Gay Dallas Judge Won't Perform Straight Marriages

[Unknown_Soldier]

When that kind of argument was presented to the U.S. Supreme Court by the Virginia lawyers in Loving v Virginia, the Justices laughed out loud....kind of like I am laughing at you now.

And a judge today that said she was going to refuse to perform any marriages in protest against interracial marriages would deserve to be summarily removed from office.

Let me add a more apt comparison....yours was sorely lacking.

If there were a state like Virginia in the 60s that did not legally allow inter-racial marriages had a judge (black) announce that they were not going to perform ANY marriages until inter-racial marriage was legalized.......I would support them JUST AS MUCH.

Did everyone notice what this Bodecea feller did? Framed an argument where he tried to get out of admitting that he would change his opinion if the issue being protested wasn't no gay marriages?

 

[Dragon]

Did everyone notice what this Bodecea feller did?

Just FYI, the "feller" has two X chromosomes.

 

[Katzndogz]

When that kind of argument was presented to the U.S. Supreme Court by the Virginia lawyers in Loving v Virginia, the Justices laughed out loud....kind of like I am laughing at you now.

And a judge today that said she was going to refuse to perform any marriages in protest against interracial marriages would deserve to be summarily removed from office.

Let me add a more apt comparison....yours was sorely lacking.

If there were a state like Virginia in the 60s that did not legally allow inter-racial marriages had a judge (black) announce that they were not going to perform ANY marriages until inter-racial marriage was legalized.......I would support them JUST AS MUCH.

The ACT, as noble and worthwhile as you imagine it to be, is separate from the bias and prejudice shown. Such a judge in the 60s, would be showing a bias that could impact any case before him. Judges are supposed to be impartial and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Your position is that this issue is SO vital and important the ends justify the means. The issue isn't same sex marriage it's judicial credibility. Can this judge adjudicate a divorce where a man finds out that his wife is a lesbian and wants a divorce and custody of the children? She might, but I wouldn't trust her to do it. No more than I would trust a judge to adjudicate such case fairly if she exhibited bias against gays and lesbians.

 

[g5000]

If a person wants to shoot themselves in the foot and go out of business rather than be forced to provide services to people they hate, that's fine. Someone else will gladly take the business.


God bless America!

 

[Peach]

Someone files an action against the state challenging the Constitutionality of the law. It would probably be removed from state to Federal Court, but could begin her court.

No such action can come before her court.

Peach is just gladly wallowing in her own ignorance at this point, isn't she?

No, Peach is being CONSERVATIVE, and showing her disapproval of judges taking political stands. She can work for gay marriage to be legalized in her state; expressing her opinion and refusing to marry straight couples does not advance that ideal.

 

[Immanuel]

It's UNLIKELY but not impossible that some racist freak could become a judge.

For the sake of THIS discussion, let's assume one is in such a position and announces that in protest of the current marriage laws allowing blacks to marry whites they will not be performing ANY marriages. How would you react?

I would think that he is a racist pig, but I would agree that he has the right to his opinion and he also has the right not to perform any marriages or even just not to perform inter-racial marriages for that matter.

Immie

Ah but that would be a no no, at least in Texas as per the code posted. A judge doesn't HAVE to perform marriages, but if they do they can't discriminate based on constitutionally protected reasons. Obviously race is so protected.

Obviously it is, but I don't have to agree with everything the law says, do I?

Hope not or I am in big trouble.

I would think the guy is a scumbag, but I would still support his right to be a scumbag.

Immie

 

[bodecea]

No such action can come before her court.

Peach is just gladly wallowing in her own ignorance at this point, isn't she?

No, Peach is being CONSERVATIVE, and showing her disapproval of judges taking political stands. She can work for gay marriage to be legalized in her state; expressing her opinion and refusing to marry straight couples does not advance that ideal.

You really find that shoe uncomfortable on that other foot, don't you?

