STAY UP TO DATE : READY TO TAKE THE INITIATIVE & JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER?
September 25th | TO MARRY OR NOT TO MARRY … SAME-SEX COUPLES WEIGH THE COMPLEXITIES OF TYING THE KNOT
The recent Supreme Court ruling permitting same-sex marriages across the nation opened up a much-appreciated option for gay couples and at the same time made the decision to marry more legally complex. What do men and women of the same sex need to consider now when making the decision to tie the knot – or the decision to divorce? Ashley Tomlinson of the law firm Laura Dale & Associates takes Rick’s mike to answer those kinds of question and discuss some of the advantages and disadvantages of the new opportunity and some of the possible limitations of the law itself. Whether you marry, cohabitate, or declare a common-law marriage, there’s some planning and weighing of benefits that need to go into the decision: taxes, employee benefits, health insurance, family planning, estate planning, explains Ashley. She recommends that it begin with a prenup or an after-the- fact postnup. As for the courts, they don’t make sorting it out any easier since the law hasn’t quite pinned down how broad the marriage rights are supposed to be. Listen in to this vibrant discussion.
[Start] [0:00:23]Segment 1
Rick: Good morning everyone and welcome to Divorce Talk with Rick Goldberg. We’re brought to you this Sunday morning by Laura Dale & Associates and you are in the right spot. If you’re going through a divorce, if you’ve been through a nasty one, you may be coming up on one, then you’re currently in the right place.
This morning, we’re going to talk to you about a different issue. We haven’t broached it yet on the show. But we’re going to talk about some of the issues surrounding same-sex marriages and maybe even what same-sex divorces might look like.
As some of you may know, on June 26th of last year, 2015, the US Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage is a right protected by the US constitution in all 50 states. Prior to their decision, same-sex marriage was already legal in 37 of the states but was banned in the remaining 13. Sadly, Texas, we were in one of those positions of banning gay sex marriage.
US public opinion has really shifted significantly over the years. I looked it up this morning and it’s really fascinating. Back in 1996, there was an approval of gay marriage of only about 27 percent. That number today has grown to slightly over 60 percent.
So with the change in law last June, there are many complex legal issues that have developed concerning this area and the courts and the attorneys that are practicing in it are trying to navigate these waters the best they can. That’s why I’m looking forward to our guest later in the show, divorce attorney here in town, with one of – one of Laura’s attorneys with Laura Dale & Associates.
Texas has issued an estimated 2500 marriage licenses to same-sex couples since last June and over 43,000 licenses since the new law. So to help me navigate these waters, I’ve invited Ashley Tomlinson on the show. Ashley, welcome to the show this morning.
Ashley: Thank you. How are you?
Rick: I am doing really good. I really appreciate you being here. Tell our listeners a little bit about that Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges that went down last year last June.
Ashley: OK. So the name of the case is Jim Obergefell and Jim was married – or was in a long term relationship, a 21-year partnership, with a man named John and John had a terminal illness and they were married in Maryland in 2013 and he died a few months later.
At the time of his death, they were residing in Ohio, which had a same-sex marriage ban. So Jim Obergefell wanted the right to be listed on his husband’s death certificate, so that he could be recognized as the – as a surviving spouse and to receive that – not only that recognition which is invaluable but also some of the benefits that comes with it.
Rick: Well, I know there are a lot of issues prior to June 2015 surrounding same-sex marriages. So, you kind of have a before June 2015 scenario and a post June 2015 scenario. What do people who are – men and women that are considering same-sex marriage coming up, what do they have to be looking for within their own relationship, to see if this makes sense to them or not?
Ashley: Right. So first of all, if you were married out of state and a state that does – that did recognize same-sex marriages – now in Texas, Texas is required to recognize that. If you’re thinking about getting married, you now have to take into consideration that all the property, which had been legally separate before, will now become community property. So if there’s an estate planning that you want to do, it’s important for you to have a prenup, those are new economic considerations that same-sex couples never really had to take into consideration before since marriage wasn’t an option.
