Kiki Cannoli
Have you met my shadow?
Ahh, but the judge (SHE) is not required to perform these duties and therefore is NOT negligent.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
SHe should not have to perform these services. Neither should any minister have to provide said services to gays if it is not to their liking.
no minister, priest or rabbi does if it isn't to their liking.
He could always resign if his job interferes with his beliefs. Rather than pontificating from the bench.Sounds like forcing to him to perform these duties compromises his values, good for him for staying true to his personal belief system.
There is no "marriage inequality" here. Everyone has an equal right to marry.
He can easily go through the ceramony for himself. He can marry any woman of his choice that is:
1) Unmarried
2) Above the age of consent
3) Not closely related to him.
Absolutely nothing but his own choices is stopping him.
and he's a she.
can any of you people read?
SHe should not have to perform these services. Neither should any minister have to provide said services to gays if it is not to their liking.
no minister, priest or rabbi does if it isn't to their liking.
None of them work for the state and get a taxpayer-funded check, bubbe.
Hypocrisy rears it's ugly head once again. So, here's a judge who will not discharge his duties because they are at odds with his personal convictions. But, how dare a pharmacist refuse to issue drugs which result in consequences counter his personal belief.
Same solution, though. If the judge won't marry you, there are others who can, and will. If the pharmacist won't dispense the drug you seek, find another pharmacy. How easy is that?
Alas, according to the rules of libtard hypocrisy, the pharmacist WILL provide the demanded remedies, regardless of personal belief while the judge is celebrated as some kind of hero.
He could always resign if his job interferes with his beliefs. Rather than pontificating from the bench.
There is no "marriage inequality" here. Everyone has an equal right to marry.
marriage is not a right.
I think Loving v VA said it was. At least that's what the fags trot out all the time. If it is, it must be one of the rights "reserved to the states." If MA wants to vote on and pass fag "marriage" fine. But the people of CA have rejected it in at least 2 referenda.
He could always resign if his job interferes with his beliefs. Rather than pontificating from the bench.Sounds like forcing to him to perform these duties compromises his values, good for him for staying true to his personal belief system.
There is no "marriage inequality" here. Everyone has an equal right to marry.
Can they all collect the cash and prizes doled out by state and federal governments that come with their marriage?
No.
Ergo, inequality.
Damn - she looks as manly as Bo-DIKE-a. They should just just strap one on and proclaim themselves men once and for all. Put on a wife-beater, pop open a beer and mow the lawn. Boycott shaving too(if that hasn't been done yet).
He could always resign if his job interferes with his beliefs. Rather than pontificating from the bench.
There is no "marriage inequality" here. Everyone has an equal right to marry.
marriage is not a right.
of course it isn't
no minister, priest or rabbi does if it isn't to their liking.
None of them work for the state and get a taxpayer-funded check, bubbe.
thanks, rabbi obvious.
any other stupid comments you'd care to trot out?
He could always resign if his job interferes with his beliefs. Rather than pontificating from the bench.
There is no "marriage inequality" here. Everyone has an equal right to marry.
Can they all collect the cash and prizes doled out by state and federal governments that come with their marriage?
No.
Ergo, inequality.
Yes they can. Who says they can't?
Funny how the left applauds him for his beliefs but condemns the catholic church on theirs and the birth control issue
Hypocrisy rears it's ugly head once again. So, here's a judge who will not discharge his duties because they are at odds with his personal convictions. But, how dare a pharmacist refuse to issue drugs which result in consequences counter his personal belief.
Same solution, though. If the judge won't marry you, there are others who can, and will. If the pharmacist won't dispense the drug you seek, find another pharmacy. How easy is that?
Alas, according to the rules of libtard hypocrisy, the pharmacist WILL provide the demanded remedies, regardless of personal belief while the judge is celebrated as some kind of hero.
stay stupid
and he's a she
That's cool. It's not one of her duties, so obviously she does it voluntarily, as such, she can volunteer when she wants and when she doesn't want.