To: piytar
This prevents “creation” of something else with “legal status identical or similar to marriage.” Which would include common-law marriage and, perhaps, any marriage ceremony conducted by a judge or JP since such unions are created by the state.
To: Non-Sequitur
Which would include common-law marriage and, perhaps, any marriage ceremony conducted by a judge or JP since such unions are created by the state. No, it would NOT include those because they are by statutory definition MARRIAGE - not a legal status equal to or similar to marriage.
23 posted on
11/19/2009 8:29:03 AM PST by
VRWCmember
(What leftists call "profiling" is really just reasonable prudence and due diligence.)
To: Non-Sequitur
Sigh. Those are examples of “creating” a particular marriage, not a new legal classification. The later - creation of a legal classification by the legislature - is what the amendment clearly refers to.
Texas judges are smart enough to understand the plain meaning and intent of the language. This isn’t going to go anywhere, word games aside.
24 posted on
11/19/2009 10:09:02 AM PST by
piytar
(Go Away RNC, Steele, Graham, and the rest of the lib-loser GOP. WE'RE TAKING OUR PARTY BACK!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson