Texas Judge Won't Perform Same-Sex Marriages, Citing Faith Beliefs

Colleen McAllister

Absolutely not! This judge is not impartial and should not even be allowed on the bench. What will be the next thing, refusal to marry 2 divorced people? Or marry a couple that has been living together previously? This is a slippery slope and Ned's to be stopped and that judge unseated.

Catherine

A judge is a public servant, not a business owner.

Gary Leu

This is ridiculous. The level of egocentrism of this judge’s argument is astounding. It’s either, “I don’t want to have do something that professionally and ethically I promised to do, just because my particular extreme view of a religion and I refuse to even consider that I might be wrong, and it makes me feel kinda uncomfortable if I do it.” Or, it’s a conscious political effort to undermine and outwardly defy something you personally don’t like. Either way it just reflects the narcissistic self importance of the opinion.

She could use her Christian faith to make the opposite argument and in my opinion would better reflect the Christian message. Jesus told us, sorry you don’t get to judge others, in fact you must serve them generously and love them as well as anyone you love. We’re supposed to forgive everyone, including our worst enemies. If we are his followers we’ll look after others, especially what some consider the least of us. Be giving, charitable, and loving. I think that someone is “loving” when the other person feels loved. This is why I despise the silliness of “love the sinner, hate the sin” when applied to these situations. The “sinner” most often doesn’t feel loved at all, just rejected.

The point is that she gets to interpret her faith the way she CHOOSES. Other’s rights shouldn’t be impinged upon because you chose an extreme position, and could very well be wrong. My opinion of Jesus is that two women wanting to love each other for the rest of their lives would be infinitely less worrisome that all the destruction brought about by the actions of those who oppose their very existence.

Grow up, get over yourself, and do the job…or quit.

Pastor Jim

Elected officials and public service employees are bond by law to serve the public, which includes LGB individuals. This does not apply to private businesses. Any public official or public employee should find another job if the cannot serve the public in lawful transactions.

Asa William Sprague, II

28 U.S.C. § 453 - Oaths of justices and judges

Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office:

''I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”

If she took such an oath, she is either a liar, a fraud and or an oath-breaker: none of which are considered good Christian principles.

Clay Serenbetz

I thought that SCOTUS settled this ruse when Kim Davis, an Alabama Clerk, tried this trick. It didn't work for Ms. Davis and it should not work for this Texas Judge who is violating the ethical rules and her Oath of Office. This Judge would face defrocking and disbarment in any non-bigotted jurisdiction.

pjm

It is the couple's Constitutional right to marry... as already settled by the Supreme Court of the United States, far above her rank. If she were a minister in a church, she might be within her rights to marry whomever she chooses according to her religion. But she works for the state of Texas, is not a religious institution, it is a secular governmental entity. and as such she has to follow the law. Or am I misunderstanding how things work? If someone says they disagree with laws on the grounds of their religion then they don't have to follow them? That would be utter chaos.

Aside from that, what she is doing is exactly the opposite of what Christ taught anyway. Many times he admonished the "religious" people of his time for basically being so self-righteous that they were no earthly good, and he emphasized showing people love above all else. The only people that angered Jesus were the self-righteous hypocrites whom Jesus called "a nest of vipers".

Minister Wilson

Greetings people,

I don't believe this person should be a judge....

There does this count?

I believe this very strongly, so, it should carry just as much weight as any other religious claim, right?

And this is the true crux of the issue, is it not?

Religion has been afforded deference where it's claims are more supported as secular understandings of facts. This is why believers, attack evolution, attack science, attack sociology, attack etc etc because any of those understandings /claims are generally supported by tangible reality.

Food for Thought,

Minister Wilson

Matthew Mastrogiovanni

A judge MUST do as the law permits. His fear and hate cannot override the law.
Fire him!

Daniel Todd Kamm

Public servants, elected or appointed are elected or appointed to serve the public. If the person can't fulfill the role, that is not the role for the person. As a therapist, (and I work for a private non-profit) I do not have the right to pick and choose who I serve based on anything other than safety or a conflict of interest. I meet people where they are at and respect any differences. I can think of two times in 35 years there has ever been a conflict, and I still served those people. Subsequently I do not feel a twinge of sorrow for these poor victimized butchers, bakers or candlestick-makers who want to use their religious views to make headlines, get attention and make money off of their "personal struggles." What martyrs to the cause! Thank g-d these days any damn fool can design a website, bake a cake, or (apparently, and thank goodness for the Monastery) officiate a wedding! If the judge can't do her tax-payer funded job, which includes taxes from people she may or may not cotton too... she needs to find another job...before her book comes out.

