Wyoming Supreme Court Censures Judge for Telling Media She Couldn’t Do ‘Gay Weddings’

CHEYENNE, Wy. — The Wyoming Supreme Court has rejected an effort to remove from the bench a local judge who is under fire for making comment to the media three years ago that, as a Christian, she couldn’t officiate same-sex unions. It has instead decided that public censure, or a statement of disapproval, is warranted.

While the court did find Judge Ruth Neely’s words to be a violation of the Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct, it did not believe that she had committed any acts worthy of removal.

“Judge Neely has not violated a clear procedural rule governing the performance of her legal duties. As a municipal court judge, she had no authority to perform marriages. As a part-time circuit court magistrate, she had the power to perform marriage ceremonies, but she was not required to do so. She has not violated the law in her daily life, and she has not violated a procedural rule of law,” wrote Justices James Burke, William Hill and Kate Fox.

However, they declared that going forward, Neely must either agree to perform all marital ceremonies or none at all. The circuit court judge who appointed her as a magistrate must also decide whether she will be able to continue to serve in that capacity.

“She must either commit to performing marriages regardless of the couple’s sexual orientation, or cease performing all marriage ceremonies,” the court wrote. “This does not mean, as the dissent suggests, that no judge can now turn down any request to perform a marriage. What it means is that no judge can turn down a request to perform a marriage for reasons that undermine the integrity of the judiciary by demonstrating a lack of independence and impartiality.”

As previously reported, Neely told a reporter for the Sublette Examiner in 2014 after a federal judge struck down the state’s ban on same-sex “marriage” that she personally could not take part in the officiation.

“I will not able to do them,” Neely stated. “We have at least one magistrate who will do same-sex marriages, but I will not be able to. … When law and religion conflict, choices have to be made.”

  • Connect with Christian News

She made clear that her personal inability would not stop homosexuals from finding a local judge to officiate.

In January 2015, following a complaint from Democratic Party Chairwoman Ana Cuprill, the Wyoming Commission on Judicial Conduct and Ethics launched an investigation into Neely’s remarks.

It soon issued her a notice of that disciplinary proceedings would commence. Neely was accused of violating six rules of judicial conduct, including that she “manifested a bias” by her statement and therefore possessed prejudice in regard to so-called sexual orientation.

Neely, who has served as judge for over 20 years, has never been asked to officiate a same-sex ceremony.

The Commission advised Neely during the disciplinary proceedings that if she admitted wrongdoing and resigned her position, and agreed to never again run for judicial office, it would drop the matter. She declined.

The Commission then asked Neely last February if she would issue a public apology for her statement and agree to officiate same-sex ceremonies. She replied that she could not because of her religious convictions.

Neely also wrote in a letter to the state’s judicial ethics advisory committee, “Homosexuality is a named sin in the Bible, as are drunkenness, thievery, lying, and the like. I can no more officiate at a same-sex wedding than I can buy beer for the alcoholic.”

Therefore, the Commission recommended to the Wyoming Supreme Court that Neely be removed from office.

While the court rejected the Commission’s request and instead censured Neely, two justices “vigorously” dissented from the majority opinion out of their belief that Neely’s religious rights are still not being properly protected.

“Contrary to the position asserted by the majority opinion, this case is about religious beliefs and same sex marriage. The issues considered here determine whether there is a religious test for who may serve as a judge in Wyoming,” wrote Justices Keith Kautz and Michael Davis. “They consider whether a judge may be precluded from one of the functions of office not for her actions, but for her statements about her religious views.”

“There is no clear and convincing evidence that Judge Neely violated any of the rules of the Wyoming Code of Judicial Conduct,” they further declared. “Wyoming law does not require any judge or magistrate to perform any particular marriage, and couples seeking to be married have no right to insist on a particular official as the officiant of their wedding.”

The justices, who noted that homosexuals would still have “full access to marriage” without Neely’s help, said that differences must be allowed to exist in society and those who have convictions about marriage should not be punished or kept from serving as judges.

