Oregon Judge Refuses to Perform Same-Sex Marriages

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

Well business is business, so until businesses go out of business for their decisions, there is no point in bitching and moaning.

Yeah. Those damned blacks should have shut the hell up and let things be. Their bitching and moaning got them nowhere.
Wimmen too.

I could respond to this with logic and facts but I really don't feel like being race or gender baited today ;-) The LGBTQ crowd got what they wanted, time to stop the crap and play nicely. And if this is all about equality then EVERY race, gender or sexual orientation should have no problem having their own groups and parades. Otherwise it's all BS.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: Phage

Woops second mistake, I guess I still didn't read the entire thread, my bad again.

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

The LGBTQ crowd got what they wanted, time to stop the crap and play nicely.

They got part of what they wanted. Nevermind that workplace and housing stuff, right?

And if this is all about equality then EVERY race, gender or sexual orientation should have no problem having their own groups and parades.

Yes. What's your point?

a reply to: Phage

Regardless of what her reasoning was, it was still based off of her personal beliefs.

She refused to do her job just like Davis and others. We can argue semantics about keeping religion out of government, but that doesn't change the fact that she used her position as her own personal soapbox to preach her own beliefs.

a reply to: Chickensalad

Regardless of what her reasoning was, it was still based off of her personal beliefs.

Actually, it does make a difference. Religion does not belong in the court system. Interpretation of law, does.

She refused to do her job just like Davis and others.

Can you provide the job description which specifies that a judge is required to perform marriage ceremonies? On the other hand, issuing licenses is what a county clerk is supposed to do.

a reply to: bobs_uruncle

As one of the LGBTQ crowd, I find your posts oozing with malice. Clearly you do not like us.

Well guess what? We're here, we're queer and we're definitely not going anywhere!

I never asked or particularly wanted to be gay at the start, but I am. I had to deal with it and get on with my life. Maybe you should too.

I'm just as sick of arguing over rights as you are. But until I'm treated the same as you I will not give up because this is MY life and I sure as hell and am not going to be forced into second class citizenship because of your heterosexual ignorance.

bobs_uruncle:

If the judge wants to exercise his beliefs, he has that right.

You are wrong! He doesn't have the right to exercise his personal belief (religious or otherwise) from the pulpit of a public office. Either he silences his personal belief in order to serve his office as a neutral advocate, or he steps down from office or is removed as unfit for office.

There is no debate about this. There are no mitigating circumstances by which he can act contrary to the legal remit of his role. If he doesn't like it, he knows where the door is.

a reply to: elysiumfire

He doesn't have the right to exercise his personal belief (religious or otherwise) from the pulpit of a public office.

Actually, it is a judge's job to exercise their opinions (personal beliefs) on what the law says.

This judge has a right to not perform marriage ceremonies, just as a minister does. But, because he is basing that decision on his religious beliefs, it calls into question his impartiality as a judge in other matters.

a reply to: Phage

Issuing at their discretion is what a county clerk is supposed to do.

There is nothing that says she HAS to issue a license.

But, by your logic; the Oregon judge that this thread is based on, has done nothing wrong either.

a reply to: Chickensalad

Issuing at their discretion is what a county clerk is supposed to do.

False.

There is nothing that says she HAS to issue a license.

Yes, she does. As long as the applicants meet the legal requirements. You think a clerk decides who can and can't be married? "I don't like you. You have a funny haircut. You ain't gettin' married round here!"

But, by your logic; the Oregon judge that this thread is based on, has done nothing wrong either.

Funny you should say that:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is my understanding of the position

Pursuant to the Kentucky Revised Statutes, County Clerks are responsible for issuing motor vehicle, marriage and vending licenses, registering voters and performing other election-related duties, storing various legal and county records, and preparing county tax bills. Under McCloud, a category-one position is a position specifically named in federal, state, county or municipal law to which discretionary authority with respect to enforcement of that law is granted -

If I am misunderstanding that then by all means point it out.