Rev. MichaelRS

Many of you that have seen my other post will probably be shocked to find out but I disagree with the judge Hensley's position in this matter.

When you take a position as a secular public official then you should fulfill all the duties to the public that those officials have.

In this case I would say the only "out" she would have, at least philosophically, would be if when she became a judge same sex marriage was not legal. But this is far more complex than private individuals withholding their services that participate in or support things that are against their base religious beliefs

Rev Mark D

Wouldn't mind getting a look at that brief. The rub here seems to be about a government denying equal service for a legal act.

Rev Mark D

On the other hand, it IS Texas.

David Arthur Lewis

The United States should encourage Texas to secede.

Kevin Michael Zurrin

A judge swears an oath to serve all of the people equally according to the constitution and the standing laws of the state and country. A clergy member serves God and His principals a judge serves all of the people. This judge needs to either follow the laws or resign if her conscience won't allow he to fulfill her oath of office.

Clay Serenbetz

I thought that SCOTUS settled this ruse when Kim Davis, an Alabama Clerk, tried this trick. It didn't work for Ms. Davis and it should not work for this Texas Judge who is violating the ethical rules and her Oath of Office. This Judge would face defrosting and disbarment in any non-bogotted jurisdiction.

David Richard Procter

So I guess we could have fire companies not responding to fires in the houses of gay people because the fire chief is against homosexuality. Can it get as ridiculous as this? I doubt it, but public officials are in the same boat; they are required by law to do certain things, and their personal opinions have no bearing whatsoever. Wasn't there a case in Kentucky a couple of years ago where a woman clerk refused to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple? Same thing. I think she was fired, but please correct me if I am wrong.

John Robert Milner

Tricky, but since she is either elected or appointed to a legal position she must follow the law and perform any legal marriage! She knows the law and has to accept the legal criteria the position required!

Rev. Rory

This happened in my town. The Clerk of the Court refused to conduct an annual marriage ceremony for dozens of couples on Valentine's Day because some of the couples that signed up were same sex couples and it was "against the Clerk's beliefs." A judge saved the day and performed the ceremony. The Clerk's Office made it policy that no employee needed to perform a marriage if it was against their beliefs and it is like that to this day.

It's interesting that the same Clerk's Office maintains a list of people like myself that will perform many different marriage ceremonies, but make it almost impossible for the public to gain access to the list. Every action taken by that office is to discourage anything they don't "like."

Michael Anton Goedeker

Two things in my opnion that are important: 1st Amendment gives no one the right to abuse another. Using that as an excuse to abuse and attack others is asnine and those people should be ashamed of themselves. Its best to just shut up in my opinion.

2nd, we don't define humanity or sexuality as approppriate or not. Since none of us are the creator then thats just a no brainer.

Many people believe they have the right to push thier views and morals on anyone else and quite frankely thats not the case supported by any religion that cautions on not being over zealous or biggots or religious. These concepts are in multiple holy books and are not really debateable as to the moral idea of freedoms that we are given by our creator to live as ethically as we can based on our set of morals, values, relious beliefs. Anyone who pushes thier beliefs on others by any means of force commits a sin. This concept is also very clear. So I am not sure where all the psuedo christianity systems really get thier justification. I saw this in Germany in discriptions of what happended to the moral fabric of societies in Europe and Germany. My family who served on the front lines paid a heavy price for the freedoms we take for granted. Those Christians who fought up against Hiter and Co showed us younger generations what being Catholic really meant. Even when they had to go against what the Pope of that time failed to do correctly.

How ironic is it that we go through 2 World Wars, only to end up back at square one and do the same mistake over again for a potential World War 3. There are no winners in that war, only losers. But so is humanity in its arrogance, too proud to admit errors and too stupid to evolve. I still don't give up hope though.

Joseph Walter Kasper

Discrimination is illegal and immoral.

George Wiley Clegg Jr.

Yes. If performing weddings is part of her job, in a state that allows same sex marriage, I believe she should do her job. A judge that is critical to same sex couples seems to raise the question of how she performs her other duties without bias. I am a 61 year old white male heterosexual but I don't discriminate against anyone that chooses to be in a same sex marriage.

Donald J Rothschild Jr

It’s very simple, based on the judge’s legal brief. She states “wedding vendors”. Judges are not “vendors”. They are either elected or appointed judicial officials charged with upholding the law. Therefore she cannot just pick and choose which laws she will follow. If she has a problem between her official government position and her religious beliefs then she should simple resign.

