Connect with us

Greg Abbott: Banning Gay Marriage Reduces Out-Of-Wedlock Births

Published

on

The Texas Republican nominee for governor says that his state’s ban on same-sex marriage reduces out-of-wedlock births among heterosexuals.

In a brief filed with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday, Attorney General Greg Abbott claims that the State of Texas’ ban on same-sex marriage reduces out-of-wedlock births, and legalizing same-sex marriage would make different-sex couples less interested in marrying and having children.

Texas’s same-sex marriage laws “are rationally related to the State’s interest in reducing unplanned out-of-wedlock births,” Abbott, who is running for governor against Wendy Davis, claims in the brief, which was filed on Friday.

LOOK: Wendy Davis Slams Greg Abbott On Social Issues In Texas Debate (Video)

Abbott makes a false cost-benefit analysis, wholly ignoring the actual civil rights issues that are central to legal arguments supporting marriage equality.

“Texas’s marriage laws are rationally related to the State’s interest in encouraging couples to produce new offspring, which are needed to ensure economic growth and the survival of the human race.”

“By channeling procreative heterosexual intercourse into marriage,” Abbott adds, “Texas’s marriage laws reduce unplanned out-of-wedlock births and the costs that those births impose on society. Recognizing same-sex marriage does not advance this interest because same-sex unions do not result in pregnancy.”

Of course, many same-sex couples adopt the very children created by the “unplanned out-of-wedlock births” of different-gender coupling, and those families deserve the same rights and protections different-sex couples are automatically granted.

“There is no ‘fundamental right’ to same-sex marriage,” Abbott claims. He also states “Texas’s marriage laws do not expressly classify based on sexual orientation,” meaning that he says they are constitutional because they don’t specifically apply only to gay and bisexual people.

The Houston Chronicle reports that Abbott “denied that other courts’ decisions to overturn gay marriage bans represented salient precedent, saying these rulings simply represented the “purely subjective” beliefs of a few judges.” 

Same-sex marriage has won over 40 decisions in courts since the supreme Court overturned DOMA in 2013.

 

Image via Flickr

 

Related At The New Civil Rights Movement:

Texas Same-Sex Marriage Ban Denies Mom Of Three Driver’s License – And Right To Vote

AT&T Donates $75,000 To Help Elect Anti-Gay Republican Greg Abbott Governor Of Texas

Sarah Palin Endorses Abbott: ‘Good Enough For Ted Nugent, Good Enough For Me!’

Texas Appeals Ruling Striking Down Same-Sex Marriage Ban — For The Children

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Piling Lie Upon Lie’: CNN Fact-Checker Torches Trump’s Iowa Claims

Published

on

Kicking off what is expected to be a weekly campaign-style tour of the nation to promote his agenda ahead of the November midterms, President Donald Trump engaged in what CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale described as an “alternative reality” of “piling lie upon lie” for his Iowa audience.

“You know, inflation we’ve solved; it’s done,” Trump told Fox News during the trip to Iowa. “We have it good where prices are coming way down. They were just saying, in Iowa the fuel is $1.95. Did you hear that? Somebody said $1.85. But it was $3.50, $4.50 just a year ago, a year and a half ago. You look at eggs, you look at groceries, it’s all down. Everything’s come down. Do you notice they don’t mention affordability anymore?”

According to Dale, it’s “true” that egg prices have fallen significantly, but the “rest of his narrative was thoroughly inaccurate.”

He continued his fact check: “Inflation is not over; prices continue to rise. Overall prices have gone up, not down. Overall grocery prices have gone up, not down. Iowa’s average gas price is much higher than $1.95. And Democrats have certainly not stopped mentioning affordability; in fact, it remains a key focus of their public remarks.”

READ MORE: Silence Is Deafening From Second Amendment ‘Don’t Tread on Me’ Crowd: Columnist

Dale apparently wasn’t the only one fact-checking gas prices.

“In an unusual moment,” he writes, “Trump was fact-checked on this subject by an attendee at his Iowa speech on Tuesday. When he spoke of gas in Iowa being $1.95 or $1.85 per gallon, someone in the crowd shouted, ‘No, $2.63,’ according to CNN’s Steve Contorno, who was on scene.”

According to Dale, “Overall consumer prices have increased during this presidential term; in December 2025, seasonally adjusted overall prices were 2.2% higher than they were in January 2025, and, again, 2.7% higher than they were in December 2024.”

He also noted that “It’s not true that ‘you look at groceries, it’s all down.’ In fact, the 0.7% increase in the Consumer Price Index for groceries between November 2025 and December 2025 was the biggest month-to-month jump reported in more than three years.”

And he added, “Iowa gas prices are generally much higher than Trump said.”

READ MORE: ‘All Tools Necessary’: GOP Hardliners Press Trump on Insurrection Act

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

Silence Is Deafening From Second Amendment ‘Don’t Tread on Me’ Crowd: Columnist

Published

on

Amid the background of federal agents shooting to death two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis and President Donald Trump subsequently declaring, “you can’t have guns,” a Marine veteran who served in Iraq is asking, where are the pro-Second Amendment “Don’t Tread on Me” activists now?