There’s also family planning. How are you – if you want to have kids, how are you going to go about? Are you going to both adopt or is – are you going to use artificial reproductive technology? Those all have different legal paths, depending on your choice.
Rick: So I guess whether you’re a gay couple thinking about getting married or a straight couple who’s thinking about getting married, it has to be right for you, right? I mean whether you decide you want to get married or whether you wanted to stay cohabitating, it has to be right for you. Are there specific advantages legally in either staying unmarried and cohabitating or are there advantages in going ahead and actually getting married?
Ashley: Well, there definitely are some advantages. There are some tax advantages. There are also hospital rights, decision-making rights, and one of the big post-Obergefell issues is a same-sex spouse’s right to employer benefits and the right to be recognized as a parent. So for example, if two women are married, if one of them conceived a child, if there’s obviously a huge benefit to – for a wife being recognized as a legal parent of the child that they decide to have together.
Rick: If you’re just tuning in this morning, this is Rick Goldberg and you’re listening to Divorce Talk Radio here on KPRC 950. Our call-in number, if you would like to call in and ask Ashley or I a question is 713-212-5950 and if you miss our show live, you can always catch it either on the KPRCRadio.com website and listen there or you can always catch it on my website RickMGoldberg.com. I do have a caller on line two. Ryan, are you there?
Ryan: Yes, this is Ryan.
Rick: Hey, thanks buddy for calling. Do you have a question for Ashley or myself this morning?
Ryan: I do. I am in a relationship with my husband Tom and I call him my husband. But we haven’t had a ceremony or anything yet. I don’t necessarily plan on having one. Right now, we’ve been looking into being common law married and I know that simply saying that you are married is one part of the common law marriage. I was wondering if there’s anything else that we need to do to make sure that we are common law married and if there’s any benefits to being common law versus regular married or – what’s the deal there basically?
Ashley: OK. So under Texas law, in order to establish a common law marriage, you first have to agree to be married. You actually have to live together as husbands and you have to tell people that you’re married. We call that holding out. So you have to hold out to other people that you’re a married couple.
So once you do that, it is possible to later get a – basically an adjudication that there is a common law marriage. One of the benefits of going forward with marriage is that you are legalizing that relationship and you can secure the financial and social benefits of having a legally-recognized marriage, without going through the additional step of adjudicating your common law marriage.
If you decide not to go that route, the two of you could still file for divorce, try to divide your property in an equitable manner. But that would require additional steps to determine whether a common law marriage existed.
So if there are any health concerns, financial concerns, beneficiary concerns that you and your husband have, then it may be the more legally prudent option, maybe marriage, so that you can go ahead and immediately take advantage of those benefits and protections.
Ryan: OK. Thank you very much for your answer.
Rick: Ryan, how long have you and your partner been together?
Ryan: We’ve been together for 19 years. We met back in July of 1997 and we’ve seen a lot of the changes in public opinion on gay marriage and kind of fought to try and legalize it for a long time and then sort of the – had the fire taken out after so many overturns of legal arguments. So that when it actually did come about last year, we kind of looked at each other and said, “Well, do you want to do that now?” We both kind of just sort of went, “No, I guess we’re good with what we’ve got.”
Rick: Well, Ryan, I would love to ask you a little bit more about that. We’re running out of time in this segment. So we’re going to take a break. Would you mind sticking around and coming back in our next segment with us?
Ryan: Certainly. That sounds great.
Rick: Sounds good. Well, we will be right back. Don’t go away after this break.
Rick: If you’re just tuning in, this is Rick Goldberg and this is Divorce Talk Radio, KPRC 950. We’re here every Sunday morning at 8 o’clock and today we’re talking about same-sex marriages. With me this morning is an attorney from Laura Dale & Associates. Laura is our sponsor of the show this morning. Ashley Tomlinson, welcome back Ashley.
