Gay Judges Are Incapable Of Giving Christians ‘A Fair Shake’ In Court

[Tilly]

Homos can adopt children heteros have created.

#HeteroPride.

"Homos" can adopt children who heteros have abused, neglected, or thrown away. AS a child protective services investigator - I removed children from irresponsible "breeders" and placed them with gay people . Now choke on that a while.

That you use derogatory gay lingo to describe hetero’s is just another indication you weren’t fit to do that job.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So do you believe that they can't be parents ?Parents to children who have been thrown away or abused by hetero parents>?

I don’t see where Harmonica ever said anything about them being unable to be parents, do you?

Harmonica: "gays are not meant to have children
it is not natural"

Don’t you know what that means?

"Having Children" can mean birthing them ( which gay people do) or parenting them ( which gay people also do) I think the ass hat means both.

Having children usually refers to procreation, and if you think harmonica meant otherwise and that gays can’t be parents - you clearly have comprehension problems as s/he has made it abundantly clear what s/he was referring to and what s/he was not referring to.

Well, we haven't heard back from s/he on that , have we. I don't have a comprehension problem but someone has a communication problem.

 

[Tilly]

I don’t see where Harmonica ever said anything about them being unable to be parents, do you?

Harmonica: "gays are not meant to have children
it is not natural"

Don’t you know what that means?

"Having Children" can mean birthing them ( which gay people do) or parenting them ( which gay people also do) I think the ass hat means both.

Having children usually refers to procreation, and if you think harmonica meant otherwise and that gays can’t be parents - you clearly have comprehension problems as s/he has made it abundantly clear what s/he was referring to and what s/he was not referring to.

Well, we haven't heard back from s/he on that , have we. I don't have a comprehension problem but someone has a communication problem.

Yes we have. Go read the replies again.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Homos can adopt children heteros have created.

#HeteroPride.

"Homos" can adopt children who heteros have abused, neglected, or thrown away. AS a child protective services investigator - I removed children from irresponsible "breeders" and placed them with gay people . Now choke on that a while.

That you use derogatory gay lingo to describe hetero’s is just another indication you weren’t fit to do that job.

Oh please. Don't try to turn it around on me. Is the fact that I was mocking the twerp that uses that term ccompletely lost on you?

 

[Tilly]

Homos can adopt children heteros have created.

#HeteroPride.

"Homos" can adopt children who heteros have abused, neglected, or thrown away. AS a child protective services investigator - I removed children from irresponsible "breeders" and placed them with gay people . Now choke on that a while.

That you use derogatory gay lingo to describe hetero’s is just another indication you weren’t fit to do that job.

Oh please. Don't try to turn it around on me. Is the fact that I was mocking the twerp that uses that term ccompletely lost on you?

Nice try

 

[harmonica]

The stupidity and bigotry is astounding!! You cant make this shit up!! The idea that we should not have gay judges because they would hostile to Christians is absurd on the face of it since many gay people are Christian, and many Christians and Christian denominations embrace gay rights.

But beyond that , where does it end? Should we not have black judges because they won't be fair to whites? Should we not have white judges because they won't be fair to minorities? Should we not have Christian judges because they won't be fair to people of other faiths? I could go on but you get the idea?

Maybe we should develop drone bot judges that have no soul and program them to be completely without bias. Of course they would not have any compassion or empathy either, but we can't have it all, can we?

Mat Staver: Gay Judges Are Incapable Of Giving Christians ‘A Fair Shake’ In Court | Right Wing Watch

Anti-LGBTQ Religious Right activist Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel appeared on VCY America’s “Crosstalk” radio program yesterday, where he asserted that gay people should not be allowed to serve as judges because they are incapable of being objective and fair in cases involving religious liberty for Christians.

A

sked about Andrew McDonald, who was recently nominated to serve as chief justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court and, if confirmed, will be the first openly gay chief justice on any state court in the country, Staver was not shy about voicing his opposition.

“Here’s the problem with it beyond the issue of the morality of this,” Staver said. “Beyond the issue of other consequences is the fact that what we typically see is someone’s identity, their being, completely wrapped up in their sexual practices, meaning that—do you think that if you had an Aaron and Melissa Klein or a Jack Phillips bakery or anything else like that where you have the LGBT clash with religious freedom or freedom of expression come before this judge, do you think this judge is going to be open and fair irrespective of what he does to rule based on the Constitution and the rule of law? I don’t think so

.

Let me tell you folks something. I am straight and I would have a problem with someone who wields religion as a weapon to justify discrimination as well. Maybe we not have liberal judges either. Judges should be selected on their ability to follow the law and to put their personal views aside.

If that is true, then we can safely infer that christian judges cannot give anyone not a christian a fair shake in court. What say you, christians? Is that true?

Dear TheProgressivePatriot and bodecea
As long as the Gay or Christian Judge can recognize the beliefs of the people in a case as equally faith based, and agree to keep govt neutral and not involved in the dispute, then that might be fair to both sides. In that case, the people in a case involving beliefs, whether Christian or LGBT or liberal/secular or conservative/constitutional should be advised to mediate and to reach their own resolution that respects both sides beliefs equally. Only those ppl can determine what is a fair solution that represents their beliefs, not the govt which can neither establish nor prohibit either sides beliefs much less regulate impose or penalize one side for another.

If any judge cannot discern what constitutes a faith based belief, that bias can become a political conflict of interest. Unfortunately our legal system doesn't recognize such conflicts but permits them, nor does our current law or precedents recognize political beliefs as a form of religion. So that's why our system has been corrupted by both which have been permitted to introduce and enforce biases due to lack of check against such govt abuses.

Common Emily. Your at it again. Turning something into a convoluted word salad. Gay or Christian Judges? Did it ever occur to you that a judge might be both?

Mediation? Maybe in some civil cases if the parties are able and willing, such as in divorce cases. but a judge's job is to apply the law. The government IS THE LAW regardless of anyone's beliefs which do not trump the law.

Political beliefs as a form of religion? Seriously?? Someday you will learn that everyone cannot be accommodated. The court imposing a decision based on the law- a decision that someone might be unhappy with is not government abuse. It is the way things work and our legal system- although not without its flaws- is one of the best.

Hate to tell every one this, but there have been gay judges since the begining. We just likely did not know! Sexual orientation should have zero factor on a judges rulings, even if it did we have an appeals process in such a case. As stated before the judge must apply the law or face the possibility of being over turned. I will spend zero time worrying about the judges sexual orientation!

seeing how their suicide rate is many times higher, they seem to be unstable

 

[bodecea]

The stupidity and bigotry is astounding!! You cant make this shit up!! The idea that we should not have gay judges because they would hostile to Christians is absurd on the face of it since many gay people are Christian, and many Christians and Christian denominations embrace gay rights.

But beyond that , where does it end? Should we not have black judges because they won't be fair to whites? Should we not have white judges because they won't be fair to minorities? Should we not have Christian judges because they won't be fair to people of other faiths? I could go on but you get the idea?

Maybe we should develop drone bot judges that have no soul and program them to be completely without bias. Of course they would not have any compassion or empathy either, but we can't have it all, can we?

Mat Staver: Gay Judges Are Incapable Of Giving Christians ‘A Fair Shake’ In Court | Right Wing Watch

A.

Let me tell you folks something. I am straight and I would have a problem with someone who wields religion as a weapon to justify discrimination as well. Maybe we not have liberal judges either. Judges should be selected on their ability to follow the law and to put their personal views aside.

If that is true, then we can safely infer that christian judges cannot give anyone not a christian a fair shake in court. What say you, christians? Is that true?

Dear TheProgressivePatriot and bodecea
As long as the Gay or Christian Judge can recognize the beliefs of the people in a case as equally faith based, and agree to keep govt neutral and not involved in the dispute, then that might be fair to both sides. In that case, the people in a case involving beliefs, whether Christian or LGBT or liberal/secular or conservative/constitutional should be advised to mediate and to reach their own resolution that respects both sides beliefs equally. Only those ppl can determine what is a fair solution that represents their beliefs, not the govt which can neither establish nor prohibit either sides beliefs much less regulate impose or penalize one side for another.

If any judge cannot discern what constitutes a faith based belief, that bias can become a political conflict of interest. Unfortunately our legal system doesn't recognize such conflicts but permits them, nor does our current law or precedents recognize political beliefs as a form of religion. So that's why our system has been corrupted by both which have been permitted to introduce and enforce biases due to lack of check against such govt abuses.

Common Emily. Your at it again. Turning something into a convoluted word salad. Gay or Christian Judges? Did it ever occur to you that a judge might be both?

Mediation? Maybe in some civil cases if the parties are able and willing, such as in divorce cases. but a judge's job is to apply the law. The government IS THE LAW regardless of anyone's beliefs which do not trump the law.

Political beliefs as a form of religion? Seriously?? Someday you will learn that everyone cannot be accommodated. The court imposing a decision based on the law- a decision that someone might be unhappy with is not government abuse. It is the way things work and our legal system- although not without its flaws- is one of the best.

Hate to tell every one this, but there have been gay judges since the begining. We just likely did not know! Sexual orientation should have zero factor on a judges rulings, even if it did we have an appeals process in such a case. As stated before the judge must apply the law or face the possibility of being over turned. I will spend zero time worrying about the judges sexual orientation!

seeing how their suicide rate is many times higher, they seem to be unstable

and......how did military veterans get introduced to this thread?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Harmonica: "gays are not meant to have children
it is not natural"

Don’t you know what that means?

"Having Children" can mean birthing them ( which gay people do) or parenting them ( which gay people also do) I think the ass hat means both.

Having children usually refers to procreation, and if you think harmonica meant otherwise and that gays can’t be parents - you clearly have comprehension problems as s/he has made it abundantly clear what s/he was referring to and what s/he was not referring to.

Well, we haven't heard back from s/he on that , have we. I don't have a comprehension problem but someone has a communication problem.

Yes we have. Go read the replies again.

Sorry. I don't have time to go hunting for it. Unlike others here I have a life and this is not it. I will assume that it claims that the statement refers only to the ability to conceive and birth children. My reply is that to emphasis that is just plain stupid because no one singles out hetero couples who can't conceive and birth children in the "normal " or usual way" It is just used as another way to disparage and marginalize gay people. The courts, all through the debate on gay marriage, rejected the idea that the ability to procreate has any bearing on gay rights. Quite frankly, I'm tired of the stupidity and pathetic attempts to malign gays.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The stupidity and bigotry is astounding!! You cant make this shit up!! The idea that we should not have gay judges because they would hostile to Christians is absurd on the face of it since many gay people are Christian, and many Christians and Christian denominations embrace gay rights.

But beyond that , where does it end? Should we not have black judges because they won't be fair to whites? Should we not have white judges because they won't be fair to minorities? Should we not have Christian judges because they won't be fair to people of other faiths? I could go on but you get the idea?

Maybe we should develop drone bot judges that have no soul and program them to be completely without bias. Of course they would not have any compassion or empathy either, but we can't have it all, can we?

Mat Staver: Gay Judges Are Incapable Of Giving Christians ‘A Fair Shake’ In Court | Right Wing Watch

A.

Let me tell you folks something. I am straight and I would have a problem with someone who wields religion as a weapon to justify discrimination as well. Maybe we not have liberal judges either. Judges should be selected on their ability to follow the law and to put their personal views aside.

If that is true, then we can safely infer that christian judges cannot give anyone not a christian a fair shake in court. What say you, christians? Is that true?

Dear TheProgressivePatriot and bodecea
As long as the Gay or Christian Judge can recognize the beliefs of the people in a case as equally faith based, and agree to keep govt neutral and not involved in the dispute, then that might be fair to both sides. In that case, the people in a case involving beliefs, whether Christian or LGBT or liberal/secular or conservative/constitutional should be advised to mediate and to reach their own resolution that respects both sides beliefs equally. Only those ppl can determine what is a fair solution that represents their beliefs, not the govt which can neither establish nor prohibit either sides beliefs much less regulate impose or penalize one side for another.

If any judge cannot discern what constitutes a faith based belief, that bias can become a political conflict of interest. Unfortunately our legal system doesn't recognize such conflicts but permits them, nor does our current law or precedents recognize political beliefs as a form of religion. So that's why our system has been corrupted by both which have been permitted to introduce and enforce biases due to lack of check against such govt abuses.

Common Emily. Your at it again. Turning something into a convoluted word salad. Gay or Christian Judges? Did it ever occur to you that a judge might be both?

Mediation? Maybe in some civil cases if the parties are able and willing, such as in divorce cases. but a judge's job is to apply the law. The government IS THE LAW regardless of anyone's beliefs which do not trump the law.

Political beliefs as a form of religion? Seriously?? Someday you will learn that everyone cannot be accommodated. The court imposing a decision based on the law- a decision that someone might be unhappy with is not government abuse. It is the way things work and our legal system- although not without its flaws- is one of the best.

Hate to tell every one this, but there have been gay judges since the begining. We just likely did not know! Sexual orientation should have zero factor on a judges rulings, even if it did we have an appeals process in such a case. As stated before the judge must apply the law or face the possibility of being over turned. I will spend zero time worrying about the judges sexual orientation!

seeing how their suicide rate is many times higher, they seem to be unstable

Yes, because of your bigotry. You have blood on your hands!!

 

[harmonica]

If that is true, then we can safely infer that christian judges cannot give anyone not a christian a fair shake in court. What say you, christians? Is that true?

Dear TheProgressivePatriot and bodecea
As long as the Gay or Christian Judge can recognize the beliefs of the people in a case as equally faith based, and agree to keep govt neutral and not involved in the dispute, then that might be fair to both sides. In that case, the people in a case involving beliefs, whether Christian or LGBT or liberal/secular or conservative/constitutional should be advised to mediate and to reach their own resolution that respects both sides beliefs equally. Only those ppl can determine what is a fair solution that represents their beliefs, not the govt which can neither establish nor prohibit either sides beliefs much less regulate impose or penalize one side for another.

If any judge cannot discern what constitutes a faith based belief, that bias can become a political conflict of interest. Unfortunately our legal system doesn't recognize such conflicts but permits them, nor does our current law or precedents recognize political beliefs as a form of religion. So that's why our system has been corrupted by both which have been permitted to introduce and enforce biases due to lack of check against such govt abuses.

Common Emily. Your at it again. Turning something into a convoluted word salad. Gay or Christian Judges? Did it ever occur to you that a judge might be both?

Mediation? Maybe in some civil cases if the parties are able and willing, such as in divorce cases. but a judge's job is to apply the law. The government IS THE LAW regardless of anyone's beliefs which do not trump the law.

Political beliefs as a form of religion? Seriously?? Someday you will learn that everyone cannot be accommodated. The court imposing a decision based on the law- a decision that someone might be unhappy with is not government abuse. It is the way things work and our legal system- although not without its flaws- is one of the best.

Hate to tell every one this, but there have been gay judges since the begining. We just likely did not know! Sexual orientation should have zero factor on a judges rulings, even if it did we have an appeals process in such a case. As stated before the judge must apply the law or face the possibility of being over turned. I will spend zero time worrying about the judges sexual orientation!

seeing how their suicide rate is many times higher, they seem to be unstable

Yes, because of your bigotry. You have blood on your hands!!

stating facts is not bigotry

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Dear TheProgressivePatriot and bodecea
As long as the Gay or Christian Judge can recognize the beliefs of the people in a case as equally faith based, and agree to keep govt neutral and not involved in the dispute, then that might be fair to both sides. In that case, the people in a case involving beliefs, whether Christian or LGBT or liberal/secular or conservative/constitutional should be advised to mediate and to reach their own resolution that respects both sides beliefs equally. Only those ppl can determine what is a fair solution that represents their beliefs, not the govt which can neither establish nor prohibit either sides beliefs much less regulate impose or penalize one side for another.

If any judge cannot discern what constitutes a faith based belief, that bias can become a political conflict of interest. Unfortunately our legal system doesn't recognize such conflicts but permits them, nor does our current law or precedents recognize political beliefs as a form of religion. So that's why our system has been corrupted by both which have been permitted to introduce and enforce biases due to lack of check against such govt abuses.

Common Emily. Your at it again. Turning something into a convoluted word salad. Gay or Christian Judges? Did it ever occur to you that a judge might be both?

Mediation? Maybe in some civil cases if the parties are able and willing, such as in divorce cases. but a judge's job is to apply the law. The government IS THE LAW regardless of anyone's beliefs which do not trump the law.

Political beliefs as a form of religion? Seriously?? Someday you will learn that everyone cannot be accommodated. The court imposing a decision based on the law- a decision that someone might be unhappy with is not government abuse. It is the way things work and our legal system- although not without its flaws- is one of the best.

Hate to tell every one this, but there have been gay judges since the begining. We just likely did not know! Sexual orientation should have zero factor on a judges rulings, even if it did we have an appeals process in such a case. As stated before the judge must apply the law or face the possibility of being over turned. I will spend zero time worrying about the judges sexual orientation!

seeing how their suicide rate is many times higher, they seem to be unstable

Yes, because of your bigotry. You have blood on your hands!!

stating facts is not bigotry

Facts.....?? Are you shitting me? You are resorting to a logical fallacy because that is all that you have, Pathetically, you don't even know it. Let me explain. This is what you just did:

Non Causa Pro Causa (see also Post hoc (also called false cause)

Translation: "Non-cause for cause", Latin

Alias: False Cause

This is the most general fallacy of reasoning to conclusions about causality. Some authors describe it as inferring that something is the cause of something else when it isn't, an interpretation encouraged by the fallacy's names. However, inferring a false causal relation is often just a mistake, and it can be the result of reasoning which is as cogent as can be, since all reasoning to causal conclusions is ultimately inductive. Instead, to be fallacious, a causal argument must violate the canons of good reasoning about causation in some common or deceptive way. Thus, to understand causal fallacies, we must understand how causal reasoning works, and the ways in which it can go awry.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/noncause.html

Smarten up and formulate a real and honest argument if you can, which I doubt




:

 

[harmonica]

Common Emily. Your at it again. Turning something into a convoluted word salad. Gay or Christian Judges? Did it ever occur to you that a judge might be both?

Mediation? Maybe in some civil cases if the parties are able and willing, such as in divorce cases. but a judge's job is to apply the law. The government IS THE LAW regardless of anyone's beliefs which do not trump the law.

Political beliefs as a form of religion? Seriously?? Someday you will learn that everyone cannot be accommodated. The court imposing a decision based on the law- a decision that someone might be unhappy with is not government abuse. It is the way things work and our legal system- although not without its flaws- is one of the best.

Hate to tell every one this, but there have been gay judges since the begining. We just likely did not know! Sexual orientation should have zero factor on a judges rulings, even if it did we have an appeals process in such a case. As stated before the judge must apply the law or face the possibility of being over turned. I will spend zero time worrying about the judges sexual orientation!

seeing how their suicide rate is many times higher, they seem to be unstable

Yes, because of your bigotry. You have blood on your hands!!

stating facts is not bigotry

Facts.....?? Are you shitting me? You are resorting to a logical fallacy because that is all that you have, Pathetically, you don't even know it. Let me explain. This is what you just did:

Non Causa Pro Causa (see also Post hoc (also called false cause)

Translation: "Non-cause for cause", Latin

Alias: False Cause

This is the most general fallacy of reasoning to conclusions about causality. Some authors describe it as inferring that something is the cause of something else when it isn't, an interpretation encouraged by the fallacy's names. However, inferring a false causal relation is often just a mistake, and it can be the result of reasoning which is as cogent as can be, since all reasoning to causal conclusions is ultimately inductive. Instead, to be fallacious, a causal argument must violate the canons of good reasoning about causation in some common or deceptive way. Thus, to understand causal fallacies, we must understand how causal reasoning works, and the ways in which it can go awry.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/noncause.html

Smarten up and formulate a real and honest argument if you can, which I doubt




:

we went over this before--YOU are the hateful bigot when you used hateful derogatory terms/words as I was trying to discuss civilly /politely/etc

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The stupidity and bigotry is astounding!! You cant make this shit up!! The idea that we should not have gay judges because they would hostile to Christians is absurd on the face of it since many gay people are Christian, and many Christians and Christian denominations embrace gay rights.

But beyond that , where does it end? Should we not have black judges because they won't be fair to whites? Should we not have white judges because they won't be fair to minorities? Should we not have Christian judges because they won't be fair to people of other faiths? I could go on but you get the idea?

Maybe we should develop drone bot judges that have no soul and program them to be completely without bias. Of course they would not have any compassion or empathy either, but we can't have it all, can we?

Mat Staver: Gay Judges Are Incapable Of Giving Christians ‘A Fair Shake’ In Court | Right Wing Watch

A.

Let me tell you folks something. I am straight and I would have a problem with someone who wields religion as a weapon to justify discrimination as well. Maybe we not have liberal judges either. Judges should be selected on their ability to follow the law and to put their personal views aside.

If that is true, then we can safely infer that christian judges cannot give anyone not a christian a fair shake in court. What say you, christians? Is that true?

Dear TheProgressivePatriot and bodecea
As long as the Gay or Christian Judge can recognize the beliefs of the people in a case as equally faith based, and agree to keep govt neutral and not involved in the dispute, then that might be fair to both sides. In that case, the people in a case involving beliefs, whether Christian or LGBT or liberal/secular or conservative/constitutional should be advised to mediate and to reach their own resolution that respects both sides beliefs equally. Only those ppl can determine what is a fair solution that represents their beliefs, not the govt which can neither establish nor prohibit either sides beliefs much less regulate impose or penalize one side for another.

If any judge cannot discern what constitutes a faith based belief, that bias can become a political conflict of interest. Unfortunately our legal system doesn't recognize such conflicts but permits them, nor does our current law or precedents recognize political beliefs as a form of religion. So that's why our system has been corrupted by both which have been permitted to introduce and enforce biases due to lack of check against such govt abuses.

Common Emily. Your at it again. Turning something into a convoluted word salad. Gay or Christian Judges? Did it ever occur to you that a judge might be both?

Mediation? Maybe in some civil cases if the parties are able and willing, such as in divorce cases. but a judge's job is to apply the law. The government IS THE LAW regardless of anyone's beliefs which do not trump the law.

Political beliefs as a form of religion? Seriously?? Someday you will learn that everyone cannot be accommodated. The court imposing a decision based on the law- a decision that someone might be unhappy with is not government abuse. It is the way things work and our legal system- although not without its flaws- is one of the best.

Hate to tell every one this, but there have been gay judges since the begining. We just likely did not know! Sexual orientation should have zero factor on a judges rulings, even if it did we have an appeals process in such a case. As stated before the judge must apply the law or face the possibility of being over turned. I will spend zero time worrying about the judges sexual orientation!

I think that people have forgotten what makes this country great! We built in checks and balances to our system. The reason every thing seems so fucked up right now is because the legistative branch has decided to not do thier job. They are only worried about getting elected and not governing. They have been shoving off their responsibilties to the Judicial and Executive branch. We send a clear message to them, that we require them to do their job again and things will go back to normal!!

And what exactly is their job in relation to the issue of who should be a judge?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Hate to tell every one this, but there have been gay judges since the begining. We just likely did not know! Sexual orientation should have zero factor on a judges rulings, even if it did we have an appeals process in such a case. As stated before the judge must apply the law or face the possibility of being over turned. I will spend zero time worrying about the judges sexual orientation!

seeing how their suicide rate is many times higher, they seem to be unstable

Yes, because of your bigotry. You have blood on your hands!!

stating facts is not bigotry

Facts.....?? Are you shitting me? You are resorting to a logical fallacy because that is all that you have, Pathetically, you don't even know it. Let me explain. This is what you just did:

Non Causa Pro Causa (see also Post hoc (also called false cause)