“In our pluralistic society, the law should not be used to coerce ideological conformity. Rather, on deeply contested moral issues, the law should ‘create a society in which both sides can live their own values,'” Kautz and Davis said. “There is room enough in Wyoming for both sides to live according to their respective views of sex, marriage and religion.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • RWH

    Well, all that is coming out of this is that she is being told that she cannot discriminate against people who have the legal right to get married. She has the right to her personal preferences just as long as she ensures that justice is served to all. Therefore, the solution is a simple binary. She either just does not perform marriages for anyone at all, or she performs marriages for all people who qualify under the law. There is no middle ground.

    • Johndoe

      Agreed.

    • Better And Better

      Bingo.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    Americans will be always oppressed as long as the nation sees the depraved immorality as something equal with the truth and purity. A mere pluralistic society is a Sodom’s monopoly because humans are sinful. America must quest after the Judeo-Christian good to live rightly and protect the children. Questing after mere co-existence only corrupts everyone and lawlessness will abound. Americans need Christianity to get saved and Christian directions to be good.

    • Johndoe

      This post yet again proves that you have no understanding of America. I don’t need your religion to be a good person. All American are equal. Nobody better or more deserving than the other, regardless of their religious beliefs.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        Secular Americans are wrong in believing in and upholding all kinds of perversions. God will strike America, and all nations on earth will get a lesson on what happens to the perversion-seeking tribes one more time. Read Jude 1.

        • Johndoe

          Perversion is nothing more than your opinion.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            The Holy Bible warns against a society like today’s secular America and its servant nations.

          • RWH

            There are hundreds of Christian churches/denominations out there. One particular group doesn’t get privilege over any other group. We have decided as a country to rule by a constitution and a set of laws. We are not ruled by religious documents. The Bible says lots of things that gravitate against a democracy and for a theocracy. However, we have learned that a state church becomes a persecutor.

            As a word of advice, the people of any country and society don’t like outsiders meddling into their personal affairs. We have had to endure the stigma of the ugly American who butts into the internal workings of foreign countries, and no matter the political stripe, we as Americans resent foreigners butting into our personal lives. You don’t like the way that we run things as a democracy? Don’t come to America? Be happy where you are and fix your own problems first before you look to anyone else.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            So happy Wyoming is having some fairness. Democracy works only with Christian-educated people. America is my heart’s home. You should leave people alone, American way.

          • Dani Miller

            “…only with Christian-educated people.”

            Wow, you really have lost your mind…

          • Tedlick Badkey

            A long, long time ago.

            That one actually believes that the US should be a christian theocracy.

          • RWH

            Grace, you may feel that America is your heart’s home, but you would never pass the citizenship test. We’re not interested in people who want to enforce doctrine of a certain church upon people who are not members of that church. And, I can safely assume that with your view of what we should be like here, we don’t want you here. We have enough of our own crazy people. I know a lot of very sincere Christian people who would violently disagree with your concept of an ideal Christian nation.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            America belongs to Christians, its creators, and not to baby-killers or Sodomites. Sodom does not inherit anything.

          • RWH

            Sorry, Grace. In the United States, our so-called “baby-killers” and our so-called “Sodomites” have the same rights under the Constitution as you do. Americans tend to have a live-and-let-live attitude. We don’t appreciate self-appointed cultural police interfering with our lives. If you can’t accept that, stay home and stop being a wanna-be American. You would not be happy here.

          • Johndoe

            So?

          • Dani Miller

            Our country is not ruled by your bible. It is governed by a Constitution. Did you miss that in school?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            America is good only when the Americans adhere the Holy Bible. Ex-christian USA is such a Sodom. They only know how to live out immorality. Americans need Christianity to get saved and be human.

          • tonysc

            Our Constitution only works for a moral and decent people.

          • bowie1

            Would you then have a problem with pedophiles getting married to an underage spouse?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            That’s exactly what the secular Western feminists want. Women are monsters when they scorn purity-before-marriage and hate the unborn babies.

          • William of Glynn

            Would you have a problem with two pedophiles marrying?

          • Tedlick Badkey

            As long as no children are involved, no. After all, we allow serial killers on death row to wed.

          • bowie1

            Yes, I would, since it violates the innocence of childhood.

          • William of Glynn

            What the heck are you talking about? What children?

          • bowie1

            The children who a pedophile might want to marry.

          • William of Glynn

            I don’t understand what you’re talking about. Children cannot legally marry anyone, pedophile or non-pedophile. I asked you if you would have a problem with two pedophiles marrying, whether the pedophile couple is male-female, male-male, or female-female.

