Nikki Travis

            http://www.bu.edu/today/2013/gay-parents-as-good-as-straight-ones/
            http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2013/06/05/2106751/same-sex-parenting-study/
            I know plenty of kids who are happy with their parents who are in the LGBTQ community. You probably don’t read much from the society and families who are supportive of gay parents and families. Remember, if you go into the field looking for cow shit, you will find tons of cow shit, but you might miss the condition and health of the grass around it.

          • Joshua Ladd

            actually I know a few people who were raised by “homosexual parents” and sadly you are quite mistaken, most of them have grown up quite heterosexual and are intolerant of bigots such as yourself who think that anyone who is in homosexual couple doesn’t deserve to have any rights in America.

          • Kay Burk

            my parents were straight and i am gay!!!

          • Nikki Travis

            BTW, Christian parents abuse their kids, instill fear and bigotry from infancy, and teach their children to fear anything with which they do not understand or agree. Heterosexual parents are just as flawed as the rest of society.

          • EdisonAlum

            Google “Zach Wahls speaks about family” and watch the YouTube video if you aren’t just making things up for sake of argument and actually want to hear from one of “those kids” as a grown up.

          • 1bimbo

            you found one homosexual man who defends being raised by lesbian mothers and that’s supposed to convince the rest of us to abandon our morals, relinquish our religious liberties, allow our children to be taught perversion in public schools and ignore the real statistics about the physiological psychological, social and spiritual harm and society dysfunction which comes from government-mandated homosexuality advocacy

          • EdisonAlum

            Um, nooo, I linked to one well known video of an articulate and intelligent young man that made good points. I personally know several others a lot like him, but they don’t happen to have a video about it online. And where do you get the idea that Mr Wahls is gay? What a strange assumption.

            Also, you have yet to explain to us how the legal recognition of someone else’s marriage causes YOU to abandon YOUR morals, or violates YOUR religious liberties.

          • Baltimatt
          • Kay Burk

            you might need to check on the actual statistics of gays raising children, they are more intelligent, more self-accepting, and more well rounded than children raised with bigotry, hatred and the crushing of other’s views. They are taught to be themselves. What would you do if your child told you they were gay???? I am guessing you would disown them!!!

          • 1bimbo

            i’m lucky to some extent but also some of it is by design, my children are physiologically, psychologically, socially and emotionally healthy and well-adjusted. but there are too many who start off disordered physiologically and sometimes damaged mentally with abuse and other times confused, manipulated and inappropriately exposed to sexuality issues as children

          • Nicko Thime

            Yeah, forced belief in magical sky fairies can have awful consequences.

          • Nikki Travis

            Thank you for proving our point. Your rights end when it impedes on others to live their lives how they chose with or without your ideology.

          • 1bimbo

            and that goes for the baker in colorado who refuses to participate in a homosexual ‘marriage’ by baking a wedding cake for them under religious objection.. and the new mexico photographer who refuses to photograph homosexual couples because of his faith.. homosexuality advocates want to force people to accept their lifestyle by forcing them with threat of fines and jail to provide a service against their religion.. that is a violation of amendment1(religion) and 13(the part about involuntary servitude)

          • Nikki Travis

            1. Providing services under a private business means you are open for to business to everyone.
            2. They aren’t forcing you to be gay, they are asking for fair service.
            3. Being a business owner (florist) I refused many clients. It was my choice to serve them or not serve them based on my availability and whether or not I felt I could give them the service and care they required. A girl came into my shop with a bad attitude and I kicked her out. I did not offer her a reason, I didn’t call her names, I didn’t do anything but say unfortunately at this time I am not able to offer my services to her. I never denied anyone service based on their ethnicity, gender, orientation etc. I did however tell a teen who decided to have a tantrum in my shop to get up off my floor and get out. When the mom said, “You can’t say that to my child!” I replied, “Apparently someone needs to, you can get out too!”
            4. When you go into business for yourself you make the choice to put your brand and name out there for everyone. If not, then you should think twice about being a business owner. When you deny a client it can’t be due to them being the wrong color, race, gender, sexual orientation etc. When a business owner places their religion on their sleeve, they have issues.
            5. When you are in business you accept you may deal with people you don’t like every day, but you still take their money. As an atheist I hated setting up weddings at churches and especially a particular Catholic Church because they always tried to steal my vases, but I still took care of my brides because I wanted to stay in business and I valued their money and repeat services.

          • 1bimbo

            this is a free country.. not a country that requires people to violate their religious beliefs because it hurts your feelings if someone doesn’t want you around them because you’re a homosexual.. every person has the right to take their money elsewhere.. sexuality/sexual orientation is not a right in the civil rights act.. nor is it in the constitution.. therefore it is arguably a human right.. but not a civil right.. in texas we have the right to refuse service to anyone for no reason.. and there is no ‘right’ not to be offended so everyone is welcome to take their business elsewhere

          • Nikki Travis

            How is providing a service going against your religious beliefs. It has nothing to do with your personal life. It is a service. That is all. Personally if I found that a company didn’t want to serve me I would find someone else who wasn’t a bigot. But, small towns with small ideology may make it hard for someone to find a company who aren’t bigots. If you place yourself on the public block then you serve the public. Whether you like them or not. I would suggest you not go into business, it would fail quickly.

          • 1bimbo

            is that why there are hundreds of thousands of thriving christian businesses in texas.. they don’t fail, they fortify their stature with like-minded individuals.. homosexuality advocates have such a delusional view of themselves they believe they rule the world and can drown all who don’t agree with them.. well they don’t and texas stays strong because of its staunch roots in liberty and the overall view that you don’t ‘force’ anyone to do anything they don’t agree with.. if you don’t like it, then go somewhere else where they control you

          • Nikki Travis

            still doesn’t make it right. You can be a bigot on certain things and get away with it, just like Jim Crow laws before the 60’s were accepted back in in the day. That still doesn’t make it ok and luckily it seems bigotry and idiocy are on the way out. Just like slavery your ideological nonsense won’t be missed but you my dear lady will become a pariah on society and everyone will remember it!

          • 1bimbo

            right and you will stop the rise of the ocean .. and everyone will melt into one color .. and there will be no more poverty or hunger.. grow up.. this isn’t disney land.. this is the real world.. throughout history- immoral actions attempt to overtake moral ideology.. it gets just so far, then everyone realizes the detrimental nature of it and then moral people push back.. it’s cyclical in nature just like everything else

          • Nikki Travis

            You are devolving and so has this conversation. When you can’t come up with a good argument you default by insulting my character. You lost. You nor this conversation matters after this point because I’ve already won the argument. Continue to spread your malicious and ill contempt. You and your kind will be remembered for what and who you really are, ignorant assholes. Just like the Nazis people will vilify you and your actions.

            As for your religion, you believe a god ghost raped a girl named Mary and impregnated her with his illegitimate god self and forced Joseph to raise said brat. Then the horrible ungrateful teenager jesus ran away from home like a spoiled god to go on a suicide mission because his father god self sent himself to earth to pay for the sins of man. All of this because he allowed Eve to let a snake talk him eating into magical fruit which made her smart! This is where you get your morality? From a fairy tale book? FAIL

          • 1bimbo

            .. well you might have ‘won’ until your disrespectful diatribe about faith.. in texas, we call that shooting yourself in the foot

          • 1bimbo

            well, you might have ‘won’ until you starting your disrespectful diatribe against faith.. in texas, we call that shooting yourself in the foot

          • Nikki Travis

            Yawns. I don’t have to respect your zombie jesus! Free country and all that!

          • Kay Burk

            That is just the point we are making, Texas DOES TRY TO CONTROL YOU!!! They take away and refuse to recognize basic rights, AR is not much better, but the people are not as rude about it, and if you think that being a Christian gives you the right to judge you better brush up on your Biblical training!!! Because being a Christian a TRUE CHRISTIAN, takes that away!!! Judge ye not, lest ye be judged. Only God can judge and only God should. We don’t care if you accept, we care that we be able to live without hate and intolerance. I have never dealt with a gay child molester, they are in fact 97% heterosexual men. Not gay men, not lesbians, not bisexuals, not transgender. They are your next door neighbor, the deacon at the church, the youth minister, the pastor, the priest. Give me a break man, you are wrong in your hatred and you can not stand that people can see it and call you on it. you need to get an education!!!

          • 1bimbo

            you are spreading misinformation.. 33% of molesters are homosexuals.. homosexuals comprise only 3% of the population.. that is staggering that 1/3 of molestations are perpetrated by the lbgtq

          • Heywood Jablowme

            You’ve got actual facts to back those numbers up, right?

          • HArt

            Isn’t it lovely that Texas saw the ban on same-sex marriage as unconstitutional?

          • 1bimbo

            you mean a social activist federal judge who distorts the constitution ‘saw the ban on same-sex marriage as unconstitutional’… Texas voted by 78% that marriage is between a man and a woman

          • texasaggie

            And Saudi Arabia voted by more than that to deny Christians the right to worship. Does that make it ok?

          • Nicko Thime

            In a free country, we don’t vote on other’s rights.

          • texasaggie

            And yet you want deny this woman her driver’s license. Seriously, sweetie pie, you are very irony deficient.

          • 1bimbo

            if a s@t@nist walked into my bookstore and asked me to order him a s@t@nic book, i’d tell him to get the h*ll out of my store.. i can do that in texas..even if some looney aclu lefty lawyer tries to make an issue of it.. he can go somewhere else.. or if a p0rn star walked into my print shop and asked me to print her nekkid flyers, i’d tell her to take her @ss somewhere else.. i can do that in texas too.. that’s called freedom.. wouldn’t trade it for all the social activist judges in the country

          • Nikki Travis

            Again, be glad you don’t have a business, it would fail. Instead of being rude and pretentious you can instead inform your clientele you do not carry those books but inform them that the library or another store down the street might be able to help them. Any proprietor can turn away clientele, the difference is whether or not it can be proven that the client is being refused for being a bigot. You can deny the client your services because you don’t want to develop certain pictures in your shop. Just like a baker can turn away a client for not wanting to make a cake in the shape of a penis or a vagina. But you cannot refuse service to someone who may be blonde, gay, black, male or female… If you do you open yourself up to lawsuit or people may picket your business in hopes of ruining your business. You get more flies with honey than vinegar.

          • Nicko Thime

            And I’d be sure to tell each person I met how rude and unhelpful you were by being such a complete horse’s ass. I’d tell them that you are a bigot who thinks their defecation hath no odor.
            You just can’t buy advertising like that.

          • Kay Burk

            Nikki,
            I now live in a tiny town in AR and if i want to get a service i can’t get here, then i hit the net, it is usually faster and well i don’t have to deal with bigots and idiots!!!

          • Nikki Travis

            Kay I wish you great joy and happiness! All Americans should have equal rights and the ability to marry anyone they chose who is of legal age and ability to consent to a relationship. I’m glad you have found a way around certain issues in your small town. I wish you didn’t have to though! You should be able to go to your local store just like anyone else and receive the same treatment as the rest of your community! I am sorry there are so many mean and hateful people who wish to deny you and your family basic constitutional rights.

          • Kay Burk

            yeah, and that is why Texas is falling apart!!! I am from Dallas, actually a tiny town called Balch Springs!!!! And guess what if you pic up the Dallas Voice or the Dallas Observer you can find the businesses that you don’t have to worry about!!! so refuse to serve all you want someone else will get that money and take many other with them!! simple as that once it gets out you are a bigot, your business gets hurt!! Facebook has a huge following and so does Twitter, and right now we are at risk of war with ISIS and all you can talk about is how gays are wrong and straights are right!!

          • 1bimbo

            what’s the big deal we’re spraying syria with b o m b s like bug spray.. beat them war drums! .. i will give you this.. you’re getting the idea now..you can take your money where you like.. that’s how it works in texas.. we don’t force people to do things here and we have freedom of association as well as speech, gun righs, religion etc etc! and like willie nelson saysm the reason he likes texas is because no one is in charge.. if it’s just too much freedom for you..go live in another state

          • Lisa

            So, would it be OK to deny a black man marrying a white woman service because you don’t believe in interracial marriages?

            Cause that’s quite frankly the same logic you’re applying. 50 years ago this was the *same discussion* but it was race – not orientation – at issue.

          • 1bimbo

            comparing someone’s skin color to someone’s sexual disorder is demeaning to the plight of black people

          • Nicko Thime

            Why?

          • Kay Burk

            Actually some people want that, personally i stick with GAY OWNED AND OPERATED. Why give bigots our money????

          • Tommy Salami

            Exactly. So kick rocks.

          • JanetMermaid

            Exactly, so you have no right to impede another’s choice of whom to marry.

          • Andrew Crisp

            I love how you just said “Your right ends where it impedes on mine and vice versa” with a straight face. You actually uttered those words when, in the realm of reality, you are advocating for the government to enforce aspects of your personal religious beliefs on others, thus IMPEDING–to use your word–their ability to pursue their fundamental right to self-determination and pursuit of happiness.

          • (justsomeguy151 is a gay turd)

            Caesar had the right idea about you bigots. It is no coincidence that the KKK was a Christian organization. You and your ilk like the Army of God, Christian Identity Movement, Phineas Priesthood, Hutaree, Christian Patriots, and lets not forget your pal Eric Robert Rudolph, are nothing but bottom feeding cowards who use religion as justification for bigotry and racism. http://www.traditionalistamericanknights.com/index.html
            Just admit it already bimbo. BTW your name is perfect description of you.

          • texasaggie

            Exactly. So when you advocate preventing that woman from getting a driver’s license because of your personal religion, you are way out of line. Thank you for admitting it.

          • Nicko Thime

            Exactly. Your right to define marriage ends with your own. You have no right whatsoever to define it for anyone else.
            No one is trying to tell you who to marry. No one is telling you who you can love. But You are doing both to others.

          • http://www.aiki14.com/ aiki14

            Kind of funny when the zealot refers to another religion as fake. You probably don’t get that. Can I get a ruling on whether or not I should even answer this person in light of Leviticus Chapter 11 Verse 44?

          • TKay Michel

            Actually, while human sacrifice is illegal in this country, animal sacrifice is not. I lived in Florida, where many still practice what most people call “Voodoo” (which is not the correct term, btw). They’re allowed to sacrifice animals, as long as they don’t torture them or leave the carcasses laying around; I believe most of these animals, such as chickens or goats, are also raised for that purpose, which is a point I remember being made once during an argument when animal rights activists were trying to stop the practice. But the courts ruled that they had the right to follow their own beliefs, which required blood sacrifice, as long as they didn’t use humans and the animals were bred and raised for that purpose, and didn’t suffer needlessly. And since the Aztec civilization is now gone, your argument really isn’t valid, anyway.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            The Aztec are still a people. And the entire point is that just because you are from a culture that has practiced something doesn’t mean you should be automatically allowed to practice it now.

          • Eli Javier

            The Aztec people are still a people. They still live in secluded villages in Mexico. Their ancestors were from the Mexia peoples which also was a term used to identify the Aztecs who later used it to name the Mexico city and then the state. So again. The Aztecs never went away. They assimilated with the Spanish conquistadores and religious people as much as they could.

            One interesting note. The Mexican Pozole which came from the Aztec tradition is made with pork. Why? Because, it was a ceremonial dish made only on occasions of human sacrifice and the sacrificed persons meat was used in the dish. Later when the Spanish outlawed human sacrifice, they began using pork instead. They said because it tasted the closest to human flesh. :-) Enjoy.

          • Nikki Travis

            So, that means he can sacrifice bimbo, there is no way anything that dumb could be considered human. She’s an animal. I wonder if she will scream during the whole fall?

          • Phyxius

            *So does that mean if I’m an Aztec I can sacrifice you to my gods? That is part of traditional Aztec religion, you know?*

            Only if I’m a virgin or if you capture me on the battlefield – bonus points if you can make it both… ;)

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            :)

          • Nikki Travis

            spoken like a true smartass!

          • Philip Thomas

            Actually no, we also state that your religion cannot break any existing laws of the US. If they do the law trumps the religion. You can practice to the point that you religion does not impede with any other laws. Assisted Suicide and Murder are both illegal so sacrifice is illegal no matter if you are in for being the sacrifice or not.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Um.. first off, that was a hyperbolic example that was obviously false to make the point. I never claimed it was right. The entire point was “It’s my religion” doesn’t excuse everything.

            Second off, you’re wrong. Assisted suicide is legal in five states including where I live, Washington state.

            Source.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_suicide_in_the_United_States

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            …and verse 30 says what?

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            go ahead and google it. Or look it up if you want.

          • Gary Teer

            The medical world has universally agreed that homosexuality is not a dysfunction, only religious zealots speak this way. As I recall the Declaration of Independence is very clear about the “unalienable rights” to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Their marriage is a clear example of the state deigning them that basic right.

            Plus you obviously don’t understand what the first amendment means.

            Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion (The US cant have an official religion) , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (and the US cant stop me from following mine no matter what you think) The first amendment is a limitation of government powers in regards to religion, not a catchall for your twisted Interpretation of a 2000 year old book that speaks about love, acceptance, and not judging 10 times as much as it speaks on homosexuality.
            So whether you agree or disagree with same sex marriage please do not try to use my beloved Bill of Rights to justify your dysfunction. Just admit you are a bigot and move on.

          • rtknight

            Gary you hit the nail on the head so hard, I had to unlike your comment just so I could like it again. Absolute perfection.

          • jontx11

            Spot On!

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            So, in your way of thinking, how many times does the Bible need to speak on homosexuality before you take God’s word seriously?

            Just admit you really don’t care what the Bible says about anything and move on.

          • Gary Teer

            Ah, Gods word…. Let discuss that and how closely you
            follow it, because I will tell you right now, I don’t let a 2000 year old book
            that a member of the Royal family had some clergy put together by committee run
            my life.

            I have to assume you approve of slavery

            “However, you may purchase male or female slaves from
            among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of
            such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You
            may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a
            permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of
            Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.” (Leviticus 25:44-46)

            The bible goes on to tell us how often we can beat them, and
            screw them, but I won’t bore you with the details.

            Don’t forget this includes your own children, including
            selling your own daughter as a sex slave (Exodus 21:1-11), child abuse (Judges
            11:29-40 and Isaiah 13:16), and bashing babies against rocks (Hosea 13:16 &
            Psalms 137:9).

            Don’t forget “then they shall bring out the young woman
            to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her to
            death with stones, because she has done an outrageous thing in Israel by
            whoring in her father’s house. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.” Du
            22-21

            And don’t forget how to handle your problem son.

            “If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his
            father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his
            father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the
            gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn
            and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all
            the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from
            among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.”

            Leviticus 20 verse 9

            Seems like a lot of rocks are involved.

            Now tell the truth, how much of a follower of the word of
            God are you really?

            Is it ok to stone my child in a small private ceremony with
            just the family, or do we really need to get the whole town involved?
            What do you think a good asking price is for my daughter?
            And if my wife had an affair should her mom, or dad
            arrange the stoning?

            This is just a very small amount of sheer terror condoned
            by your book, but since I’m not a Christian you’re right, I don’t care about
            the word of your god. The difference is I served my country with pride so we
            could all observe freely without worrying about how yours conflicted with mine.
            That is the crux of the article. The state should never impart a definition
            that is religiously based on any of us. You want to be Christian, then do so…
            but leave EVERYONE else alone!

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            Gary, if you really don’t care about the word of God, why go to such great lengths to display your ignorance of it? [Hint: if we were Jewish and living in the time before Christ, your questions might be germane.]

            I still think it would have been far easier for you to “admit you really don’t care what the Bible says about anything and move on.” Of course, to do that would have deprived you of an opportunity to share your feelings.

            So…thanks for sharing your feelings.

          • Gary Teer

            You are quite welcome! I do find it interesting how the world of Christianity picks and chooses when it will and wont consider the old testament with the new, or for that matter wont consider The Apocrypha because it doesn’t always agree with the other scripts, but that’s pick and choose faith or you, even though rev 22:18 states a warning against adding and removing from the bible.
            With that said the point of this article and discussion is what possible reason could the state of Texas have to refuse a DL in someone legal name because of why the name was changed. If the name change is legal (it is) and the proper forms presented (they were) the why is personal and not subject to review. Therefor the State of Texas is wrong in withholding a DL to this person and that wrong needs to be addressed. All those fanatics who want to quote “Gods word” like they were there personally have no business adding to the discussion and for that matter being in the discussion with the rest of us grown ups.
            Don’t get me wrong, If you want to be Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindi, Shinto, or Vodou be my guest, but keep your religion out of my government.

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            Gary,

            Why do you continue to quote from a book you don’t respect in order to bolster an argument which, ultimately, should have no meaning to you?

            Your basic stance is that religion should have no place in U.S. government. I’ve acknowledged your opinion. We’re now going back over it the third time! Why?!

            I agree that my decision to chime in was a mistake and that “fanatics” like me “personally have no business adding to the discussion and for that matter being in the discussion.” The Texas Observer’s editorial stance is obvious – as is the reason they picked this specific news item to highlight.

            If I make a simple comment regarding the political side of the equation, I end up feeling like a troll. If I mention the Bible, there are many who’ll eagerly cherry-pick scriptures to use as bludgeons; yet, if I attempt to go back to that same Bible for mutual edification, they’ll claim they don’t believe it!

            Regarding the article itself, it is not true that “the name change is legal” under Texas law; however, based upon the doctrine of Full Faith and Credit, I see that eventually being changed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

            In other words, the war has already been won; there are simply a few more battles to be fought.

            As an amateur historian, I’m not really interested in that fact as much as I am curious as to what will happen next. And after that.

            And so on.

            Take it easy,
            Garl

          • SlightlyTwyst

            1bimbo.. re-read what you just posted.
            No law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..
            That doesn’t actually say that religion is established, it just says that you can believe whatever you like and not go to jail for it.
            It does NOT say that you can use your religion to establish laws, or take away rights guaranteed by the rest of the constitution, and bill of rights.. Things like Pursuit of happiness, or Heck.. the 14th amendment in it’s entirety.
            and, Why does it always have to be about sex?
            Really?
            No one mentioned sex function or dis, until you did. This is about life, Love, Pursuit of happiness.. you know, stuff in the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and bill of rights.
            Seriously, I don’t know one single gay person who is as freaking obsessed with gay people sex as just about every conservative ‘christian’ straight person.
            Why do you worry so much about what happens in someone else’s bedroom? I could care less what people do in their private lives, as long as it’s not breaking laws, or imposing on my personal freedoms to exist.

