Texas and 5 Other States Resist Processing Benefits for Gay Couples
Source: The New York Times
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.
Published: November 10, 2013
The two women handed a sheaf of official papers, including their 2008 California marriage license, to a clerk who glanced at the documents and declared, Its one of those. She then called over her boss, who told the couple that they would have to travel to a federal military base like Fort Hood, 70 miles to the north, to get the ID, Ms. Butler recalled.
The reason: Texas is one of six states refusing to comply with Defense Secretary Chuck Hagels order that gay spouses of National Guard members be given the same federal marriage benefits as heterosexual spouses. Mr. Hagels decree, which applies to all branches of the military, followed the Supreme Courts ruling in June that struck down part of the Defense of Marriage Act that had prohibited the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages.
While a majority of states ban same-sex marriages, most are not fighting the new policy. But Pentagon officials say that in addition to Texas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma and West Virginia have balked. Each has cited a conflict with state laws that do not recognize same-sex marriages. (A West Virginia official said, however, that the state intended to follow the directive.) While the president has the power to call National Guard units into federal service and nearly all Guard funding comes from the federal government the states say the units are state agencies that must abide by state laws.
Requiring same-sex Guard spouses to go to federally owned bases protects the integrity of our state Constitution and sends a message to the federal government that they cannot simply ignore our laws or the will of the people, Gov. Mary Fallin of Oklahoma said last week....
Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/11/us/texas-and-5-other-states-resist-processing-benefits-for-gay-couples.html?hp
sakabatou
(42,155 posts)Glorfindel
(9,730 posts)even though they lived in Georgia, they had to travel to Tennessee to get married. (This was in 1968.) When even Tennessee is more progressive, you know you're in deep doo-doo.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Most Red States take more from the federal government then they pay into it.
They'd be squirming, screaming, crying, and pleading in no time flat, and it would be a beautiful thing to see.
quakerboy
(13,920 posts)yup.
theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)Even if the chances of that happening are nil. I don't understand why there are so many bases in Texas to begin with.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)elleng
(130,973 posts)Kick their asses.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)hate Americans so much.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Skittles
(153,169 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)of growing up in there.
Tooth for tooth, eye for an eye
Sell your soul just to bop on by
Beggin' for a dollar, stealin' a dime
Come on can't you see that I'm
Stranded, caught in the crossfire
I am stranded, caught in the crossfire
I need some, kind of kindness
Some kind of sympathy, oh no
(Lead) Save the strong, lose the weak
Never turning the other cheek
Trust nobody, don't be no fool
Whatever happened to the golden rule
Stranded, caught in the crossfire
I am stranded, caught in the crossfire
Skittles
(153,169 posts)when you run into a Democrat they really are true blue - like flowers hardy enough to grow with weeds
bucolic_frolic
(43,181 posts)"... the federal government ... cannot simply ignore our laws or the
will of the people, Gov. Mary Fallin of Oklahoma said last week....
The Federal government is the will of the people. National law trumps
state law. Ask the Confederacy.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)Individual states would have to stop allowing gay couples to marry?
Does it also mean that state laws legalizing marijuanna are invalid because they violate federal drug laws?
bucolic_frolic
(43,181 posts)it ain't as clear as the 1950s
but if states are allowed to ignore federal laws, which ones do they
get to ignore? just the ones the federal DOJ doesn't wish to prosecute?
Voter laws, federal gasoline tax laws and highway funds, Social Security
laws, ACA .... we're headed toward controlled anarchy, or at least
mass confusion.
christx30
(6,241 posts)funds, what can the Feds do to force an issue if a state wanted to make a stink? If Rick perry wanted to pull a "Mr Holder has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."
groundloop
(11,519 posts)Not that I think it will do much good, but after reading this I'm emailing my tea-bagger state reps to complain about it.
theHandpuppet
(19,964 posts)At least your reps will know that there are constituents out there who are appalled by this BS!
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)All of the states listed (except for WV which said they would comply) have right wing nutjob governors.
I wish there was a line item veto so Obama could start stripping projects from these states and taking away money and jobs. If the wackjobs don't want to cooperate, don't give them anything.
sinkingfeeling
(51,457 posts)and recognize gay marriage!
atreides1
(16,079 posts)Just those that are manned by the National Guard, after all the Guard is a "State agency...", and unless it's been called to duty by the Commander in Chief...then those states should be footing the entire bill for non-federal bases!
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)Issuing a Federal ID and processing Federal Benefits paperwork. You either do it for all of the eligible people or none. Now if they want to send everyone to Fort Hood, etc. that is their option I guess. But you can't just administer Federal Benefit's to White people, or Christian people, or those with Chartreuse hair.
Rstrstx
(1,399 posts)Just one more step towards the inevitable