          • bowie1

            I was asking a rhetorical question since it seems almost every arrangement is what people seem to want to have the right to do.

          • William of Glynn

            There are some who have proclaimed they wish to marry their dog, or their computer, or their lawnmower, but these are people who cannot bear marriage equality and simply seek notoriety.

            In any event, would you have a problem with two pedophiles marrying?

          • bowie1

            I already answered that question but, yes, I would have a problem with that.

          • William of Glynn

            Even if they’re an opposite-sex couple?

          • bowie1

            If they want to marry a minor, yes. Of course at the moment it is not legal here.

          • William of Glynn

            To quote the warden from Cool Hand Luke, “What we have is failure to communicate.”

          • Tedlick Badkey

            False comparison… one is a couple of consenting adults, the other is a child abuser.

            If you can’t see the difference, you’re a dangerous human being.

          • Jason Todd

            Nope. These very same people are involved in the “normalization” of what is now being called, “Intergenerational relationships.” So the question stands.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            No, it is not… one is a case of consensual adults… the other, abuse of children, much like we see in religious polygamous sects.

            They’re not the same thing. If you can’t see the difference, you’re a very dangerous human being.

          • Jason Todd

            Whether or not I “see the difference” is not relevant. What’s relevant is bowie1’s question, even though he did not ask you.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Okee Dokee…

            Hope somebody is watching all these dangerous people.

          • tonysc

            You’ve got to be kidding…..right?

        • Johndoe

          It’s just your opinion that it’s perversion. Opinion only.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Ya, liberals persecutes everyone who disagrees.

          • Dani Miller

            You seem to have that reversed. it is YOU who continue to try and limit Equality Under the Law for those people whom YOU disagree with. People seeking equal treatment and Equality under the Law from our Government are not hurting YOU one bit!

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Sin has no equality with anything. Secular West must get halted on forcing their depravity upon mankind. They are creating a new slavery by demanding unconditional support of homosexuality. They are childless but very powerful. People should retain freedom to reject the West’s inclination to sexual depravity.

          • Johndoe

            Poor thing…so sorry that I’ve persecuted you by disagreeing

          • Amos Moses

            and just yours that it is not ………. fail …..

      • Amos Moses

        “I don’t need your religion to be a good person.”

        there are no “good people” ……….. fail ……

        “All American are equal.”

        no they are not ……….. fail ………..

        “Nobody better or more deserving than the other, regardless of their religious beliefs.”

        yes they are ….. fail ………

        • William of Glynn

          Thank you for that alt-Christian perspective.

        • Johndoe

          Thanks for your opinion

  • William of Glynn

    “… Neely must either agree to perform all marital ceremonies or none at all.”

    A good compromise.

    • Jason Todd

      Not a compromise. An ultimatum.

      I’d simply tell the Court what it could do with itself and keep doing what I always did, sans marriage ceremonies.

      • William of Glynn

        Any sensible person would see it as a fair compromise.

        By the way, you can certainly tell a judge what he can do with himself, but that doesn’t mean you’ll continue to do what you always did.

        • Jason Todd

          “Do it my way or not at all” is a compromise? On what planet?

          By the way

          I don’t care.

          • William of Glynn

            As I said, any sensible person would see it as a fair compromise.

          • Jason Todd

            If you define sensible as “agrees with you.”

          • William of Glynn

            No, I define “sensible” as not some nut who thinks he can do whatever he pleases.

          • Jason Todd

            To be sensible is to be reasonable. As I said, there’s nothing reasonable about “my way or not at all.”

            You need a dictionary.

          • William of Glynn

            And “sensible” does not mean “my way and only my way, no matter what.”

            I think you’re in need of a dictionary.

          • Jason Todd

            You just reposted my comment. Changed the words, but the meaning and intent are the same. Does this mean you agree with me?

          • William of Glynn

            No, it simply means you’re not sensible and the planet you’re from should be called Chaos because the government employees who work there would never get anything done.

          • Jason Todd

            This comment makes no sense at all when placed with the previous ones. Could you rephrase for the sake of coherence?

          • William of Glynn

            In your current mental state, any attempt on my part would be an exercise in futility.