          • 1bimbo

            ‘pursuit of happiness’ is not in the constitution.. it’s in the declaration of independence

          • Ramona Salden

            No, bimbo, it is int he Preamble to the CONSTITUTION! D’OH!

          • 1bimbo

            ‘life, liberty and the property’ is in the constitution.. if you read it, you would know this.. but obviously, you have not

          • EdisonAlum

            Bimbo, no one is interesting in your religious extremism, either, yet you keep shouting it out loud and clear.

          • djplong

            The Constitution of the United States say that Texas MUST honor the laws of California – so if they got married in California, Texas is CONSTITUTIONALLY BOUND to honor that marriage. (Article IV, Section 1)

          • 1bimbo

            you are distorting the constitution.. the document protects states from overreach by the federal government.. it does not give the federal government the right to force states to honor each other’s state constitutions (not the language ‘good faith’)… liberal socialist democrats are truly snakes who try to manipulate a document meant to protect people from the government- not force people to adhere to and acquiesce to government

          • Jed

            actually, it does. it’s called “full faith and credit.”

            you really don’t know, do you?

          • Gary Teer

            Boom! Gotta love those pesky facts

          • Nicko Thime

            Yeah, it did.

          • Lisa

            We’re not interested in your cranial dysfunction.

          • gemini69sqrd

            Correct “bimbo” …..no law establishing ONE religion…..meaning, there is no RIGHT religion, therefore, NO religion should have any influence over the laws of the states or the country. It’s called “separation of church and state” as noted by Thomas Jefferson, and that is also in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

          • Philip Thomas

            You have the right to worship how you choose however your religion should not affect governmental choices. That is what the law is stating. Making a law, based on a religious belief is illegal on its face. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. Respecting means making a law that was made in respect to a religious belief. However the government cannot stop your from practicing that religion. Wiccan is a religion and gay marriage is accepted in that religion, how can your Christian beliefs trump another religion and still be constitutional?

          • 1bimbo

            there is no ‘trump’.. government sanctions marriage or faith-based covenants between a man, woman and God.. governments also allow any person to enter into civil contracts with any other person.. the only reason homosexuality advocates want to ‘marry’ is for social reasons and to try to force society to accept their lifestyle

          • Kay Burk

            no marriage is not a faith based covenant, Holy Matrimony is!!! Again Bimbo, get an education or the rest of us can just keep taking you to school!!

          • 1bimbo

            altering definitions, distorting biblical tenets and usurping concepts and phrases for indoctrination purposes is not taking anyone ‘to school’.. it’s merely pushing homosexuality advocacy propaganda

          • Nicko Thime

            The bible doesn’t matter at all. It is of ZERO consequence.

          • Nicko Thime

            Marriage is not faith based. It is a contract and always has been.

          • Jenny Garnsey

            Your intolerance has no place here 1bimbo. It is seen as the comments of a bigot. And that law you just sited… in the constitution.. it protects against people who want to STOP others from getting married. Not stop them from doing so. Also, getting married isn’t strictly a Christian thing. It is something that any person of any religion can do. The only laws that should effect it are those of age of consent. Period.

          • 1bimbo

            no it doesn’t.. marriage is not addressed in the constitution… state’s choose to sanction it.. if you want it to be federally-mandated then you should advocate for a federal law, for an amendment to the constitution.. that’s how our system works.. and know this, the constitution isn’t a document to tell people what to do.. it is a document meant to protect the people from the government

          • SMRL

            “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”

            Yet every time a Christian or Catholic (the bad ones of course) make a stupid little whine about the bible (which they are probably reading wrong and misinterpreting), the Congress get all ChickenS#!t and make laws to please their rednecked (the bad ones again) little @$$

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Except you know, for the whole gay marriage thing making a foothold and things like civil rights and the like.

          • Nikki Travis

            Not interested in your religious dysfunction. If you don’t like it fine, but you cannot force your beliefs and code of conduct on others. It is wrong. The way they live their life doesn’t affect you, why must you control everyone. Apparently you can’t even control yourself.

          • Wesley Cole

            Bimbo kinda suits you

          • Michael Fisher

            Where did you get the idea that the free exercise of religion includes your right to force your religious standards, morals, and beliefs on everyone else in the society?

          • Nicko Thime

            Left out.
            No religious test.
            Then there is that pesky Treaty of Tripoli.

          • EdisonAlum

            I’m sorry that we live in a world so intolerant that you, Benjamin, and many others have to struggle with something as innate and natural as your sexual orientation. Please know that there are many, many, straight Christians that support you.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Thank you Edison. It’s truth many of my allies, both Christian and not, that I’ve grown to accept who I am. It’s taken a long time but here I am. Saying how I feel with my real name and picture attached to it.

            I know these people are the majority and that people like bimbo here are getting to be the minority. And I hope in my lifetime they become the vast minority.

          • 1bimbo

            we’re far from the minority.. and we all have children and families who feel the same way about homosexuality advocacy.. it’s damaging to a functional society.. it’s cruel and abusive to force the lifestyle on children

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            And that’s why you’re the only one arguing your side on this thread, right?

          • 1bimbo

            this is a looney lefty website.. patriots rarely hang out here.. the insane socialist rantings are enough to inspire a run on ammo.. either way i consider myself the resident neocon.. a mascot of sorts i figure because they allow me to rant all day and i don’t back down from my core principles

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Timothy 2:12: “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent.”

            Your own bible says that you’re wrong. And of course, it’s totally the “Loony left” and not that you’re wrong.

          • Connie Gilbert

            I wouldn’t go there Benjamin. I don’t agree with the bimbo1, but lets not drag up Timothy. Paul and Jesus did not agree with the issue of women in my opinion.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            And that’s my point, you interpret the bible. It was written in an entirely different era.

            I’m honestly not trying to be a jerk. I’m trying to point out to Bimbo that the bible says a lot of things, and it’s up to us to interpret the messages that we take from it. There is literally no way you can live the bible entirely as it says. I mean, do you not kill or not suffer a witch to live?

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            “There is literally no way you can live the bible entirely as it says.”

            Do you think God will accept that as an excuse on the Day of Judgement?!

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Do you know what “Literally” means? It means there is no possible way you can follow everything in the bible. And if god made it that way on purpose then we’re all gonna go to hell, dude.

            Example, do you suffer a witch to live or kill her? The bible says you must do both.

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            I understood your question the first time around, Benjamin. It reminds me of the question “a certain lawyer” asked of Jesus in an attempt “to justify himself” – which led to the story we know as the parable of “The Good Samaritan” (Luke 10:25-37).

            By the way, if you truly believe “it’s up to us to interpret the messages we take from” the Bible, then I’d recommend beginning with the apostle Paul’s admonition in II Timothy 2:15.

            Take care,
            Garl

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            So, yet again. You conveniently ignore if you allow a witch to live, and break that commandment, or do you murder her and break the “thou shall not kill” commandment?

            That is proof right there you can not live your life exactly as the bible tells you too, because it tells you to do two mutually exclusive things. So yes, someone has to decide what the bible means for you to do.

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            Benjamin,

            If the Bible “tells [us] to do two mutually exclusive things,” then how could Jesus have remained sinless? After all, he lived under the Law of Moses (the ultimate basis for your postulate).

            You want a reasonable response to your query – and that seems fair enough. Hopefully, you’re not simply asking that question in an attempt to “prove” the Bible’s contradictory nature, thereby excusing yourself from any reasonable attempt to pattern your life after its teachings; but, I guess we’ll know soon enough!

            I plan to return sometime later today (even though it may be late).

            Best,
            Garl

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            It’s pretty obvious to me that you’re going to give me the canned response that whoever trained you in your religion came up with. But unless they are reading original texts in the original languages, there has to be interpretation. That’s just the nature of the beast.

            Man is flawed. Even if you’re talking in a non-religious sense that’s pretty obvious.

            I have nothing against the religious. But as the analogy goes, “your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.” My state of grace, or lack thereof, is between me and God, not me and you.

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            Well, it’s pretty obvious to me that you’ve already made up your mind and are prepared to discard anything I might have to say. Oh, well; I did make a promise.

            1. The word “kill” as used in the Decalogue is most closely akin to our English word “murder.”

            2. According to God’s word, the practice of witchcraft was a capital offence in ancient Israel.

            3. Capital punishment is not murder (then or now).

            4. Therefore, the Jewish people living before the time of Christ who did “not suffer a witch to live” were keeping the Law, not violating it.

            During lunch, I had collected several specific scriptures to use as references, but sharing that information would simply make my reply longer and more time consuming for you to read.

            So long, Benjamin.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Yes, time to talk down to me because I don’t agree with you. I’ve heard these arguments before and I don’t buy them.

            And people are saying you have to live by the bible’s words in today’s modern world. And, as you said, it was a totally different place there. I mean, if abortion is legal it’s not murdering a child, but the zealots use it as an excuse to actually murder people.

            Arguing semantics about what they meant in the past has NOTHING do with how acceptable it should be in the present. And that’s what I was talking about.

            also the old/new testaments argument doesn’t hold water because BOTH of those are part of the 10 commandments.

            TL;DR You’re right. i have made up my mind already. But you’re wrong, I’ve actually listened to the arguments and actually have read the bible twice, front to back. How many Christians do you know that can say the same?

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            In what way have I talked down to you, Benjamin?!

            Seriously: is this not frustrating to you, too? Are you actually able to enjoy this sort of mindless pseudo-dialogue? Apparently a lot of people can, since internet discussion sites tend to be chock-full of it.

            Hopefully, our conversation will come to mind the next time I’m tempted to post an on-line comment.

            Good-bye. I will no longer respond.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            “mindless pseudo dialogue??”

            Why no, that doesn’t come across as using big words to try to make yourself look smart at all.

            And of course, it’s all my fault. You had no desire to do anything but to tell me I’m wrong. And your “I’m leaving.. oh no wait, I gotta tell Ben he’s wrong again.” Only proves it to me.

            The truth is that unless you’re reading the original bible in the original language with a perfect understanding of the original culture it was written in, somewhere down the line someone has interpreted it. If not you then your biblical scholars.

            I’m sorry if my refusal to just bow down and accept that my opinion is wrong offends you so much guy. But I’m not going to change my mind.

            If you really want to take the high road, take the high road. But I’m willing to bet that your ego can’t handle not getting the last word in.

            And as far as picking fights go.. You’re suprised when you say “No you’re wrong.” and someone doesn’t immediately cave in?

            Go preach to the flock, it’ll be better for your ego.

          • boblucas

            You sound like you just escaped off the Democrtas welfare plantation t Al Sharpton caught you and brought you back…..weeeeeeeeeee

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            I know it’s hard not to be the center of attention Bob. But you’re an adult you should know the world doesn’t revolve around you by now.

          • boblucas

            just affirmative action hires, eh………………………hehehhehee

          • boblucas

            thou shall not kill..you could take or leave it, huh?

          • boblucas

            your not trying to be anything, ben….

          • Nicko Thime

            Nothing could be more irrelevant than what the buybull has to say about it.

          • Marty

            Resident Neocon? So you’re one of those people who think America has the right to invade other countries and force them to become democracies? We have no right to police the world. And the Government has no right to spy on it citizens and arrest them and hold them without trial.

            I dislike both parties and Barack Obama is the same as George W. Bush as far as I’m concerned. Hell, he’s the same as Nixon and nobody likes him anymore. There cannot be limits to our liberties.

          • texasaggie

            Actually there are limits to our liberties. Those limits are when the exercise of our liberties prevents someone else from exercising their liberties, as in Hobby Lobby where management is imposing their twisted religion on the people who work for them.

          • TrollopeReader

            You are NOT a “patriot”. You wouldn’t even know the meaning of the word. What a dsgraceful and disgusting being you are.

          • 1bimbo

            you are not the overseer of who is a ‘patriot’.. nor are you the god of what should be deemed ‘disgraceful and disgusting’.. from where i stand, your vile disrespect for religious protection, morality and the constitution is the most damaging element of leftist policy

          • TrollopeReader

            Actually, I am the overseer, and I know true patriotism. And I know religiion. Sadly, I also know Texas. And I know what ‘disgraceful and disgusting’ are , and that’s also the definition of bimbo. Also known as “slut”. And that is how you treat yourself, your “religion”, your “patriotism” and your state.

            And, yes, “slut” is a synonym for bimbo.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            You can believe whatever you want, you still have to follow the law. You are not being persecuted against.

            And if the constitution was inflexible it never would have been changed and you’d never have gotten the vote.

          • Heywood Jablowme

            And you’re all done. Supreme Court won’t hear the appeals because Roberts knows he doesn’t have the votes to uphold any bans on same sex marriage. If the 5th or 6th circuit courts uphold the bans, then the SCOTUS will have to take up the case and your side loses. Either way, your side loses. Like I predicted. Done and done. Now go wallow in fear and anger.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Of course he isn’t, because “patriot” means “Mindless conservative” by the way you’re using it.

            You do know you can love your country, that is be a patriot, without liking what it’s done, right? Oh no, sorry. “patriot” means you toe the line and never question anything ever, save why the gays aren’t marched away because they make you uncomfortable.

          • boblucas

            Jane Fonda is a your kind of patriot…..bwah…………………….

          • george the sceptical

            Your core principles are hatred for anyone who is not like you, and does not agree with you.
            What else ya got?

          • texasaggie

            What do you know about patriotism? It’s the first refuge of scoundrels (Ambrose Bierce), so it appears to fit you rather well.

          • Nicko Thime

            Ah, the “patriot” card.
            Since they don’t think like you, they aren’t patriots.
            Shove it.
            signed,
            Purple Heart COMBAT Vet (Volunteered)

            You served where?

          • spanklee

            must be a rotten core if debate inspires you to stock your ammo coffers. Did you know that there are Liberals who are Christian and also have their own guns and ammo? I am Liberal. However I am not against wearing real fur. I believe in the right to bear arms. I believe in the death penalty. However, I am against any party that does everything they can to oppress women, oppress those who are not white, do everything they can to take away some Americans right to vote, who think they have a right to make womens medical decisions, demonize the poor and accuse people of wanting handouts when they pay for those handouts too. But you go ahead thinking you are the know all conservative Christian. You too will soon enough feel what the rest of us already know. It’s just unfortunate that we have to be punished along with you. You’re refusal to think with an open mind and research facts will be your downfall. Better hide that ammo good. Because it won’t be long before the Koch boys order the gang in Washington to confiscate them.

          • boblucas

            you sound like the typical far-left

          • Kay Burk

            But divorce which is also an abomination in the eyes of God is okay to subject children to? and please tell me how what someone does IN THEIR OWN BEDROOM affects a functional society???? Really Bimbo first off your name is offensive to women, as it is bigots like you that have tried to keep women barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen!!! Jesus said to love thy neighbor as thyself, not love them if they are straight, love them if they believe in me the way you do, JUST TO LOVE THEM!!!! AS HOMOSEXUALS WE ARE NOT DESTROYING ANYTHING HATE AND THE PEOPLE PERPETRATING THAT HATE ARE WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY!!! BET IF YOU HAD THE CHOICE OF HAVING YOUR LIFE SAVED BY A GAY MAN OR MEETING YOUR DEATH YOU WOULD HIDE LIKE THE COWARD YOU ARE BEHIND HIM!!!

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            Why are you yelling, Kay? And why the hate-filled rhetoric?!

            Never mind. I really don’t care. You’ve already said everything I need to know about you and your opinions.

          • gregormendel

            Why do you have such deep hatred for gay people? That seems to be the bulk of your recent internet comments.

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            How can you even ask that question if you’re honestly familiar with “the bulk of [my] recent internet comments”? After all, if a recurrent theme is truly evident, it would be passenger train transportation – not “gay people”!

          • JanetMermaid

            “we all have children and families who feel the same way”

            You know where gay kids come from? Straight parents. So NO, you DO NOT all have children who feel the same way. You’re just so hateful that you’d likely disown your child if he/she came out as gay.

          • TrollopeReader

            she probably already has.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Actually, I know someone with two dads and a mom. It’s not like your reproductive organs shrivel up and die when you realize you’re not straight.. You’re mostly right, I just had to point that out.

          • Robyn Reviere

            wow! Do those blinders squeeze your head so much that your brains have leached out of your cranium?

          • george the sceptical

            I think she’s (?) a paid troll.
            You should hear her (it?) extoll the Kochs…

          • VoiceofReason

            1bimbo, PROPER name for you , MORON ! you are so WRONG and YOU are what is DAMAGING.. go live with ISIS, ISIL, you LIKE those kind of extremists !

          • Nicko Thime

            You probably think it is contagious, like cooties.
            You are most definitely a minority, an ever shrinking one.

          • http://www.facebook.com/peggy.w.larson.3 Peggy W. Larson

            Geez, Bimbo, what planet do you live on anyway? As a former state prosecutor, I saw plenty of abuse and cruelty, including sexual abuse, to children from heterosexual parents, mostly fathers. Most sexual child abuse is perpetrated by heterosexuals not homosexuals. My grand daughter was such a victim at age 10. Her abductor and abuser was heterosexual. He had abused over 200 children, both boys and girls, and was the prime suspect in the murder (drowning) of one of them. Homosexuals are not “advocating” their lifestyles, they are living what God gave them. You need to educate yourself – but then, maybe you do not have the intellectual capacity to do that.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            She does not want to educate herself. She is quite happy with her ignorant bliss. Anything said against her is just the socialist liberal agenda and anti-god.

            You know, truthfully? I think the best thing we could do is just stop replying to her at all. it’s pretty obvious to me that she has a martyr complex and is feeding it by arguing here. It probably makes her feel like god’s special warrior to do it.

            But of course the odds of that actually happening on a comment forum are virtually nill.

          • spanklee

            being gay is not learned or contagious. People are born gay. Please tell us in full detail how it damages society? With facts too, please? Because you have quite the imagination.

            Let’s try looking at it this way first:
            Jesus told his followers to live as he lived. And how did he live? Well, he was homeless and penniless. Yet, he fed the hungry, healed the sick, and he loved and embraced everyone. He did not point fingers. He did not look down on people in judgement and condemn them. He surrounded himself with all of the people that society shunned. He had nothing but love to give. It did not matter who it was. Anyone who approached him, he embraced. He even died for EVERYONE. Not just a select few straight white people.

            Or look at like this”
            There is absolutely NO scale that measures sin. We ALL sin. No one is perfect. So who are you to insult and judge a person for what you consider a sin? You sin. What makes your sin better? Don’t answer that unless you can back it up with a factual reference from the New Testament.

          • Kay Burk

            Good for you Benjamin!!!! Don’t let the hypocritical bigots keep you bottled up inside, and keep you away from the blessing that is God’s love!!!

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            She’s probably going to freak out about this, but the truth is I pity people like her who willingly choose to be angry and hateful. I am not a religious person per se, more spiritual. And ironically it’s people like her that have driven me away from the churches. I figure that when my time comes, as it must for all of us, I will be able to at least look god in the eye and say “Sir, I did my best.”

            If he exists and if he is as loving as it’s claimed he is, I think he’ll understand.

          • boblucas

            your parents did a number on you, boy

          • Jennifer Kathleen

            Then PLEASE be more vocal. Please.

          • Kay Burk

            Edison, Thank you!! I am a lesbian and I am a Christian!!! Jesus Christ died on the cross for everyone’s sins, not just the ones that kill, hate, and discriminate in his name!!!

          • AstroPhD

            Religion is certainly in the Constitution. God was purposely left out. That’s the big difference.

          • missmacintx

            The Constitution guarantees the freedom from STATE SANCTIONED religion. It forbade our government from establishing a state religion or interfering with free choice of religion and religious practice. Dude, we call it the Establishment Clause. Religion IS in the Constitution, and it is specifically preserved as an individual freedom, one of private conscience. The Constitution does not advocate freedom FROM religion or atheism. It was a universal view of the drafters of the document, even if it might be considered a deist one, that there was a God, a creator in the universe, and that there is consequence to that for moral misdeeds.
            Now, I don’t care what name she drives or goes by, or who she sleeps with. I care if she can actually drive a car, has a license and insurance, and that if she messes up, I can find assets by which she can pay for my medical injuries if I have to sue her. THAT should be the issue…administration of licensing to ensure that financial responsibility for operating a motor vehicle in Texas can be met.

          • Merv99

            Marriage is not a constitutional right, but the 14th Amendment says no state can “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” So, if a state has a marriage law, it cannot be a discriminatory law.

            “Homoseuality advocacy” is absolutely a constitutional right. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and the right to petition government.

          • 1bimbo

            ‘marriage’ isn’t ‘protection’, it is a faith-based covenant between a man, a woman and God.. homosexuality advocates want to change the definition and usurp the practice to force government-mandated acceptance of sexually dysfunctional lifestyles

          • Merv99

            The 14th Amendment is deliberately vague about who and what it protects. It leaves it up to the courts to decide. Right now, the courts are finding overwhelmingly in favor of marriage equality. This isn’t judicial activism, but the constitution and courts working as they were designed.

            A magazine is something you read in the bathroom, and it’s also something you put into your Glock. The same word can be used to refer to two different things. Civil marriage, the one being fought about in courts, is not the same as religious marriage. Churches always have had and always will have the right to define religious marriage however they want for their parishioners. In fact, some liberal Christian churches in the US have recognized same sex religious marriage for longer than any state government has recognized civil marriage.

          • 1bimbo

            no it doesnt’.. the 14th amendment referred to race, blacks in particular.. the fact that social activist federal judges are advocating for government mandated acceptance of homosexuality doesn’t make it right or constitutional.. forcing anyone to accept homosexuality violates the first amendment, free speech and religious liberty protections.. federal judges t are stretching the limits of any interpretation to try to enact their own ‘laws’about sexuality and sexual orientation- not the function of judges. their actions are unconstitutional.. if homosexuality advocates want to apply to become a special class, then they should follow the constitution and advocate for either an amendment passed by congress and signed by the president or an act passed in the same way

          • Merv99

            I suggest you read the 14th Amendment again. While it certainly was inspired by interest in protecting the civil rights of black people, and overturning the Dred Scott decision in particular, it in no way restricts itself only to black people. Section 1 defines citizens as “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” and then goes on to say how citizens, or even just people under its jurisdiction, are protected.