In an opinion piece for The Hill, Jos Joseph explains the effect that the 1993 federal government raid in Waco, Texas, had on him as a teen, when he “watched as federal agents, dressed up like commandos, tried to storm a religious compound in Texas. A shootout and then a siege ensued in which the government used the same psyops operations on Americans as they had on Panamanian Gen. Manuel Noriega.”

He says that he was “baffled by the government’s actions and willingness to escalate things to the point of using commando-style tactics before exhausting other options,” and as a result, he “would understand why people didn’t trust the government, why they advocated for the Second Amendment, and why they warned me about the dangers that an unchecked politician could do to American citizens.”

He then blasts “self-described libertarians, Second Amendment advocates, Punisher logo wearing tough guys, and ‘Don’t Tread on Me’ flag wavers” who “wilt like flowers when it comes time to actually standing up for the Bill of Rights.”

READ MORE: Trump’s ‘Playing With Fire’ Attack Proves He ‘Isn’t Changing Course’: Experts

He then turns to the crisis in Minnesota.

“The Department of Homeland Security immediately tried to control the messaging,” he exclaimed, “that somehow this man who was legally permitted to carry a gun was killed for carrying a gun.”

“I think about all the ‘Don’t Tread on Me’ people and wonder, why are they so silent?” Joseph asks.

And, “why are some putting restrictions on the Second Amendment now? You can carry a gun but not magazines? You can’t carry more than one magazine? You can’t bring a gun to a protest if you are a Democrat?”

Joseph did not specifically mention President Donald Trump, who said on Tuesday that Alex Pretti, the VA ICU nurse shot and killed by federal agents in Minneapolis over the weekend, was carrying magazines.

“He had a gun,” Trump said, as Reuters reported. “I don’t like that. He had two fully loaded magazines. That’s a lot of bad stuff.”

Joseph writes, “Over the years, I was told by my conservative friends to be worried about Big Government,” then laments, “I guess none of that applies anymore. The killings of Alex Pretti, Renee Good and others in ICE custody should be reprehensible to any decent, patriotic American. But the silence is deafening from those who cried loudest over government tyranny.”

READ MORE: Trump: ‘We’re Bringing Back God’

 

Image by Fibonacci Blue via Flickr and a Creative Commons license

Continue Reading

News

Trump’s ‘Playing With Fire’ Attack Proves He ‘Isn’t Changing Course’: Experts

Published

on

After pledging to deescalate tensions in Minnesota, President Donald Trump kicked off Wednesday by taking aim at the mayor of Minneapolis, asserting — incorrectly — that declining to enforce federal immigration laws is unlawful.

Legal analysts and administration critics have warned that the moves the president made this week in the wake of the second deadly shooting of a U.S. citizen by federal agents were simply a change in tone — not in strategy or tactics, and not an actual pivot. Trump has recalled Greg Bovino, the head of Operation Metro Surge, from Minneapolis, and sent in border czar Tom Homan.

“Surprisingly,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, “Mayor Jacob Frey just stated that, ‘Minneapolis does not, and will not, enforce Federal Immigration Laws.’ This is after having had a very good conversation with him.”

“Could somebody in his inner sanctum please explain that this statement is a very serious violation of the Law, and that he is PLAYING WITH FIRE!” the president declared.

READ MORE: GOP Instability Deepens as Another Republican Candidate Calls It Quits

The president declared Frey’s stance is unlawful but legal experts note that cities and states generally cannot be forced to carry out federal immigration enforcement.

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance noted that “the feds can’t ‘commandeer’ state law enforcement resources to execute their policies.”

She also called the president’s statement, “More evidence Trump isn’t changing course on mass deportations.”

Politico senior legal affairs reporter Kyle Cheney offered some additional insight.

“Trump could not have designed a better statement to convince Judge Menendez that Operation Metro Surge is meant to coerce policy changes,” Cheney wrote.

He noted that courts have “ruled repeatedly” that the federal government “cannot coerce states to enforce federal law.”

“Nor is it illegal for states to decline to do so,” Cheney added.

READ MORE: Trump: ‘We’re Bringing Back God’

“And the menacing ‘playing with fire’ is exactly the kind of statement (‘retribution is coming’) that worked against the administration in court earlier this week,” he added.

Indeed, ABC News interviewed the president on Tuesday and reported that Trump was suggesting federal agents would take a “more relaxed” approach in Minnesota after the two deadly shootings.

Trump said, “we can start doing maybe a little bit more relaxed,” and, “we’d like to finish the job and finish it well, and I think we can do it in a de-escalated form.”

ABC called it “a shift in tone.”

The New Republic’s Greg Sargent wrote on Wednesday, “The media narrative that Trump is ‘pivoting’ and ‘deescalating’ on his ICE raids … is wildly overstated. As long as the military occupations and the treatment of US cities as enemy territory continue, there’s no pivot. It’s that simple.”

“Trump wants to appear eager to minimize clashes between his govt militias and protesters. But he doesn’t want them to stop doing the things that are causing the clashes in the first place,” he continued. “There’s no Trump ‘pivot’ until we see real investigations into the government’s killings and real accountability for them.”

READ MORE: Former Federal Prosecutor Blasts Trump’s ‘New Malignant Normal’

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.