 

[bodecea]

And a judge today that said she was going to refuse to perform any marriages in protest against interracial marriages would deserve to be summarily removed from office.

Let me add a more apt comparison....yours was sorely lacking.

If there were a state like Virginia in the 60s that did not legally allow inter-racial marriages had a judge (black) announce that they were not going to perform ANY marriages until inter-racial marriage was legalized.......I would support them JUST AS MUCH.

The ACT, as noble and worthwhile as you imagine it to be, is separate from the bias and prejudice shown. Such a judge in the 60s, would be showing a bias that could impact any case before him. Judges are supposed to be impartial and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Your position is that this issue is SO vital and important the ends justify the means. The issue isn't same sex marriage it's judicial credibility. Can this judge adjudicate a divorce where a man finds out that his wife is a lesbian and wants a divorce and custody of the children? She might, but I wouldn't trust her to do it. No more than I would trust a judge to adjudicate such case fairly if she exhibited bias against gays and lesbians.

The....Judge....does....not.....have.....to.....marry.....anyone....It....is.....not.....an.....official....part.....of....their.....job.....description.....How....hard.....is.....that.....for.....you....to.....understand?

 

[Katzndogz]

If a judge wanted to refuse to perform interracial marriages or any other kind of marriage and just refused to do it there is no problem. In this case the judge chose to expose her bias by saying that the reason is she doesn't agree with the laws of her state.

That's the difference.

What other laws does she not agree with and therefore would avoid rulings?

 

[bodecea]

If a judge wanted to refuse to perform interracial marriages or any other kind of marriage and just refused to do it there is no problem. In this case the judge chose to expose her bias by saying that the reason is she doesn't agree with the laws of her state.

That's the difference.

What other laws does she not agree with and therefore would avoid rulings?

Boo Hoo.


BTW....I'm noticing a definite lack in you and others condemning ChessWarsNow for his horrific comments about this judge.

 

[Katzndogz]

Let me add a more apt comparison....yours was sorely lacking.

If there were a state like Virginia in the 60s that did not legally allow inter-racial marriages had a judge (black) announce that they were not going to perform ANY marriages until inter-racial marriage was legalized.......I would support them JUST AS MUCH.

The ACT, as noble and worthwhile as you imagine it to be, is separate from the bias and prejudice shown. Such a judge in the 60s, would be showing a bias that could impact any case before him. Judges are supposed to be impartial and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Your position is that this issue is SO vital and important the ends justify the means. The issue isn't same sex marriage it's judicial credibility. Can this judge adjudicate a divorce where a man finds out that his wife is a lesbian and wants a divorce and custody of the children? She might, but I wouldn't trust her to do it. No more than I would trust a judge to adjudicate such case fairly if she exhibited bias against gays and lesbians.

The....Judge....does....not.....have.....to.....marry.....anyone....It....is.....not.....an.....official....part.....of....their.....job.....description.....How....hard.....is.....that.....for.....you....to.....understand?

How hard is it for you to understand that the issue is she's biased.

 

[Immanuel]

If a judge wanted to refuse to perform interracial marriages or any other kind of marriage and just refused to do it there is no problem. In this case the judge chose to expose her bias by saying that the reason is she doesn't agree with the laws of her state.

That's the difference.

What other laws does she not agree with and therefore would avoid rulings?

When you have reviewed a significant sampling of her rulings and can point to an actual bias as opposed to an alledged bias, I will accept your point of view regarding this particular judge. To date, I have seen nothing at all that supports your allegations that she is biased against heterosexuals.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

If a judge wanted to refuse to perform interracial marriages or any other kind of marriage and just refused to do it there is no problem. In this case the judge chose to expose her bias by saying that the reason is she doesn't agree with the laws of her state.

That's the difference.

What other laws does she not agree with and therefore would avoid rulings?

Boo Hoo.


BTW....I'm noticing a definite lack in you and others condemning ChessWarsNow for his horrific comments about this judge.