Ashley: Hi, thanks.
Rick: And we have a caller Ryan on the show. Ryan, are you still with us?
Ryan: Yes, I am.
Rick: And …
Ryan: Great to be here.
Rick: Yeah, I’m glad you’re here. We were talking about Ryan about – Ryan has been together – if you were listening in on our last segment – with his partner for 18, 19 years now and have decided not to get married at this point in time. I guess one of the things Ashley and I wanted to just talk to you about is if you all have any financial concerns or any interest in purchasing what would be community property together, starting a family. Anything like that, which might lend itself to either make sense to go ahead and move forward and maybe sanctify the relationship and get married or hey, enjoy things where they are.
Ryan: All right. Well, I know that eventually, we might want to buy a house and when that time comes, we will definitely have to figure out the financial paperwork for all that and how the community would – or how that community property would be for us.
The other thing that has been going on recently is I just got Tom onto my healthcare at work as my husband. So putting that out as common law. I asked the HR if that was OK for him to be listed as my husband on the paperwork and since there was an option for both domestic partner and for spouse, we just checked the one for spouse and that was OK by them.
Rick: Oh, that’s great.
Ryan: He has been on my healthcare.
Ashley: OK. Well, yeah, so then – I mean you would need the holding out prong of a common law marriage. If you guys are thinking about buying property together in the future, you would be able to – in the event of separation, it would be community property under common law marriage.
The real decision that you guys need to make is whether you want to go ahead and have that legally established now. If you do – if you aren’t married at the time that you buy property, it is – it can still be treated as community property in the future. But in the event that something happens to one of you or if the property is not titled in both of your names, it’s easier to ensure that the other partner is taken care of if you’re both married.
Ryan: OK. Is there any kind of documentation that we can do that wouldn’t be like a full-on marriage certificate but more along the lines of what we’ve got as a common law marriage that would be more legally-binding but not having to have a ceremony?
Ashley: There’s – you can register a common law marriage. But you don’t really need to take any other steps or fill out any other form. The next step would be getting the marriage license.
Ryan: OK. All right.
Rick: What’s risky about that, Ryan?
Ryan: Well, risky about that is if ever we do have – signed the paperwork to have the marriage license, then both of our families will really kind of pressure us into having a ceremony and there’s really only the one time you can do that ceremony and it feels like if we were to sign the paperwork and then say three years later, “Oh, yeah, let’s go and have a ceremony,” it wouldn’t have as much of an impact I guess.
Rick: And if you could have a ceremony like literally anywhere in the world, where would you want it to be?
Ryan: Oh, like one of those German castles that look like from Disneyland. Yeah.
Rick: Nice. Well, if you do do that, I hope Ashley and I get an invitation and we would love to come there and support you. So I really appreciated you taking the time to listen to the show and call in this morning, Ryan. I really do appreciate it.
Ryan: Definitely. I love the advice. Thank you so much.
Rick: You are very welcome. So Ashley, I mean it’s fascinating. They’ve been together for a long time and deciding not to pursue marriage. How many cases are you getting popping up in your offices where same-sex couples are wanting to get divorced? How often are you seeing that now?
Ashley: It’s not – we don’t have nearly as many cases as opposite-sex marriages. But we are starting to see them more and more and they present some really interesting issues. One of the post-Obergefell questions that we’re dealing with is how broad was that ruling. Does it mean that you – same-sex couples are just guaranteed the right to marry? Just the ceremonial act or how – how broad is that? Does it also extend to being recognized as a parent under the family code?
My opinion is that the Supreme Court was pretty clear that it extends to marriage and all of its benefits. But there are some people who are arguing that the Supreme Court’s decision didn’t necessarily guarantee all of the marriage-related benefits. There have been a couple of interesting cases in Texas recently.
