Claim Chowder: Alabama Style

Liberty kisses Justice

So the probate judges in Alabama have decided that a Federal Judge ruling does apply to them after all, and they will start issuing marriage licenses in February:

The professional association of Alabama’s probate judges said Wednesday it now is satisfied that a federal court order striking down the state’s same-sex marriage ban applies to them.

The Alabama Probate Judges Association had taken the position that the order Friday by U.S. District Judge Callie V.S. “Ginny” Granade in Mobile applied only to the two women who brought the suit and the Attorney General’s Office, which was the named defendant.

Lawyers for plaintiffs Cari Searcy and Kim McKeand, as well as same-sex marriage advocates and legal experts, roundly criticized that position. Earlier Wednesday, Granade released a “clarification” making clear that her ruling applied broadly statewide.

The Probate Judges Association now is satisfied, as well.

So what made them change their minds, you ask? Money, seems to be the answer:

Adam Romero, senior counsel and Arnold D. Kassoy scholar of law at the Williams Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, said the clarification makes clear the decision wasn’t specific to plaintiffs in the case.

“If and when that decision goes into effect, any Alabama official that enforces the state’s bans on same-sex marriage are in danger of not only being hauled into Judge Grande’s court and added to the pending lawsuit, but also getting hit with the costs of doing so,” Romero said.

News That Will Drive You To Drink


“The people of Alabama elected me to uphold our state Constitution, and when I took the oath of office last week, that is what I promised to do.

“The people of Alabama voted in a constitutional amendment to define marriage as being between man and woman. As governor, I must uphold the Constitution. I am disappointed in Friday’s ruling, and I will continue to oppose this ruling. The Federal government must not infringe on the rights of states.”

–Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley

If you are worried that the Judiciary of Alabama (motto: Where the Debris Hits the Sea) will come after him, fear not. Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy ’10 Commandments’ Moore sent a letter to Bentley saying that he plans to recognize the state’s ban on same-sex marriage. Oh, and he hopes that the Guv has the spine to continue to stand-up for bigotry, if not sedition:

“As Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, I will continue to recognize the Alabama Constitution and the will of the people overwhelmingly expressed in the Sanctity of Marriage Amendment,” Moore wrote.

“I ask you to continue to uphold and support the Alabama Constitution with respect to marriage, both for the welfare of this state and for our posterity,” Moore continued at the end of the letter. “Be advised that I stand with you to stop judicial tyranny and any unlawful opinions issued without constitutional authority.”

Somewhere, the late Orval Faubus, the very late Governor of Arkansas, is smiling.


4th and 40: Alabama Goes For A Hail Mary


Y’all Qaeda is not happy about having to issue marriage licenses to the ‘mos: Alabama probate judge association: ‘We cannot issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples’

“Judge Granade’s ruling in this case only applies to the parties in the case and has no effect on anybody that is not a named party. The probate judges were not parties in this matter,” Al Agricola, attorney for the Alabama Probate Judges Association, stated in Saturday’s press release. “The legal effect of this decision is to allow one person in one same sex marriage that was performed in another state to adopt their partner’s child. There is nothing in the judge’s order that requires probate judges in Alabama to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples.”

I sense a smack-down coming from the Federal Bench.

One Lump of Stupid or Two?

O-K-L-A-H-O-M-O, OK!

Oklahoma Bill Would Put An End To Marriage Licenses

To put an end to the Lavender Menace that is just itching to hitching-up in Oklahoma (legal since last October), State Rep. Todd Russ (a credentialed Assemblies of God minister) is the one, lone, brave state politician who has had the brainstorm to propose ending all marriages in the state. He’s only proposing it to protect county clerks from having to issue marriage licenses to probably eternally damned same-sex couples.

There’s just one small fly in the ointment:

Under his plan, a religious official would sign a couple’s marriage certificate, which would then be filed with the clerk… If a couple did not have a religious official to preside over their wedding, they could file an affidavit of common law marriage.

The Separation of Church and State, how does it work anyway?

News That Will Drive You To Drink: Clarence Thomas Edition

So why should you fill up the I.V. bags (not bread bags) with booze for this tweet? Take it away Jeremy Hooper:

Robert George is the cofounder (along with Maggie Gallagher) of the National Organization For Marriage and one of the authors of the Federal Marriage Amendment. Ryan T. Anderson is a Heritage Foundation staffer and a top voice against marriage equality.

But you know, no one will ask Ol’ Clarence to recuse himself from the upcoming ruling on same-sex marriage unlike the chorus of Y’all Qaeda who are screaming for the women of the SCOTUS to recuse themselves because they know gay people.

You Have To Fight For Your Right To…


zombie cake

Who knew that the battle for equal rights would be fought in the bakeries of America? Y’all Qaeda knew!

We know that the Xristian majority in this country are the most discriminated, put-upon, and generally powerless Americans of all, and the ‘mos are cramming their gay agenda down their strangely relaxed and accommodating throats, amiright? Of course I am! So Bill Jack, a Christian educator who lives in Castle Rock CO had a plan to prove how the secularists were taking away his rights and giving them to the ‘mos.

According to Azucar Bakery owner Marjorie Silva, Jack came into her shop in March of 2014, and asked her to make him a Bible-shaped cake. Silva said Jack also wanted her to inscribe what she described as an anti-gay message on one of the Bible pages.

“The customer wanted us to draw two males holding hands with a big ‘X’ on them,” Silva wrote in a letter to DORA, who had requested her side of the story after Jack filed the complaint. “We never refuse service. But we did feel it was not right for us to present hateful words or images about human beings.”