          • 1bimbo

            yes it applies to all people.. it doesn’t break anything down into special classes.. marriage is not a right.. it is the state’s preferences to sanction it.. state’s can choose not to sanction any and all marriages, and they would *not* be in violation of the constitution.. because AGAIN.. marriage is not a civil right

          • Merv99

            Marriage doesn’t have to be a right. Suppose a public library prohibited left handed people from checking out books. There is no right to a public library; cities can choose to provide them or not. But, if they provide them, they are subject to “due process” and “equal protection” considerations, both of which are contained in section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment (due process is also in the Fifth Amendment). Due process requires at least a “rational basis” for discrimination that would otherwise be a violation of equal protection. Everybody should be able to use the library on a non-discriminatory basis, unless there is a valid reason not to. The left handed library rule would violate this. On the other hand (pun intended), a rule that a ten year old could not check out Playboy from the library might not violate the Fourteenth Amendment.

          • rozlee

            It most certainly is a civil right. Just over five decades ago, my husband and I wouldn’t have been able to marry legally in the United States. Loving vs. Virginia changed that. Too many religious people thought that the children of Adam shouldn’t mix blood with the children of Ham. Not much has changed. Even today, in Mississippi, almost half of Republicans polled think interracial marriage should be illegal. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/interracial-marriage-illegal-46-mississippi-republicans-new-poll-article-1.111449.

          • Kay Burk

            So if gays were to take over the world as you suggest we are trying to do then gays can take away straight marriage and force you to hire expensive lawyers, pay court costs, miss work to make court dates just to make sure your partner can bury you if they wish, raise the children you have even if you didn’t make them together and you could live as married????

          • 1bimbo

            you mean like anyone else that wants to enter into a civil contract… yes

          • EdisonAlum

            Incorrect, again. Atheist straight couples who want to enter into a civil marriage contract don’t have to do all that. They can head to Vegas, hand over some cash and be married by an Elvis Impersonator within an hour. Their marriage will be recognized by the government exactly like any hetero religious couple’s church wedding (as long as they got the marriage license for it).
            It is wrong to put a Biblical requirement on a legal contract.

          • 1bimbo

            i’m insulted and so should you be that anyone would imply that race is the same thing as sexuality/sexual orientation.. race is immutable.. homosexuality is based on behavior.. every homosexual has the same right to enter into a civil contract with any other person and have all the same perks as married people – except for adoption which is thankfully for the protection of children.. find me one straight adult child of a homosexual couple that advocates for anyone to live in that lifestyle.. you’re hardpressed.. it’s cruelty

          • Merv99

            As far as marriage equality, it’s almost irrelevant whether sexual orientation discrimination is considered equivalent to racial discrimination. Jurisprudence surrounding the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment has resulted in several levels of “scrutiny” regarding discrimination toward “suspect classes.” The highest level of scrutiny, “strict scrutiny,” is currently applied to racial discrimination and religious discrimination. “Intermediate scrutiny” is applied to gender discrimination. The lowest level of scrutiny is “rational basis.” Even at this lowest level of scrutiny, courts are ruling against laws that exclude same-sex marriage. Some courts are applying somewhat heightened scrutiny, with the same results. If you considered sexual orientation discrimination to be equivalent to racial discrimination, then the rulings would almost certainly be unanimous because of strict scrutiny. But even without it, the vast majority of courts over the last year or so have ruled in favor of same-sex marriage.

          • 1bimbo

            it’s not the ‘vast majority of courts’.. it’s a string of cherry-picked liberal activist federal judges who are so immersed in their own self importance that they manipulate the constitution to further their social justice goals.. remember when the courts ruled that black people were 3/5s of a person? … the constitution and our system of government was built the way it is to prevent these violations of the public trust and representative government.. and these totalitarian ‘rulings’ by fed judges are temporary.. the pendulum always swings back the other direction

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Do you believe that science is evil and the work of the devil?

          • Kay Burk
          • Nicko Thime

            I’m insulted by your fanaticism and religiously caused blindness.

          • Karenc2002

            I have to jump into this with the bimbo. I’m transgendered and a male to female transsexual. My daughter would never stand for someone as stupid as you to sit and denigrade anyone for their sexual orientation. My daughter support me 100% in regards to my gender change and will go nose-to-nose with anyone that says anything bad about me.

            My daughter also has a daughter who thinks loves her “grandpa” completely. Now, you need to back off of all of this religious bullshit. The “sky fairy” or the “flying spaghetti monster” doesn’t exist and that piece of trash called the “bible” is nothing more than fairy tales. Religion has killed more people than any war ever has. As-far-as I am concerned, religion is nothing more than indoctrination for children into hate and should be considered “child abuse.”

          • EminenceFrontman

            Gotta disagree with ya one this one; while the 14th Am. may have been intended to address freed people of color, it was just as soon used to recognize that, in Mitt Romney’s words, “corporations are people too.” See U.S. v Cruikshank 92 U.S. 542 (1876) That is hardly what I would call “socially activist judges” who empowered a legally-created paper entity with constitutional rights and protections. If you want further proof see Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company 118 US 394 (1886) for how 14th Amendment protections for former slaves were turned into protection for corporations. Also, the Full Faith and Credit clause requires a contract legally entered into in one state (and marriage is a contract,) must be deemed valid and enforceable in another: it’s the reason out-of-state Driver’s Licenses also must be recognized. If you’re going to argue law, you better get your facts straight or a judge will slap ya down.

          • gemini69sqrd

            Your Eminence, I bow down to you! You are awesome!

          • 1bimbo

            yet a texan with a valid concealed carry gun license is prohibited from carrying their firearms in a state which does not recognize concealed carry… so no.. other states do not always honor the licenses, contracts and legal trappings of all other states

          • Lisa

            We’re not telling you to be a homosexual, which would infringe your rights. We’re simply arguing that homosexuals should be able to pursue happiness and have the right to liberty.

            They being gay has NO bearing on how you choose to live your life.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Except bimbo thinks gays are icky and god tells her to hate them. So of course it’s the gay people who are wrong, right?

          • EdisonAlum

            Text of the 14th amendment can be found here. http://constitutioncenter.org/constitution/the-amendments/amendment-14-citizenship-rights Not a single reference to race anywhere in it.
            Our constitution and amendments were written to be intentionally vague, because the authors were smart enough to realize that similar issues would come up in the future. Issues that they couldn’t foresee, and couldn’t address specifically. Yet they wanted to be sure that rights such as equal protection under the law applied to everyone.

          • rebfan831

            Hey Bimbo…are you the lady that’s re-writing Harry Potter so her kids won’t turn into witches? I’m just wondering because you’ve both taken your religion to far.

          • Ramona Salden

            SPECIAL CLASS—have you lost your freaking mind, they are not indigent of aliens, they are fellow humans, created by the BIG Bang! What a sickening state of mind you bible thumpers live in, and the Christ you claim to follow, would roll the stone back over his grave if he heard you TRY to claim to know and follow him.

          • Mike Clifford

            “the fact that social activist federal judges are advocating for government mandated acceptance of homosexuality doesn’t make it right or constitutional.” Oh, but a vote by the public (basically ‘mob rule’) about who I can and cannot marry IS constitutional?? Let me ask you this – who voted to allow you the right to get married, bimbo? The courts were set up to rule if a law is constitutional or not. It’s their job. If the country voted today to not allow blacks to vote in the U.S., it would be the courts that would be there saying, “that’s not constitutional” and strike down the publicly voted on law. It’s the exact same thing with same sex marriage and that is exactly what court after court after court is doing in this country.
            Just cause you’re on the losing end of the ruling, don’t get butt hurt about it here.

          • 1bimbo

            the voting rights was passed (with a majority vote of representatives of everyone) and that’s where voting is addressed… there is no ‘homo rights act’ and not even a homosexuality advocacy amendment passed by our representatives, instead the mob rule of the minority is attempting to use a small number of activist judges(judicial tyrants) to force their views on the rest of us.. if homosexuality ‘rights’ are important enough to you then pass an amendment or pass an ‘act’ that supports it.. don’t foul up our system with unconstitutional ‘rulings’ where judges are trying to pass laws instead of interpreting the constitution – as is their job

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Ever hear of “tyranny of the majority”? That’s exactly why these so called “activist” judges exist. To protect the minority from tyranny of the majority.
            Black people are only about 14% of the population. Would it be OK if all of the white people decided to pass a law to deny blacks the right to vote?

          • 1bimbo

            homosexuals, fake poster, are a ‘minority’ -demanding to distort the constitution, attempting to force government mandated acceptance of their lifestyle(one that the vast majority find morally reprehensible) and manipulate federal activist judges(judicial tyrants) to rule in their favor

          • DCSDparent

            What about Brown v the Board of Education? Loving v. Virginia? In these cases, the public was against school desegregation and interracial marriage, but the courts found such laws unconstitutional. Do you disagree with those rulings?

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Better question. “who voted for her to have the right to vote…?” It wasn’t a given right in the past for women…

          • Kay Burk

            Key Clauses of the 14th Amendment
            Four principles were asserted in the text of the 14th amendment. They were:
            State and federal citizenship for all persons regardless of race both born or naturalized in the United States was reaffirmed.
            No state would be allowed to abridge the “privileges and immunities” of citizens.
            No person was allowed to be deprived of life, liberty,or property without “due process of law.”
            No person could be denied “equal protection of the laws.”
            Do you need help reading THIS??

          • 1bimbo

            does that go for polygamists, incestuous relationships and a group of co-workers who wish to ‘marry’ too for the, uh, ‘benefits’, right?

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Wrong. Again, I challenge you to show me how allowing two people to marry forces you to accept their lifestyle.

          • 1bimbo

            convenient.. as it stands now.. homosexuals are not allowed to adopt children in texas nor is homosexuality advocacy permitted in schools..and homosexual are not considered a ‘special class’ where people are required by law to serve them wedding cakes or take their intimate photos.. in states where homosexual ‘marriage’ is approved by the will of the people, homosexuality adovcates violate the 1st and 13th amendment- religious liberty and involuntary servitude.. they also require inappropriate public school curriculum instructing children about ‘healthy’ ‘sodomy’ and sexuality ‘exploration’.. inappropriate and destructive to healthy childhood development and a functional society.. homosexuality advocates are political correct fascists who attempt to destroy the lives of people who don’t agree with their ideology-doctors, attorneys, clergy, churches, educators, legislators and straight families.. texas doesn’t need that horsesh*t here

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Wow. There is so much propaganda and so few facts included in your statement, this might take a while. First of all, when someone or a group of people, are denied the same rights as others for no other reason than “We don’t like their lifestyle” and said people fight for those rights, that’s not considered a “special class”. That’s just someone wanting what everyone else already has. If they got to do something that you couldn’t do, that is the definition of a special class. Learn the difference. Second, homosexual marriage is legal in the state I live in (NY) and no one’s 1st amendment or 13th amendment rights have been violated. Freedom to practice your religion does not give you the freedom to violate someone else’s civil rights. As far as the 13th amendment, you need to re-read it. It abolished slavery and involuntary servitude. If you’re going to claim selling a cake or taking a picture against your will as involuntary servitude, than once again you need to better understand the meaning of that phrase. Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person’s will to benefit another, under some form ofcoercion other than the worker’s financial needs. If the baker, photographer, etc. are being paid for the services, then it is not involuntary servitude. So you’re wrong on both counts. And lastly, as someone with school age children in a state where we have no problem with homosexuals, I can assure you that my kids have never had any cirriculum preaching about sodomy and sexual exploration. They never had to read a book about having two daddys or mommys, or any of the other non-sense you’re claiming. This state managed to allow homosexuals to marry without any “fascists.. attempting to destroy the lives of people who don’t agree with the ideology”. It’s been well over a three years here since homosexuals have been allowed to marry and I notice no difference. There were some people in NY that sounded a lot like you, warning about how this is going to have a negative impact, blah, blah, blah. And it is yet to happen. In fact, in every state where same sex marriage has been made legal, all of those gloom and doom predictions have yet to occur. When it becomes legal in Texas, probably in about a year, you’ll see that nothing changes there either.

          • 1bimbo

            states’ rights trumps your social totalitarianism claims for the nation.. marriage is not a civil right, it is not in the constitution.. narcissism is not a civil right either which is the foundation of the homosexuality advocacy movement.. this country wasn’t built on the premise of ‘you owe me’.. ‘that hurts my feelings’ and faux ‘equality’.. our country was forged in liberty, rejection of tyranny and justice.. allowing a mob minority to dictate how the rest of us lead our lives or what we’re subjected to is unconstitutional.. no matter your short-lived ‘victories’, ultimately you will fail in your attempt to force government-mandated acceptance of homosexuality advocacy.. the backlash is already underway

          • Dot McFarlane

            People don’t have to follow a religion to be legally married. All they need is a marriage license and these woman have one.

          • Phyxius

            Actually, “marriage” is a civil contract, bound by civil law. Don’t believe me? Try to start or end a marriage without government approval and have it recognized by the state. Your marriage license doesn’t have to be signed by a clergyman, it MUST be signed, however by a government official and the two parties involved.

            As for whether or not marriage is a “right”…

            “Marriage is one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The
            Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

            ~ Supreme Court of the United States in Loving vs. Virginia (1967)

            AND…

            “DOMA’s principal effect is to identify a subset of state-sanctioned marriages and make them unequal. The principal purpose is to impose inequality, not for other reasons like governmental efficiency. Responsibilities, as well as rights, enhance the dignity and integrity of the person. And DOMA contrives to deprive some couples married under the laws of their State, but not other couples, of both rights and responsibilities. By creating two contradictory marriage regimes within the same State, DOMA forces same-sex couples to live as married for the purpose of state law but unmarried for the purpose of federal law, thus diminishing the stability and predictability of basic personal relations the State has found it proper to acknowledge and protect. By this dynamic DOMA undermines both the public and private significance of state-sanctioned same-sex marriages; for it tells those couples, and all the world, that their otherwise valid marriages are unworthy of federal recognition. This places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage. The differentiation demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects, … and whose relationship the State has sought to dignify. And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples. The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.”

            ~ SCOTUS in United States v. Windsor (2013)

            Sooooooo that would make you completely and utterly wrong, bimbo. It’s also the reason even Scalia already knows how this is going to turn out when SCOTUS takes up the issue. And the reason why Reich-wingers are freaking out harder and harder the closer we get to that day. They know that they’ve already lost. All that’s left now is the paperwork – and the weeping and gnashing of teeth.

          • EdisonAlum

            Thank you, Phyxius, well said. I’ve also always said that the religious extremists who want to put a Biblical requirement on a legal contract, know how it’s going to turn out at the Supreme Court level. They know discriminating against same sex couples is unconstitutional, they proved that by rushing to amend so many state constitutions to write this discrimination into it.

          • 1bimbo

            like that time scotus ruled it was ‘constitutional’ to count black people as 3/5s of a person? … marriage is not in the US constitution and at anytime if scotus addresses ‘whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects’ in reference to state laws, the 5 justices who would support such a stance are violating the constitution themselves because there is no reference to ‘sexual choices’ in the constitution.. if that would be the case, then the ‘sexual choices’ of pedophiles, incestuous relationships and polygamists would all be just as ‘valid’ under the windsor ruling.. so remember the time when scotus gets it wrong, the pendulum always swings back the other direction, because moral people push back and make it right

          • Lisa

            Actually, that is only a Christian interpretation of marriage. Marriage can also mean several other things – including a state-sanctioned partnership between two individuals.

            There are other places where marriage can mean one man, many women, or one woman, many men and it falls within the proper jurisdiction of what is marriage.

            You are enforcing a religious reading of a term that is used by the government in a non-religious way, specifically because the government is not to be a religious institution. As such, they *should not* read marriage as a religious covenant because they are not entitled to be a religiously influenced organization.

          • Darlene Kuykendall

            Were is the one for one woman many men? I could use a few more men around to complete the honey doo’s that my husband and neglegted! :)

          • JM74

            Trust me Bimbo (an odd choice of name if you ask me, completely denigrates yourself and suggests sexual proclivities not condoned in the Bible). My sex life is fully functional. And so is my love life, because I know love. I am loved. Are you? I mean besides by Jesus (though if he read some of what your posts here, I dunno, the Light and the Way might not agree with you).

          • 1bimbo

            you must be the ‘happy’ pitcher then.. because the poor catcher is the one at higher risk for disease and medically devastating consequences caused by the lifestyle.. yes, there is a reason why blood banks don’t accept the blood of homosexuals because it’s to great of a public health risk for the public at large

          • Jenny Garnsey

            Do some scientific reading about homosexuality. Take PSYC 101 at a local college. People are BORN gay, bi-sexual or transgendered. Do you REALLY think millions of people around the world would really chose to become targets for bigots on purpose. Your discrimination is no more different than calling a black person a certain N word for the color of their skin. I hope one day you find that out. (( when I was young, I was lead to believe that homosexuality is a sin and that gay people were perverted individuals. Then I looked at people I met, talked to them. People who were gay or bi-sexual and I found I couldn’t look at someone like that. Like they were less than anyone else. Just about every person I’ve ever met that was LGBT has always been just as awesome as any of my other friends. Then I started really looking at things on my own, and reading. Reading lots of scientific reports and even Bible verses. Educate yourself fully. ))

          • 1bimbo

            being black is not the same a being a homosexual.. and everybody has homosexuals in their families and some they work with.or come into contact with in their associations.. the only difference is before the totalitarian homosexuality advocacy movement their private lives were private.. now they’re demanding their sexuality/sexual orientation be automatically deemed a ‘civil right’.. well it’s not unless an amendment or ‘homo rights act’ or something like that is passed

          • DCSDparent

            So, they should just stay in the closet, you’re saying? They’re not allowed to walk hand in hand with their significant other, or put a picture of the two of them on their desk at work? Because same sex couples don’t go around talking about their sex lives any more than straight couples do, and certainly not as much as you went on and on about anal sex elsewhere in this comment section.
            You’re also taking a very “big government” approach towards civil rights. The declaration of independence states that all men are created equal and have certain unalienable rights. The ninth amendment says the specific mention of some rights in the constitution does not mean the people do not hold other rights.
            A true constitutionalist doesn’t need a special “homo rights act” to recognize that gays and lesbians should have the same rights that heterosexuals have, including the right to marry a consenting adult partner, and the right to get a driver’s license in their federally recognized, legal name (after passing their driver’s tests of course).

          • 1bimbo

            the sexually dysfunctional demanding ‘rights’ to marry is like disabled people in wheelchairs demanding the ‘right’ to use the stairs. it’s possible to do so but it’s not really effective or functional, is it?

          • DCSDparent

            It’s not up to you (or big government) to decide whether someone else’s marriage is “effective” or “functional”.

            And disabled people do have the “right” to use stairs if they choose. Would you actually deny this man the use of the stairs, just because you don’t think YOU would be able to do it?

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH82l-OEXcg

          • 1bimbo

            nice gimmick.. looks dangerous, tedious and i doubt 99% of the wheelchair bound can safely navigate stairs.. not going to advocate for doing away with wheelchair ramps.. and certainly won’t advocate for doing away with protecting traditional marriage

          • EdisonAlum

            He didn’t say we should do away with wheelchair ramps, just as no one has said we should do away with hetero marriage. The point is that you’re saying the government must specifically grant people their “rights” and if they haven’t then they don’t exist. He’s exactly right that you are taking a very non-conservative, “big government” stance here. That’s not the way it works. Everyone is allowed to use the stairs, whether or not you think they should use the ramp. Marriage should be the same. As long as the parties are consenting adults, everyone should be allowed to marry.

          • 1bimbo

            here’s where we disagree on perspective.. adding homosexuals to the marriage category is like throwing a mound of gravel on steps. it damages the effectiveness of the stairs and makes the steps hazardous for everyone… homosexuality advocates want to call themselves ‘married’ so they can force government mandated acceptance of sexually dysfunctional relationships.. doing so threatens religious liberty by pitting sexual orientation against freedom of religion, promotes misinformation about normal sexual behavior as well as detracts from the physiological and medical issues associated with such behavior.. government-mandated homosexuality advocacy damages healthy childhood development with age-inappropriate sex-related instruction and mandates special considerations for a group defined by behavior but not defined by an immutable trait or a constitutionally-protected civil right

          • EdisonAlum

            You still haven’t explained how someone else’s marriage infringes on YOUR religious liberty, or how a strangers marriage damages your own or makes it “hazardous”. Nor have you explained how the legal recognition of same sex marriages translates to “government mandated acceptance”, when in reality, people are still free to look down their noses at same sex couples and teach their children that it’s wrong, just as people currently teach their children that marrying outside their race or religion is wrong, even though the government recognizes those marriages, or that divorce, adultery and premarital sex are wrong, even though they are all legal.

            No one is throwing gravel on your stairs but you.

          • 1bimbo

            http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/09/30/christian-baker-who-lost-her-shop-following-refusal-to-bake-lesbian-couples-wedding-cake-reveals-the-two-huge-lies-she-says-our-culture-has-embraced/

            “Under Oregon law, Oregonians may not be denied service based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” read the release. “The law provides an exemption for religious organizations and schools, but does not allow private business owners to discriminate based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot legally deny service based on race, sex, age, disability or religion.”

          • 1bimbo

            http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/nm-court-says-christian-photographers-must-compromise-beliefs.html

            “….At its heart, this case teaches that at some point in our lives all of us must compromise, if only a little, to accommodate the contrasting values of others,” he wrote.

            He said the Constitution protects the rights of the Christian photographers to pray to the God of their choice and following religious teachings, but offered a sobering warning.

            “But there is a price, one that we all have to pay somewhere in our civic life,” the justice wrote. “The Huguenins have to channel their conduct, not their beliefs, so as to leave space for other Americans who believe something different. That compromise is part of the glue that holds us together as a nation, the tolerance that lubricates the varied moving parts of us as a people…..”