          • Jason Todd

            You mean smarter than you? I know, it must be rather humbling when you realize you are up against your intellectual betters. Read the Bible and the Constitution and then come back and maybe things won’t be so bad.

          • William of Glynn

            Yes, hopefully in time I will recover from the intellectual whipping I’ve received here today. /s

          • Johndoe

            Jason will soon block you due to his inability to form coherent arguments.

          • William of Glynn

            He’s so sensitive.

          • Jason Todd

            Just give it time.

        • RWH

          If someone tells a judge what he can do with himself, s/he had better be prepared to cool off in a jail cell for contempt.

      • Johndoe

        You would be out of a job.

  • DTrevor

    I must assume that those in support of the judge would also not object to a judge citing a religious belief that God intended the races to remain separate as a basis for refusing to officiate interracial marriages.

    • Adagio Cantabile

      The race card.

      How original.

      Poor bored homosexuals – nothing to do but insult Christians.

      • Ambulance Chaser

        Okay, but that doesn’t answer the question. Would you support a judge who refused to marry interracial couples based on her religious beliefs?

        • DTrevor

          A small minority of people to whom I have addressed the question have demonstrated intellectual consistency in answering “yes”.

          The majority of those to whom my question is addressed will go to great lengths to dishonestly misrepresent my question in order to avoid answering a simple “yes” or “no”. Many who refuse to answer the question claim that the Bible does not proscribe race-mixing which is interesting because — apart from being able to cite examples of persons quoting the Bible to justify racial segregation — I never cite the Bible when asking my question and whether or not the Bible prohibits race-mixing is not relevant to my question.

          • RWH

            Years ago, Dr. Bob Sr. of Bob Jones University preached that segregation was supported by Scripture and that one could not be a born-again Christian and believe in integration. Bob Jones Sr. never did see the light, but Jerry Falwell, who held the same beliefs did manage to change his mind.

      • DTrevor

        I observe that you did not actually address my statement.

        Additionally, I made no insult against Christians in my posting. For what reason are you lying?

      • Dani Miller

        DEFLECTING – even more “original”….

        • Adagio Cantabile

          I would not lower myself to debate some les.

      • Better And Better

        Used by judges, sweetcheeks… this is from Judge Leon Bazile in the VA trial that led to Loving v. Virginia:

        “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”

        He’s one of yours.

        • Jason Todd

          Non-sequitur, sweetcheeks.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Perfectly relevant.

            You just don’t like it.

          • Jason Todd

            Skin color and sexual behavior will never be comparable, no matter how much you think, wish, hope and pray it is or ever will be.

            Get over it and move on.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Neither is religion… see, it’s just a choice.

            Precedent set. Enjoy the ride.

          • Jason Todd

            Religion is protected under the Constitution.

            Ride over.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Goody! Stoning must be legal!!! Executing children for back-talking parents is now legal! Stoning adulterers is legal!!!

            All because religion (and your religion is where that comes from) is “protected under the constitution”.

            Ain’t that just sell! Jinkies!!!

          • Jason Todd

            Your stupidity is making my head hurt.

            Blocked.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            How? Does the Bible not call for these things?

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Bigot.

          • William of Glynn

            Religion, yes. Discrimination, no.

          • Jason Todd

            Relevant, also no.

    • Jason Todd

      As I must assume you are a complete idiot if you believe skin color is in any way comparable to sexual behavior.

  • Dani Miller

    Interesting. So, if a judge admits to being racist and hates all non-whites — is it now our decision that this judge is OK TO DO THE JOB, and s/he will either marry couples of ALL races, or do no marriages at all? Is that how this works now, in the United States? Judges no longer have to be impartial to our citizens — it’s OK to hate some people while sitting on the Bench?

    Brilliant!

    • Grace Kim Kwon

      Western whites should stop putting colored people and sexually sinful people in the same category. Their movie is distasteful.

      • DTrevor

        Western whites should realise that “colored people” is an archaic term.

        • Grace Kim Kwon

          I think categorizing all Earthlings as “white” and “non-white” is more racist.

          • DTrevor

            I made no statement about racism.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            It IS racism.

          • DTrevor

            What is “it”?

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Putting colored people and homosexual people in the same category. Having darker skin is God’s creation. Being gay is a willful sin. Don’t mix them.

