What’s to understand about case?

This is in response to the column by Ellen Goodman published Oct. 12 in The Daily Progress (“For better, for worse in Texas”). It concerns a gay couple, lawfully wed in Massachusetts but now seeking divorce in Texas. Problem is, the citizens of Texas, as well as the law of Texas, do not recognize same-sex marriages.
How can a same-sex couple expect to get a divorce in Texas when Texas does not even recognize that they are married? Resolution of this conflict, as long as this couple remains in Texas, is a simple contractual one.
According to the column, the couple have divided their property and their separation is amicable. Why is there is a need for a “gay divorce” as long as they remain in Texas? I am not sure why this concept is hard to accept or should be called “perverse.” Texas simply does not recognize same-sex marriages (the state also does not recognize marriages of children younger than 15, refuse to let first cousins or siblings get hitched, and says that a man cannot have two wives at the same time). Divorce, therefore, is unnecessary — unless of course you are trying to make a point.
Goodman concludes her piece by saying, “But for sheer perversity, nothing quite beats the current Texas divorce fandango.” It is such because we have a couple of gay men attempting to impose their beliefs on an entire state. It is clear what is happening. A conflict of state laws is being intentionally created. If there are enough of these “conflicts” across the land, the federal courts will eventually get involved under the Equal Protection Clause or the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution to resolve the matter.
I firmly believe that Texas should do what is right for Texas and Massachusetts should do what is right for Massachusetts. And if you disagree with either, convince the people of those states to change the laws by campaigning and running for office — do not create situations where the courts are doing it for them.

Craig Merutka
Albemarle County