The Houston Court of Appeals recently held – it was about a year ago, so relatively recently held. But that same-sex spouses under Obergefell are entitled to employee benefits and that was challenged and taken up to the Texas Supreme Court and the Texas Supreme Court left that ruling in place. So in Houston right now, our courts have said that Obergefell does apply to spousal benefits.
Rick: Now, is that a case that you were involved with?
Ashley: That was not a case I was involved in. I was involved in recently a case regarding parental rights for same-sex marriage couples. We have a set of statutes that defines what is a parent and in order to file a suit for custody, you have to be a parent. Our statutes are written as husband, wife, man and woman.
So the issues was, does Obergefell make that a gender-neutral statute or are they just – the court is only required to recognize the marriage and deny the non-biological spouse of recognition as a parent?
So we were arguing that they are entitled to that recognition and there are a lot of states and other courts who have held that same ruling that it does extend to all of marriage-related benefits.
Rick: How did that case shake out for you?
Ashley: So we’re still waiting for a decision. Obviously we’re hoping for a good outcome. But we think that the legal arguments are in our favor and we think that it is consistent with the way a lot of other courts across the country are ruling.
Rick: So explain to our listeners – I think oftentimes, we don’t understand that even once there’s a ruling and a verdict is made in a case, it’s not necessarily over. There’s this next process, which is the appellate process. So can you explain to our listeners – I think they might be interested by how that actually comes together in words.
Ashley: Yeah. So in this case for example, my client had filed for divorce and custody and her wife challenged her right to file for custody, claiming she wasn’t a parent because she wasn’t biologically-related to the child that she had conceived with donor sperm. The trial court said, “You’re right. She’s not a parent and we’re dismissing the custody portion of her case.”
So the divorce can still go forward, but not the custody suit. So once the trial court made that decision, we came on to represent our client and filed an appeal challenging that decision in the Court of Appeals. So that is – it’s a lengthy process. A lot of legal briefs and long waiting periods. So it’s purely to answer that question of law. Is she a parent?
Rick: So when do you suppose you will get a ruling on that?
Ashley: It’s really hard to tell. Sometimes it can be a couple of months. Sometimes it could be more. So we’re just holding our breath and see …
Rick: Well, thanks for that feedback, Ashley. Stay tuned because when we get back, we’re going to go a little bit further in and discuss the impact that the Supreme Court’s ruling and Obergefell has had on same-sex couples, who were married prior to that case. So stick around. We’re at the halfway point and we will be right back.
Rick: Welcome back everybody. This is Rick Goldberg and you are listening to Divorce Talk Radio here at KPRC 950. If you would like to call in and talk to me or our guest Ashley Tomlinson from the law firm of Laura Dale & Associates, you can give us a shout at 713-212-5950. We’ve been talking about same-sex marriages this morning and before we jump into that, Ashley, I know that you also get involved in a pretty unique area of family law called child abduction and work on child abduction cases. Can you talk about that and sort of let our listeners know what kind of cases those are, how often they come up and some of the unique features about a case like that?
Ashley: Yeah. It’s a really interesting area of law and it’s becoming increasingly important because so many more families are international. So you have a growing number of international custody disputes. In the cases of international child abduction, it’s governed by an international treaty. There are over 80 signatories and so basically if one parent removes the child or the children from the country, we call it their country of habitual residence, then – without the consent of the other parent, then that triggers this treaty and you can bring it here in the United States. You can bring a federal lawsuit under that treaty to ask the court to order the immediate return of your child to the country where they were previously residing.
It is very common. We see a lot of these cases, especially in Houston, because we do have such an international community here. There are a lot of people who just don’t understand that they are violating the law. When you have one parent who’s the primary caregiver and the relationship or the marriage deteriorates, that primary caregiver just wrongfully or rightfully so would assume that they have the right to take the children with them.
But that can lead to a lot of legal problems and if this child was removed without the other parent’s consent, then it is very likely that they could be ordered to return.
