US Judge Selects Work based on Clients Race

**Fragony** · 11-07-2009, 11:26

Should have been fired on the spot, who the hell does he think he is.

**Meneldil** · 11-07-2009, 11:43

Wow, between that and the couple getting 6 months for killing their children, I'm left wondering. Is there any state of law in America, or is any public servant allowed to do whatever comes to his mind according to his own petty beliefs?

**Strike For The South** · 11-07-2009, 17:43

Originally Posted by Meneldil

Wow, between that and the couple getting 6 months for killing their children, I'm left wondering. Is there any state of law in America, or is any public servant allowed to do whatever comes to his mind according to his own petty beliefs?

THOUGHT POLICE!

Who needs laws? We have the constitution! That's all we need....well my interpatation of it, your interpatation is WRONG

**Kralizec** · 11-07-2009, 17:49

If it's against the man's conscience to marry interracial couples, he shouldn't have picked a job that makes it his obligation to do so.

It would be slightly different if gay marriage were to be legalised and preople who had been doing this job for years were uncomfortable with it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...on/7499248.stm
Anybody know if that decision was appealed against?

**ICantSpellDawg** · 11-07-2009, 18:16

Originally Posted by Kralizec

If it's against the man's conscience to marry interracial couples, he shouldn't have picked a job that makes it his obligation to do so.

It would be slightly different if gay marriage were to be legalised and preople who had been doing this job for years were uncomfortable with it.

Why would that be different? Because you could appeal to Religious belief as opposed to just personal belief? Or because they were there first?

**HoreTore** · 11-07-2009, 19:10

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Why would that be different? Because you could appeal to Religious belief as opposed to just personal belief? Or because they were there first?

I believe Kralizec's point was that marrying gay people wasn't a part of the job description when the guy took the job, while marrying interracial couples was. He knew he would be required to marry them when he took the job, so no excuses, he should've found a different job in the first place.

However, sacking someone from a job they've had a long time because you changed the job is, well, not that fun. So, adjustments will be made.

EDIT: but still, I would've fired him if he refused to marry gays when that was the law. Public officials can be as political as they like, but when they're on the job, they will have to do the job the state requires them to do, or take their hats and leave. None of this "I'll let that guy handle this one for me"-nonsense. Either do your job or get out.

**Major Robert Dump** · 11-08-2009, 06:57

Just admit it, TuffStuff, you don't like chocolate in your milk....or cream in your coffee....or dark meat mixed with white meat from KFC...its okay, this is the giuld, we will still love u

**ICantSpellDawg** · 11-08-2009, 15:55

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

Just admit it, TuffStuff, you don't like chocolate in your milk....or cream in your coffee....or dark meat mixed with white meat from KFC...its okay, this is the giuld, we will still love u

Actually, I've dated blacks and asians, my sister is black and my brother is a puerto rican. I have no problem with it at all. I just believe in the conscience clause for everyone while accepting the rule of law. Don't deny them if they are entitled, but if you strongly disagree, find someone else to write the license.

**Evil_Maniac From Mars** · 11-08-2009, 07:03

In the capacity of a judge as a servant of the government, he is required to follow the laws of that government. He does not have the right to refuse to marry those who the government says can be legally married, unless there is a valid reason (which the government agrees with) that the individuals cannot be married. He is there to carry out the law, not to make his own. Resignation is the acceptable solution if he can't do his job.

**Don Corleone** · 11-08-2009, 16:18

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

In the capacity of a judge as a servant of the government, he is required to follow the laws of that government. He does not have the right to refuse to marry those who the government says can be legally married, unless there is a valid reason (which the government agrees with) that the individuals cannot be married. He is there to carry out the law, not to make his own. Resignation is the acceptable solution if he can't do his job.

QFT.

For the record, I believe that so long as religious officials engage in performing the civil portion of a marriage as well as the religious one, they also must recognize the law of the state. For this reason, should religious officials continue this action, they have nobody but themselves when GLAAD follows through on their threats and force them to perform gay mariages in St. Patrick's.