Not according to the Texas constitution:
And if you don't think that amendment pertains to you just because one spouse has twig-and-berries and the other doesn't, and you're officially married with a license and everything, you've got another think coming. Just ask any lawyer who knows what "legal status identical or similar to marriage" means.Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Houston lawyer and Democratic candidate for attorney general, says that a 22-word clause in a 2005 constitutional amendment designed to ban gay marriages erroneously endangers the legal status of all marriages in the state.
The amendment, approved by the Legislature and overwhelmingly ratified by voters, declares that "marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman." But the troublemaking phrase, as Radnofsky sees it, is Subsection B, which declares:
"This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage."
Architects of the amendment included the clause to ban same-sex civil unions and domestic partnerships. But Radnofsky, who was a member of the powerhouse Vinson & Elkins law firm in Houston for 27 years until retiring in 2006, says the wording of Subsection B effectively "eliminates marriage in Texas," including common-law marriages.
Looks like the homophobes have fucked over their sacred institution rather badly, dunnit? Excuse me while I go laugh my ass off. Damn, I love poetic justice.