Translation: "Non-cause for cause", Latin

Alias: False Cause

This is the most general fallacy of reasoning to conclusions about causality. Some authors describe it as inferring that something is the cause of something else when it isn't, an interpretation encouraged by the fallacy's names. However, inferring a false causal relation is often just a mistake, and it can be the result of reasoning which is as cogent as can be, since all reasoning to causal conclusions is ultimately inductive. Instead, to be fallacious, a causal argument must violate the canons of good reasoning about causation in some common or deceptive way. Thus, to understand causal fallacies, we must understand how causal reasoning works, and the ways in which it can go awry.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/noncause.html

Smarten up and formulate a real and honest argument if you can, which I doubt




:

we went over this before--YOU are the hateful bigot when you used hateful derogatory terms/words as I was trying to discuss civilly /politely/etc

Not surprisingly, all that you can say is response to my calling you out on your logical and dishonest fallacy is to call me a bigot. Pathetic indeed.

 

[Marion Morrison]

If that is true, then we can safely infer that christian judges cannot give anyone not a christian a fair shake in court. What say you, christians? Is that true?

Dear TheProgressivePatriot and bodecea
As long as the Gay or Christian Judge can recognize the beliefs of the people in a case as equally faith based, and agree to keep govt neutral and not involved in the dispute, then that might be fair to both sides. In that case, the people in a case involving beliefs, whether Christian or LGBT or liberal/secular or conservative/constitutional should be advised to mediate and to reach their own resolution that respects both sides beliefs equally. Only those ppl can determine what is a fair solution that represents their beliefs, not the govt which can neither establish nor prohibit either sides beliefs much less regulate impose or penalize one side for another.

If any judge cannot discern what constitutes a faith based belief, that bias can become a political conflict of interest. Unfortunately our legal system doesn't recognize such conflicts but permits them, nor does our current law or precedents recognize political beliefs as a form of religion. So that's why our system has been corrupted by both which have been permitted to introduce and enforce biases due to lack of check against such govt abuses.

Common Emily. Your at it again. Turning something into a convoluted word salad. Gay or Christian Judges? Did it ever occur to you that a judge might be both?

Mediation? Maybe in some civil cases if the parties are able and willing, such as in divorce cases. but a judge's job is to apply the law. The government IS THE LAW regardless of anyone's beliefs which do not trump the law.

Political beliefs as a form of religion? Seriously?? Someday you will learn that everyone cannot be accommodated. The court imposing a decision based on the law- a decision that someone might be unhappy with is not government abuse. It is the way things work and our legal system- although not without its flaws- is one of the best.

Hate to tell every one this, but there have been gay judges since the begining. We just likely did not know! Sexual orientation should have zero factor on a judges rulings, even if it did we have an appeals process in such a case. As stated before the judge must apply the law or face the possibility of being over turned. I will spend zero time worrying about the judges sexual orientation!

seeing how their suicide rate is many times higher, they seem to be unstable

and......how did military veterans get introduced to this thread?

I would suppose when you came here and started posting.

How many dollars of hazard pay did you draw again?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

AS a child protective services investigator - I removed children from irresponsible "breeders" and placed them with gay people .

That you use derogatory gay lingo to describe hetero’s is just another indication you weren’t fit to do that job.

That he put children into the custody of sick, immoral perverts, is just another indication that he wasn't fit to do that job. Handing children over to sick sexual perverts makes one a willing and knowing accessory to the sexual abuse of those children.

 

[Tilly]

Don’t you know what that means?

"Having Children" can mean birthing them ( which gay people do) or parenting them ( which gay people also do) I think the ass hat means both.

Having children usually refers to procreation, and if you think harmonica meant otherwise and that gays can’t be parents - you clearly have comprehension problems as s/he has made it abundantly clear what s/he was referring to and what s/he was not referring to.

Well, we haven't heard back from s/he on that , have we. I don't have a comprehension problem but someone has a communication problem.

Yes we have. Go read the replies again.

Sorry. I don't have time to go hunting for it. Unlike others here I have a life and this is not it. I will assume that it claims that the statement refers only to the ability to conceive and birth children. My reply is that to emphasis that is just plain stupid because no one singles out hetero couples who can't conceive and birth children in the "normal " or usual way" It is just used as another way to disparage and marginalize gay people. The courts, all through the debate on gay marriage, rejected the idea that the ability to procreate has any bearing on gay rights. Quite frankly, I'm tired of the stupidity and pathetic attempts to malign gays.