Rick: So when I hear the word “child abduction,” I mean I want to think one of those Liam Neeson movies where the child is being literally kidnapped out of the country. But I think what I’m hearing you say, it’s not necessarily kidnapping per se. It’s just that the child inappropriately is removed from this country by – whether it’s their primary parent or the other parent inappropriately. Is that right?
Ashley: It is. I mean there is parental kidnapping. A lot of these cases do involve parents who are trying to hide the children from the other parent. Sometimes it is just a dispute as to where the child is going to live. But there are actual – I guess what people would think of as more dramatic kidnappings. But whether it – no matter what the nature of the case is, it’s all treated as an abduction.
Rick: And are those cases tried in federal court as opposed to family court here in state court?
Ashley: They can actually be tried in both federal and state courts. But they are very unique because most family-related cases can only be tried in state court. But we usually – our firm usually litigates these cases in federal courts.
Rick: I got you. Well, let’s jump back into same-sex couples. What I wanted to ask you is, does the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell apply to same-sex couples who were married prior to that decision?
Ashley: Yeah, it does. So if you were married in New York before Obergefell came down, then obviously that marriage existed beforehand. But Texas didn’t recognize it. So now, Texas is required to recognize a preexisting marriage. So if you were married before Obergefell in Texas, you are now married.
Rick: Grandfathered in, so to speak.
Ashley: You’re grandfathered in.
Rick: So does this mean that same-sex couples will also qualify for spousal benefits?
Ashley: We think so. We think so. That goes back to the case from the Houston Court of Appeals that we saw recently. We think that Obergefell does apply to – and does guarantee spousal benefits as a fundamental right that is inherent in marriage.
But there has been some litigation on that issue. But we think that Texas will hopefully go where many of the other courts are going and Obergefell does guarantee those benefits.
Rick: You’re listening to KPRC 950. This is Rick Goldberg on Divorce Talk Radio. If you would like to call and ask a question this morning, you can call at 713-212-5950 and in fact, on line two, we have a caller here from Houston. Tracy. Tracy, can you – thanks for calling in this morning.
Tracy: Hi. Thank you for having me.
Rick: Have you been listening to the show?
Tracy: Yes, I have.
Rick: And so far, what do you think? Are we covering the topic and giving it the kind of attention that it needs?
Tracy: Well, I’m wildly grateful that my three children are not under the age of 18 after what I’ve heard, because I would hate to have to go through anything. You know, in a worst case scenario. I’m kind of surprised about – you know, when the federal ruling came down about marriage, that that wasn’t across the board in all things and that some of these people are having to wait for appellate court to rule. I think that’s surprising in fact for those people.
Rick: Yeah. So tell us a little bit about you Tracy. How long have you been together with your partner and what might be on your mind this morning?
Tracy: Well, I’m kind of a different animal. I was married to a man and divorced from a man. I also worked for a divorce attorney for 20 years. So …
Rick: Anyone we might know?
Rick: Anyone we might know?
Tracy: Probably. Board-certified but this was in the 80s. So probably much older than you guys.
Tracy: Anyway, so in my heterosexual marriage, I always use powers of attorney, medical powers of attorney, durable powers of attorney, wills. We were always covered for any event that might happen. So when I entered into this relationship with my partner, approximately 16 years ago, I was coming at it from a position of having all of these rights that I took for granted. The attitude of no one is going to tell me who I can get married to. So that was a little bizarre.
But also after having been married, I was not wanting to get married. I had no natural interest in it. As the years rolled by, it occurred to me that I wasn’t being thoughtful of my partner, who had never gotten an opportunity to get married. So in 2015 in April, spontaneously we got married in Santa Fe, New Mexico. It was before the ruling came down. It had nothing to do with the ruling. It was a natural, spontaneous event and it was – we loved it. It was awesome.
Rick: That’s great. So you’ve been married for how many years now?