          • 1bimbo

            http://news.yahoo.com/couple-fined-refusing-host-gay-wedding-shuts-down-193206210.html

            ‘A Christian couple fined $13,000 for refusing to host a lesbian wedding on their New York farm has decided to close the venue rather than violate their religious beliefs.

            Cynthia and Robert Gifford decided not to host ceremonies anymore, other than those already scheduled, Alliance Defending Freedom attorney James Trainor told The Blaze. ”Since the order essentially compelled them to do all ceremonies or none at all, they have chosen the latter in order to stay true to their religious convictions, even though it will likely hurt their business in the short run,” he said…..’

          • 1bimbo

            http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/15/judge-rules-in-favor-lesbians-suing-hawaii-bb/
            ‘…..When Cervelli specified they would need one bed, the owner asked if they were lesbians. Cervelli responded truthfully and the owner said she was uncomfortable having lesbians in her house because of her religious views, the lawsuit said.

            The bed and breakfast violated the state public accommodations law and is ordered to stop discriminating against same-sex couples, according to the ruling dated April 11. The public accommodations law prohibits establishments that provide lodging to transient guests from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation, race, color, ancestry, religion, disability and sex –including gender identity or expression…..’

          • Nicko Thime

            Facts can’t disturb faith
            If they could, it wouldn’t be called faith.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            It’s not a lifestyle bimbo.

            If it was, can you tell me the time you said “You know what? I’m not attracted to women.”

          • gemini69sqrd

            Sooooo, i got married in a non-denominational civil ceremony that never mentioned God (because I am a Buddhist, and YES that is a valid religion, 500 million strong), does that mean that my marriage is not real, or valid?
            Actually, marriage is not a religious covenant. It is a legal ceremony, a law binding contract. That is why you need to get a license to obtain one, and go to court to get rid of one. LAW, LEGAL……..doesn’t need to involve your God.

          • 1bimbo

            marriage is a faith-based ceremony… states choose to sanction it.. state’s can choose not to sanction any and all marriage and they would be well within their right if the people in that state and the representatives in that state voted not to.. the federal government can not force a state to recognize marriage because it is not in the constitution and it is not an act or law passed by congress and signed by the president.. that’s how our system works

          • EdisonAlum

            Not true. There are two different forms of marriage. Legal and religious. You are ignoring the legal contract of marriage that two opposite sex atheists can obtain from a justice of the peace or an Elvis impersonator. There should never be a Biblical requirement to enter into a legal contract.

            Conversely, many churches do perform same sex wedding ceremonies. The government should never place one faith over another by recognizing some faiths marriages and not others.

          • 1bimbo

            those ‘churches’ which perform homosexual ‘marriages’ are frauds

          • EdisonAlum

            They are recognized by your beloved big government as tax exempt churches, just like any other. Tell me, in a country with freedom of religion, were there is no established national religion, why should the government pick and choose which churches marriages to recognize, and which not to?

          • Nicko Thime

            So now you are the arbiter of “god’s” word?

          • Nicko Thime

            Matrimony is a church based ceremony.

            Marriage is a civil contract.

          • Jenny Garnsey

            No, 1bimbo. Marriage is not from Christianity. I am a Christian and I’ll tell you, people all over the world of different faiths get married. Wiccans, Muslims, Jewish people, Hindi, Native American’s. It is not something that belong to just Christian people.

          • Ramona Salden

            No, bimbo, churches perform WEDDINGS….you need a state license for marriage…..geez, don’t you ever read a real book with real information for real people?

          • 1bimbo

            wrong.. marriages happen in churches primarily.. states sanction marriages.. if you don’t want to be married in a church or someone’s home then a justice of the peace has the power vested in him or her by the state to sanction your marriage

          • Nicko Thime

            http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-10-06-civilmarriage-usat_x.htm

            “Fewer American couples who marry today see the need for religion’s approval. The rate of civil marriage is on the rise coast to coast, a USA TODAY analysis of marriage license statistics suggests.”

          • Mike Clifford

            No, we don’t. We just want the same legal protections and benefits of the legal precedent of ‘marriage.’
            Frankly, I wouldn’t touch your religion with a ten foot pole.

          • rozlee

            The most ‘sexually dysfunctional lifestyle’ is adultery. The bible mentions homosexuality four times. It rails against adultery over a hundred times. Yet, we accept adultery by allowing divorced Americans to remarry. Jesus told his disciples that a person that put aside his wife and married another was an adulterer and made his wife an adulteress as well. Yet, we allow the practice of divorce and remarriage to be a part of American life. Adultery must be a much more serious sin than homosexuality. Because it’s mentioned a great deal more. If you truly wanted to defend the institution of marriage, you’d be petitioning the government and voting to end divorce and remarriage.

          • 1bimbo

            never go full libertarian.. libertarians advocate for the government not to sanction marriage nor divorce

          • rozlee

            Libertarians are people who bitch about government intervention after the government fixes the pot holes on the street they drive to work. You want marriage to be ‘a faith-based covenant between a man and a woman and God?’ You
            don’t want any kind of advocates to change its definition and usurp the practice to force government-mandated acceptance of sexually dysfunctional lifestyles? Just a few decades ago, couples living together ‘in sin’ was sexually dysfunctional. Divorce changes the definition and usurps the practice of marriage and the faith-based covenant between a man, a woman and god. But, that doesn’t get ruffle your feathers in the least. Selective outrage over sin.

          • 1bimbo

            we might as well live in a different universes much less a different state.. where do you live? in a p0rn star c0ven? where i live, we advocate for our sons and daughters not to live in sin, not to be promiscuous, to have healthy straight relationships and to marry as a faith-based covenant.. state’s sanction marriages, they don’t create them.. and the vast majority of people i know have been married to the same person for their entire lives.. and that includes myself.. you want to infect this state with your perversion, chronically divorced and broken families? no thank you

          • rozlee

            I live in TEXAS. A state with a higher rate of divorce and cohabitation that your favorite bugaboo, Massachusetts. Just google ‘Bible Belt has highest divorce rates in the country’ and see how many hits you get. The bastions of religious right morality have the most broken families and remarriages.

          • 1bimbo

            in the immoral blue cesspool urban centers like houston, austin and san antonio? yeah, i could see that being the case, but much of elsewhere, not likely

          • rozlee

            Good try, but no cigar. The cities in Texas with the most divorces are Beaumont and Tyler. In fact, they rank among the top 50 in the nation. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/10/17/the-50-cities-with-the-worst-divorce-rates.html.

          • 1bimbo

            you do realize tyler and beaumont are cities of 100,000 people and are run by dumbdemocrats

          • rozlee

            Oh, really? Tyler is Rep. Louie Gohmert’s district last I heard and is in the most arch conservative part of Texas.

          • Kay Burk

            no, you attend a church and beat that into your children!!! They are not free to have a PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with God, they are expected to be clones of you and your narrow minded beliefs. They probably are not even allowed to play with children that don’t go to YOUR church. how far off am i here? Being from a small town in Texas myself, I know how they raise kids!!! Thank Jesus that my Mama and Daddy know what unconditional love is, but i am one of the lucky ones. If your kid was gay would you kill them or just disown them?? Cause an abomination should be put to death, hope you don’t work on sunday or wear clothes that are of 2 or more different material cause that is an abomination too!!! oh and don’t mix your vegetables either!!!

          • 1bimbo

            you do christians a disservice with your ignorance of biblical tenets.. the bible is a brilliant and valuable guide to life.. the Good Book is allegory, literal, figurative, parable, metaphor and health guide.. if you had an adequate pastor you might have adopted the ideals instead of criticizing and attacking them as farce.. i’ll give you a basic example.. at the time the writing of the bible warned against pork, there was rampant sickness connected to consuming parasitic infected, diseased and contaminated pork.. that part of the bible reflected the protections offered to followers of the time.. here’s one more.. when you read the text ‘spare the rod, spoil the child’ in my church the ‘rod’ was translated as ‘guide’ and even ‘jesus’ who said, ‘i am the rod’.. soooo if you studied a little more and rethought your faith, you might could be saved.. one christian to another that is

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Then explain why the great state of Texas has one of the highest divorce rates in the country. You can’t blame that on homosexuals.

          • 1bimbo

            per capita? texas does not.. but i’m used to homosexuality advocates distorting numbers.. it is important to note that the concentration of divorce is in cesspool blue cities

          • Nicko Thime

            Well said

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Then why does Texas, and every other state, require people to get a marriage license If it’s a “faith based covenant between a man, a woman and God”? Sounds like without the government issuing you and your spouse a license, your marriage doesn’t exist.

          • 1bimbo

            the marriage ‘license’ is an agreed upon contract to have standing in court for shared assets.. but you can have a civil contract in the same way.. without being married. the only difference is homosexuality advocates like to attach the ‘ceremony’ of traditional marriage to their relationships to demand the state sanction it in the same way they would sanction a traditional married couple.. why is that? to force social acceptance of their lifestyle

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Anecdotal evidence on my part, but the people I know that are in same sex marriages weren’t too concerned about a church ceremony. They were concerned about having rights as a spouse to property, bank accounts, etc. Personally if a church doesn’t want to perform a same sex marriage ceremony that is their right. For a state not to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple, thus denying them the same legal protections that heterosexual couples have, is discrimination. And it will be judged so by the SCOTUS. And you still haven’t demonstrated how same sex marriage forces their lifestyle on you. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. You don’t have to like it, and it has absolutely no effect on your life.

          • 1bimbo

            you can have all those asset management rights with a power of attorney

          • Heywood Jablowme

            And the tax advantages? What about the hospitals that only allow family to make decisions regarding life and death? Or even to visit someone critically ill?
            You’ll never win this argument when your entire argument is based on “because I don’t like it”, which from what I can tell is your entire argument. You, and others like you, are less than 1 year away from being on the wrong side of history… again.

          • 1bimbo

            doesn’t happen.. yes a legal document takes care of decisions about the critically ill too.. and no, scotus has not ruled that states’ rights are unconstitutional and will not no matter how much you wish it so.. there is no ‘marriage’ rights in the constitution .. if scotus were to make an unconstitutional ruling based on ‘one state does it then the rest should too’, then the same would go for gun laws, prostitution laws, marijuana laws, etc.. on that day we would cease – by judicial fiat- being a constitutional republic of states

          • Heywood Jablowme

            You are so wrong, it’s not funny. Here are a list of things denied same sex couples in states where they can’t marry:

            If a couple is not married and one partner dies, the other partner is not entitled to bereavement leave from work, to file wrongful death claims, to draw the Social Security of the deceased partner, or to automatically inherit a shared home, assets, or personal items in the absence of a will.

            Unlike spouses, unmarried partners are not considered next of kin for the purposes of hospital visitation and emergency medical decisions. In addition, they can’t cover their families on their health plans without paying taxes on the coverage, nor are they eligible for Medicare and Medicaid coverage.

            Unmarried surviving partners do not automatically inherit property should their loved one die without a will, nor do they get legal protection for inheritance rights such as elective share or bypassing the hassles and expenses of probate court.

            Unmarried couples are denied the automatic right to joint parenting, joint adoption, joint foster care, and visitation for non-biological parents. In addition, the children of unmarried couples are denied the guarantee of child support and an automatic legal relationship to both parents, and are sometimes sent a wrongheaded but real negative message about their own status and family.

            Do I need to go on? SCOTS will not make an “unconstitutional ruling’ based on “one state does it then the rest should do it”. What they will base the decision on is the fact that rights are being denied to a certain segment of the population for no other reason than people don’t like a certain lifestyle. That’s it. And when they make that ruling, and they will, then all of the laws and amendments to state constitutions outlawing same sex marriage will be as unconstitutional as laws denying blacks the right to vote. Your side will lose.

          • 1bimbo

            there is no ‘requirement’.. it’s a way for the state to recognize the relationship and to have standing in court regarding each other’s assets.. the same can be achieved with a civil contract with any gender

          • Nicko Thime

            It’s not a faith based anything. It is a CIVIL contract.

          • Jed

            have you read all of the bill of rights?

            have someone read nine and ten to you if you need help.

          • Thomas Alex

            Marriage is a Civil Right per the US Constitution and the United States Supreme Court. Freedom from Religion is protected before Freedom of Religion is.

          • 1bimbo

            there is no freedom ‘from’ religion.. there is however freedom ‘of’ religion

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Oh so you mean that people can’t legally be atheists?

            Um..

          • Kay Burk

            Freedom of religion IS freedom from religion!!! We are free not to be subjected to one religions rule!!!

          • Philip Thomas

            Actually it does, have you read the Amendments, The 9th amendment to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, addresses rights of the people that are not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. It states The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. The only way the ban on same sex marriage can be legal is to ban all marriage!

          • 1bimbo

            oklahoma has a bill-in-waiting with that in mind in the event scotus rules unconstitutionally to force states to accept homosexual ‘marriage’.. i suspect other states will follow suit.. the government can not force states to sanction ‘marriage’

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Yes, they can. And here is why same sex marriage will be legal in Texas within the year. When the Utah case goes to the Supreme Court, should the court choose to hear it, this was Justice Kennedy’s opinion on DOMA: “Under DOMA, same-sex married couples have their lives burdened, by reason of government decree, in visible and public ways”. Kennedy also wrote that DOMA violated constitutional protections and discriminated against gays and lesbians by preventing them from fully accessing “laws pertaining to Social Security, housing, taxes, criminal sanctions, copyright, and veterans’ benefits.” That’s exactly what the woman in the story above is complaining about. You think he’s changing that opinion? Nope. The court will rule that states HAVE to recognize same sex marriages because to not do so will be considered discrimination. You, and others who think like you, will once again be on the wrong side of history.

          • 1bimbo

            does that go for polygamy and incestuous ‘marriage’ too? their argument is the same.. that’s the problem with the looney left.. they have no morals, no sense of decency, don’t respect how our government functions and distort the constitution.. the simple fact is ‘marriage’ is not a civil right.. it is not in the constitution, therefore it is a states’ rights issue.. ruling any other way is in violation of our country’s founding document.. 2% of the population igniting mass hysteria with buzzwords like ‘inequality’, ‘homophobia’ and ‘marriage rights’ doesn’t change that

          • Ramona Salden

            so is non-religion, bimbo

          • Robyn Ann

            My right as a US Citizen carries EVERY right you claim to have. Period.

          • Melanisia

            You have the right to worship as you please, this does not mean you have the right to dictate how others live based on YOUR beliefs. In fact it means the complete opposite as you are allowed to worship as you please, they are allowed to worship or not worship as THEY please. Everyone gets to believe as they want, no one gets to use those beliefs to make rules about how others live.

          • Michael Fisher

            The right to shove your particular religion down everyone elses damned throats is NOT a constitutional right. Christian fundamentalists in this nation have YET to figure that out. And they wonder why they’re seen, rightly, as loons.

          • (justsomeguy151 is a gay turd)

            I guess you are against interracial marriage as well. Do you also follow the Christian law of not letting your hair get unkempt (Leviticus 12)? Hypocrite.

          • Nicko Thime

            Religion was deliberately EXCLUDED from the Constitution.
            It was literally told to take a hike.

          • didi

            Yes, you are a bimbo because only my gender but not my sexuality, nor my marital status is printed on my Texas driver license. The driver license of my wife does not show her name at birth. She was never hassled. The issue here is not civil rights but equal protection under the law. The DPS person who violated the constitution should be immediately fired but she will not be immediately fired because this is a God-infected state.

          • boblucas

            you don’t have to defend your homosexuality

          • Azlefty

            Such as your Hubris?

          • Marcus J. Hopkins

            If you want to live in a theocracy, I suggest you move to Iran.

          • leastyebejudged

            But your intolerant ones are ?

            Liar, hypocrite, cowardly POS.

          • Ignatz

            Your pretense of being a Christian is not a justification for imitating the New Testament Pharisees.

          • Philip Thomas

            SAYS BIMBO 1

          • Jenny Garnsey

            Mine is not a tolerance. Mine is of love, understand, and acceptance. I believe in Jesus and that makes me a Christian. I, also, believe that people who happen to be gay or straight are both born that way. You can not explain away how children, born to straight parents, feel so gender blocked and feel like they are not the gender they were born to the point of depression. So many people try to site things in the Bible stating that being gay is a sin. God created everyone. He does NOT create sin. There for, being gay is not a sin. Most people who are gay in the world would tell you, if they had a choice, they would not want to be gay. Simply because of all of the crap they have to go through with bigotry and extreme Bible thumpers and homophobes. No one would chose to be called names, looked down upon, and beaten. They are born the way they are, just like straight people.

          • 1bimbo

            not sure what’s more disturbing, when self-proclaimed ‘christians’ try to fraudulently re-write and distort biblical tenets or when someone claims to be a christians but violates the tenets of the faith.. if you advocate for government-mandated acceptance of homosexuality you are violating biblical tenets and if you think you can change the Word of God, you are blaspheming and need to reconcile if christianity is actually meant for you

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Ah the old “Word of God” argument. Except God isn’t mentioned in your favorite document, the Constitution. So God’s word doesn’t mean diddly when it comes to the law of this land. That only happens in a theocracy.

          • TrollopeReader

            you blaspheme against God with each and every comment.

          • Ramona Salden

            Not everyone believes in your fairy tale book and we
            refuse to be ruled by it’s Sharia Laws.

          • sfsilver

            The Constitution however is a catch-all to prevent the bible be the basis for law. Also there is nothing unethical about marriage equality. In fact I’m guessing most ethics experts would say what is unethical is preventing this woman from having a driver’s license as a matter of law over what amounts to religious objections in a Nation that is not a theocracy.

          • texasaggie

            And what does that have to do with the case at hand?

      • http://www.monster-island.net/ kushibo

        DeserSun59, that was a big fat fail. Dustin Sandage is right on the money: Matthew 10:34 and the verses surrounding it are talking about the opposite situation you suggest.

      • Benjamin Eugene NElson

        Counter argument Mark 12:31

        • johnnyboyjohn

          Looks to me like the bible conflicts with itself in many places!

          Same ol’ same ol’. The bible is not a very good document to try and prove anything. It’s not historically accurate, the values run all over the map (beating wives, having more than one wife, owning slaves, one cloth made from two fibers, two different crops in a field) and on and on.

          Christians stupidly think they have a monopoly on religion. They forget there are several other ones out there that don’t use the bible as their rule book.

          • rtknight

            SHHHHH!!! Don’t say things like that Johnnyboy, You’ll have “x-ians” screaming “RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION!!!!”.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            how they can be persecuted when the vast majority of people in the US are baffles me. By the way some people think you’d think ISIS was in the US slaughtering people who don’t convert..

          • TKay Michel

            That’s because the bible was written by MEN, not ‘inspired by God’ as the Christians believe. No book that claims one group is ‘God’s chosen people’ could have possible come from God, because God has no chosen people. No book that says one gender must submit to another ever came from God. And no book that is as historically and scientifically inaccurate as the bible could have come from God, because God would know better! And how do I know this? Because I had a NDE in ’97, and even though I was an agnostic, I still was welcomed into Heaven. Nobody asked me what religion I belonged to, because there is no religion in Heaven. (Think about it: why would there be?) Nobody in Heaven cares about sex, either, because they’re spiritual beings so sex isn’t happening there. All the things we fight over down here: religion, sex, money, power…none of them exist in Heaven, and so God really doesn’t care about any of it. God only cares about the love in your heart. And anyone who hates gays, or nonChristians, or anyone else, isn’t going to make it into the Light, not because they’re being punished but simply because hatred can’t exist there, because if you’re full of hate, you simply can’t stand the intensity of God’s Light. Jesus himself said, in the future, the world would be full of people claiming to be Christians and that he would tell them, “I never knew you.” He was talking about the haters!

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            It does. And that’s why it makes me sad that people choose to miss the messages of love and tolerance. I’m not saying everyone who calls themselves a christian is a bad person. I’ve several friends who are and are aware of my non-christian nature and are OK with it. Heck, one of my heroes was a priest. (RIP Mr Fred Rogers.)

            But people like Bimbo there just make me sad.

      • Kalib Butler

        Jeremiah 31:34

      • Brandon marsh

        Matthew 10:34 = 34 Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth, but a sword.

        Matthew 10:52-53

        52 “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?” (NIV)

        Jesus denounces violence to accomplish the will of God—at least as Peter imagines the will of God. Then Jesus says that he has more than twelve legions of angels at his disposal. He did not come to crush the Roman Empire. Instead, he willingly lays down his life and dies for the sins of the whole world. Will it accept this wonderful gift?

        Don’t take one line out of the bible out of context it makes you look stupid

      • Brandon marsh

        So are you saying that these real Christians deserve to die by the same sword the use to punish so said by Jesus a fucking 18 lines later in the same passage

      • Philip Thomas

        You need to learn how to read a BOOK of the bible or at least a chapter, not just one verse. That line is taken out context all together.

      • Robyn Ann

        You are fake. POSER!

    • Benjamin Eugene NElson

      And yet you do realize that many Christians are for same sex marriages and the like?

      Considering that about 70% of Americans Identify as “christian” they’d have to be for us to get anywhere.

      • JamesOfNY

        Indeed, thank you for the reminder. We should always be careful to distinguish between Christians and Christian extremists.

        • Kevin Schmidt

          Whatever, Christians are still responsible for more murder, torture, terror, rape, looting and pillaging than all other religions combined.

          • Garl Boyd Latham

            That’s a fascinating (if hateful) statement to make, Kevin. Any time you’re ready to provide some documentation, I’d be interested in reviewing it.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson
          • Kevin Schmidt

            Thanks for posting that link, but unfortunately, Christians were only warming up during the Crusades.

          • boblucas

            your hatred shows your lifestyle…..

          • Kevin Schmidt
          • JamesOfNY

            I don’t really see much use in tallying up and comparing the dead from different religions, even if it were possible to disentangle religious, political, and economic motives from centuries past (Hard enough in the present!). I am more interested in people today and what they are doing. Christians who are just being Christian in a way that does not impinge on the rights of others should not be held responsible for the misdeeds of their forbearers, or their more extreme contemporaries. I don’t know what your nationality/race/ideology is, but I doubt you’d like to be judged on the basis of the worst of your kind.