I don't read CWN posts but saw your comments about it. I won't comment about his post because I believe he is deliberately attempting to make an ass out of himself and a joke out of the issues he participates in.

He's trying to be funny. I don't find him funny. I don't comment on his posts.

Sorry, that is all I have to say about his comment.

Immie

 

[Article 15]

"They have equal protection before the law. They are entitled to marry with the same constraints and benefits as everyone else." ...... is the gay marriage argument equivalent of putting your finger an inch from someone's face and repeating "I'm not touching you" over and over.

 

[bodecea]

If a person wants to shoot themselves in the foot and go out of business rather than be forced to provide services to people they hate, that's fine. Someone else will gladly take the business.


God bless America!

Yes. It would be interesting for us to find out what Portrait business Katzndogz is in. And, letting people know, so they don't inadvertently try to hire her. After all, she doesn't want our business.

 

[bodecea]

"They have equal protection before the law. They are entitled to marry with the same constraints and benefits as everyone else." ...... is the gay marriage argument equivalent of putting your finger an inch from someone's face and repeating "I'm not touching you" over and over.

Isn't it odd that that argument doesn't stand up in court?

 

[bodecea]

If a judge wanted to refuse to perform interracial marriages or any other kind of marriage and just refused to do it there is no problem. In this case the judge chose to expose her bias by saying that the reason is she doesn't agree with the laws of her state.

That's the difference.

What other laws does she not agree with and therefore would avoid rulings?

Boo Hoo.


BTW....I'm noticing a definite lack in you and others condemning ChessWarsNow for his horrific comments about this judge.

I don't read CWN posts but saw your comments about it. I won't comment about his post because I believe he is deliberately attempting to make an ass out of himself and a joke out of the issues he participates in.

He's trying to be funny. I don't find him funny. I don't comment on his posts.

Sorry, that is all I have to say about his comment.

Immie

Funny. Hah Hah

 

[bodecea]

The ACT, as noble and worthwhile as you imagine it to be, is separate from the bias and prejudice shown. Such a judge in the 60s, would be showing a bias that could impact any case before him. Judges are supposed to be impartial and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Your position is that this issue is SO vital and important the ends justify the means. The issue isn't same sex marriage it's judicial credibility. Can this judge adjudicate a divorce where a man finds out that his wife is a lesbian and wants a divorce and custody of the children? She might, but I wouldn't trust her to do it. No more than I would trust a judge to adjudicate such case fairly if she exhibited bias against gays and lesbians.

The....Judge....does....not.....have.....to.....marry.....anyone....It....is.....not.....an.....official....part.....of....their.....job.....description.....How....hard.....is.....that.....for.....you....to.....understand?

How hard is it for you to understand that the issue is she's biased.

Show....her.....biases....in....her.....rulings....aka.....her....JOB.

 

[bodecea]

They have equal protection before the law. They are entitled to marry with the same constraints and benefits as everyone else.
**********************************************
Not in Florida. Until a Supreme Court case of just a few years ago, gay citizens could not even ADOPT children They could be guardians, and foster parents but not NO ADOPTION. And the law stood through Democratic AND Republican governors.

When that kind of argument was presented to the U.S. Supreme Court by the Virginia lawyers in Loving v Virginia, the Justices laughed out loud....kind of like I am laughing at you now.

Not an argument Bodecea, FACT:

Florida gay adoption ban ends - US news - Life - msnbc.com

Less than TWO years ago. It wasn't an USSC decision however, it was a Federal appeals court decision that Gov. Crist chose not to appeal. The law was on the books for 33 YEARS.

Um....hate to break this to you, but your link and that court case has NOTHING to do with the argument that gays are treated equally as straights.

I'm beginning to feel sorry for you Peach. You are in SO over your head.

 

[boilermaker55]

Sounds like forcing to him to perform these duties compromises his values, good for him for staying true to his personal belief system.

If his belief system keeps him from doing his job, he needs to move on.

You mean like the pharmacists that are paid to do a duty and refuse.