Gay Dallas Judge Won't Perform Straight Marriages

[bodecea]

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.

Are you talking about cigarettes again?

 

[bodecea]

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.

Another one who CAN'T READ.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

Um, they aren't taxpayer-funded public servants.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Gay Dallas Judge Won't Perform Straight Marriages | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth

“I use it as my opportunity to give them a lesson about marriage inequality in this state because I feel like I have to tell them why I’m turning them away,” Parker said. “So I usually will offer them something along the lines of, ‘I’m sorry. I don’t perform marriage ceremonies because we are in a state that does not have marriage equality, and until it does, I am not going to partially apply the law to one group of people that doesn’t apply to another group of people.’ And it’s kind of oxymoronic for me to perform ceremonies that can’t be performed for me, so I’m not going to do it."

Update: Judge Parker released the following statement to the media on Thursday afternoon.

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.

Prediction: This will have all the societal impact of another Jennifer Aniston movie.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ahh, but the judge (SHE) is not required to perform these duties and therefore is NOT negligent.

Says who? Her? And why should we take her word for it?

 

[bodecea]

if she isn't obligated to perform any than this is a complete non-story.

Still doesnt change the fact that her entire premise is wrong and that she is completely entitled to marry the man of her choice as long as they comply with the conditions i mentioned earlier.

How does marrying someone you are not at all physically attracted to working out?

 

[bodecea]

Yes they can. Who says they can't?

See my signature.

Two straight men cannot marry and claim benefits either.
Ergo gays have the same rights as men.
Fail on your signature line.

Thus you just proved it is gender discrimination.

 

[Si modo]

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.

Um, they aren't taxpayer-funded public servants.

And, it is not a duty of the judge in the OP. So, this also is not taxpayer funded.

 

[bodecea]

Only in your case, miskeit.

i've been married 29 years and my youngest child turned 18 yesterday

keep swinging rebbe nebbish

The Judge made this a PUBLIC issue. CAMPAIGNING from the bench should be discouraged.

Boo Hoo

 

[Cecilie1200]

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?

If it's so "stupid", how come all you had in response was insults, rather than refuting or arguing what he said?

YOU compared ministers to judges. So YOU need to respond to the self-evident fact - which you nevertheless missed in your initial comparison - that ministers are private citizens, employed by private institutions, and judges are public servants, paid by the taxpayers to serve the general population. And performing weddings IS one of the services they're paid to perform. This is why they are given the legal power to do so.

 

[bodecea]

I agree. If she wants to engage in homosexual behavior, she can. I just think it absurd that we should be forced to change the definition of marriage because she doesn't want to comply with it.

I think it's absurd that you let the government define marriage.

I didn't have to. It's had the same definition for thousands of years.

Legal civil marriage has been around for thousands of years? Really?

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

See my signature.

Two straight men cannot marry and claim benefits either.
Ergo gays have the same rights as men.
Fail on your signature line.

Thus you just proved it is gender discrimination.

it is not. It's not discrimination at all. It's a simple matter of the government should not be defining marriage.

Yall would have a lot better chance of winning if you'd stick to the topic.

Oh, and I am 100% for the government butting out of marriage altogether

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Gay Dallas Judge Won't Perform Straight Marriages | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth

“I use it as my opportunity to give them a lesson about marriage inequality in this state because I feel like I have to tell them why I’m turning them away,” Parker said. “So I usually will offer them something along the lines of, ‘I’m sorry. I don’t perform marriage ceremonies because we are in a state that does not have marriage equality, and until it does, I am not going to partially apply the law to one group of people that doesn’t apply to another group of people.’ And it’s kind of oxymoronic for me to perform ceremonies that can’t be performed for me, so I’m not going to do it."

Update: Judge Parker released the following statement to the media on Thursday afternoon.

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.

Good for her, I love it when people exercise their rights.

 

[bodecea]

I didn't have to. It's had the same definition for thousands of years.

Same RELIGIOUS definition. I will of course remind you that the government isn't supposed to favor any one religion.

I hate to break this to you but it's had a legal definition for thousands of years too. otherwise iet would be impossible to do any sort of marital law.

Bullshit

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He's paid to perform that service.

He should be reprimanded for not doing his job.

blithering on about the fine line of rights and privileges is horseshit, it's part of his job.

She actually is not required to do it, and even if she was, I would support her not doing it if that is her choice.

 

[Cecilie1200]

if she isn't obligated to perform any than this is a complete non-story.

Still doesnt change the fact that her entire premise is wrong and that she is completely entitled to marry the man of her choice as long as they comply with the conditions i mentioned earlier.

I suspect that we're going to see a number of responses to this story in the news in the next day or so, disputing her . . . um, interesting take on her job.

 

[Peach]

i've been married 29 years and my youngest child turned 18 yesterday

keep swinging rebbe nebbish

The Judge made this a PUBLIC issue. CAMPAIGNING from the bench should be discouraged.

Boo Hoo

AND her announcement of a POLITICAL statement is also inappropriate.

 

[Cecilie1200]

my work here is done

Calling everyone stupid while refusing to respond to any points and then running for the door like a scared bitch is your job? I thought it was just your hobby.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

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?

If it's so "stupid", how come all you had in response was insults, rather than refuting or arguing what he said?

YOU compared ministers to judges. So YOU need to respond to the self-evident fact - which you nevertheless missed in your initial comparison - that ministers are private citizens, employed by private institutions, and judges are public servants, paid by the taxpayers to serve the general population. And performing weddings IS one of the services they're paid to perform. This is why they are given the legal power to do so.

You are of course WRONG.

Judges are given the authority to preside over a wedding, they are NOT required to do so. In fact where I live a judge would be fired if he performed a wedding during "working hours" and in fact it has happened.

They perform weddings on their own time. Judges aren't working 24/7 , you know that right?

By the way ministers, chaplains, priests, etc are empowered to perform weddings as well, So are ship captains.

How would you like it if you were FORCED to stock shelves for a fast food restaurant you didn't like after a hard day of flipping burgers at your job?

 

[Si modo]

Ahh, but the judge (SHE) is not required to perform these duties and therefore is NOT negligent.

Says who? Her? And why should we take her word for it?

She's a judge in the civil district court.

The only justices who have a DUTY to perform marriages are Justices of the Peace, in Texas. I know this for a fact because when I got married my first time, I was living in Dallas County. I called up the courthouse to schedule a civil marriage, and they said I would be better off going to a JP because the judges are too busy. When I was confused by his putting off our civil marriage, he said they don't have to do that.

So, my husband (now ex) and I tried to get a local JP to do it. They were pretty busy, too, but their schedules were not horrendous. We ended up getting one in Collin County (an adjacent county) to do it on our preferred date.

But, that's just a poster on the net posting it. I'm sure if you looked into it, you could confirm what the judge in the OP said.