‘It’?

 

[Tilly]

Don’t you know what that means?

"Having Children" can mean birthing them ( which gay people do) or parenting them ( which gay people also do) I think the ass hat means both.

Having children usually refers to procreation, and if you think harmonica meant otherwise and that gays can’t be parents - you clearly have comprehension problems as s/he has made it abundantly clear what s/he was referring to and what s/he was not referring to.

Well, we haven't heard back from s/he on that , have we. I don't have a comprehension problem but someone has a communication problem.

Yes we have. Go read the replies again.

Sorry. I don't have time to go hunting for it. Unlike others here I have a life and this is not it. I will assume that it claims that the statement refers only to the ability to conceive and birth children. My reply is that to emphasis that is just plain stupid because no one singles out hetero couples who can't conceive and birth children in the "normal " or usual way" It is just used as another way to disparage and marginalize gay people. The courts, all through the debate on gay marriage, rejected the idea that the ability to procreate has any bearing on gay rights. Quite frankly, I'm tired of the stupidity and pathetic attempts to malign gays.

I’ve never heard of people pretending that those who require medical intervention to have children are doing it naturally.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The stupidity and bigotry is astounding!! You cant make this shit up!! The idea that we should not have gay judges because they would hostile to Christians is absurd on the face of it since many gay people are Christian, and many Christians and Christian denominations embrace gay rights.

But beyond that , where does it end? Should we not have black judges because they won't be fair to whites? Should we not have white judges because they won't be fair to minorities? Should we not have Christian judges because they won't be fair to people of other faiths? I could go on but you get the idea?

Maybe we should develop drone bot judges that have no soul and program them to be completely without bias. Of course they would not have any compassion or empathy either, but we can't have it all, can we?

Mat Staver: Gay Judges Are Incapable Of Giving Christians ‘A Fair Shake’ In Court | Right Wing Watch

Anti-LGBTQ Religious Right activist Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel appeared on VCY America’s “Crosstalk” radio program yesterday, where he asserted that gay people should not be allowed to serve as judges because they are incapable of being objective and fair in cases involving religious liberty for Christians.

A

sked about Andrew McDonald, who was recently nominated to serve as chief justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court and, if confirmed, will be the first openly gay chief justice on any state court in the country, Staver was not shy about voicing his opposition.

“Here’s the problem with it beyond the issue of the morality of this,” Staver said. “Beyond the issue of other consequences is the fact that what we typically see is someone’s identity, their being, completely wrapped up in their sexual practices, meaning that—do you think that if you had an Aaron and Melissa Klein or a Jack Phillips bakery or anything else like that where you have the LGBT clash with religious freedom or freedom of expression come before this judge, do you think this judge is going to be open and fair irrespective of what he does to rule based on the Constitution and the rule of law? I don’t think so

.

Let me tell you folks something. I am straight and I would have a problem with someone who wields religion as a weapon to justify discrimination as well. Maybe we should not have liberal judges either. Judges should be selected on their ability to follow the law and to put their personal views aside.

The logic goes that only Christian judges who support this guy's views should be judges, how convenient for him.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Why are you [TheRegressivePervert] soooooo obsessed with all things gay? Why do you only make threads about gay stuff?

I recently stumbled across a thread that he started nearly two years ago, that wasn't about gay stuff. But it's almost as disturbing as—if not more so than—his obsessive pro-pervert threads. In it, he describes his idea of a Utopia in which space aliens take over the Earth and use drugs to brainwash the people to eliminate religious faith. It shows TheRegressivePervert to be seriously f•••ed-up in the head and f•••ed-up in the soul, in a different way in which we already otherwise knew him to be.

What Price Peace and Prosperity for All...........

The conditions:
1.All religious expression and thought of religion-yes thought- will be abolished. They have developed a drug to cleanse the mind of all such primitive thought patterns which, they know, causes so much strife in our world. Houses of worship will become centers for performing arts, or museums funded by the government. Some will be converted to housing.