Suzanne Barnes

A janitor doesn't get to choose what they mop up, a 5-star-chef doesn't get to choose which customers he will or will not cook for in someone else's restaurant, a nurse doesn't get to choose her patients and a judge doesn't get to choose who he will or will not try for a crime-- or legally marry. If they can't do what they signed up to do, then the door to unemployment is equally open for all of them; if they want a job where they can choose the clients, then I understand that sex workers can do that when they work their way up to be really high-demand. shrugs Best of luck to them; I suspect they'll find it's a much more difficult career field than they think.

In the meantime? Boot them to the curb if they can't do what they signed up for-- they knew the rules when they took their jobs.

Douglas Robert Spindler

More negative press against Christians. Why is it Christians alway like to be in the headlines over child molestation, rapping/sexual abuse of women and hatred of their fellow man? No other religious group get so much press as Christians.

Val Jester

Tough turd cookies. Go find another judge who will and stop looking for trouble.

ServantOfJudgement

Oh am I gonna get it for this. Since it's not possible for two people of the same sex to marry, this judge would merely be linking the two together legally. Just fill the forms out and go grab lunch, no big deal.

Dr. Zerpersande, NSC

And THIS is why this site exists. The feeling is reciprocal at times.

Canadian Yankee

This one should be simple. He applied for and ran for the job. If it is a requirement to marry any lawful cuuple that comes before him he has no choice if he wished to keep the job.

Brien

I hate to say this, but it is the mythical beliefs that will rip this country apart. Zealots simply will not allow any other frame of thought than their own. On the other side, people of alternative beliefs simply won't leave the Zealots alone, just gotta keep poking the bee's nest. We are headed for a real civil war. It may not be a traditional war, more like states coming together and separating from the Union. But it will happen. We did well huh? Kind of like a scorched earth senario. No way to live in peace so lets trash it all. Do I think the judge should step down? Yes I do. Does that make me part of the problem? Yes, yes it does. There simply is no fix to this. The rift will get wider. It is already wider. Please grab your village and keep them close. I just see bad times ahead. Peace ✌️

David Messenger

Marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman under God. Two men or two women may have the same legal rights as a man and woman who are married, but it is still an abomination by God. It makes no sense to me whatsoever as to why anyone so opposed to Christianity in the first place would want to be married.

Michael Holland

Marriage is a promise to two people that love each other! If that minister doesnt want to marry you for whatever reason move on and find someone that will, there are plenty of us!

James Riggle-Johnson

I’m impressed… I thought this would take longer, but here we are. Yes, I agree with everyone that she, as a public servernt, must perform her duties without prejudice, but SCOTUS has been waiting for the right case to come along. One that will challenge the 2015 rulling on Obergefell v. Hodges, or the legalization of same sex marriage. I don’t know if this is that case, but with their recent ruling, eventually one will come along that they will hear and rule on. It’s all just a matter of time.

Daniel Gray

This judge needs to do her job or quit. There is a major difference between running your own business and dealing with the Customers you want to deal with according to your religion, and swearing in as a public official after you swore to treat everyone equally. If this is allowed to stand, then whats next? A police officer refusing to help a person because they are gay? A fireman refusing to put out a fire at a gay persons house? An EMT or a doctor refusing to give treatment or a hospital refusing to admit a patient because they are gay?

As I said I can see doing this if its your own private business and you are following the teachings of your religion as this is covered by the 1st Amendment. But in doing this, its just wrong. You go so far and thats it and only then if it would violate your religion AND you OWN the business in question.

Thomas Edwin Peterson

Just perform the duties as prescribed by law. As a judicial official your bond could be forfeit if you don't follow the mandate. The other choice would be resignation. As well perhaps a judicial disciplinary board could become involved.

Mrknowitall

Comment has been removed.

Merlin

Remove courthouse marriage responsibilities from Judges. We definitely have an alternative solution.

Patricia Ann Gross

The difference here, is that the SCOTUS ruling was for a private company, not a state agency, and therefore she is not just "some wedding vendor." This could start a slippery slope. If a judge is an orthodox Rabbi, should that judge be able to not perform a wedding unless both parties are Jewish (and Orthodox)? Same would hold for clergy of any faith, especially those that require both parties to hold the same religious views. Her job is to perform weddings, and as a public servant, she cannot pick and choose which "public" she serves any more than a policeperson or fireperson can.

Timothy Allen Foss

According to a Judge yes, According to God no!!! Think on that a minute.

Amber Fry

Yes, she is. It's law not to discriminate and if she cannot do that then she should step down and do something more religious specific like become a pastor somewhere. This isn't brain surgery.

Sam Prater

No she’s not out of order. The gender confused animals are out of order. God didn’t make any mistakes.