Kentucky Case Law Source

a reply to: Chickensalad

If I am misunderstanding that then by all means point it out.

Maybe you should have read on. Or read what that case was about in the first place.

It was an unlawful termination suit.

Shortly thereafter, Eldridge sent a letter to all County Clerk's office employees directing them to submit applications for rehire. In December 2006, Eldridge sent letters to Summe and seven deputy clerks who supported her campaign, notifying them that he was discontinuing their employment beginning January 1, 2007.

caselaw.findlaw.com...

Discretion, yes in some things. Not in deciding who gets a license.

County Clerks are charged with enforcing the law regarding the issuance of licenses,

Enforcing the law. Not interpreting it. Not using "discretion" in it's application. The law says that applicants who meet the legal requirements are to get a license.

County Clerks presumably have discretionary authority regarding how to facilitate these numerous and varied duties. We, thus, conclude that the position of County Clerk is a McCloud category-one position.

caselaw.findlaw.com...

Those duties include issuing licenses. You know what a duty is? It's something you are supposed to do. She has discretion in operations. Not discretion in issuing licenses to applicants who meet the legal requirements. She based her refusal not on law, not on operational reasons but on her personal beliefs. No can do.

a reply to: Willtell

This is an easy solution.

Get another judge.

Who should have to "get another judge", the couple seeking to get married or the courthouse personnel office that schedules the "justice of Peace" duty? I mean, if you're in a big city, where there are several judges on duty to act as Justice of the Peace, but if there's only one, who's responsibility is it to find another judge, one that WILL follow the law?

a reply to: windword

Judges are not required to perform marriage ceremonies.

Of course, if they do it for one group and not another, there would be a problem. But that is not the situation here.

a reply to: Phage

Judges are not required to perform marriage ceremonies.

No they're not, unless they're the Justice of the Peace. If you have a JoP that refuses to marry LGBT couples, then who's responsibility should it be to find another JoP that will?

a reply to: windword
I don't know. I guess it would be sort of similar to the situation that Davies created and would probably be resolved by the Court, perhaps in a similar manner. I don't know how a JOP gets the position or can be removed from it.

Is the judge we are talking about a Justice of the Peace? In any case, I guess the people concerned have been "getting another judge" since last fall.

a reply to: Phage

I just assumed the judge in question served as a Justice of the Peace, at least sometimes. My (ex)husband and I got married when we went to the courthouse, applied for and got our marriage license/certificate, and got married by the Justice of the Peace on duty at the time, in his chambers. It was a large courthouse with numerous of judges available. I'm just guessing that it's a assigned and scheduled thing, done by some kind of personnel manager.

a reply to: windword

I just assumed the judge in question served as a Justice of the Peace, at least sometimes.

Not a good assumption I think.
Judges can perform marriage ceremonies but it is not a "duty." Like ministers.

a reply to: Phage

I had read it, and am aware of what the case was based on.

Yet, I see no where in there that "duties" were described in the same manner that you described.

It explicitly explains rather, that county clerk has discretionary authority on said duties.

I have yet to see anything that says a county clerk HAS to issue a license, yet I HAVE found a case that allows some wiggle room for the fact that they may run things how they see fit.

a reply to: Chickensalad

Yet, I see no where in there where that "duties" were described in the same manner that you described.

Really? Let me quote it one more time then:

County Clerks are charged with enforcing the law regarding the issuance of licenses

What law allows a clerk to refuse to grant a license to someone who meets the legal qualifications? Can you cite it?

It explicitly explains rather, that county clerk has discretionary authority on said duties.

Yes. And it explicitly states the extent of that discretion:

County Clerks presumably have discretionary authority regarding how to facilitate these numerous and varied duties.

Facilitate:
make (an action or process) easy or easier.

The discretion lies in how those duties are facilitated. Not in if they are carried out. Tell me, how did she make it easier to obtain a marriage license?

Anyone who qualifies is to be granted a license. Anything else is discriminatory. Not allowed. No sir. No way. She exceeded her authority and defied a court order to cease doing so. So she is in jail.