Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oregon judge refuses to perform same-sex marriages

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Oregon judge refuses to perform same-sex marriages

    Now we have a judge that is refusing....

    Marion County Circuit Judge Vance Day, a former chairman of the Oregon Republican Party, took steps Thursday to create a legal defense fund in an apparent response to his decision not to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies.

    Day took action because of what he described as "deeply-held religious beliefs," KGW reported.

    "It's an exercise of his religious freedom rights under the First Amendment," Day spokesman Patrick Korten told the news station.

    http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-no...to_perfor.html
    "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

  • #2
    Wow, isn't it terrible that there is only one Judge in Oregon.

    Oh, wait a minute...

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
      Wow, isn't it terrible that there is only one Judge in Oregon.

      Oh, wait a minute...
      Fear not Devil Dog....it gets stranger.......

      Here's another judge the refuses:

      "On Monday, July 6, I declined to marry a non-traditional couple during my duties assignment," McConnell explained in a released statement. "The declination was based upon my personal and Christian beliefs established over many years."

      Another judge was brought in to perform the "wedding" the same day.
      "The court has implemented a process whereby same-sex marriages will be accommodated," the judge wrote.

      McConnell said he would continue to perform traditional marriages.
      He said, "I am also seeking advisory opinion from the Supreme Court of Ohio at this time as to whether or not I can opt out of the rotation. Upon receipt of the advisory opinion from Supreme Court, I will abide by its decision."

      Should be happy ending for all because another judge married the couple...but no....

      Gay activists were quick to call for Judge McConnell to leave the bench. “They didn't deserve to be inconvenienced,” Nick Komives, executive director for Equality Toledo said. “We won’t tolerate it. It is his duty to perform this ceremony, and if he's not willing to perform his duties, he needs to step down.”

      https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bl...e-on-religious
      "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

      Comment


      • #4
        Here's another judge that refuses to grant a divorce:

        “The Tennessee Court of Appeals has noted that Obergefell v. Hodges … affected what is, and must be recognized as, a lawful marriage in the State of Tennessee,” Atherton began. “This leaves a mere trial level Tennessee state court judge in a bit of a quandary. With the U.S.

        Supreme Court having defined what must be recognized as a marriage, it would appear that Tennessee’ s judiciary must now await the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court as to what is not a marriage, or better stated, when a marriage is no longer a marriage.”

        http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/m...-gay-marriage/

        So now a judge is claiming that the Supreme Court has to define what is not a marriage........
        "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

        Comment


        • #5
          Once again, this is inevitable and will only get worse, especially now that judges are personally involved.

          Either we all have rights that are equal, or we don't, and if we don't, it's all going to come apart.
          Last edited by Mountain Man; 04 Sep 15, 16:33.
          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

          Comment


          • #6
            This man, Rod Dreher, who writes for the American Conservative, often writes about religious subjects. Sometimes I agree with him and sometimes I don’t. He has been talking about gay marriage for some time as an unwinnable battle for Christians, because the young people are coming to be less and less against it. He feels that Christians must choose their battles very carefully or they will injure the Christian cause irreparably in the future.
            I can’t make the point more strongly or clearly than these Southern Baptists — both conservatives — have done here. If the public comes to think of religious liberty as the constitutionally guaranteed right to ignore the Constitution whenever it suits us, the cause of religious liberty — which is guaranteed by the First Amendment — is going to suffer tremendously.
            Conservatives are supposed to understand the difference between the vice of cowardice and the virtue of prudence. If religious liberty means that even officers of the state can defy the law without consequence, then it makes every individual a potential tyrant. The Kentucky Pentecostal county clerk who refuses the gay couple a marriage permit in principle legitimizes the California Episcopalian county clerk who refuses to record marriages performed by ministers of churches that don’t marry same-sex couples.
            http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ty-christians/

            I think that this is what the founders had in mind when they advocated a separation of church and state. If you cannot keep personal religious beliefs out of government in the enforcement of the law then everything goes to pot and we won’t have a republic any more that honors everyone’s beliefs but we will have a mish-mash of conflicting beliefs that will ruin freedom of religion for everyone. Even Jesus says it, Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s.

            We are coming to a point where people are saying “It’s my way or no way.” But someone else may ask, “Is your way God’s way? My God does not feel that way.”

            Is it up to an individual to prosecute God’s law or is it up to us to ignore or forgive another’s sins and let God punish the transgressions?