Windsor Durant Thompson III

She should be counseled on the conditions and rewuirements of the position she holds. She should be given the opportunity to change her stance on performing all of her assigned duties. If she cannot, she should be separated. Her personal religious affiliation 1)has no place on the bench when it obstructs a party's right to service 2) should not inhibit her from conducting the duties of her position. I'm a nurse. Sometimes people invest or reject medical treatment plans that I personally do or do not support. As their RN I am the advocate of their wishes and an instrument of the wellness path they chose. Same situation.

Windsor Durant Thompson III

She should be counseled on the conditions and requirements of the position she holds. She should be given the opportunity to change her stance on not performing all of her assigned duties. If she cannot, she should be separated. Her personal religious affiliation 1)has no place on the bench when it obstructs a party's right to service 2) should not inhibit her from conducting the duties of her position. I'm a nurse. Sometimes people invest or reject medical treatment plans that I personally do or do not support. As their RN I am the advocate of their wishes and an instrument of the wellness path they chose. Same situation.

Pamela Parker-Visconage

As Christians (and I realize in this forum some are not) we are to love, encourage and embrace all created in the image of a holy God (Imago Dei). We are also called to bring sinners to repentance. We are not however called to affirm, embrace or approve of their biblically identified indwelling sin - whether homosexuality is nature, nurture or biology, the Bible identifies homosexuality as sin. As we all must mortify the flesh for our own indwelling sin - those who battle same sex attraction are no different. No Christian should affirm sin and therefore deny an individual their repentance and salvation. She is in her rights to refuse and biblically correct. It gets sticky as a government employee and her required duties as a public servant.

Mrknowitall

On the other hand to be fair if your going to refuse to do Homosexual marriage ceremonies you should also refrain to do Heterosexual ones as well, Impartiality is crucial for a judge and on that note it should be the law of the land that no judge recognize or conform to one party political belief or another, if you do than how do you be impartial ?

Karen Robinson-West

I have read most all of the comments here. It seems like everyone has there opinion about this Judge. Yes I agree with David about what the Bible says about marriage. Texas is one of the states that considers itself to be the Bible belt. Probably back in the day when this Judge took office same sex marriage was not a thing. Now that it is everyone gets to throw a fit and judge others whom are against it and refuse to become a part of the norm. With the Judge being a Christian she does have a right to refuse to do something that goes against her religious beliefs. That's just like everyone is entitled to refuse to do anything that they don't agree with or it goes against their moral compass. It's just like racism. Parents teach their kids to hate and even though they grow up and know that it's wrong they still hate someone because of their skin color. It's also like Parents who go into a store and their child is hungry, they go grab a bag of grapes, a bunch of bananas, or even food from the deli. They give it to their child before paying for the items first. Now you have shown your child or children that it's okay to steal or take what you want without doing the right thing. This gas been the issue with homosexuality. The funny thing is that I have friends that are gay and they are no so offended when they are refused certain things, they just find someone that is willing to provide the service. Someone said that the Judge just wants media attention but I beg to differ. She just wants to have the same 1st Ammendment rights as everyone else.

Michael Wilkinson

NO SAME SEX IS WRONG, THEY NEED TO READ SODOM AND GOMORAH

Keith David Harry

DO YOUR JOB!! Or BE TERMINATED!

Simple

Tom Herman

Either uphold your oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution or resign. There is no middle ground. Leave your personal beliefs at home when you go to a job you're being paid to perform under the standards you are hired or in this case elected or appointed for. If you don't like their standards then don't take the job. This judge should be impeached.

Rev. Jim Sutton

The judge's argument using the recent Supreme Court rulings is a non sequitur. The web designer is a PRIVATE BUSINESS (to me, the "evangelical" part is inconsequential --- it's a private business with the right to refuse service to anyone). The judge is a PUBLIC SERVANT. The two are not the same or equal. As a Public Servant, her job is to, obviously, "serve the public." And if her job description duties include marrying people, then she needs to do her job. The only way I can see her not losing the case is by forfeiting the performing of ANY marriages. It's either all or nothing. (Aren't there other judges who could perform the marriages? In some places, the Clerk of the Court has the power to marry. It just seems that if there are so many options as to who performs the ceremony, then this is, kind of, an ado over nothing and borders on an exercise in futility.)

Keith David Harry

I’m going to assume that there was an oath of office administered at the time the Judge elected/appointed(?). I may be in err, but I don’t believe that anywhere in the oath that once installed; “ you may ignore the oath and do what you wish”. Do the job you were installed to do. Should that job conflict with your personal beliefs, go out into the real world and get a job that more coincides with your agenda.

Gregory Jerry McCoy

I think the word of God says render to ceasar what's ceasar.