          • Kevin Schmidt

            If you think Christians are no longer committing horrendous deeds in the name of Jesus, then you are living in denial.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            Kevin?

            Just because some of them do doesn’t mean all of them do. Please don’t go to the other end of the spectrum in paining a lot of people with the same brush.

          • Kevin Schmidt

            When did I say “all of them”?
            Oh, that’s right, never.

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            I never said you did, I said you seem to be heading that way.

          • Kevin Schmidt

            You’re the worst liar in the world. Pretty dumb of you to think I would not reread your last comment where you said, “Just because some of them do doesn’t mean all of them do.”

            Now take a hike and stop wasting my time.

          • boblucas

            when did you say anything?

          • boblucas

            are you muslim?

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            I believe there are good Christians. please don’t get me wrong. But to say “Christianity has never been used to spread hate” is not true.

            After all 70% of the US has identified as christian on the last census. Without Christians there would be no progress made in gay rights at all.

    • invictus2

      Looking at the large number of upvotes for your post is uplifting. There are a lot of people that recognize the hypocrisy. Thanks for a great post.

    • Stroud Coe

      How is this hate?

  • Tigernan Quinn

    So now you can just ignore legal documents when you want? I took my husband’s last name in 2003 – we weren’t worried about a legal marriage, we just wanted to be a family unit – and that was a judge’s order. Would they really ignore that here?

  • Jim_FTL

    I see the basis for a great Federal court case. Texas is just setting itself up for a fall on this one.

    • 1bimbo

      not likely.. with the next conservative prez comes installation of conservative federal judges who honor the constitution unlike liberal judges who are social activists

      • Jim Kane

        Actually the Constitution requires Texas to recognize and respect all of the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state, Article IV, Section 1. I suggest you learn what the Constitution actually entails instead of just regurgitating the same gibberish that you hear on talk radio.

        • Jeff Bowles

          You are being too kind to the bimbo.

          • Jim Kane

            I did not notice that until after I had written the post and had read 1bimbo’s other posts. I would lay even money that with the lack of proper grammar that this same person also is a supporter of “english only” laws as well.

          • Shea LaRoux

            Not to mention her assumption that a conservative will prevail in the next election. HA!!! With the reputation that the conservatives have at this point? Who is she kidding?

          • marcusgresham

            Seems to me that any truly staunch conservative is but a mere stroll through a public park away from being nabbed in a career-ending homosexual affair.

          • 1bimbo

            sorry.. contrary to the beliefs of the sexually dysfunctional, not everyone wants a pickle in their p o o p e r

          • http://www.monster-island.net/ kushibo

            There are more straight people putting their pickles in someone’s p o o p e r than there are gay people doing it. Simple math: percent of straight people engaging in anal sex (medium) multiplied by the number of straight people (high), versus percent of gay men doing it (I guess high) multiplied by the number of gay men (low). Same with cunning linguists. Chew on that.

          • Kalib Butler

            It’s surprising how many straight people have anal sex. So, it’s not just gay people. It’s EVERYWHERE…
            Oh, and I can also quote stuff:
            Treaty of Peace and Friendship, Signed at Tripoli November 4, 1796
            ARTICLE 11.

            As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense
            founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of
            enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as
            the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility
            against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no
            pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an
            interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

          • leastyebejudged

            Fun facts : Straight people have anal sex WAY more than gay people, simply because there are + 10 times more straight people.

            So when a straight person expresses some issue over anal sex or “sodomy” (which includes oral sex), they are being the worst hypocrites and liars ever. And you should point these facts out, ridicule them, and laugh loudly in their faces.

          • 1bimbo

            that’s such bullsh*t.. the only women who practice sodomy are p r o s t i t u t e s,
            p o r n stars and addicts

          • leastyebejudged

            You’re an idiot, and a liar.

          • leastyebejudged

            …and your mother, don’t forget your mother…

          • EdisonAlum

            I feel sorry for your husband. To go through life without ever getting a blowjob.

          • Dot McFarlane

            Sodom’s downfall wasn’t homosexuality. Please read Ezekiel 16:49.

          • Phyxius

            Good lord – you really don’t get out much, do you?

          • TrollopeReader

            well….you would know, as your name is synonomous with slut and prostitute…..

          • Phyxius

            I do. Living in Gohmert’s district I run into that a LOT. My response: You mean you would outlaw blowjobs? REALLY? I bet your wife would be thrilled!

            Then I smile and walk away…

          • johnnyboyjohn

            Wow, sounds like you think about anal sex a little too much. Seriously, pick a new hobby.

          • rextrek1

            if you’re putting food in your body orifice…that’s on you……and FYI- Einstein – SODOMY is ANY and ALL sex that’s NOT Missionary PP to VaJJ..so ALL ORAL SEX IS Sodomy too!

          • TKay Michel

            You really need to work on your reading comprehension. That’s not what marcusgresham meant. But then, you seem to be seriously stupid. Anyone who is proud to be a bimbo has got to have a limited intellect.

            Bet you’re from Texas and need oversized breast implants to even feel like a woman. One of my friends was a nurse in Houston; she told me that so many woman in Texas have breast implants, one of the first things they check when a woman is in a car crash is whether her implants have burst. For a state that beats the “God drum” so loudly, they seem awfully focused on sex if so many of the women there need silicon pillows in their boobs to catch a man!

          • Angela Marie

            Hey hey now. I’m too am from Texas, but I do not agree with this idiot bimbo person at all… can we please leave the Texas bashing out? …. p.s. mine are all natural!

          • Joshua DeLapp

            Contrary to your ignorance, the statistical fact is that there are more heterosexuals having anal sex than there even EXIST homosexuals.

          • 1bimbo

            just making it up now… still horsesh*t

          • Shawnee Luke

            Anyone else notice that homophobes seem more concerned about gay sex than gay people are themselves? Why else do they keep making comments like this about anal sex? I know I don’t meet new couples for the first time and talk about what they do in their bedroom.

          • 1bimbo

            no such word as ‘homophobe’.. just a made up word by homosexuality advocates to try to control and quiet speech against their propaganda

          • Shawnee Luke

            dictionary.com disagrees with you.

            Back to my question: Why do you care how other people have sex?

          • Heywood Jablowme

            And not everyone has to have it. You keep going back to this argument about how Texas recognizing same sex marriage will force a lifestyle on you, but it won’t. I’ve been married to the same woman for 22 years here in the really great state of New York, where same sex marriage is legal. Hasn’t affected my wife and I. We’re still married and neither one of us thinks about trying out the “gay lifestyle” as you put it.

          • 1bimbo

            yep

          • Jim Kane

            Well, I suggest that you need to learn proper english first.

          • 1bimbo

            ..or else what?

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            You’ll continue to look stupid.

        • 1bimbo

          i bet the low info looney liberals gobble up that drivel you shovel.. article IV,Section1 states: ‘Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State; and the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be approved, and the Effect thereof’

          that does not go for prostitution as recognized as a profession in Nevada, no matter if a brothel is ‘licensed’ by the state of Nevada… and that doesn’t go for polygamy either as a federal judge in Utah has now deemed it ‘unconstitutional’ for the state of Utah not to recognize a polygamist ‘marriage’… and it doesn’t go for homosexual ‘adoptions’ which are not recognized in the state of Texas… no matter how much you morally-bankrupt whiners want to whine about it

          • Baltimatt

            No judge in Utah has ruled it is unconstitutional to not recognize polygamous marriage.

          • 1bimbo
          • 1bimbo
          • 1bimbo
          • Heywood Jablowme

            That doesn’t legalize polygamy. It only deals with co-habitation. Basically the ruling kind of does what the Oklahoma law that you keep cheering about does. It only allows you to have one marriage license, but you can get married in your church 100 times. In other words, the state will only recognize 1 person as your legal spouse. But in their church, they can get married over and over again.

          • Jim Kane

            She is trying to claim that the ruling concerning Utah’s law about cohabitation is legalizing polygamy. Which, of course it does not. The Supreme Court ruled on polygamy over a century ago.

          • Jim Kane

            You really are stupid aren’t you? Prostitution is not recognized as a profession in all of Nevada only certain counties. That only applies to those counties, not the entire state. Polygamy has already been addressed by the Supreme Court over a century ago. It was argued that it was protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court did not buy it. And I am an openly Gay man who adopted in Texas many years ago, and there is no law in Texas preventing us from adopting. And my partner could have adopted my son as well with both of us on the Birth Certificate. And regardless, you are still wrong. The Constitution still requires states to recognize the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state, that means Marriage Licenses as well. It is not drivel, it is what is in the Constitution. And why do hide behind a pseudonym? (That means fake name) Do you lack the strength of your convictions to stand behind them publicly? How can you accuse me of being “morally bankrupt” when you self identify as “one bimbo”? You do know what a bimbo is? I have to ask considering how bad your grammar and punctuation is. Oh, that’s right, I forgot how stupid you are.

          • 1bimbo

            all of nevada is allowed to legalize prostitution.. only a handful of counties have applied to do so.. polygamy is a caste system which assigns value on primarily women and children based on wife and birth order.. the marriages are typically arranged as well.. the last thing looneyliberals need to advocate for is a ‘marriage’ system which treats women like chattle..

            and no the state of texas is not required to honor a prostitution contract in nevada even when the prostitute and her john come to live in texas..

            pseudonym to ‘hide’? is that what you think? i believe, you people on the left are sociopaths.i wouldn’t trust any of you with my identity if someone paid me

          • Jim Kane

            Oh honey, you need to freshen your tin foil. You’re the one sounding like a sociopath. Polygamy is not legal anywhere in the US. The Supreme Court has already ruled on this over a century ago. It is not legal in the US according to Federal Law and backed up by the Supreme Court. And the word is chattel. And could hide a little better? Please? Someplace far away? It really would not be hard to find your IP if the “looney liberals” wanted to find you. But I think you really need to worry about the mean in the white coats with the-one-size-fits-all-I-love-me jacket. Honestly, all your arguments just show how ignorant you and your kind are. For that I thank you and Westboro. They have done more to further the cause of equality by showing how ignorant prejudice is. Just as you do even with your horrible grammar and now spelling. You notice there are very few people or even any that are coming to your defense.

          • 1bimbo

            you’ve used up all your lefty ‘tolerance points’ with the public at large so fewer people are buying all your memes about westboro church or elitist demands for grammar and spelling on dumb website threads.. everyone knows this is a liberal blog which spews lefty socialist opinions so of course the patriots don’t typically hang around here.. the lunacy would drive anyone to buy more ammo.. anywho.. you’re just another wayout lost lefty so i consider you relatively harmless.. maybe you’ll learn a thing or two about conservatism if i haunt this website

          • Jim Kane

            Do you know how to capitalize? So you consider me harmless, but a sociopath that you have to hide from by using a pseudonym? So which is it? I have learned a thing or two about conservatism from you. You are ignorant, uneducated, have no idea how our government works, and possibly inbred. And I don’t need to buy more ammunition. I’m also a Texan (note the capitol T there), I buy in bulk as well.

          • 1bimbo

            ahh, hyperbole.. it’s exhilarating isn’t it.. your name calling doesn’t bother anybody.. and i’m educated allright.. i’m also smart enough to know that the only difference between you and me is ideology..

          • Jim Kane

            No, it is not exhilarating to know that there are disgusting evil people like you in the world. And there is a lot more than mere ideology that separates you from me. It is called humanity, which you do not posses. It is called logic, which you do not posses. It is called a shift key, which you do not posses or don’t know how to use.

          • 1bimbo

            ‘evil’.. really? evil is ISIS, evil is people who r a p e, rob and steal.. evil is governments who use chemical weapons on their own people.. evil is the satanic church who is claiming ‘free speech’ to hold a black mass in oklahoma.. evil is allowing children to die because of anti-vaxxer hysteria… you don’t know what evil is.. you are just p*ssed because a conservative doesn’t buy your looneyliberal drivel

          • Dorito Reiss

            Now I know what the problem is: vaccines have rendered you brain damaged!

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            HEY GUYS.. STOP PICKING ON HER.. Even though she flat out says things that are wrong in an attempt to deny other people basic humanity and that’s totally what Jesus would do. BUT STOP PICKING ON HER.. GOD HATES PEOPLE SHE HATES DON’T YOU KNOW THAT?!

          • 1bimbo

            your ‘hate’ meme is such horsesh*t.. it’s about morality and protection of children, not about the narcissistic attempts of the sexually dysfunctional to force government mandated acceptance of their lifestyle on the vast majority of people who want to protect children from perversion

          • Dot McFarlane

            If you want to protect children, protect them from PEDOPHILES, not gay people. Most pedophiles are STRAIGHT.

          • 1bimbo

            1/3 of pedophiles are homosexual.. pretty harrowing statistic given that homosexuals make up 2-3% of the population

          • Dot McFarlane

            So naturally I guess you’ll assume that every gay person is a pedophile (which is NOT the case!!)??

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Statistics to back that up please. And from a reputable source.

          • 1bimbo

            http://www.homosexinfo.org/Sexuality/Pedophilia

            ‘..homosexuals commit more than 33% of all reported child molestations in the United States, which, assuming homosexuals make up 2% of the population, means that 1 in 20 homosexuals is a child molester, while 1 in 490 heterosexuals is a child molester…’

          • Heywood Jablowme

            You clearly have no understanding of what is meant by the term “reputable source”, do you? You’re citing stats from http://www.homosexinfo.org? That’s like citing how much the state of Texas sucks from the site http://www.texassucks.org. Now go and find a real, reputable source. By the way, notice the first sentence in your source: “The alleged association between homosexuality and pedophilia is a contentious issue that is addressed on this page.” Even your source admits this is just an “alleged association”.

          • Robyn Ann

            no theyre not. 99% are heterosexual and you know it, troll

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            And that entire thing was just a regurgitation of your standard anti-gay propaganda line.

            John 8:17…

          • Benjamin Eugene NElson

            It’s about imposing YOUR morality under a thinly veiled excuse of “Won’t someone think of the children!?” You’re right about that.

            And if you choose to be gay and it’s a lifestyle, when did you choose to not be gay, bimbo? I mean if it’s a choice to be it, it must be a choice to not be it right?

          • TrollopeReader

            If you were actually concerned about your (supposed) children, you’d have a moniker other than bimbo. Though, perhaps that’s how you came to have children….

          • Heywood Jablowme

            “claiming free speech”? First amendment, my friend. The Church of Satan is a recognized church, which means they are entitled to all of the same constitutional protections as your favorite religion is. The more of your replies that I read, the more obvious it becomes that you only like the constitution when you believe that it justifies what you believe, rather than what it actually says. The constitution exists to protect the little guy not only from government, but from the “tyranny of the majority”.

          • TrollopeReader

            …and a college education is something you most likely have and she doesn;t…..

          • TKay Michel

            Yes, the obvious lack of literacy in your posts is proof of how ‘allright’ your education is! And you’re deluded if you think ideology is the only difference between yourself and the man you’re harassing…his heart isn’t full of hatred, while YOURS is overflowing with evil. You may think you’re praying to God, but it’s Satan who is accepting your prayers. When your heart is full of hatred, God doesn’t hear your prayers; they go directly to the other guy!

          • TKay Michel

            Um…patriots don’t try to take away the rights of other citizens. They have respect for the United States Constitution, and don’t try to force THEIR religion down other people’s throats. And if you’re deliberately ‘haunting’ a ‘liberal’ website, then you’re definitely NOT a Christian, either, because Jesus wasn’t exactly a Conservative, nor would he approve of your hatred of anyone and everyone else.

            I’ve been to Heaven, and I can promise you, with your current attitude, you won’t be welcome there.

          • 1bimbo

            jesus wasn’t political.. if you think He was then you have the problem and need to consult with your pastor or priest

          • TKay Michel

            So where did you say you got your degree in psychology? Watching tv, right? You don’t even know what a sociopath is! I do have a degree in psychology, and I can tell you that you sound more like a sociopath than the other people commenting here. But I’m pretty sure you’re not a sociopath, because sociopaths generally have high IQs. I’m guessing you suffer from clinical narcissism and borderline personality disorder. At the very least, you’re a raging codependent.

          • 1bimbo

            your attempt at head shrinkage is pathetic

          • Joshua DeLapp

            “all of nevada is allowed to legalize prostitution”

            Bzzzzzzzt, wrong answer:

            Per NRS 244.345, only counties that have a population of 700,000 or less (as of the last dicennial census) may legalize brothels. This means that 5 of the counties in the state cannot legalize brothels; it’s not simply a matter of them not applying to do so.

          • Baltimatt

            Actually, marriage has never been found to fall under Full Faith and Credit.

          • Jim Kane

            Obergefell v. Wymyslo On April 14, 2014, Judge Timothy Black, of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, declared Ohio’s ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional and that Ohio must recognize same-sex marriages from other jurisdictions.

          • Baltimatt

            That case was decided on Equal Protection and Due Process issues, not Full Faith and Credit.

            http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4084558157698332873&q=Obergefell+v.+Wymyslo&hl=en&as_sdt=20000006&as_vis=1

          • 1bimbo

            horsesh*t! ‘marriage’ is not mentioned in the constitution.. no state even has to sanction it.. and oklahoma has a bill in waiting to that end if scotus tries to force states to do so

          • Baltimatt

            You obviously did not read my post. I said marriage is not covered under Full Faith and Credit.

          • johnnyboyjohn

            Oklahoma… LOL, that figures.

          • Heywood Jablowme

            You mean the bill to no longer issue marriage licenses to anyone? Good luck passing that. It’s got almost no chance of passing. What do you do with the people that already have a government sanctioned marriage? The federal government won’t recognize your marriage without a valid license. That means couples married in a religious ceremony won’t qualify for tax breaks, or other federal protections offered to married couples. Not a chance that that bill passes.

          • TKay Michel

            The only one here who is “morally bankrupt” is YOU! Maybe you should go read what Jesus said about gays…oh, right, he didn’t say ANYTHING about gays, he just told his followers to love their neighbor. Not their STRAIGHT neighbor, just any neighbor. He also said “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone” and “Judge not, lest ye be judged”…and here’s one that applies directly to you: “Hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye. Then you can see to help your brother.” But you aren’t interested in brotherhood or love, are you? I bet you’re a really lonely person that nobody else can stand, so you cherry pick quotes from the old testament to justify your bitterness, anger, and hatred. Try sticking to the red letters in the new testament, because you’re not a Christian unless you follow CHRIST. Unfortunately, most so-called “Christians” today are actually Moseites or Paulites, because they’re following the teachings of Moses or Paul instead of the teachings of Jesus.

      • DesertSun59

        Nice try. Let’s talk about Scalia and Alito.

      • KLSiegel

        Yeah – like them librul judges that said you can’t segregate schools or discriminate on the basis of race. My God, but you people disgust me. Conservative to me now means “hateful.” It didn’t, before – but now it does – because all you people do is try to impose your personal interpretation of Christianity on everybody, and cry and whine when you aren’t allowed to.

        • 1bimbo

          race is not the same thing as seuxality/sexual orientation.. race is immutable, sexuality is based on behavior.. you don’t have to be ‘gay married’.. but a black person will always be black

          • Merv99

            Can people change religions? Or is the US now like Islamic countries that don’t allow that?

          • 1bimbo

            religion is protected in the 1st amendment

          • EdisonAlum

            That’s incorrect. Sexual orientation is innate. I assume you’re straight? Could you have homosexual sex? Or does the thought of it disgust you? As a straight woman, the thought of sex with a woman completely and thoroughly disgusts me. I’m not straight because of my behavior, because I have sex with a man. I’m straight, and my behavior is to have sex only with a man, because I’m innately attracted to men and men only. Gays and lesbians are gay or lesbian because they are innately attracted only to their own gender. Bisexuals are bisexual because they’re innately attracted to both genders. (note: A straight person who had a drunken same-sex experience once in college isn’t bisexual)
            And black people can bleach their skin if they’d rather be white. Ridiculous, you say? No more ridiculous than asserting gays and lesbians can just “choose” to be straight.

          • 1bimbo

            there’s no doubt that most of the sexually dysfunctional are who they are..just like an autistic person or a pedophile.. it’s psychological for many however it is also influenced by a number of other factors like abuse, boredom, peer pressure, curiosity, illness and loneliness

          • leastyebejudged

            You are a liar.

          • EdisonAlum

            That’s another myth that has been debunked by many medical and mental health organizations.

          • Joshua DeLapp

            A gay person who is not having sex is still gay, just as a straight person who is not currently having sex is still straight.

            Regardless, whether it is an immutable characteristic or not is irrelevant. Religion is a protected concept under the Constitution, and it is very much a choice. Marriage is a civil institution that has federal benefits tied to it; therefore without providing valid legal justification for restricting that institution to heterosexual couples only, it must be offered regardless of gender to any consenting pair of adult citizens.

            If you believe you have evidence that is actually admissible in court that shows the justifiable harm that results from allowing same-gender couples to marry, you might want to contact the so-called Alliance Defending Freedom; as it stands, though, no such evidence has been presented (because there is no such evidence, since “It’s against my religion!” and “I think it’s icky!” don’t fall into the category of “admissible”).

          • 1bimbo

            ‘icky’ has little to do with it.. advocating for state mandated acceptance of homosexuality is immoral not to mention a violation of the true constitutional rights of others… the physiological, psychological, social, spiritual and economic harm in doing so is well-documented… children need to be protected from the perversion of being brainwashed with a sex-centric notion of being as homosexuality advocates push for

          • EdisonAlum

            If it’s so well-documented, why don’t you provide some specifics. Or provide a link to this so-called “documentation”? What exactly is the “physiological, psychological, social … and economic harm”? (note I left out spiritual, because I do understand that some religions believe it to be a sin).
            What makes you think that children are being “brainwashed with a sex-centric notion of being”, and what evidence do you have that “homosexuality advocates” push for that? The same sex couples I know are no more “sex-centric” than the straight couples I know.

          • DCSDparent

            Crickets. No surprise.

          • EdisonAlum

            Also, just a note on a couple of the terms you like to use. No one is advocating for “state mandated acceptance of homosexuality”. Treating people equally under the law does not mandate that your “accept” their private behaviors. I don’t “accept” cheating, lying or adultery, yet cheaters liars and adulterers are allowed to enter into civil marriages, and most religious marriages. Some people still don’t “accept” interracial marriage, yet it’s very legal. Likewise, when same-sex marriage becomes legally recognized throughout our country, you will still be allowed to hold your nose and look down on the people who enter into them.

