Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow! Will she remain on the bench? This reminds me a bit of a recent case in Michigan where a psych. college student refused to counsel gay clients stating that due to religious reasons, she didn't feel comfortable with regard to their relationship issues and offered to refer them to another therapist at the college clinic. That student was fired.
This judge is an ass. She is a public servant, if she did not like the laws of her state she should never have sworn to uphold them. What's next, a judge refusing to marry people until polygamy is legal, or until it's legal for 12 year old children to marry?
This judge is an ass. She is a public servant, if she did not like the laws of her state she should never have sworn to uphold them. What's next, a judge refusing to marry people until polygamy is legal, or until it's legal for 12 year old children to marry?
Bro what are you on about? She has the right to not hold the marriage ceremony if she doesn't want to. If you say that about this judge then you have to apply that same statement to the straight judges that choose not to uphold the ceremony as well.
There's going against the status quo and being ignorant. Polygamy is never going to be legal nationwide and has nothing to do with this topic. Nice straw man by the way.
That whole 12 year old comment was at one point legal...back in the 1700/1800s. We're in 2012 now, so again nice straw man. Do you choose not to read the quote that I've posted numerous times in this thread or do you blatantly choose to wear that veil of ignorance?
Wow! Will she remain on the bench? This reminds me a bit of a recent case in Michigan where a psych. college student refused to counsel gay clients stating that due to religious reasons, she didn't feel comfortable with regard to their relationship issues and offered to refer them to another therapist at the college clinic. That student was fired.
She should be removed from the bench immediately. Judges are supposed to judge based on the law, their personal feelings are irrelevant. Since she cannot seperate her feelings from her work she is simply unfit to b a judge.
Not in a growing number of places. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Blah blah bah. A same sex couple will never be anything but two people with sexual disorders living together, regardless of what you call it. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Bro what are you on about? She has the right to not hold the marriage ceremony if she doesn't want to. If you say that about this judge then you have to apply that same statement to the straight judges that choose not to uphold the ceremony as well.
Um, sorry no, she has a job she is getting paid for & its not to set policy.
Quote:
There's going against the status quo and being ignorant. Polygamy is never going to be legal nationwide and has nothing to do with this topic. Nice straw man by the way.
Not a straw man arguement if you think about it. Polygamy is much more natural & normal than homosexuality. If the arguement for homosexual marriage that they are free adults making the decision to spend a life together is enough to constitute a marriage even though it brings nothing except sexual gratification to the table then whats wrong with several people who can actually function as mateing pairs being married?
Quote:
That whole 12 year old comment was at one point legal...back in the 1700/1800s. We're in 2012 now, so again nice straw man. Do you choose not to read the quote that I've posted numerous times in this thread or do you blatantly choose to wear that veil of ignorance?
Was legal & normal well into the 1900's and again, since its a much more normal pair than two people of the same sex why shouldnt it be ok if its concensual? Thats the biggest hole there is in the homosexual argument. Homosexuality is much more deviant in nature than many other sexual preferences that are illegal & it has zero societal benefit. A 12 year old can have children & raise them, if there were four people left on earth. two homosexuals, a 12 year old girl or boy & an adult heterosexual male or female. Which one would be the one that saved the human race or at least gave it a fighting chance?
One of the biggest problems faceing this country is we are too PC to make people deal with reality. We cater to all sorts of far fetched delusions in an attempt to keep people happy & then wonder why we have a nation of delusional sociopaths incapable of dealing with reality. The reality is homosexuality is a disorder and we are better off marrying off 12 year olds than acting like there is anything normal about two men getting married. There might be an arguement that two men having sex is normal, but not getting married or constituting a mateing couple.
She should be removed from the bench immediately. Judges are supposed to judge based on the law, their personal feelings are irrelevant. Since she cannot seperate her feelings from her work she is simply unfit to be a judge.