Sharon Wynette Taylor

Why do we not want to be forced beyond our beliefs, but refuse to let others live in their beliefs. I would marry same sex couples, but she should not be forced. If I were her I would step into another position! Just because you have a JOB does not mean you have to do things you believe are immoral.

Same sex marriage likely wasn’t even a topic when she got in office. Leave her alone!

Morris Meadow

TSK,TSK!

Ms Judge bought the whole package when she agreed to be a judge! Employees don't get to cherry pick the tasks that they are willing to do.

If same sex marriage is legal where she presides, she is required to perform the act. This is not a private citizen's business she administers.

Joseph Walter Kasper

The purpose of the black robe is to cover/remove the personal individuality of judges.

Martorano Ministry

First and foremost she is a judge. Part of her job description is to protect civilians to the extent of the law. If she has a problem with LGBTQ community then she should be removed from all cases that pertains to that community. She should not be made to go against her beliefs but she should also not have a day in any case or matter that pertains to LGBTQ community. It's a lot like jury selection. The courthouse has judges that have no problem performing said ceremonies, let that judge do it.

Paul Andrew Breda

By answering the question as posed, are we in danger of accepting as fact the premise that homosexuality, same sex marriage, etc. is, in fact counter to Christian principles or values? I am a Christian, and I reject that premise.

By my faith, everything in the Christian Bible points to the ministry of Jesus. And he ate and associated with everyone in his society - prostitutes, lepers and tax collectors being most frequently mentioned. What, there were no homosexuals in those times? And when did he give me the authority to pass judgment on anyone, other than maybe those who neglect widows, orphans, the poor and the oppressed? No, Christ(ianity) does not reject homosexuality outright.

Going back further and considering the Ten Commandments - no to adultery, bearing false witness, covetousness, taking the Lord's name in vain. But no mention of homosexuality - it apparently doesn't make the list of "thou shalt nots"!

So before debating the legalities of the judge's position (on which we seem to have agreement), let's be sure to push back on her notion of what a Christian is, also.

Alice Iline Wieland

Y'all remember a judge is not a minister of religious law therefore should not be marrying anybody anyways. Do we have judges baptizing people too? She was only following her belief. REMEMBER they took church out of State HANDS. THE separation of church. Neither one should be influencing each other or padding each other's pocketbook with greed. We are all someone's creation & child. We are all flesh and blood human given the Breath of Life and free will to choose our path through life. Not to be forced by a Corporation. Government state & corporation has no right meddling in church or minister of religious law. This is the United Life Church Which means all kinds of denominations of belief. Somebody else could have done it or they could have went somewhere else if they didn't like the service. A judge is a banker. Jesus tore up the church for lining the tax collectors pocket with money. If you agree with this judge you are judging your own peers and we are not here to be judges of people. We are here to administer religious understanding and belief to help each other and support each other. Not to stab each other in the back. We're all supposed to embrace each other's religion beliefs and understanding. May your lord God or creator whom you have a religious belief in forgive you for agreeing with the corporation that a person is guilty of upholding their faith & religious beliefs in their GOD. The courts are not feeling police. They don't care about feelings nor does the flaming tongue of truth. IT sounds like some of you are not upholding the faith and understanding of other people's religion. This is the United Life Church. You know not what you do. You are playing judge jury and executioner. Judging your own peers. These people that condemn this person should be ashamed of their own selves for not upholding each other's religion. And maybe these people were offensive & rude to the judge in their behavior and how they talked. Either way a judge has no right to marry people because they are part of a corporation not a church or ministry.

Alice Iline Wieland

You failed to notice that Jesus was talking about taxes nothing else. Religion was the first law of the land before Caesar ever existed Moses was before Jesus The ten commandments existed before Caesar 1 Corinthians 6:9 ESV / 2,141 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,

Leviticus 18:22 ESV / 2,030 helpful votes You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 20:13 ESV / 1,613 helpful votes 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.

Alice Iline Wieland

You failed to notice that Jesus was talking about taxes nothing else. Religion was the first law of the land before Caesar ever existed Moses was before Jesus The ten commandments existed before Caesar 1 Corinthians 6:9 ESV / 2,141 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,

Leviticus 18:22 ESV / 2,030 helpful votes You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 20:13 ESV / 1,613 helpful votes 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.

Dr. Darryl G Dykes

No one should be required or forced to perform any marriage for any reason. Should a Catholic priest be required to perform a Wicken union or a non-binary union or LBG alphabet wedding yeah that won't ever happen. As a non government employee ordained Minister I have the right to refuse to perform any marriage.i do not have to give any reason.