Tracy: We got married in 2015 and actually the proof of the spontaneity is our wedding anniversary is April 20th. So that makes our three adult children laugh at us because 4/20 is our anniversary.
So I think that’s proof that we didn’t really plan it. But my question would be in the category of estate planning because of my prior history with family law. I kind of come from separate property, community property, have respect for children. We’re a blended family. She came into the relationship with one daughter. I came in with a daughter and a son. So we’re very thoughtful of the way things would shake out just as they would in any other marriage.
Rick: Got you.
Tracy: So would Ashley think that it’s appropriate to look at it from an estate planning point of view, because we’re blended, we’re blending families?
Ashley: When you mean estate planning and blended families, are you talking about – I’m not quite sure what you’re asking.
Tracy: Well, I mean, you know, with second marriages with children, oftentimes you do things legally to be protective of your separate property estate, so that it passes on to your children.
Tracy: We’re just looking at it from that same perspective.
Tracy: Are separate estates – kind of like they follow the vein of the law so that our children would inherit – you know.
Ashley: Right, right. So you want your children to each get what they would have otherwise inherited if you weren’t married.
Ashley: OK. Yeah. So now that you’re married, it is – it’s possible to do a post-marital agreement to basically protect your assets in the way that you would want them to be passed along in the event of either of your deaths. If you want to make sure that your money, your assets go to your children, you can do that in a post-marital agreement.
Tracy: And you wouldn’t do that using a will?
Rick: Tracy, I tell you what. Would you stick around after this break and we will answer that question and anything else you might have? We’re going to have to stop right here for a minute. But when we come back, we will continue our discussion with you and Ashley right here on Divorce Talk Radio.
Rick: Don’t go away.
Rick: Welcome back everyone to the final segment of Divorce Talk Radio. I’m Rick Goldberg. We are brought to you this morning by the law firm here in Houston of Laura Dale & Associates. In the studio with me is one of her awesome attorneys named Ashley Tomlinson. Ashley and I actually have worked on a number of cases together and with us also, calling in from Houston is Tracy. Tracy, what I wanted to ask you about, if you’re kind of open to it, you know, I’m very aware – as a privileged, straight, white, heterosexual male, I’m very aware of the privilege that I have that comes with that. I can walk into a department store. I’m not going to be targeted by a security guard who is going to watch my every move. I can walk through that same mall with my girlfriend. I can hold her hand. I’m not going to get funny looks. I’m not going to get – talked about.
How is that – you know, as a woman who’s in a same-sex relationship, how is that for you these days? I know you’ve been with your partner for over 15 years now. Are you seeing progress in our country of just how you’re viewed and whether you’re targeted or not, you know, 15 to 20 years ago versus today? I know that’s a very convoluted question. I apologize for that. But I just want to know from your perspective, are we making progress at the end of the day?
Tracy: I think so. In the beginning when we got together, we would actually go to Austin and we had a lot more freedom to just be affectionate or ourselves in the – you know, in public. But I was raised in the South and PDA is not really something that you do with anybody too much. So I’m just not into it that much anyway. But if she …
Rick: For those of you that don’t know, when Tracy says PDA, I think you’re saying public display of affection, right?
Tracy: Yes. I’m sorry, I’m sorry.
Rick: No, that’s OK.
Tracy: But over the years, people pick up on our energy all over the place. If Joyce and I are in a store and we’re just being ourselves and talking, laughing, or whatever, people get – they pick up on our energy. We’re happy. They just know that there’s something special between us and they commented on us all the time.
So we are very well-received by most everybody who meets up. But I do know in the early years that I was a little bit nervous about it – but definitely things are changing. I have two 26-year-old children, one 22-year-old child.
You know, this younger generation doesn’t care about this subject. It’s a non-subject for them for the most part. I’m very happy about that because then another decade or so, it’s going to be, “What? Do we even care about gay marriage? That’s ridiculous.” That’s how things are moving. They’ve been going at light speed and that’s how it should be.
