Back in 2005, Texas enacted a ban on marriage. It was enthusiastically voted in by a large majority of Texan voters, and it was worded so those sneaky fags and dykes couldn't duck around the holy concept of marriage and shoehorn themselves into with those too-near-marriage unions like "civil union" and "domestic partnership."
It's worded like this:
"The state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage." (emphasis mine)
That should fix them gays but good, right?
There's just one small problem with the wording, however, and it's a problem that's sure to create a legal tangle that even an experienced weaver might not be able to unravel. That problem is, put simply: isn't marriage identical to... um, marriage?
Come with me over the jump for more on this startling, yet four-years-past-its-due-date-for-media-recognition story. Bring your popcorn, your soda, and your beer - you'll want it.
Now, obviously, the intent is there. And isn't it sweet and perfect? That'll keep those icky gays and lesbians from polluting the pristine Texas landscape with their rainbow "wedding" rings. Right? That'll make sure that only good men marry good women (and only one per customer). Right?
Well, I remember commenting on it back then, but at the time I was pooh-poohed, even though it bans marriage. The phrase "selective enforcement" was used quite a bit. Put bluntly, nobody thought that Texas would ever wake up to what it had done that day in 2005 when it voted in its marriage ban, but apparently someone finally has.
This week, Barbara Radonofsky, the Democratic candidate for Texas attorney general, announced that in her opinion as a lawyer, this statute invalidates every marriage in Texas. Every. Single. One.
Like I said, they voted in a marriage ban. (I never said it was a gay marriage ban, although that might be what the bigoted voters in Texas thought they were getting. Reading comprehension, folks. Embrace it.)
But! The really fun part about this is that the ban is even more interesting than the current news media have been reporting. The headlines this morning were very amusing:
F[au]x News: Texas AG Candidate Argues Anti-Gay Marriage Law Bans All Marriages
Miami Herald: A Texas-size technicality: Marriage may be unconstitutional
CBS News: Oops: Did Texas Ban Marriage?
Oops, for sure. They're all focusing on the fact that it's quite possible that nobody can get married in Texas. But the fun goes even further than that. Check it out.
The text of the amendment that Texas voters voted on says:
SECTION 1. Article I, Texas Constitution, is amended by adding Section 32 to read as follows:
Sec. 32. (a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.
At the time this happened, I wrote about it in my personal blog (not open to the public):
So, first they define marriage, and then they say that the state can't recognize anything that is either identical to marriage as they've defined it, or anything that is similar to marriage as they've defined it. So: no straight marriages, no straight common-law marriages, no straight civil unions, no straight anything. If it's one man and one woman, by definition, it's not allowed in Texas anymore.
BUT! As was said in an anonymous comment to a blog that pointed this out before the election even took place, "To apply (b) you need to use the definition in (a). Thus the state cannot create or recognize a legal status involving the union of one man and one woman. But it could still recognize other kinds of unions, eg same sex unions and unions involving more than 2 persons."
Whoops.
So not only does Texas have enough eggs on its collective face to make an omelet worthy of the renowned Texan insistence that "ours is bigger than anyone else's", it's also managed to outlaw only opposite-sex marriage as defined by the statute.
This is not just a small error on the part of the bigots. It's an enormous error. As Radonofsky said today in a press conference, "Whoever vetted the language in [the clause] must have been asleep at the wheel."
Now, won't it be interesting for Texas if a judge says this is enforceable as written? Think of all the people who thought they had legal civil marriages in Texas whose marriages have just been invalidated. Think of the anguish they're going through right now. Think of the children that have been born to those unions that are now, legally, not unions - thus making the children bastards. Think of the pain that they're going through. Think of how many of them are bigots who brought it on themselves in their efforts to smack the queers one more time with the heavy hand of the law. Think of how utterly perfect it is that they've now been hit by their own legal boomerang.
But now, think about all the same-sex couples in all fifty states of this nation who have to go through that every day, through no fault of their own. Think about the families damaged by the recent vote this month in Maine, and the vote last year in California. Think about the families worrying that their families might be just as easily invalidated as the families in Texas have been, and by just as stupid a cause. Even the ones in supposedly "safe" states like Iowa and Connecticut. Think about the continual efforts of the bigots to reverse equality in California, in Maine, in Washington D.C.
I'm not saying this isn't funny. It is. It's schadenfreude of the purest ray serene. The phrase "hoist on their own petards" comes to mind. Pass the popcorn, certainly.
But it's also horrifying. It's horrifying because it's an example of how broken our system is, when any such law can be passed by a majority vote in the first place. And I feel equally horrified for the non-bigoted opposite-sex couples in Texas who, through no fault of their own (because they didn't vote for it) are also caught in this net of invalidation and hatred.
Now, perhaps the bigots in Texas are getting a taste of their own medicine, and finding out what it's like to be the target of such vile, abusive, unconstitutional laws. Maybe they'll finally realize that rights are just that - rights, and not to be jerked away from a vulnerable population just because the majority has the technical ability to do so. Maybe, like the Grinch, their hearts will grow three sizes today and they'll realize what it was they did and vow to stop doing it.
Maybe.
....
Hey, a guy can dream, can't he?