A-HA! The baker discriminated against the Xristian by not giving up her free-speech rights in favor of the theocrat’s free-speech rights! Baby Jeebus weeps

“I believe I was discriminated against by the bakery based on my creed. As a result, I filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights division. Out of respect for the process, I will wait for the director to release his findings before making further comments.”

To this day, the bakery owner will not say what Black wanted her to write on the cake. But she did offer to bake the cake and give him the frosting and tools so he could write it himself.

So to sum it up: because the baker would not write hate-speech on a cake, the rights of the hater were violated because of his creed? If you read the story, you’ll also find that our old pal Dr. Chaps gets into the act in a strange, trojan horse (see what I did there?) kinda way.

(KDVR and also here)

One Lump of Stupid or Two?

texas-logo big.jpg

It’s from Texas (of course) and it doesn’t involve Screwie Louie (whoddathunkit?!):

Four Republican lawmakers from the Plano area plan to introduce legislation that would bar cities and counties from adopting ordinances prohibiting discrimination against LGBT people, the Observer has learned. The proposed legislation also threatens to nullify existing LGBT-inclusive nondiscrimination ordinances in cities that are home to roughly 7.5 million Texans—or more than one-quarter of the state’s population.

The bill comes in response to the Plano City Council’s passage last month of an equal rights ordinance banning discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing and public accommodations.

And what is their reasoning, you ask, and by reasoning you mean fig leaf:

“It should be a uniform standard statewide, and cities can’t just arbitrarily create new classes that criminalize a whole segment of the majority of the population,” Welch said. “It’s just self-evident that they’re going to try to do it city by city. We’re dealing with a broad public policy that creates criminal punishments. That’s a pretty serious issue, and when it’s based on a special agenda by a small, tiny fragment of the population … that’s a legitimate need and reason for the state Legislature to act.”

Who is this “they” of whom you speak? Sounds like “they” have an agenda?… But less you think this is aimed solely at the ‘mos, well, think again:

“Nobody supports discrimination and nobody supports discriminating against anybody in the GLBT community,” Welch told the Observer. “What we’re against is laws that are passed that essentially give them privileged-class status and threaten with criminal penalties business owners and individuals and ultimately churches and pastors for practicing historic beliefs that have been part of this country since it’s founding, and that’s something that’s a direct threat against our First Amendment, and that’s what this is all about.”

That is indeed what this is all about: your need to discriminate is the lone-star reason to go down this road, boys, and it is aimed very specifically at a specific minority. Also/too, so much for local control of which Wingnuttia sings the praises so often. Let’s watch this one closely in a future Claim Chowder: will Texas hatred of gay people push them to take away local autonomy of cities and counties?

The Morning Quote

Sharpest Pencil

“The vast majority of the rhetoric coming from many of these Republican politicians is complete and total denial of marriage being an institution that gay couples should have access to. Why [Jeb’s] position is novel and his tonal impact is important is he is at least willing to acknowledge that committed and loving gay people can get married.”

Fred Sainz, vice president for the Human Rights Campaign’s communications and marketing division. His statement, which makes it the HRC statement, has led to protestors demonstrating outside of HRC’s headquarters, “Bigotry disguised as ‘religious liberty’ is still bigotry!”

Not Chimpy’s position is not in favor of Marriage Equality, but that he recognizes the rulings of the court. The Smart Bush still believes that civil liberties should be put to a popular vote. But you know, the HRC is always gonna follow the money.


Y’all Qaeda Looking For A George Wallace…

to send out the National Guard to stop the ‘mos from marrying:

[Randy Thomasson, a veteran pro-family leader with Campaign for Children and Families/] sent a letter out Jan. 7 to 25 pro-family organizations asking them to step up the pressure on Republican governors to use the powers granted to them by their state constitutions to defend marriage. Those powers include the ability to forbid county clerks from changing marriage forms or issuing licenses to same-sex couples, and even calling out the National Guard, Thomasson said.

I wonder what legal grounds Thomasson found to call out the National Guard?

— Marriage licenses are not in the U.S. Constitution, so federal judges have no authority here.

Tell us more about how this would work:

In view of the current crisis on marriage, a constitutional governor can and should do the following:

  • Announce he took an oath to obey the constitution, not to obey a judge’s unconstitutional opinion.
  • Announce that no homosexual “marriage” licenses will be issues, and no county clerk is permitted to issue marriage licenses to anyone other than a qualified man and woman.
  • Utilize the support of the state attorney general (if that constitutional officer is willing to stand alongside) or use the state’s National Guard to enforce the law at county clerk’s offices.

That’s pretty air-tight thinking right there, Sparky. Cannot imagine what could go wrong with that.

Some Florida Stupid For Bedtime?


Local counties to end courthouse weddings to avoid marrying gays

Couples who wanted to skip the pomp and circumstance of a wedding and get married at the Duval, Clay or Baker county courthouses will no longer have that option in the new year.

These counties’ decision to end the long-standing tradition of courthouse wedding ceremonies is due, at least in part, to the continued debate over same-sex marriage in Florida against the backdrop of conservative Christianity. U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle could rule any day and make gay marriage legal across the state.

If same-sex marriage is allowed, Duval Clerk of Courts Ronnie Fussell, Clay Clerk Tara Green and Baker Clerk Stacie Harvey will have no choice but to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. But to avoid performing ceremonies for them, these clerks have decided to end all courthouse weddings.

But you know, Xristians love the sinner.