Rick: Well, that’s a real credit to the, I think, ability for our generation to be able to work on our homophobia that was kind of instilled into us by our parents’ generation.
Rick: So that’s really positive to hear. What other kind of challenges do you have with your partner with regards to – you know, holding yourself out as wife and wife and just integration into this community?
Tracy: Well, we were born in the community that we live in. She and I both were raised in neighborhoods in 77024 and that is a very conservative neighborhood. So we feel like we ruled the area. OK? So we’re not too worried about people – you know, about integrating into this neighborhood because we were here first. So the concept …
Rick: Where is 024?
Rick: Memorial. I was – I knew it was in River Oaks. But my second guess was Memorial.
Tracy: Yes. And granted, when we were raising children in elementary school, she was a pioneer because she put her name and her then partner’s name as the co-contact in the elementary school directory. That at the time, in about ’94, was – or ’96 was very daring. She has been called a pioneer because she was brave.
Rick: Her child was with her same-sex partner.
Rick: Whereas your children were from a traditional marriage.
Rick: Got you.
Tracy: And I got a very traditional divorce for very traditional reasons. Then met this – my partner and she had left her partner and out of respect for our children, we kept our houses and it was quite a difficult thing for ten years. But we didn’t want to, you know, uproot them from their homes and their bedrooms and we were very respectful of that and it all worked out very well.
Rick: How did you know that she was the one?
Tracy: I knew that she was the one within a week of meeting her and you have to understand, I never thought I would have a same-sex relationship. So you could have knocked me over with a feather. So I had a whole bunch of getting-used-to things. You know, getting used to time periods and – but I had a decision I had to make at the time and that is what I told my children.
When I realized what I was – that I had fallen in love with this person, I could either face it and deal with what may come or I could be a chicken and not have the happiness that I had discovered. I decided to be brave and I decided to face it head on and be happy and not really care too much about what other people thought and it worked out fine. You really just have to own it.
Rick: That’s fantastic. Well, you really are, Tracy, super brave and very courageous and I really appreciate you coming on the show this morning and sharing a little bit about your story, asking some very insightful questions, because not only I think are you learning from just sharing, but there are literally thousands of people in the community who are listening to the show, who are – who I think are benefiting as well. So really, thank you again. I really appreciate it.
Tracy: Well, thank you for having me and I just want to say I couldn’t be happier about how quickly things are changing and if people just wait just about five more minutes, this is going to be a non-issue as it should be. So thank you very much for having me. I appreciate it.
Rick: You bet. You’re very welcome. Have a great Sunday.
Tracy: You too.
Ashley: Thanks Tracy.
Rick: So Ashley, how do we – in this show this morning, what do you think our listeners would want to hear about some of the legal ramifications of same-sex marriages?
Ashley: It’s going to be an exciting time. There are going to be a lot of changes in our laws and there’s going to be more and more news about it and we think – our prediction is that this is going to play out in a way where same-sex marriage is allowed under the exact same conditions and terms as heterosexual marriage and hopefully we’re right.
Rick: How long does it normally take the law to catch up with the new social issue?
Ashley: This has been – this is not a new observation. But people have commented that this revolution happened a lot more quickly than the Civil Rights Revolution in – you know, it came to – ahead in the 60s. So hopefully because public opinion has changed so rapidly, that will help move this along through the courts more quickly and hopefully public opinion will also keep it out of the courts and just courts will do the right thing and follow the Supreme Court’s holding.
Rick: Well, thanks Ashley. I’ve really enjoyed having you on the show this morning. Thanks for getting up so early on a Sunday and for all of you out there in Houston and everywhere else, thanks for listening to Divorce Talk Radio here on 950 KPRC. I’m Rick Goldberg. We will be here next Sunday at 8 o’clock. If you missed a minute of this show, you can go catch the podcast online at KPRCRadio.com. Have an amazing Sunday and we will see you next week. Take care.
[End of transcript]