            Also, I don’t know of anyone who considers himself a “homosexuality advocate”. (maybe some do, they can correct me if I’m wrong). Homosexuality is a state of being. One can’t really advocate for a state of being. It’d be like saying you’re a “brown hair advocate”. I advocate for marriage equality. I advocate for treating people with kindness and respect. But since sexual orientation is innate, I can’t advocate for homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality.

          • Phyxius

            Well said! Someone asked me in a heated debate once if I was ‘pro-f**.’ I told him I’m pro civil rights and equal protection under the law for ALL Americans. If that makes me ‘pro-f**,’ then I guess I am…

          • 1bimbo

            the sexually disordered can try to candy coat their defect all they want.. for that matter polygamists and pedophiles make the same arguments.. pedophilia advocates believe that’s a ‘sexual orientation’ too.. how you draw the line at perversion is by assessing the dangers it causes to society, especially to children

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Because children aren’t legally allowed to consent to sexual acts. That’s how you draw the line. When what you do causes physical harm someone that can’t or doesn’t consent to it, that’s another way to draw the line. Banning something because you don’t like it? Sorry. You don’t get to do that.

          • Dot McFarlane

            Children need to be protected from attitudes such as yours. No one else’s rights are being violated just because same-sex marriage is legalized.

          • gillfish

            Citation needed.

          • Heywood Jablowme

            Please provide all of that “well documented” evidence you have. I’d love to read it because just about everything I’ve read says just the opposite.

          • Dot McFarlane

            If you don’t want same sex marriage, don’t have one. Another person’s marriage is none of your concern. And since you think sexual orientation is a choice, please tell me when you chose to be straight.

      • johnnyboyjohn

        Hate to break it to you, but so far MANY conservative judges appointed by conservative presidents to the circuit courts have ruled same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional. You might want to open a newspaper once in a while and see what’s going on in the world. Discrimination against a class of people is unconstitutional. Get a clue.

        • rtknight

          Come on now, Johnny boy, don’t you know them facts always have a liberal bias?

      • Joshua DeLapp

        “with the next conservative prez”

        HAHAHAHAHA, good one.

        …oh, you were serious?

      • Phyxius

        Unless the GOP can conduct the 2016 primary in a more rational manner than the clusterf*** of 2012, that ain’t gonna happen. And if this election is any indicator, the crazy is still gonna be oozin’ out of Goebbels’ Own Party waaaaaaaaay past that.

  • GirlGoneGaymer

    I don’t understand how any state can pretty well ignore legal documentation.

    Yes, I understand my state doesn’t acknowledge same-sex marriage — and we’re trying to fix that — but I just don’t get how they can ignore any sort of legal documents.

  • http://cftxp.net Chris Fornesa

    Bullshit! Plain and simple. Let the shoe drop, it seems as if Texas is about to lead the nation to another landmark gay victory with this sort of crap.

    • 1bimbo

      if homosexuality advocates want to have special privileges then they should try to pass an amendment to the constitution or pass a ‘homo rights act’.. otherwise you’re cheating, the victories are short-lived and you can not trample on states’ rights or religious freedom

      • captslomo

        Like the “special privilege” of using your Federal government ID to get a driver’s license? What part of the 4th Amendment do you not understand?

      • DesertSun59

        Perfect logic fail. You have absolutely no idea how the government functions.

        • marcusgresham

          If Jesus were real and came back 1bimbo probably wouldn’t acknowledge his presence because he has long hair and he wears a dress.

          • rozlee

            And he slept with twelve guys, never got married and lived with his mother until he was 30.

      • Cassandra Nancy Lea

        please take your hateful and mean-spirited view of life somewhere else

        • 1bimbo

          oh grow up.. let the adults talk, weiney

          • Chris

            You’re calling yourself an adult and you spell “whiny” as “weiney”?

          • nick

            It is a common Jewish slur. Wein- being a common part of Jewish surnames.

      • Arachne646

        What about our religious freedom as Christians to champion the oppressed, for example, LGBTQ people, and states’ obligation to recognize contracts enacted in any other state?

        • 1bimbo

          contracts like prostitution contracts in brothels from nevada?

          • Arachne646

            Selling sex is not legal anywhere but certain counties in Nevada. It is an illegal activity for which you are setting up a straw man argument. Marriage and other legal contracts are legal throughout and between states. Like Mr. and Mrs. Loving’s marriage, interracial marriages are accepted as normal today, and same-sex ones will be ordinary everywhere tomorrow. God bless you.

      • http://cftxp.net Chris Fornesa

        Lol. The Constitution trumps states rights. Also, we aren’t asking for special privileges, we just want equal recognition, something that’s guaranteed by the 14th amendment which states that contracts in one state shall be deemed valid in another. You want state’s rights? Well, Texas has to recognize California contracts or violate the constitution. Don’t troll your animus on me, that shit don’t work. ;)

  • Brooklyn_Reader

    Wouldn’t the easiest solution be to get a U.S. passport? With that in hand, no one can deny your name, not even the “great state” of Texas.

    • Baltimatt

      I was thinking along the same lines.

      • Ionic Column

        Believe me, prejudice will find a way around that.

    • nick

      That won’t help her get a driver’s license. Apparently she needs a birth certificate for that, and she doesn’t have any other documentation with her maiden name.

      This is among the reasons I don’t believe in changing one’s last name upon getting married.

      • Cassandra Nancy Lea

        once I had my original license, I was NEVER required to submit a birth certificate, just my license, when it came time to renew or get one for another state when I had moved for work, myself.

  • Allison Flood Lesh

    Oddly enough…I did the same in ft worth. The first DPS said the same thing…so I drove to another and guess what they gave me my license with my married last name. DPS has no right to say no to you Wilson. You have the documentation and the last name IS yours. So sorry you are going through this. I will help spread the word and post this to my public figure facebook page. Hope this helps get someones attention. Allison Flood Lesh

    • tony

      Lesh. I went to DPS in Grand Prarie and denied my license change. Which Did Other Did U Go To Where U got it??

  • Shawnleem

    This is so upsetting. That name doesn’t belong to you? How did you stop yourself from slapping that horrible woman. I say horrible because although policy is policy and it’s not her fault, she sounds like a b****, which is unnecessary. I am sick of discrimination. I’m sick of it all.

  • Jason Webber

    First of all, why would someone move from one of the most LGBT-friendly states to Texas? But that aside, this is horrendous. The federal government recognizes the marriage performed legally in California. I agree with others who have posted. Get a US Passport which confirms citizenship and use it as an ID.

    • tomwest

      As the article said, they moved there for “work”. They may also like other aspects of Texas (the tax code, for example).

      • Jed

        i bet they’re rethinking that choice.

        low taxes gets you big stupid.

  • Karen K.

    Could a Kick-Starter fund drive be started preemptive for their court costs? I think this will be a horribly long and drawn out case.

  • Casey Evans

    ……This is something that happens?

    • 1bimbo

      yes.. texans hope they move back to whatever immoral state they came from

      • captslomo

        Yessiree, Bob. You Texans done got the dibs on moral behavior: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-10-24-dragging-death_N.htm

      • Casey Evans

        I don’t know why any LGBT person would want to live in Texas. I know it’s one of those backward, third world states on a lot of things… (come to think of it, I don’t know why anyone would want to live in Texas, period. All of that conservative bulls*** they come up with isn’t worth it just to save on taxes), but I seriously didn’t think they’d deny someone a *driver’s license* because they’re married and the state won’t recognize the name change… not the marriage, but the name. That’s just low.

        • EdisonAlum

          Right. As a straight woman, and a Caucasian, I was horrified when visiting Texas, and hotel employees told a group of us that we wouldn’t want to go to a certain nearby bar because “that’s where all the black people go”. We heard several similar comments from many different people, including a realtor who told me I would not want to live in a certain neighborhood because “it’s very dark”. We were there checking out the area to see if we wanted to move our company there. Needless to say, we decided to stay far away.

          • leastyebejudged

            So… You didn’t go and check out the bar and the neighborhood anyway ?

            Interesting.

          • 1bimbo

            she probably wanted to avoid being r a p e d or shot

          • leastyebejudged

            Honey, you couldn’t get raped if you begged for it.

          • EdisonAlum

            Why would you say that? My fears (or not) of violence are not based on the racial makeup of the people around me. Please, enlighten us as to what makes you say such a thing.

          • DCSDparent

            I don’t see that she said whether or not she went to the bar or the neighborhood. Why do you assume she did not?

          • EdisonAlum

            Where did you get that out of my post?
            Since you’re so interested, I really don’t know whether we went to the bar or not. The hotel workers mentioned several nearby bars, restaurants and clubs, and I don’t think they even mentioned the name of the one “where all the blacks go”. It was the first time any of us had heard such a disturbing comment and we were so taken aback, none of us thought to insist that they tell us the name and make sure we went to that one.
            As far as the neighborhood, yes, I did tell the realtor to take me into that neighborhood to check it out. By that time, I’d heard enough racist and sexist comments that I was no longer shocked and speechless. I enjoyed watching the old biddy squirm as we drove through Unfortunately, there were no homes for sale there to check out, but it was a lovely neighborhood with well-manicured yards and a diverse group of kids playing outside. Exactly the type of neighborhood I live in now and love.

    • DCSDparent

      Yes. Gays and lesbians are still treated like second class citizens across the country, even in states less backwards than Texas.

  • 1bimbo

    good grief, lesbians are horrible misandrists.. i’m more concerned about lesbians trying to raise a boy without a father than lesbians being denied the privilege of having a driver’s license.

    • Paul Cutlip

      Please stop calling yourself a Christian.. you’ve giving the rest of us a bad name.

    • Jim Kane

      This is coming from someone who refers to themselves as “bimbo”?

      • marcusgresham

        I bet she’s the mayor of her trailer park.

    • angellgirl

      Good grief, Christians are horrible bigots. I’m more concerned about Christians raising a non-bigot without a reasonable individual in the house than having religious liberty. (Oh, no, wait, this just applies to you. Carry on, everyone else. PS What a jerk.)

      • Wolf

        Don’t lump all of us Christians in with this pompous windbag. Most of us can see how childish Texas is being over this issue.

        • Merv99

          Why is it that liberal Christians never correct conservative Christians who imply that conservatives are speaking for all Christians, but when a non-Christian refers to Christians as a group then the liberal Christians come out of the woodwork to declare they’re “not all like that”? Wouldn’t the time to speak up be when the conservative Christians are ruining the reputation of all Christians?

          • Wolf

            You make the assumption that I’m NOT speaking up elsewhere ;)

        • angellgirl

          Sarcasm to point out how inappropriate it is to do such generalization.

        • angellgirl

          I’m not. I was rewriting the original comment to reflect the OP in the same (unfair) light s/he was assuming for the woman in this story. Apologies if you missed the sarcasm.

      • Cassandra Nancy Lea

        do NOT assume this idiot speaks for all followers of Christ’s teachings. Some of us take it to heart..ALL OF IT… and the most important part being “love one another as I have loved you”…they forget that Christ’s life had many instances of including the people who were hated and shunned by everybody else. People like “ibimbo” (what a perfect ‘handle”) do us all a great wrong by trying to convince themselves and the rest of the world that they are “christians”…they aren’t.

        • 1bimbo

          such cr*p, you don’t get to decide who is ‘christian enough’.. baptists and methodists can’t even agree.. so the last thing you self-righteous christians need to do is judge others

          • TrollKiller1

            you mean like you do in every judgemental post you write?

        • angellgirl

          Sarcastic generalization to point out how rude and ridiculous it is to say such things about a diverse group of people.

        • angellgirl

          I’m well aware that all Christians are not jerks. I was rewriting the original (terrible) comment to reflect the OP in illustration of how completely ridiculous it sounded. Apologies if you missed the sarcasm.

          • Cassandra Nancy Lea

            It’s hard sometimes to “get” a tone via a written message. I used to think emoticons were kind of silly, but, find myself resorting to them LOL. Thanks for knowing we aren’t all “jerkms.” Believe me, I live in the rural South and am surrounded by more than my share of Bible-bangers (sighs, deeply) but, sometimes, I find my notions upended! I was buying groceries from a coop effort and the pickup place for orders was one of the churches I had assigned to that category in my mind and, when I met the folks running the program there, they turned out to be very “genuine” people really “living the message” and not trying to force anything on anybody. So much for preconceived notions, right? I have been in Episcopal parishes (dyed-in-the-wool Anglican here) that went thru a “phase” of being worse “Bible bullies” than any fanatic banging away on my door with a handful of pamphlets. (I still don’t ‘get” why they think God can’t take care of these things.)

    • Jeff Bowles

      “lesbians are horrible misandrists.”

      While that is not true, you’re certainly making bimbos look ignorant.

    • TrollKiller1

      be sure to starch your sheets before your next meeting. you know, so–unlike here– your “point’ is made.

    • leastyebejudged

      I’m more concerned that people like yourself are even permitted to breed.

      You’re a POS.

      • 1bimbo

        well.. that’s your opinion… man

    • Chris

      Uh yeah, that’s not true. Not wanting to sleep with men isn’t the same thing as hating men. You probably shouldn’t spout off about things you’ve only heard mentioned on Fox News.

      – straight, red blooded American male who actually knows lesbians

    • Dot McFarlane

      I suggest you Google a young man named Zach Wahls. He has lesbian parents and is an Eagle Scout!!!!

      • DCSDparent

        I’ll make it easy on her. Watch this video. What an intelligent, well-spoken young man! I’d be very proud to be one of his moms. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSQQK2Vuf9Q

        “The sexual orientation of my parents has had zero effect on the content of my character”.
        Exactly!

  • Ionic Column

    Sad little petty officials who can’t distinguish between law (already bad in this case) and their own prejudices. That the public is not subject to their arbitrary punishments is way too complex an idea. The sad thing is that such officials are acting in the spirit of the law and in that their colleagues and superiors will close ranks. That a runaway train is now heading straight for them is too abstract an idea and too far into the future. That’s right, they can’t see it coming. They’re too busy saving civilisation.

  • randommentality

    Don’t forget full faith and credit and the right of free travel when you file suit. Just saying.

  • Mendle Adams

    sounds like a valid ACLU suit to me.

  • Janet Lea Riggs

    I think it is a shame for the kids, our next generation to deal with the so called Christian republicans hate. You should want for others what you want for yourself. They only want for themselves.

  • Sensia

    Sue, take the State of Texas to court.. get these laws overturned and changed.

  • tony

    Same happen to me

  • Sensia

    Folks get together and do a mass class action lawsuit against the State of Texas.

  • rantingcitizen

    Another reason to never move to Texas. Why not just leave that cretin place behind and live in a more enlightened place?

    • DCSDparent

      It looks like the family had to move there for a job. Sad.

    • waltereg0

      Jobs and homeowners are leaving Cali because of the high taxes caused by Sacramento spending too much money on govt. employees. Arnie tried to do something about it but he was shut down by the entrenched government interests/state employee unions.

  • DCSDparent

    “This is a disappointing incident and certainly not reflective of Texas hospitality or values,” Equality Texas field organizer Daniel Williams told the Observer this week.

    I’ve got to disagree. This is absolutely “reflective of Texas hospitality and values”. A majority of Texans voted not to recognize same sex marriages of other states. What the heck did they think was going to happen? Same sex married couples are treated as second class citizens because that’s what a majority of Texans wanted. It’s good that Mr Williams and Equality Texas are working to resolve this matter, but the fact is that this is what the voters wanted. Anyone who voted not to recognize the same sex marriages of other states, but thinks she should be able to get a drivers license in the name she uses, please realize this is all on you.

  • DesertSun59

    Here’s the bottom line: “I’m further being deprived the freedom to use air travel, make
    purchases that require a valid photo identification, seek medical
    attention for myself or my children, as well as other situations that
    would require proving who I am legally as an individual.”

    TX is actively denying American citizens their basic rights.

    • KLSiegel

      And this is news? We shoulda let ‘em secede. Or give ‘em back to Mexico – except they likely wouldn’t have them.

    • 1bimbo

      good thing there are 49 other states for you to choose… oh wait.. the presidents said there were ’57’ so there are ’56’ other states according to barack obama

      • TrollKiller1

        spoken like a true Perry groupie. be sure to wash your sheets before your next meeting

      • Makoto

        Yeah, really! It’s just ONE state denying rights. What’s so bad about denying rights? /s

      • rozlee

        And Bush said our soldiers were being blown up by IUDs.

  • Cassandra Nancy Lea

    GO FOR IT! I don’t understand why, if her name is LEGALLY changed, that the DPS is giving her such a hard time. I changed my own surname to my mother’s family for some personal reasons, and, once I had all the other documents, like my SS card and passport, I have had no problems. This is just an outrage and I hope she sues and wins. Public employees all too often use their “power” to push people around. Most of these folks are nice, hard-working and helpful, but, get one of the “bad apples” and you’re toast!

  • Don Eichhorn

    I am not condoning the back laws of Texas however as stated in the article “When a DPS employee noticed that Wilson’s name didn’t match her birth certificate” she was denied…so take your birth certificate with your maiden name and get a drivers license unfortuantely Texas is not as progressive as California, Colorado or about 45 other states and i do believe that a person’s right to love whomever they wish is their own. That being said I believe before you move from one state to another you should check out their laws. This case unfortunately will not change Texas’ stance on same-sex marriage just as Colorado making 400 million in tax revenue will not change their stance on legalization of marijuana, which is unfortunate but that is the mentality of the state. My sympathies to this couple..and welcome to Texas

  • Rivalry

    I have no sympathy for Californians moving out of California. Especially liberal californians moving to conservative states. Stay away.

    • Baltimatt

      Ain’t freedom wonderful?

    • Gigi

      This is but a temporary blip. Soon same-sex marriage will be the law countrywide and folks like you will either get used to it or STFU about it.

  • Acadian Flag

    It seems to me that all states would be obligated to issue an ID in the name that is on a social security card. States should recognize the same names as the federal government.

    • Tim

      Louisiana is no better. Especially after the moron federal judge ruled against same-sex marriage based on pro-creation. In essence that mean that quite a few people in Louisiana should not be allowed to marry based on that alone.

      • Acadian Flag

        Oh trust me, I know that Louisiana isn’t better.

        • People4Humanity

          [see comment just above]

      • People4Humanity

        You may have missed this news from Louisiana, where yesterday a state district court judge declared Louisiana’s ban on equal marriage unconstitutional:

        Same-sex legal in Louisiana… for now

        A landmark day in Louisiana law after the long-standing ban on marriage for same-sex couples has been ruled unconstitutional by 15th Judicial District Court Judge Edward Rubin.

        http://www.klfy.com/story/26596682/judge-ruled-the-same-sex-law-prohibiting-marriage-is-unconstitutional-in-three-areas

  • http://www.monster-island.net/ kushibo

    I hope she can read this, because the answer may be very simple. It’s a two-step process, and both steps are important.

    Step 1: Contact the DMV headquarters in Sacramento and request a renewal for her license by mail with her Texas address as the mailing address. The California DMV will issue her a completely valid California driver license with her Texas address on it, and she can use this however long she wants, and keep renewing it.

    I know this because I live in Hawaii and have been using my California license this way — with my Hawaii address on it — for years now. Hawaii recognizes it and California recognizes it, and it fulfills the “report new address” requirement. The only glitch would be if Texas does not recognize such a document, which is a possibility. (She’d have to go to a DMV or local law enforcement agency and ask; perhaps keep the same-sex marriage story out of it so that any homophobic bias doesn’t skew the response.)

    Step 2: Having secured a legal and useable driver license, sue the Texas DMV for this treatment. As Ms Wilson is stating, she’s not trying to get the State of Texas to recognize her marriage, just her name, which the Federal government does. Her case would show that Texas’s (and other similar states’) laws barring same-sex marriage are sledgehammer-esque in their imprecision. Not to mention just plain mean-spirited.

  • Tim

    Exactly why my husband and I are going to leave this backwards state where we can be treated equally. I will be happy to spend my money and tax dollars elsewhere!
    I simply love the campaign commercial of Gregg Abbott touting how many California based companies are moving to Texas. I think it’s time to let California know how much hatred is involved here and hopefully most of them will keep their companies in states that welcome EVERYONE! Let the haters burn in hell!

    • 1bimbo

      amen

    • EdisonAlum

      Hopefully the Californian employees will start voting reasonable people into office in Texas and bring the state into the 21st century.

  • Tim

    Reading some of the comments regarding this being a religious thing, well then, you are violating my constitutional right to religious freedom! Or is that ok to do according to the sweet little constitution of Texas! Since my husbands name can be either (male or female) I will just claim female when I change mine! Mud on the face Texas! A state of biggots!

    • 1bimbo

      we just call out the crazies when we see ‘em

      • johnnyboyjohn

        Amazing projection on your part.

    • EdisonAlum

      Exactly. It’s astounding that some people think their religious rights are violated by the marriages of strangers. Yet somehow they think the religious freedoms of couples who DON’T follow the Christian bibles view of marriage, are NOT being violated? They’ve got it completely, 100% backwards.

  • afisher

    GOP: TX is open for business and please ignore the asterisk – that limits who we welcome….sigh. Another reason to fill all the judicial and elected positions ( GOV / Lt.GOV and AG / SOS with DEMS. End the lawsuits and make TEXAS really open for business for ALL .

  • Dorito Reiss

    This should be a non-issue. The fact that she changed her legal name to reflect her marriage (same-sex or otherwise) shouldn’t be an issue. People change their legal names ALL THE TIME for any number of reasons. Texas is just choosing to be a dick because Texas bureaucrats are a bunch of bigots.

  • Sydney S

    This is discrimination!! And it is just so stupid. If she had a passport with her married name on it, she could use that instead of a birth certificate and they would have never known.

  • Gary Denton

    She is also being denied her constitutional right to vote with no valid photo ID.

  • MBarnard

    If you LEGALLY changed your name (no matter the reason), you should be able to get a TDL. Fight it. Your name is legal, they can’t deny you a license in your legal name.

