She has been arguing that, as a Christian, she should not have to follow state rules about judicial impartiality.
A judge who cannot separate their religious bias of what is right and wrong from their role as a judge (the impartial arbiter of law as set forth through the political process), isn’t just saying the separation of church and state shouldn’t apply to marriage. They’re also saying they cannot legitimately sit as a judge because they cannot keep personal bias separate from their role as a fair and neutral arbiter. She’s telling on herself.
A judge. Someone who is meant to uphold law and the constitution, has a problem separating her religion from the state.
The sad thing is, this is not a new problem. Worse: she might get her way.
We all knew this was next after Roe v. Wade. It will bring the evangelicals out to vote.
Well, the radical right wing, the “centrists”, and not a few so-called leftists were all declaring that anyone talking about Roe was just being hysterical, NBD, it will just “revert to the states” and it won’t happen anyway, etc.
And then 2022 rolled around. And during that ruling, it became very very clear that Trollito is an extremely angry activist judge who wants to roll back all of modernity.
How do you even become a State judge without knowing the US Constitution?
The same way you become president without knowing anything about civics
On the state level, a lot of judges are elected rather than appointed. So, sometimes a weesle gets far without having gone to law school. Texas is one of those states.
Up until a decade ago the Constitution officially said nothing about gay marriage. Roe was precedent for half a century.
“As a xtian…the rules don’t apply to ME! Because I’m so very fucking special!”
I’m so sick of this line of “reasoning” from these people.
Honestly, laws like the bill of rights are needed to protect us from Christians.
Well, the founders definitely knew that. The Inquisition was still on in their lifetimes and many of them knew of the atrocities that xtians carried out on each other in the colonies.
Of course, lots of xtians will claim that there is no freedom FROM religion (just OF religion, LOL) and that the founders meant for this to be a xtian nation. Which is a nonsensical statement. What kind of “freedom” is it to only pick among various (Protestant) sects of xtianity? And why didn’t the founders make any mention of their precious Jesus Christ anywhere in the Constitution?
The first amendment requires freedom FROM religion, too. But warped mush brains like this so-called judge think the nation should not be secular, but instead should cater to special snowflakes like her, just because of her chosen lifestyle.
TIL the Spanish Inquisition only ended in 1834. Jfc.
Yeah, when today’s xtians act like the founders left their little book club out of the Constitution as some kind of “oversight” (if they even know or admit that fact at all) and that they all just assumed everyone was going to be some (Protestant) xtian as some kind of requirement to be a full citizen, they are skipping over quite a bit of context.
Of course the Inquisition was still a thing and certainly the horrible things xtians do to not only “unbelievers”, but to “heretics” (meaning xtians they disagree with over some bit of doctrine), was something the founders would have been keenly aware of.
You should be aware of what the inquisition actually was.
Ah yes Texas true believers in state’s rights
Bit choosy isn’t she. What about the subordinate to men part of Christianity? If she is a true believer, she needs to be a good little girl, quit her job and go home.
As a Christian, she chose the wrong job. She does not live in a theocracy.
Maybe not officially. Yet. But there’s definitely some handwriting beginning to appear on the wall.
“Conservatives” are mentally ill, mind your own fucking business you Isis wannabes
What a B. Well just boycott working at straight weddings and then nobody will have one. Well we will cause we’ll host our own and they will be marvelous while theirs will look right out of a dollar tree and ugly bridal dresses
For some reason my eyes jumped from
What a B. Well
straight to
Well we will cause we’ll
and I thought I was losing it for a moment, lol
Better comma usage would be helpful, but I agree with the sentiment (I think?). The spirit of the message seems to be on point, so updoot to op.
Abolish the abrahamic religions
Unfortunately, republicans have been telling on themselves for decades. To great success.
A partical judge shouldn’t be a judge. Clearing stating she has biases and won’t be fair.
The Bible says the punishment for rape should be having to marry your victim. This punishes the victim too, but the Bible shows no concern for that.
Is her Judges robe made of more than one fabric? 🤫
Cotton/poly blend?
That’s a stoning
Well if you are a nomadic tribe in bronze age Mesopotamia who view women as possessions, then that makes perfect sense.
The Bible makes a ton of sense when you actually study it in an academic setting. It’s when you start getting life advice out of it when things start going down hill really fast.
Yeah, I get the impression that the Bible barely views women as moral agents at all. The rules are written by men, for men. And when a man rapes a woman, she isn’t viewed as the victim, her father is viewed as the victim because he is her owner
You hit the nail on the head there
Idc anymore, do it or don’t do it, they obviously didn’t care enough to get out and vote
