News

It seems completely logical to me that if a judge claims her Christianity is so vital to her being that she cannot perform duties that don't align with her Christianity then she cannot give fair and impartial judgments to anybody who is not also a Christian. Anybody of any religion that's not Christianity in her courtroom should call for her recusal. Anyone not Christian for whom she has made judgment should call for mistrals.

Not even to mention the fact that can she truly be impartial to other sects of Christianity?

As a Christian, my worldview is inherently superior and correct in all instances, and anyone trying to tell me otherwise is oppressing me, no matter what harm that may cause to other people.

Or, more simply: I deserve special rights and privileges.

These people are just a lot more obvious in their desire for theocracy now, but the whole Seven Mountains Mandate thing has been around for longer than I've been alive.

They just want to be Ya'll Qaeda.

She claims that, as a Christian, she should not have to follow state judicial ethics rules about impartiality.

That sounds like she is not qualified to be a judge then. If she's using her religion to guide her legal decisions, will she also deny a heterosexual couple a divorce because she believes it goes against her interpretation of christianity?

If you can't be impartial then you can't be a judge. I mean jet pilots can't wear glasses, librarians can't be illiterate, dog groomers (reasonably speaking) can't be allergic, priests can't have a wife. You don't get to have a job just because you want the job.

In a just world she would be disbarred

Why can’t you just let people be happy?

If she feels that religious she should be unbenched and disbarred, as religion is extremely partial and such followers cannot see things outside that lense

Of course its some Texas asshole

Great news! Her bitch ass doesn't have to marry a woman! Your fucken non-problem is solved you galaxy class cunt

They’re going to strip abortion rights (done), then LGBTQ2A++ (in progress), then interracial marriage. You know it.

I don't think anyone is taking this constant assault step-up as seriously as they should.

We thought Roe Vs Wade was safe, now nobody even talks about it anymore. Project 2025 outlined all of this and how to accomplish it and so far they've been following the playbook to great success.

And we're here "LOL AT THE FUNNY LADY."

Yah it won't pass or even be considered. Today.

But next time someone with more power and influence raises it with a stronger case or argument, most of us will have tuned out as it gains more and more traction. Like they did with everything else so far.

After same-sex marriage they will go after interracial marriage. I dare some fucker to tell me that's hyperbolic, I already know the pretense and argument they will use to "ease" in the long dick of dicking americans.

Funny as fuck for her to whinge about unelected judges while she submits this to the supreme Court... And by funny I mean she's a fucking piece of shit, obviously

Jesus fucking Christ. Why can't Texas be its own country and be the right wing Christo-Fascist hell hole they want to force on the rest of us? Just fucking leave already.

Wacko, Texastan

If your religion overrides your ability to judge fairly, then you cannot uphold your duty as a judge and should step down.

Government should not be involved in marriages.

These are contracts between citizens. Nothing more. Consenting adults that need a way to manage the outcome if the contract needs to be disolved.

There is nothing more to do.

And all citizens are equal, male or female, it doesn't matter because you cannot discriminate who gets to enter into a contract.

Delulu folk.

You want to enforce Christianity? Go be a pastor not a judge, you fucking cunt.

I misread the title by missing the word "equality" and was intrigued by the idea of a Texas judge calling for the abolishment of marriage XD

I think that that would open a can of worms well beyond this issue, considering that religion in general can tell adherents to do things that aren't mandated by secular law.

I also have a pretty difficult time swallowing this in that any Christian mandate isn't on not performing marriages, but on not engaging in homosexual sex yourself. "I don't want to facilitate people in doing things that would be prohibited them if they belonged to my own religion" seems like a pretty wildly unreasonably broad reading of any sort of freedom to practice religion on the judge's part. If she herself was obligated by the job to participate in lesbian sex, okay, then I could see her maybe having an argument for some kind of exemption.

What happens if you have, say, Muslim building inspectors? Are they allowed to not approve a meat-packing plant because it processes pork and if the people who are eating its output were Muslims, as the inspector is, they'd be violating rules of their religion? I mean, that's on par with what she's asking for.

EDIT:

I'd also add that her argument didn't work for Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, and there it was just a private business, not a public official. Ermold v. Davis seems like it'd even more clearly establish a precedent that her argument doesn't work.

EDIT2: Well, okay, there's that one Old Testament verse somewhere about how you have to execute practicing homosexuals. That's the extent to which I can think of the Bible having a mandate regarding someone else engaging in homosexual sex. But even without looking at her complaint, I am very sure that the argument she is trying to make is not "I should be excused from not executing practicing homosexuals".

searches

Leviticus 20:10-16:

Punishments for Sexual Immorality

 “If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.  If a man lies with his father's wife, he has uncovered his father's nakedness; both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.  If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death; they have committed perversion; their blood is upon them.  If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.  If a man takes a woman and her mother also, it is depravity; he and they shall be burned with fire, that there may be no depravity among you.  If a man lies with an animal, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall kill the animal.  If a woman approaches any animal and lies with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.