            The Southern Baptists he mentions in his quote says in their article:
            The situation in Kentucky reminds all of us that America is extremely divided on issues that show no signs of weakening. This zero-sum culture war cannot continue if the social fabric of America is to have any chance of unifying around a robust pluralism. What’s next is unknown, but Christians must exercise due diligence when thinking through the complex webs of navigating religious liberty with the Romans 13 obligation to see law and order followed—even laws we consider contrary to the common good and human flourishing. If Mrs. Davis’ plight reminds us of anything, it is that Christians—like all Americans—must utilize every measure available to them in the democratic process to enact laws that are just, moral, and peaceable.
            http://erlc.com/article/need-we-jail...riage-licenses

            They actually say in another part of their article:
            When an official can no longer execute the laws in question due to an assault on conscience, and after all accommodating measures have been exhausted, he or she could work for change as a private citizen, engaging the democratic process in hopes of changing the questionable law.
            Another article that Dreher wrote this morning on the issue.

            http://www.theamericanconservative.c...-gay-marriage/

            He is thinking deeply about the issue of religious freedom, and I think when nitty comes to gritty on this issue he is saying that within the culture the battle is lost, it’s lost within the government and within public opinion. So he is talking about how to protect religious freedom within the church itself, because that is going to be the issue in the future. Religious organizations will be attacked and then that may the “hill to die on” for your religion.

            But the way I see this is that some religions have pushed their views on society, making thinking people realize that their way of thinking about God, Gods or no-Gods is being suborned. A lot of folks don’t want to accept a particular religion’s views on society and so they will claw back, and I think it is because of excessive force on the part of the religious fighters. The Catholics came to realize that they had to become a milder, more Christian organization or they were going to keep on losing members in the US as they have become so ineffectual overseas. Religious organizations must act more Christian in not forcing their beliefs on individuals or more individuals will see that as power issues and not issues of conscience.

            If we have free will, we have free will to leave a particular church, to never accept the teachings of a church. So if a religious organization acts in an un-Christian way people will turn away from it. And I think if you read the Baptist ministers article you will see that that is the fear—

            I actually think those fighting for Religious Freedom, need to be turning the other cheek so to speak to gain the respect of those of us out here who don’t want to be forced into believing a particular religious message but to be making our own choices in what to read into and out of our religion’s holy books.

            They should preach the message in their churches and not in the courtrooms. Religion was actually a more powerful force back when the evangelicals were not pursuing an anti-government message.
            Homo homini lupus

            Comment


            • #7
              Good concept, but in a nation where the rich, the influential and the politicians all routinely ignore and break the laws, Christians cannot be held to a different standard, and Muslim in America don't want to obey any of our laws to begin with.
              Last edited by Mountain Man; 04 Sep 15, 16:44. Reason: spelling due to diplopia
              Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                Here's another judge that refuses to grant a divorce:

                “The Tennessee Court of Appeals has noted that Obergefell v. Hodges … affected what is, and must be recognized as, a lawful marriage in the State of Tennessee,” Atherton began. “This leaves a mere trial level Tennessee state court judge in a bit of a quandary. With the U.S.

                Supreme Court having defined what must be recognized as a marriage, it would appear that Tennessee’ s judiciary must now await the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court as to what is not a marriage, or better stated, when a marriage is no longer a marriage.”

                http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/m...-gay-marriage/

                So now a judge is claiming that the Supreme Court has to define what is not a marriage........
                So a couple, going through a very difficult time in their live is now put on hold and basically used as a tool so a 'conservative' state Judge can throw a public hissy fit. If I held the same beliefs as him I'd be embarrassed for people to know it.
                “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                “To talk of many things:
                Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                Of cabbages—and kings—
                And why the sea is boiling hot—
                And whether pigs have wings.”
                ― Lewis Carroll

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                  So a couple, going through a very difficult time in their live is now put on hold and basically used as a tool so a 'conservative' state Judge can throw a public hissy fit.
                  No...according the all the gay activists...being gay has always been a difficult time. Victimhood is a proud thing for them. And you have no idea what a hissy fit is until you deal with a dike or a queen.

                  If I held the same beliefs as him I'd be embarrassed for people to know it.
                  And we would be embarrassed to have you since you obviously hold your beliefs legitimate above others which is okay, but some might just call you a queen having a hissy fit.
                  Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

                  Prayers.

                  BoRG

                  http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Salinator View Post
                    No...according the all the gay activists...being gay has always been a difficult time. Victimhood is a proud thing for them. And you have no idea what a hissy fit is until you deal with a dike or a queen.


                    And we would be embarrassed to have you since you obviously hold your beliefs legitimate above others which is okay, but some might just call you a queen having a hissy fit.
                    The case the Judge was hearing had nothing to do with any Gay person. So yes he is throwing a hissy hit. Only way to describe it.

                    Personal insults now? Really? What a fine line of argument.
                    “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                    “To talk of many things:
                    Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                    Of cabbages—and kings—
                    And why the sea is boiling hot—
                    And whether pigs have wings.”
                    ― Lewis Carroll

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                      The case the Judge was hearing had nothing to do with any Gay person. So yes he is throwing a hissy hit. Only way to describe it.

                      Personal insults now? Really? What a fine line of argument.
                      Why is it okay to say Judge is having hissy fit?

                      IT was not intended to be a personal insult. I said that some might think that you are having a hissy fit. Judge disagrees. You disagree with Judge. I don't see the problem.
                      Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

                      Prayers.

                      BoRG

                      http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Salinator View Post
                        Why is it okay to say Judge is having hissy fit?