Here's that quote since you seem to not want to read it:
Quote:
"I faithfully and fully perform all of my duties as the Presiding Judge of the 116th Civil District Court, where it is my honor to serve the citizens of Dallas County and the parties who have matters before the Court.
Performing marriage ceremonies is not a duty that I have as the Presiding Judge of a civil district court. It is a right and privilege invested in me under the Family Code. I choose not to exercise it, as many other Judges do not exercise it. Because it is not part of our duties, some Judges even charge a fee to perform the ceremonies.
I do not, and would never, impede any person’s right to get married. In fact, when people wander into my courtroom, usually while I am presiding over other matters, I direct them to the Judges in the courthouse who do perform marriage ceremonies. If my deputy is not busy, I will even ask him to escort or help these individuals find another Judge who performs the ceremonies. I do this because I believe in the right of people to marry and pursue happiness."
Pay attention to the bold part in particular. Again I bring the point up that she is not obligated by her position to marry straight couples. Where is it in a Texas state law does it say that a judge must 100%, always fulfill the ceremony to marry straight couples? There are plenty...PLENTY of straight judges who don't fulfill the ceremony. So again I ask do you mean to tell me that just because a judge doesn't marry straight couples that they must be removed from their position?
The fact that an openly gay judge is doing is irrelevant to my question. I am asking if you think in your opinion if any judge in Texas who doesn't fulfill the marriage ceremony to straight couples ought to be removed from power. If so I ask you to provide reasons and logical fact to back up your argument. Remember this judge who was appointed their by the Bar Association is well within her right and scope of power to act the way that she is and not be in violation of her post she is currently occupying.
Also since when does a judge have to follow the law without question? Yes it is their duty to uphold the law but we have a place called the Supreme Court who...oh I dunno...changes laws? They hand down verdicts and decisions that might go against the current law at the time thus changing the law in question. Keep that in mind as you answer my question that I asked above.
Um, sorry no, she has a job she is getting paid for & its not to set policy.
You're right in that she does have a job to do; however, that job also allows to NOT perform the ceremony to marry straight couples. It is well within her scope of power to do so and as such she is allowed to behave in such a manner. If the Texas Bar Association felt she was in violation of her power, then she would be removed from her position. Since that hasn't happened yet she isn't violating anything whatsoever except your notion of what a judge does.
Quote:
The reality is homosexuality is a disorder and we are better off marrying off 12 year olds than acting like there is anything normal about two men getting married. There might be an argument that two men having sex is normal, but not getting married or constituting a mating couple.
Says who? Homosexuality (which applies to both men and women by the way) is not proven to be a disorder except by biased, bigoted research who are being bought out by people with money to skew fact and spin myth around and around.
Did you really just say you'd rather allow someone marry a 12 year old than allow two homosexuals (again men AND women can be homosexual) get married? That right there just caused your opinion to no longer be relevant. Congratulations, some would call you a pedophile because of that, but I won't. I'll let you deal with that on your own. By the way I am NOT calling you one nor is that a personal attack. Just clarifying for your sake since I know you'll misconstrue it somehow.
Men and women can both be homosexuals and you're only including the men in your argument. Remember lesbians are homosexual women and I think you keep forgetting that. Anyway allow me to post a picture that pretty much debunks your whole argument:
She should be removed from the bench immediately. Judges are supposed to judge based on the law, their personal feelings are irrelevant. Since she cannot seperate her feelings from her work she is simply unfit to b a judge.
A marriage license is not a judgement. It's not part of her duties as a civil district court judge. It's her prerogative of whether to marry someone or not. She isn't required to.
A marriage license is not a judgement. It's not part of her duties as a civil district court judge. It's her prerogative of whether to marry someone or not. She isn't required to.
Thus the entire point of the thread has been proven. Again.
I'm seriously wondering why this isn't locked yet since it's reached its logical conclusion. Ah well.
More ammo to prove these folks wrong with, I guess.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
