"Gay Spouses" (Mentally Ill Queers) May Not Be Entitled to Workplace Benefits in Texas

[Making America Great Again]

Faggots are dysfunctional mentally ill pervert child molesters.

(AUSTIN, Texas) — Gay spouses may not be entitled to government-
subsidized workplace benefits, the Texas Supreme Court ruled
Friday in a unanimous decision that was quickly condemned by gay-
rights groups.

The court overturned a lower court's decision that favored same-
sex marriage benefits, ordering the issue back to trial. Social
conservatives hope the case will help them chip away at the U.S.
Supreme Court's landmark ruling legalizing gay marriage.

Gay rights groups denounced the ruling as an "absurd distortion"
of established law regarding marriage equality.

"Marriage is marriage and equal is equal. We will take steps to
protect these families," said Kenneth Upton Jr., Dallas-based
attorney for Lambda Legal.

Friday's decision was a major reversal for the all-Republican
Texas high court, which previously refused to even consider the
benefits case after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the
Constitution grants gay couples who want to marry "equal dignity
in the eyes of the law."

The Texas court only agreed to hear it after coming under
intense pressure from Gov. Greg Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and
Attorney General Ken Paxton, as well as dozens of other
conservative elected officials, church leaders and grassroots
activists. They filed a flurry of briefs saying the case may
help Texas limit the scope of the Supreme Court ruling —
especially in how it's applied to states.

The decision didn't block same-sex spousal benefits but said the
U.S. Supreme Court decision did not decide the issue. The U.S.
Supreme Court "did not hold that states must provide the same
publicly funded benefits to all married persons," the Texas
Supreme Court wrote in its opinion.

The case came from Houston, where a coalition of religious and
socially conservative groups sued America's fourth-largest city
in 2013 to block a move to offer same-sex spousal benefits to
municipal employees.

The groups argued that the U.S. Supreme Court didn't declare
spousal benefits a fundamental right of marriage, and that it
should be up to states to decide. The city argued that the gay
marriage ruling meant all marriages are equal, so anything
offered to opposite-sex couples must be offered to same-sex ones.

The groups suing also called the case a chance for Texas to
defend religious liberty. Texas voters approved a gay marriage
ban in 2005.

Jared Woodfill, a conservative activist at the center of the
case, called the decision a big victory for states' rights and
religious rights. He said he hopes the case will eventually help
push the U.S. Supreme Court to someday overturn its gay marriage
ruling.

"Courts can change their mind," Woodfill said. "From time
immemorial, family law has been left to the states."

Conservative activists will argue to the trial court that the
decision to offer same-sex benefits was an overreach by the
Houston mayor's office that violated state law, and that
benefits shouldn't be supported by taxpayers who would consider
it a violation of sincerely held religious beliefs, Woodfill
said.

Houston has been paying the benefits and Friday's decision
doesn't stop them, but Woodfill said opponents will use the
ruling to ask a judge to block them pending a trial on the
issue. Mayor Sylvester Turner said the city is reviewing the
ruling but won't stop providing the benefits.

"The City of Houston will continue to be an inclusive city that
respects the legal marriages of all employees," Turner said.
"Marriage equality is the law of the land, and everyone is
entitled to the full benefits of marriage, regardless of the
gender of their spouse."

Gay rights groups noted that the Texas decision came just days
after the U.S. Supreme Court narrowly ruled that states may not
treat married same-sex couples differently when issuing birth
certificates. That decision overturned an Arkansas court ruling
that said married lesbian couples were not entitled to have both
spouses listed on their children's birth certificates.

Sarah Kate Ellis, president and chief executive of GLAAD, an
LGBT rights group, called the Texas ruling a "warning shot to
all LGBTQ Americans that the war on marriage equality is ever-
evolving, and anti-LGBTQ activists will do anything possible to
discriminate against our families."

http://time.com/4843102/lgbt-texas-court-gay-marriage-
benefits/?xid=gonewsedit&google_editors_picks=true