                        IT was not intended to be a personal insult. I said that some might think that you are having a hissy fit. Judge disagrees. You disagree with Judge. I don't see the problem.
                        Do you think he laid down a rational decision for these two married people that at probably one of the lowest points in their lives, the break up of their marriage???? Really? No need for it EXCEPT he wants to push his PERSONAL opinion on the SCOTUS gay marriage ruly.

                        Did you read anything about the details of his ruling?
                        “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                        “To talk of many things:
                        Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                        Of cabbages—and kings—
                        And why the sea is boiling hot—
                        And whether pigs have wings.”
                        ― Lewis Carroll

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
                          Do you think he laid down a rational decision for these two married people that at probably one of the lowest points in their lives, the break up of their marriage???? Really? No need for it EXCEPT he wants to push his PERSONAL opinion on the SCOTUS gay marriage ruly.

                          Did you read anything about the details of his ruling?
                          I actually do not care what he said. I cared about what you said. You would be ashamed of him...he had a hissy fit....

                          It would be of no surprise that some might think that you are having a hissy fit.

                          Judge had a personal opinion. You have a personal opinion of Judge. How can one be hissier than the other?
                          Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

                          Prayers.

                          BoRG

                          http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Salinator View Post
                            I actually do not care what he said. I cared about what you said. You would be ashamed of him...he had a hissy fit....

                            It would be of no surprise that some might think that you are having a hissy fit.

                            Judge had a personal opinion. You have a personal opinion of Judge. How can one be hissier than the other?
                            Because my opinion on the Judge was written on a forum message board, not given out in a Court Hearing.

                            See the difference between the two?

                            Forum vs formal court hearing.... Do you think that is the proper time for and I quote you "a personal opinion?" Or maybe he should just post that 'personal' opinion on a message board after he has issued a proper order for the couple.

                            By the way he did not SAY anything, he wrote it all into his official order for the final result of the 4 day divorce hearing.
                            “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                            “To talk of many things:
                            Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                            Of cabbages—and kings—
                            And why the sea is boiling hot—
                            And whether pigs have wings.”
                            ― Lewis Carroll

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Jannie View Post
                              This man, Rod Dreher, who writes for the American Conservative, often writes about religious subjects. Sometimes I agree with him and sometimes I don’t. He has been talking about gay marriage for some time as an unwinnable battle for Christians, because the young people are coming to be less and less against it. He feels that Christians must choose their battles very carefully or they will injure the Christian cause irreparably in the future.

                              http://www.theamericanconservative.c...ty-christians/

                              I think that this is what the founders had in mind when they advocated a separation of church and state. If you cannot keep personal religious beliefs out of government in the enforcement of the law then everything goes to pot and we won’t have a republic any more that honors everyone’s beliefs but we will have a mish-mash of conflicting beliefs that will ruin freedom of religion for everyone. Even Jesus says it, Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s.

                              We are coming to a point where people are saying “It’s my way or no way.” But someone else may ask, “Is your way God’s way? My God does not feel that way.”

                              Is it up to an individual to prosecute God’s law or is it up to us to ignore or forgive another’s sins and let God punish the transgressions?

                              The Southern Baptists he mentions in his quote says in their article:

                              http://erlc.com/article/need-we-jail...riage-licenses

                              They actually say in another part of their article:

                              Another article that Dreher wrote this morning on the issue.

                              http://www.theamericanconservative.c...-gay-marriage/

                              He is thinking deeply about the issue of religious freedom, and I think when nitty comes to gritty on this issue he is saying that within the culture the battle is lost, it’s lost within the government and within public opinion. So he is talking about how to protect religious freedom within the church itself, because that is going to be the issue in the future. Religious organizations will be attacked and then that may the “hill to die on” for your religion.

                              But the way I see this is that some religions have pushed their views on society, making thinking people realize that their way of thinking about God, Gods or no-Gods is being suborned. A lot of folks don’t want to accept a particular religion’s views on society and so they will claw back, and I think it is because of excessive force on the part of the religious fighters. The Catholics came to realize that they had to become a milder, more Christian organization or they were going to keep on losing members in the US as they have become so ineffectual overseas. Religious organizations must act more Christian in not forcing their beliefs on individuals or more individuals will see that as power issues and not issues of conscience.

                              If we have free will, we have free will to leave a particular church, to never accept the teachings of a church. So if a religious organization acts in an un-Christian way people will turn away from it. And I think if you read the Baptist ministers article you will see that that is the fear—

                              I actually think those fighting for Religious Freedom, need to be turning the other cheek so to speak to gain the respect of those of us out here who don’t want to be forced into believing a particular religious message but to be making our own choices in what to read into and out of our religion’s holy books.

                              They should preach the message in their churches and not in the courtrooms. Religion was actually a more powerful force back when the evangelicals were not pursuing an anti-government message.
                              I find that the Catholic Church continues to make this world a better place. The teachings of the Church are the teachings of Jesus Christ. Pope Francis continues to be a very successful leader for people of faith around the world. Francis preaches the message of Christ, which is to treat your neighbor with respect that Jesus showed to even the people that rejected the truth, in other words treat others as you want to be treated.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X