  • SacJP

    She should have told this supervisor that it was none of her business whether it’s same sex.

    Now she should just petition the Superior Court in California for a written declaration that her name is changed.

    This seems ripe for a full faith and credit lawsuit in the US federal court system. The State of California granted her a name change incident to marriage, and while their constitutional amendment prevents them from recognizing the marriage is doesn’t prevent recognition of a legal name change (which doesn’t require a marriage to accomplish.)

    • 1bimbo

      that is the first actual common sense explanation i’ve read on this whole thread.. provide the state of texas with the legal name change document from CA.. problem solved.

  • Teto85

    Textards.

  • Yonatan

    While this must be changed, I don’t understand why Ms. Wilson doesn’t simply get a passport issued with her new name, based on the marriage certificate, and then get a Texas license using the passport?

    • Acadian Flag

      Passports cost about $170. It is a waste of money if you don’t travel.

      • Yonatan

        It’s not a waste of money if it’s what stands between Ms. Wilson and her ability to drive and her family to function.
        Don’t get me wrong – Texas not allowing her to get a license based on her marriage certificate is an abomination and this must be changed. At the same time, if there are practical solutions that can allow their family to keep functioning, why not take them?

  • Grum Fan

    Stupid F***s.

    Well this is the time to move forward with a federal lawsuit against Texas. The Federal District courts have been uniformly and quickly striking down state laws and state constitutions that don’t provide “equal protection under the law” for same sex marriages.

    This just means the end of Texas’s version of that Law!

    YEE Haw!

  • Gigi

    It boggles my mind that so much time, energy and $$$ has been spent denying LGBT citizens of this the right to marry their same-sex partners. Equal treatment under the law doesn’t exclude those with whom we disagree. They legalized SSM in Canada more than 11 years ago and none of the slippery slope predictions made here by “christians” have one true. Men can’t marry children, dogs or blenders. “Traditional”marriage hasn’t been destroyed. The definition of marriage hadn’t been irreparably changed, it’s simply been expanded to include same-sex couples.
    And for those who say marriage is about procreation and raising children, I have two things to say about that: 1) procreation isn’t a required to obtain a marriage license and, 2) same-sex couples already are raising children. Denying them the right to marry is denying their kids the right to be raised by parents who are legally married.

    • rextrek1

      shhhh u make too much sense for the nitwits that make up Texas and the red Hate states…

      • Ziggy Nobutz Forewe

        I’m a Texan and I don’t hate the LGBT community. Hell, we here in Houston even have a lesbian mayor!

  • don76550

    Hey, you can always relocate back to pervert friendly California.

    • rextrek1

      were u born an ahole..or just always were one?

    • Acadian Flag

      I’m sure there are plenty of therapists that would be willing to discuss your obsession with the sex lives of others.

    • Dot McFarlane

      The only perverted thing here is your attitude!!!!

    • Little Liberal Larry

      Or they can wait 2 the SC rules this session & Jesus junkie states will be forced to assimilate

      GO PRAY

  • Paul Alan Whitehouse

    Her name is Wilson on her Social Security Card, which is the federal standard for identification. If this goes to court the DPS is totally screwed, due to the full faith and credit clause of the constitution. Seriously, Texas, it is behavior and muddled, ignorant thinking like this that has the rest of the country secretly wishing you would just go back to being part of Mexico sometimes.

    • Darkahsoka

      You could get a double whammy by also suing for disenfranchisement and get their voter ID laws knocked out.

  • djplong

    The United States Constitution, Article IV, Section 1: “Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof”

    That means that, if it was legal for her to get married in California, Texas IS REQUIRED BY THE CONSTITUTION to honor that.

    • Ziggy Nobutz Forewe

      Texas Legislation declared sovereignty on that one. So the Federal government would have to force them to change.

  • Phillip

    My husband and I had this problem, too. The ACLU basically told us the most they could do was write a letter to them but they would not pursue litigation. We had to go a round-about way of getting a passport first so we did not have to use a birth certificate. It was nothing but discriminatory taxation against same-sex married couples.

  • Darkahsoka

    Isn’t Texas a Voter ID Required state? so they’re essentially completely disenfranchising any married gay person who comes to live in the state.

    • 1bimbo

      ‘gays’ aren’t considered married in texas

      • Darkahsoka

        Brilliant deduction, sherlock.

        I said they are disenfranchising any married gay person who comes to their state and takes up residency there. Their refusal to recognize gay marriage is a whole other bigoted sack of potatoes. We’re talking about their disenfranchisement (as well as denial of the ability to drive legally) of people by refusing to recognize federal and state documents from outside of Texas (i.e. violating Full Faith And Credit) and denying an id to someone for being gay and having entered into a marriage..

        • 1bimbo

          even if bigotry were the reason, there are no social ‘anti-bigot’ laws.. homosexuality advocates are worse than the illegals.. demanding everyone violate rule of law and abandon all moral obligation because their feelings are hurt because people want to protect family, country and society from them

          • Darkahsoka

            Dear aptly-named poster, the only ones violating rule of law and moral obligation here are those who make up the government of Texas, with both their disenfranchisement (violation of moral obligation and of law), and their violation of the Constitution, i.e. the Full Faith and Credit clause.

          • 1bimbo

            texas is protecting its citizens from the perversion, the violation of civil rights and dangerous sex-centric environments which follow when states advocate for acceptance of homosexuality .. see massachusetts as the most glaring example

          • Darkahsoka

            Dear, Texas is protecting no one. They are literally the ones that are doing the perverted violation of civil rights, with their violation of her right to obtain a driver’s license, her right to have her legal documents from another state recognized when trying to get a driver’s license (or any ID), and her right to vote (photo ID is required for voting in Texas).

          • Ziggy Nobutz Forewe

            The majority of people in the Texas State government believe homosexuality is wrong, and wish to extend legislation that promotes that belief. No argument anyone makes can change that reality. Until those legislators are replaced with ones with different beliefs, that is the reality in Texas. Choices are (1) Accept and move on with life, (2) Move to another State, or (3) Work within the law to get things changed.

          • Darkahsoka

            That’s nice for Texas, and indicates just what backwards, bigoted, toothless hicks make up the majority of people in the Texas state government.

            But this issue isn’t about gay marriage. It is about the disenfranchisement and denial of driving rights of a woman who legally had her name changed- who has the documentation from another state – by the state of Texas. she didn’t ask them to recognize her marriage or give her marriage benefits and the various other things that come with marriage. She asked for them to fulfil their basic constitutional duties and recognize her documents as valid for issuing her a driver’s license (an ID she is required to have to be able to vote there) with her actual, legal name on it. Texas has failed that constitutional duty, and needs to be hit hard with the consequences.

          • Little Liberal Larry

            Have you not been paying attention to the 30+ equality case that have been ruled in the favor of gays.

            SC is hearing cases this term…by 2016 marriage equality will be a reality from coast 2 coast & border 2 border

          • 1bimbo

            driving is a privilege.. not a ‘right’ .. you people are just insane with calling all your narcissistic pursuits ‘rights’

          • Joshua DeLapp

            You mean Massachusetts which has the lowest divorce rate in the nation?

            If by “glaring example” you mean “showing absolutely no major negative impact whatsoever, and in fact showing a mostly positive impact on divorce rates AND fiscal income”, then you got it right. But that’s not what you meant – oh well, we’re used to you speaking from ignorance at this point.

          • 1bimbo

            glaring by the health department working with lbgtER lobbyist to expose children in schools to perversion, promoting pederasty and promiscuity.. forcing catholic adoption agencies to close their doors for refusing to adopt out to the sexually disordered, allowing for camps for children as young as 5 to explore their sexuality.. reporting high rates of HIV infections, creating fraudulent ‘religious’ groups which advocate for homosexuality.. yes, that glaring

          • TrollopeReader

            Catholic Charities chose, own their own, to stop offering adoptions. Prior to that, they actually had adopted children to same-sex couples, and their board was willing to do so. In fact, several board members resigned when the church itself forced the no-more-adoptions.

            Facts should be your friends, but you have to know your facts. And since Catholic Charities was receiving state funds (in fact, the bulk of it’s funds were from the state), well, then you have to abide by state rules……

          • rozlee

            Massachusetts isn’t one of the leading states in teen pregnancies. It doesn’t have as many students failing school. It doesn’t have as many abortions per capita as Texas despite Texas having stricter abortion laws. It doesn’t have as many people living in poverty and as many people without health insurance.

          • TrollopeReader

            MA is doing just fine. Great educated people, great student test scores, more colleges and universities of the highest caliber, good economics and low un-employment. And far fewer divorces than the “bible-belt” states. And much healthier people, too….

    • Laren Ganer

      EXACTLY.

  • jonquilofmars

    Keep it classy, Texas. If you use a hyphenated name, they also don’t like last names to revert to a “maiden name only” after husbands die. That was the final indignity of being a Texas woman for my sister-in-law.

    • Ziggy Nobutz Forewe

      You’re telling me!

  • Acadian Flag

    So basically what Texas is saying is that they believe that the federal government and the state of California issued her IDs in the form of a social security card and driver’s license respectively, that are in a non-legal name. Ridiculous.

    • Ziggy Nobutz Forewe

      Not Texas, just the DPS. Several other branches of Texas government don’t care.

  • Joshua DeLapp

    One of the very reasons why this can’t be settled on a state-by-state basis. Marriage recognition for same-sex couples nationwide and NOW.

    • 1bimbo

      polygamy and incest too? why don’t you just throw in pedophila for good measure.. because as is reported and researched pedophila is a ‘sexual orientation’ too

      • Ziggy Nobutz Forewe

        It is. So what do you intend to do about it?

      • Acadian Flag

        If you can’t tell the difference between 2 or more adults doing what they want in the privacy of their own house and of someone violating a minor, there is little to no hope for you. Polygamy should be legal also. As long as all parties involved are consenting adults, it should be legal. If it is against your personal set of morals, don’t do it. Quit being so obsessed with what other people do in bed.

      • Joshua DeLapp

        Aww, look, you think you’re making relevant arguments! Not only are they false comparisons, they’re also the same old, tired things that every competent judge has rejected. I’ll try to spell out the reasons why they’re rejected; let me know if any of the big words scare you.

        First, you need to understand the basis of any rational “prohibition” law: Such a law exists if and only if a provable, unique, and tangible harm results with a high statistical probability from the action in question.

        Why’s that important? Well, if you were actually thinking rather than simply knee-jerk reacting based on your personal “ick” factor, you’d have already figured it out yourself.

        Incest has a high statistical consequence of birth defects in resulting offspring, due to a reinforcement of recessive genes stemming from the close sanguinity. This is a provable, unique, and tangible harm with a high statistical probability stemming from the action in question. Thus why incest is (mostly) illegal. I say “mostly” because a number of states actually allow close-sanguinity marriage, such as ‘cousin marriage’ in certain cases – for example, when the two are incapable of producing any offspring.

        As for pedophilia? Age of consent laws are established as a way to determine when a person has the emotional and mental maturity necessary to consent to more complex actions – such as signing a contract or having sex. A child lacks that maturity; thus, all pedophilia is rape, and is therefore criminal. This differs from homosexuality, of course, in that homosexuality is an act between consenting adults.

        Finally in regards to polygamy, as you’ve already been told by someone else at least five times in this thread, the Supreme Court already ruled on the matter back in 1878. It’s possible the issue could be re-opened, but to be honest? I find no rational reason why polygamy should be criminalized. What two or more consenting adults choose to do with their lives is their business. But it’s also a wholly separate matter.

        Attacking straw men is a fallacy for a reason. But feel free to continue to do it; at this point even conservative-appointed judges are looking at your ‘arguments’ and just rolling their eyes at how moronic you are.

        • 1bimbo

          your claims fall right in line with the problem with government mandated acceptance of the lifestyle.. such as-homosexual sex has a high statistical consequence of viral, bacterial and medically-devastating physiological illnesses.. also polygamy is a caste system which favors men and places women and children in a social system based on marriage and birth order. advocating for the treatment of women and children as chattel is immoral and damaging to families and destructive of a functional society.. and as self-righteous as you claim to be against pedophilia, homosexuality advocates typically advocate for pederasty which is just as bad and the not too distant cousin of pedophilia.. i will never back down from the protection of children so that narcissistic perverts can try to force by judicial fiat their dangerous, deadly and unhealthy lifestyle onto moral people

      • Little Liberal Larry

        I have no issue with polygamy
        Incest presents genetic problems
        Pedophilia involves children & like animals they cannot give consent

    • Ziggy Nobutz Forewe

      Good luck with that!

      • Little Liberal Larry

        SC is hearing a SSM case this session…maybe 3
        Then Marriage Equality from sea 2 shining sea

        Don’t need luck I have the constitution & the courts

  • TeeTimeTomTexas

    If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. — Leviticus 20:10

    • EdA

      Bacon cheeseburgers are also abominations, as is permanent press clothing, a childless widow is expected to marry her husband’s brother (whether either of them want to, and according to Matthew 25:41 ff Jesus has explicitly condemned every single Republican in Congress and many Republicans in state houses to burn in hell until the end of time and beyond.

      What’s your point, if any?

    • kuvasz

      What if its with another woman? God’s silence on such things seems to indicate that it would be okay, or God would have mentioned it. After all, God is quite thorough, don’t you think?

      Or are you simply “interpreting” the Bible to fit your own personal feelings?

      btw: Even the Devil can quote Scripture.

    • Little Liberal Larry

      “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.” -James Madison letter to Wm. Bradford, April 1, 1774

      Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.”
      -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

  • Phyxius

    There are three cases before the Texas Supreme Court right now that
    could affect this. All three of those cases have to do with whether or
    not gay couples married in other states can get divorced in Texas. It’s a
    sneaky way to do it, but if Texas decides its judges can divorce gay
    couples, then by definition Texas has recognized those marriages as
    legitimate. If they weren’t legitimate, there could be no legal divorce.

    In all three cases, the lower courts had ruled in favor of the same sex
    couples. In one case the court in Austin actually granted the divorce
    before Abbott jumped in to attempt to squash the ruling. The Third Court
    of Appeals in Austin essentially told the esteemed Mr. Abbott he had no
    standing in the matter and to kindly f*** off.

    Add to that the fact that Texas’ gay marriage ban has already been ruled
    unconstitutional by a federal judge, and that decision has moved up to
    the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

    Add to that the fact there are five cases on the SCOTUS short list in
    which states that have lost their federal cases defending their gay
    marriage bans are appealing the rulings, even though the overwhelming
    tide in those decisions indicates it’s a losing fight. When you have 15+
    rulings at the federal level that agree, and 1 that doesn’t, SCOTUS is
    loathe to go against the 15 – and even Scalia can see the writing on the
    wall.

    All of this (and more) indicates that sooner rather than later Mrs.
    Wilson will be able to get her license under her correct name and DPS
    (and the state of Texas) can just suck it.

    • Smeagel4T

      While I don’t support it, I can actually see a Texas position of “you can’t get divorced because you’re not married” as being legally consistent (at least within Texas law).

  • ScottInClearwater

    Sorry Daniel Williams, but this is reflective of Texas’ hospitality. I’ve been to your state once and heard several deragatory gay terms used in the airport terminal almost the second my foot hit the ground (not directed at me), was harrassed by a Dallas police officer for walking down the street in a gay area and talking to another gay friend (your police department didn’t even respond to my phone call to complain about the officer) and everyone I ran into in Texas kept asking me “We aren’t that bad, are we?” because they already knew the answer. “Yes, Texas you are that bad.” I feel sorry for any gay person that has to live there, but I guess it might be worse in Alabama.

  • Ignatz

    This makes ZERO sense, even from a Right-Wing Troglodyte point of view. They aren’t being asked to acknowledge her marriage – they’re being asked to acknowledge her NAME. I hope she sues the pants off of these stupid, stupid people. Heck, I hope other same sex couples move there and just flood the place, and ALL sue them.

    • 1bimbo

      how stupid would anyone be to move some place just to attempt to spread chaos and cultivate a miserable existence full of rejection and struggle for themselves and the children they tow along with them.. what a childhood.. instead, embrace freedom and the constitution for all.. and live in the state that is the best fit for you

  • kuvasz

    US Constitution, Article IV, Section 1:

    “Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.”

    The only things that will happen is that the state of Texas will be sued in the Federal courts, lose due to the above constitutional requirement for full faith and credit among the states, the woman will get her licence, and the state will have spent tens if not hundreds of thousands of tax-payers dollars while losing.

    All for what? A statement? Talk about throwing money down a rat hole.

    • Smeagel4T

      Thanks for posting that. I went to go find it by a quick scan of the Constitution, but didn’t recognize the “Full faith and credit…” introduction as being the start of the sentence I was looking for. When scanning, that line gets dismissed pretty easily as “probably” applying to finance/debt/etc. :-)

  • Phyxius

    What I don’t get is how rabidly the “small government conservatives” are defending this monstrous intrusion into the personal lives of their fellow citizens, and scrambling for ways to intrude even further. If you don’t believe in homosexual sex, don’t have sex with a homosexual. Or marry one, for that matter. Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one. Don’t approve of inter-racial relationships? Don’t date outside your own ethnic group. Don’t like Muslims? Stay away from mosques. Don’t like non-whites running for political office? Don’t vote for ‘em. But don’t expect the rest of us to follow along. Stop trying to make everyone else live under your antiquated tight-assed American Taliban rules.

    Personally, what someone does in the privacy of their bedroom (or living room, or on top of the kitchen table, or washing machine on the spin cycle) doesn’t fricking concern me unless I’m an active participant. The same goes for who they choose to marry. It only becomes my problem if they’re marrying me. If I’m not a participant, it doesn’t intrude on my life or my personal freedoms in any way whatsoever, so why should I care if they do? It’s hard enough to find someone to love and share your life with. What possible benefit is there to myself or society as a whole in making it harder for anyone to accomplish that simple fundamental part of human existence?

    Why our conservative defenders of individual freedom seem to have a cranial-rectal inversion on something so damned basic is beyond me.

    • EdisonAlum

      Again, very well said. I agree completely. As a lifelong Republican and a proponent of smaller government, I too am baffled by the so-called conservative insistence that government should decide which marriages are worthy of legal recognition and which aren’t.

      • Joshua DeLapp

        Thank you, EdisonAlum! Exactly. The current crop of so-called Republicans in power are about as “small government” as an elephant is a “tiny animal”. It’s a ridiculous claim.

  • Adam

    I live in the state of Kansas. I went through the same situation. HOWEVER, I was advised by the people at the DOL, that i could use a Passport. I was relocated from Washington state and used my SS card along with my WA state ID with my legal name change.. They wouldn’t honor it. So I obtained a new passport by sending off my marriage certificate(From washington state) and copies of my SSN card, credit cards and photo ID from Washington. It was accepted and then I was able to go to to the Local DOL and obtain a new kansas state issued License.

  • DCSDparent
    • 1bimbo

      no matter how much homosexuality advocates want to leech off the gains of blacks during the civil rights movement, it will never lessen the insulting nature of the comparison.. to further their narcissistic pursuits, homosexuality advocates try to usurp true civil rights struggle.. here’s a novel statistic that shows how different these two groups are.. the average income of the white male homosexual is $50,000 per year.. the average income of a black male is $12,000 per year.. quite a disparity isn’t it.. homosexuality advocates are a self-entitled group who don’t care for the constitution, the rule of law or health childhood development.. they only care about their own ‘feelings’ and forcing other to be ‘tolerant’ of their dysfunctional lifestyle

      • People4Humanity

        You have chosen an accurate name for yourself.

      • DCSDparent

        Aw, honey, you have no idea who you’re talking to. Nothing insulting about it. Those against interracial marriage back in the 60’s made many of the same arguments you make now. “It’s against God”, “the children will suffer”, “next thing you know, people will want to marry their dog or their toaster”…
        In many parts of the country, the top picture is already viewed EXACTLY like the bottom one is. Even in Texas, it soon will be.

      • DCSDparent

        Aw, honey, you have no idea who you’re talking to. Don’t be insulted on my behalf.
        Reality is that many of the arguments made today against same sex marriage are EXACTLY the same as those made against interracial marriage in the 60’s. “It’s against God”, “the children will suffer”, “it’ll lead to people wanting to marry their dog or their toaster”.
        No difference.

        • 1bimbo

          no doubt homosexuality advocates attempt to leech off the true civil rights struggles of blacks to attempt to further their argument to mandate acceptance of the sexually disordered lifestyle.. but it’s not the same.. insulting that you would try to compare the two groups.. race is immutable and there are no other factors that effect race other than skin color.. with sexuality or ‘sexual orientation'(pedophiles are making that claim now, ya know), these are traits based on behavior.. i.e. a black person can not stop being black.. but a homosexual can choose not to be gay ‘married.’

          • EdisonAlum

            “Coretta Scott King, speaking four days before the 30th anniversary of her husband’s assassination, said Tuesday the civil rights leader’s memory demanded a strong stand for gay and lesbian rights. “I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice,” she said. “But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’” “I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people,” she said.” – Reuters, March 31, 1998.

          • EdisonAlum

            “Speaking before nearly 600 people at the Palmer House Hilton Hotel, Coretta Scott King, the wife of the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Tuesday called on the civil rights community to join in the struggle against homophobia and anti-gay bias. “Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood,” King stated. “This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group.” – Chicago Defender, April 1, 1998, front page.

  • LJRhodes

    Absolutely unacceptable. The state of California and the government of the United States both say her name is legally Wilson. Texas’ refusal to accept even the Social Security card deeming her name Wilson is straight-up illegal.

  • Darlene Kuykendall

    Fortunately in the near future the Supreme Court will be taking up the issue. Hopefully making it a federal crime for states to discriminate against same sex marriage.

    • Smeagel4T

      With Scalia dissenting, of course.

  • Janell Smith Bradley

    The way around this is….. Use your marriage license to change your name on your passport. Because the passport agency will recognize the marriage license.. Then take the passport to the DPS and use that as a primary document. It works.. That’s how I did it!!!

    • Smeagel4T

      Yes, fine. Now picture yourself a minimum wage Walmart worker with absolutely no need (due to lack of money) to engage in international travel. The need to purchase all this extra stuff (like a passport) then becomes a clear example of a “poll-tax” when somebody must show such ID to vote. It’s a clear example because the person has absolutely no other reason to purchase a passport.

