In 2005 about 75% of Texas voters approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. Eight years later we have a Supreme Court ruling in US v. Windsor striking down part 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
In October two couples filed suit in federal court in San Antonio (TX Western District). The case, DeLeon et al v. Perry et al, challenges the state’s ban on both in-state and out-of-state same-sex marriages.
Along comes Jonathan Saenz, president of Texas Values. This guy is a lawyer. Yet, according to Mr. Saenz:
Do laws mean anything to the homosexual advocates? … It’s gotten to this point to where the only way they win is people don’t enforce the law. That kind of mob rule will not work, and it’s something that will be a disaster for our state and our country.
I’ll get back to Saenz’s nonsensical statement momentarily. But first, according to the group’s website:
Note that “tax deductible” part. Well, not exactly. Turns out that Texas Values is actually a spin-off of Kelly Shackelford’s Liberty Institute which specializes in combating usually non-existent persecution of Christians. I contacted Texas Values by telephone and was told that their status is pending. Mr. Saenz was supposed to return my call to explain how they are soliciting tax-deductible contributions. There actually is a way to do it lawfully but they are supposed to indicate “501(c)3 status pending.” Do laws mean anything to Mr. Saenz?
Getting back to his rhetorical question. Yes. Laws matter very much to LGBT advocacy groups. That is why plaintiffs in this case have hired six attorneys to represent them. Challenging a law as unconstitutional honors our legal system and Mr. Saenz, as a lawyer, should know better. Moreover, I find it odd that he accuses our advocates of seeking mob rule. Nothing could be further from the truth. “Mob rule” occurred when the majority decided to tyrannize a minority by voting away their constitutional rights including due process and equal protection.
I am not entirely sure what Mr. Saenz thinks will be a “disaster.” Challenging a law as unconstitutional? According to his own website his group is trying to overturn Roe v Wade. They advocate numerous laws that directly contradict Roe v Wade. The key here is very simple. One must presume that God is on their side in which case such advocacy is acceptable. I wonder though. When a child is being raised by a gay couple, wouldn’t God be on the kid’s side? Don’t we want to provide for that child financially as well as emotionally. God wants his or her parents to be legally married.