      One of the strongest examples between the US and the USSR that CONSERVATIVES used to promote was that the USSR “big government” required you to carry ID, while the US “big government” had no right to require its citizens to carry ID. Now suddenly conservative governments in the US are increasingly trying to force their citizens to carry ID and show them to government officials in order for the government officials to grant the citizens their Constitutional rights.

      • Clayton Colwell

        As I noted elsewhere, a passport, besides being a *really* *useful* document to have, is tons cheaper than the court-order route.

  • Ami Colon-Treyger

    You know, if you don’t like same sex marriage, don’t marry someone of the same sex. How does marriage equality affect you and your family? Seriously? How does it affect your GOP Republican Pharisee family? Tell me? Because I’d like to know how it really does. I mean, I know many happily married gay couples, and I know many transgendered people who are fighting for their rights, too? Why is it such a problem to gain equal rights? I feel awful for these families who teach hate to their children, and then disown them when they come out as gay, bi, transgendered, pan-sexual, etc. Its like you talk about God’s love but then crap all over it once your own children come out as something you don’t believe in. You drag them to “Pray the Gay Away” camps and torture them with shame and Lord knows what else. But, yeah, its all for the love of Jesus, right? I don’t get it and I don’t want to be a Christian because of it.

  • Reasonoverhate

    How ridiculous and sad. History will not be kind to these narrow-minded bigots!

  • Guest

    I’ve know women after divorce who’ve had similar problems with getting their names changed back to their maiden name on their licenses because of the way the court paperwork lags behind most other stuff. It’s especially sad for someone who is finally getting out of an abusive relationship to have to keep answering to a name that they don’t want.

  • Robyn Ann

    These governments need to realize that US CITIZENS have EVERY right they claim to dispurse to Christians; even if they are not Christian. There is no such thing as the “right to deny” using any religion in ANY constitution.

    • Smeagel4T

      Not entirely sure what you meant by that. What is happening in Texas and other intolerant states is an effort to tread all over the First Amendment rights of those religious groups wishing to perform same-sex marriages.

      • Robyn Ann

        Exactly. To further elaborate on your question; I was speaking of the argument that their Christian “rights” are being trampled because they feel they have the right to deny government services, public purchasing, or anything else based on their “right” to deny service. They are completely wrong on that interpretation and especially when it comes to government services (such as issuing driver licenses). The purpose of registration for these licenses is simply record keeping. There is no right (to deny a service) based on the religion of the counter clerk. The rights belong to those requesting the service of registration (as you point out), not the other way around. This clerk should get out of the government if they can’t handle the public. So should any retailer that sells to the public.

  • http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu RhymesWithRight

    Actually, she has no “freedom to drive a vehicle” — if she did, there would be no licensure requirement at all.

    • Robert

      She has a right to equal treatment before the law. I have no doubt that this is a concept someone who would post a comment like you did would have great difficulty comprehending.

      • http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu RhymesWithRight

        Just pointing out a reality — one has no right to be a licensed driver. Nobody does.

        And it might surprise you to find out that I disagree with the interpretation of the Texas statute in question. I was simply pointing out an entirely different issue.

        • Smeagel4T

          Fair enough. But it would have been more productive if you had pointed that out in your original posting.

  • rainey13

    Of course, DPS has another reason to stall on giving more info, or just plain doing the right thing here. Without a valid TX ID, Connie Wilson can be prevented from voting in November, and the teapubs will jump at any opportunity to further voter suppression.

  • Arbite

    Odd, I don’t think that’s the proper interpretation of the statute since name chances go on a different level.

  • SMRL

    Unfortunately, my and my husband are currently going through the same problem here in Texas. We moved to out of state and got married, changing our name with Social Security as well. When we came back (already having an Texas ID with our Birth Names), we specifically told them that we are not changing our names with the marriage certificate. We just wanted to update our ID card with our new name because we have ALREADY legally changed it within the US Government. Just a simple name update and change of address. We were told to get a court order as well. WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too expensive. So, we just use our old ID’s with our Old Address and our Old Last names. Until we can officially change it, we’re not even going to update our new address……

    • Smeagel4T

      Please bring your story to the ACLU or some other civil rights group. Cowering to Texas’ treading all over your First Amendment rights is bad for the country. Texas is attempting to tread all over the freedom of religion for those religious groups that wish to perform same-sex marriages.

  • Wesley Cole

    Get ready Texas we are going to drag you into the 21st Century whether you like it or not!

    • 1bimbo

      yeah, they’ve been saying that since 1836.. y’all can go to h*ll, and i will go to texas!

  • Makellan

    Most of what she needs will be available with a passport, which she should get regardless of the outcome of this case. Not being able to drive until the case finishes will be a huge pain, though.

    • Smeagel4T

      Why should a person who may be working a minimum wage job with no real option of traveling internationally be forced to pay for a passport?

      • Makellan

        She should not be forced to. I’m just pointing out an option that’s federally controlled and a legal ID for all of the purposes she’s worried about except driving. She’ll be able to get one in a few weeks (or less with enough money), which sounds faster than this court case will be resolved.
        This entire thing is bulls}*]#, but there is an option outside of Texas’ control for most of what she needs in the short term. Presumably, her lawyer has pointed this out and she’s already filed for one.

      • Clayton Colwell

        A passport, besides being a *really* *useful* document to have, is tons cheaper than the court-order route.

  • daybreaq

    If the Texas DPS continues to “dig in their heels,” I think Wilson vs Texas might be the next Loving vs Virginia.

    • Smeagel4T

      Agreed. But since the DPS decision is legally flawed and incompetent, I’d be amazed to see it go that far. Since the “marriage” itself does not actually change the person’s name (as confirmed by people keeping their names when they get married), the Texas DPS is simply demonstrating their legal ignorance and incompetence.

      Two separate legal actions took place in California — #1 was a marriage, #2 was a name change (or not). Those two legal actions are entirely legally separate. The “marriage license” was nothing more than the optimized paperwork for triggering the two entirely separate legal actions.

      As another proof of this, consider that when people get divorced they do not automatically revert back to their original names when the “marriage contract” is dissolved. Here again, the divorce agreement is an optimized application for triggering two entirely legally separate actions: #1 is a dissolution of the marriage, #2 is a legal name change (or not).

  • Smeagel4T

    Classic, Texas. Once again, you have the nation laughing at you. The marriage license itself does not change the person’s name. California simply allows a person to use the marriage license to request (or not) a legal name change at the same time. This is demonstrated by the fact that a person does NOT have to get their name changed as part of being married. From a legal standpoint, the two actions are entirely separate from each other.

    The name change legally has NOTHING to do with the marriage itself. Anybody can apply for a legal name change practically on a whim (so long as you’re not using it to dodge legal obligations). In fact, I’m going to assume that in Texas a person can pretty much apply for a legal name change on a whim without it having anything to do with marriage. California simply uses the marriage license as a convenient vehicle (a paperwork optimization) to apply for a legal name change.

    We have yet another example of Christian Sharia Law in effect in Texas.

  • Smeagel4T

    This once again points to the fact the Supreme Court is going to be forced to rule that intolerant states must provide some legal recognition for same-sex marriages performed in other states and in other countries. They could stop at, I suppose, declaring that “civil unions” for recognizing same-sex marriages in intolerant states must be adopted at a minimum.

    For example, what if a person in a legal same-sex marriage from another state or country is traveling through an intolerant state? For example, say they have a lay-over at Dallas-Fort Worth airport? One spouse has a serious accident and is rushed to an emergency room. The intolerant state is going to deny “next of kin” decision making and death attendance to their spouse? THAT’S going to look good on the front page of the newspapers in London, Paris, and Berlin. Yet another “America the Medieval Third World Country” story.

    • 1bimbo

      ‘forced to rule’.. the federal judiciary doesn’t create laws. it merely interprets the constitution.. there is no right not to be offended.. there is no right to ‘strike down’ intolerance.. if that were the case, the supreme court would rule that the klan is unconstitutional because they are intolerant or they offend people.. as it stands now, anyone can enter into a civil contract with anyone with all the rights to power of attorney, assets management etc.. the only reason homosexuality advocates want ‘gay marry’ is so they can try to force government mandated acceptance of the lifestyle on the rest of us

      • Smeagel4T

        False. Unless intolerant states wish to start recognizing power of attorney automatically for spouses due to their same-sex marriage status. I am unaware of how same-sex marriage forces anything upon anyone else. Please explain. How does same-sex marriage force you to engage in a same-sex marriage? Intolerant states are attempting to tread upon the First Amendment rights of religious groups that wish to perform same-sex marriages with equal standing to all other religious groups. Intolerant states are not permitted to establish state biases toward one religion or another.

  • Justin

    I can’t believe this site has no way to share a story to Facebook from an article!!!

  • Archturiat Baumann

    This is why sane and rational people don’t move to Texas.

    • Bob Hounddog

      You’re right and that explains all the Californians moving to Tx

  • Tiffany H.

    Same thing happened to me back in November of 2011. We went to DC to get married, came back here, I changed my name on my social security card & then with my new & marriage license I went to DPS to change it. The first woman who helped me even congratulated me. Imagine my shock, sadness & surprise when my new license came in under my maiden name. When I went back they told me the same thing they told Mrs. Wilson & would not budge. So I just went back another day, got a different person & didn’t say anything about it being a “same-sex marriage”. I wish the Wilsons all the blessings in the world & my heart goes out to them at this ridiculously difficult time.

  • Tiffany H.

    Furthermore, I’d like to add that hate only fuels hate. I’m not a Christian & being a lesbian born & raised in the bible belt, I’ve had more than my fair share of negative encounters with Christians. I’ve also had a few positive ones too. I feel that saying hateful things about Christians & blanketing them as ignorant homophobes as a whole only exacerbates things.

  • Heywood Jablowme

    I was really hoping that the Scots would vote for independence. I was more than willing to offer Texas to Great Britain as a replacement for Scotland. Awful, shitty state.

    • Baltimatt

      What did England, Wales, and Northern Ireland ever do to you to deserve that?

      • Heywood Jablowme

        My company has an office in London. If you had to deal with the people that work there on a daily basis like I do, you’d know why.

  • People4Humanity

    I hope she sues the knickers off pRick Perry and his attorney general [who shall remain nameless], as well as TX DPS, and receives back her attorneys fees, court costs and treble damages.

  • Austin

    Feel free to correct me if I am wrong anywhere in this: But we aren’t talking about a simple service here. We are talking about a government body denying a citizen the ability to obtain an ID and thus the ability to drive, among other things, based on religious beliefs? Am I mistaken that the separation of church and state exists, if not for reasons like this? Again I could be wrong, I tend to keep out of both politics and religion because of the amount of anger it stirs up and nothing can be truly debated anymore.

    • Acadian Flag

      You are absolutely correct. There are a lot of fundamental christians in the US that are against secularism. The ironic thing about these people is that most of them hate muslims and talk about how horrible things are where the majority of them live. They do not seem to realize that if they get their way in the US, things will be exactly like that here. As I have pointed out to many people, if someone wants to live in a place that is governed by religious morals, there are countries that are already like that and they should move there.

  • CommanderOgg

    Article IV

    Section 1.

    Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

    Court is Adjourned

  • bullhorn

    For 169 years, Texas, as a state has held to its values. Then now, suddenly, they come in and demand we change our values and our laws to accommodate them. Reminds me of the amnesty crowd.

    • JT

      Ah yes, Texas, filled with people whose ancestors renounced their U.S. citizenship to become Mexican citizens, broke their oaths to that nation in order to establish an independent nation, rejected that nation to rejoin the U.S., broke their oaths to the U.S. in order to join the CSA, renounced their ties to the CSA in order to rejoin the Union, and now refused to grant citizenship to the people who originally owned Texas before it was stolen from them.

      Yes, that history is TOTALLY something to be proud of. Totes.

      • Acadian Flag

        That was so beautiful, it brought a tear to my eye.

      • 1bimbo

        revisionist horsesh*t.. i blame the looney liberal radical professor who brainwashed you

        • JT

          It’s not “revisionist” when it’s the universally accepted historical narrative. Name one reliable source that contradicts a single thing I said.

          • 1bimbo

            ‘…and now refused to grant citizenship to the people who originally owned Texas before it was stolen from them….’ this is where you shot yourself in the foot.. peer long and hard at the phrase ‘originally owned Texas’, do your research, lick your self-inflicted wounds and come back to fight another day, ya self-loathing wannabe

          • JT

            Who originally owned Texas? Why, the Amerindians, of course, such as the Apache, Caddo, Comanche, Choctaw, Kickapoo, Kiowa, etc. Do you know the ethnic origins of Mexicans, Central Americans, and South Americans? Primarily, Europeans having intermarried with the native Amerindians, including (among many others) the Apache, Caddo, Comanche, Choctaw, Kickapoo, Kiowa, etc.

            The people Texans are refusing to recognize as humans now-a-days can trace their ancestry to the people who lived in the region before those 5-time turncoats moved in.

            Let me guess, you’re the result of the Texan education system, aren’t you?

    • Nell Webbish

      A state doesn’t have “values”. Individuals have values.

      Individuals in the state of Texas are as free today as they were a decade ago to think whatever they want about gay marriages. They can refuse to attend them, refuse to respect them, curse them, rant about them and preach against them.

      And they would still be as completely free to do all of that if Texas gave this woman a driver’s license.

      The idea that Texas being required to issue a document in a legal name as established by documents from another state and the Federal government somehow infringes on anyone else’s rights is asinine.

  • Eli Javier

    I would gladly donate and rally to this cause. File suit ladies and watch your supporters come to your aid.

  • HArt

    Maybe if she uses her ss card and gets a passport she can use those two forms of ID instead of her marriage certificate?

    • Clayton Colwell

      If she gets a passport with her married name, that is acceptable as a primary ID in TX, and she would then get her TX DL.

  • Linda

    This couple chose to move to a state that does not recognize same-sex marriages as legal unions. I’m surprised they didn’t think to research important issues such as getting a driver’s license and qualifying for disability benefits for their son. Same-sex marriages are illegal in many states.

    • amy

      Why should she be required to show more documentation that a straight person who relocates to Texas with an already recognized name change? I relocated from Tennessee to Texas and my name change was already completed, just like hers. I was only required to show my current license and my ss card which showed the name change. They didn’t require my marriage certificate nor my birth certificate. So why should she be required to show more than the straight person to her left or right?

    • BarkingDawg

      Not for much longer. SCOTUS will strike down the bans and this will no longer be an issue.

    • Nell Webbish

      They didn’t move to TX for the giggles, they were relocated by an employer.

  • missmacintx

    I suggest she gets a US Passport. It is the UNIVERSAL IDENTIFICATION resource for most Federal and State documentation purposes. It can be issued in her legally married name, regardless of TDPS and the Texas Constitution. A name change does not “legitimize” a marriage, nor does a marriage necessitate a name change. I still have my prior married name on my drivers license, and yes, it differs from my Social Security card. DPS refused to hyphenate my last name, to allow me to include both my current and married surnames, so I refused to change it at all, and re-issued in the old name only.
    They said the problem was having enough space to include both names. Oh well. The fact of the matter is that MEN can legally change THEIR names to their spouse’s name, as well, if they wish. Tying the DL to the BC is just one more way to cause trouble for women. I haven’t ever been known by my maiden name in this state! I have been married more than once and divorced more than once. I should not have to walk around with documents that detail my name from cradle to present!!!

  • amy

    So let me get this straight. She had 2 forms of id with Wilson as her legal name. One being her social security card. So how then can she be denied a new license? That’s all I needed to get a Texas license, my current license from TN and my social security card. That’s some bs.

  • amy

    Blatant discrimination. Her name change was already recognized on the federal level since her ss card showed her married name.

    Why do I say this is discrimination? Because when I relocated to Texas from Tennessee my name change was already recognized at all levels. Straight marriage or not, her documents indicated the change and therefore should not have stopped her from receiving a drivers license. All I was required to provide was the current license from Tennessee as well as my social security card. Requiring more from her or requiring her to submit for another name change is discrimination. This is wrong on so many levels. Her name change was already official at the federal level given the ss card reflecting as such. They didn’t ask for my birth certificate. They didn’t ask for my marriage certificate. Just the current license and my ss card. Why does she have to show more than that?

    • BarkingDawg

      It’s Texas. What more can be said.

  • BarkingDawg

    If the state wants a court order, I’m sure that the federal court would be happy to issue one

  • Julie Olivas Thielke

    I am going though the same thing. I have hired an attorney to petition the courts for a name change, but I am very worried that my petition will be denied. Texas needs to ammend their laws on same sex marriage. I am a homeowner here in Texas as well as an RN. I am in limbo waiting to make the necessary changes to my drivers license as well as my nursing license. It has caused my family great stress. Thank you for this article bringing to light the struggles same sex couples are enduring here in Texas.

  • BarkingDawg

    In this particular case, Wilson needs to consult with a civil rights attorney.

    A federal civil suit will do wonders to help the state figure out where they are mistaken in their interpretation of the law.

  • T-How

    So how many heterosexual females have had a problem getting a driver’s license in Texas because their name is different on their birth certificate and their marriage license. Zero. How many heterosexual females have to go to court to get their name changed when they get married? Zero – it’s automatically done because the laws in Texas (supposedly) favor marriage (only if the right kind). So now Texas is going to not honor court-approved name changes from another state when the reason for the name change is same-sex marriage? But they will recognize all the other name changes? Ridiculous. Crap like this is going to guarantee that same-sex marriage becomes legal in all 50 states. The sooner the better. This is a no-brainer – we can’t continue with this mis-application/interpretation and alphabet soup of laws from state to state.

  • Alan Gilfoy

    I understand that name changes upon marriage are separate from marriage paperwork, so she should be able to prove that another way, but the proof she presented was the marriage license.

  • pliny

    Not that she should have to spend money to deal with DPS’s spitefulness, but Wilson can bypass this for about $55 and an hour at the post office. DPS will take passport cards as a primary ID source (no birth certificate + marriage license required). A passport card is a stripped down version of a full passport only good for ground crossings in North America.

    The State Department shouldn’t have any issue with her Cali documentation…

  • EmpressCrane

    Had this happen to a friend, took him and his husband thousands and thousands of dollars in court battles before he brought a court order to the DPS forcing them to issue a DL. This was Dallas. Total fucking bullshit.

  • ludwig123

    First of all Gay people are some of their worst own enemies.
    No wonder she got turned down by the Texas DOT telling them that she took her
    ‘wife’ s last name and that is confusing to a lot of straight folks who to begin with are ignorant about gay people and furthermore do not want to know that they are no different than anyone else. She should
    have said that she took the surname of her SPOUSE’s surname.

    There may be some liberal folks in Texas but if there is I
    have not heard of them. Texas is ruled by the Southern Baptist church and the
    Roman Catholic Church–two religious groups that violate the Constitution of
    the United States by mixing religion with State. Texas is the home of some of
    the most bigoted folks in the United States—hang’em high and ask questions
    later after they are dead.

    There are similar problems all across the old
    Confederacy—in South Carolina a trans-gendered person was refused a driver’s
    license because she (a ‘ he’ in transforming process) wore feminine attire as
    she always does and showed up in makeup and dressed her normal dress.

    My advice to these women is to sue the hell out of the State
    of Texas as is being done in South Carolina with the help of the ACLU.

  • newsmom4968

    What a shame we can no longer use the term “retarded” without incurring censure; it’s the only adjective I can think of to describe Texas’ position. “Antiquated” just doesn’t cut it.

  • texasaggie

    The basic function that the bimbo serves is to be a window into the wing nut faction and keep decent people current on their twisted minds. She is very revealing.

  • VoiceofReason

    Thanks REPUBLICANS for BEING SO ANTI – American and ANTI-HUMAN and bastardizing ‘religion’ into your own PERVERTED beliefs ! Their days are coming and will be flushed down the TOILET !

  • rmstallman

    One thing this article shows is that there are too many things
    in the US that require an official state ID.
    It is being changed step by step into a national ID card.
    We need to reverse that change.

  • jleachesq

    “This is a disappointing incident and certainly not reflective of Texas hospitality or values,”

    Regrettably, it is these days.

  • wstockwin

    Did she really expect something better from Texas? Better come back home to California ladies, before your kids regress into ‘open carry’ mouth-breathers.

  • Kevin Schmidt

    The laws of Texas do not trump US Federal laws. ACLU, do your job!

  • uncleernie

    Remind me again why anyone would want to live in Texas?

  • larryoinpdx

    We can expect little else from the state that removed Thomas Jefferson from the American history books due to his radical notions.

  • ll9956

    This couple presumably has a good reason for moving to Texas. I would think they would get the hell out of such an exceedingly unenlightened state and go almost anywhere else.

  • Maura

    I’m not sure what the DPS supervisor was thinking, but my wife and I moved to Dallas from Pittsburgh 3 years ago, and I had no problem obtaining a license using my marriage certificate, and I took my wife’s last name.

  • 1bimbo

    couldn’t resist sharing this article because the sexually dysfunctional are ripe for it: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/10/white-lesbian-mother-sues-sperm-bank-after-having-black-baby/
    ‘…Two lesbians from Ohio are suing a sperm bank after having a black baby.
    Via Rebel Pundit: Jennifer Cramblett and Amanda Zinkon, a White couple living in Ohio selected sperm from a White male provided by the Midwest Sperm Bank. Cramblett used the sperm to become impregnated with her first child, but just months before little Payton arrived in August of 2012 Cramblett received a communication from the donor bank informing her she had been given the wrong sperm. Her baby would be black. Unsurprisingly Cramblett is suing the sperm bank for “wrongful birth and breach of warranty.” While she can’t be blamed for being a little miffed that she did not receive the product she purchased, her reasoning behind the lawsuit is unnerving to say the least. Here are some of Cramblett’s main concerns with now being forced to be the mother of a Black child as laid out in the lawsuit: On August 21, 2012, Jennifer gave birth to Payton, a beautiful, obviously mixed-race baby girl. Jennifer bonded with Payton easily and she and Amanda love her very much. Even so, Jennifer lives each day with fears, anxieties and uncertainty about her future and Payton’s future….’