          • DTrevor

            Disregarding your unsubstantiated claims, I mixed nothing. You seem to be attempting to change the subject.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You Western whites who support homosexuality using race cards are all heinous racists against all colored peoples. Shame on you.

          • DTrevor

            Your baseless insult remains off-topic.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Read the first comment. And secular Western whites do that same thing all the time everywhere. Real racists.

          • DTrevor

            I have read the comments. Your accusation of racism remains both baseless and off-topic.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are not Dani Miller? Or didn’t you read his comment? I thought you were supporting him. You wrote a similar comment elsewhere.

          • William of Glynn

            Jesus himself said some are born gay.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Never. Secular Americans do not comprehend the Holy Bible or their own Christian ancestors. Stop insulting the people with disability.

          • Johndoe

            You come on here an insult Americans everyday. Try again

          • Jason Todd

            That’s a lie. Period. You should know better than that.

          • Johndoe

            As usual, WRONG.

          • Sharon_at_home

            As usual, RUDE
            (sorry I just couldn’t resist) 🙂

          • Johndoe

            Takes one to know one I guess

  • bowie1

    I suppose then she would have to stop performing all marriages.

    • RWH

      This is the crux of the problem. When we work at a job, we do surrender some of our constitutional rights. Our personal beliefs are subordinate to the policies and standards of our employer. If I work at a restaurant and believe that drinking is a sin, I have a real problem if someone orders a strawberry margarita. I can turn around and say that I believe that this is wrong, but I am not responsible for the decisions that others make. If I cannot separate my personal morality from that of the clientele that I’m supposed to serve, I have a real problem. And the only alternative I would have is to find a different position in the same restaurant where I don’t have to face this moral problem. However, even if I am an accountant, I still have to enter the data for people who drink, so I am still responsible. What made this so serious is that one has to question her ability to be fair and impartial.

  • InTheChurch

    That is easy, stop doing them. Like the bakers and florists, no more custom items, what is on the floor, is what you get.

    • RWH

      The big problems is that some have not been able to reach that conclusion. Beauticians face the same problem with customers who come in wanting something that they know won’t look good on their clients.

      • InTheChurch

        I agree. the only thing I can suggest, have 10 hair styles and that’s it. No custom haircuts. Is it wrong or dumb? yes, but again, no issue with person a and person b. It’s sad that we are going to this.

  • tatoo

    If I refused to do my job for any reason, I would be fired.

    • Better And Better

      As she should be.

  • Darren H

    Good for her, it’s impressive to see the Christian laity willing to take the heat for their faith. What is truly shameful is that you have high-profile pastors like Rick Warren and that grinning Joel Osteen who say nothing in support of Christians like this. During one interview, Osteen was asked why he didn’t ever talk about homosexuality, and of course he just grinned and said, “Hey, you know what, that’s not me, that’s now who I am.” No chance Christians like him will ever be persecuted for their faith. Of course, in the New Testament teaching, if you are ashamed of your faith, it means you have no faith anyway.

    • Grace Kim Kwon

      Yes, it would be truly helpful if pastors like Rev. Rick Warren and Rev. Max Lucado were more outspoken against the nation’s specific decadence like Rev. Franklin Graham is. Or is it simply not reported in news?

      • Darren H

        I think it would be reported. They’re just keeping silent, because they are cowardly and afraid of being called “bigots.” Without courage, Christianity is worthless.

        • Grace Kim Kwon

          That’s sad. Everyone plays such a safe politician nowadays…

          • Jason Todd

            Rick Warren has no problem with homosexuality. That’s why he’s silent. But why Max Lucado?

    • Better And Better

      Do gay folks get a tax break for paying the salary for a woman who will not do her job?

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        American Sodomites should not force mankind a sin and falsehood. Period.

        • Better And Better

          Blizzahd chimbly wee bit nippy Auguster down east anuthah ‘Roostik Powrtland Museum of Aht Powrtland unthaw, Powrtland Museum of Aht hahd tellin’ not knowin’ what a cahd Katahdin. Ayuhpawt wicked cunnin’ Yessah Auguster some eleghant numb I’m tellin’ you Have a good one., down east Mount Dessuht If you can’t stand the wintah you don’t deserve the summah Bean’s ayuhpawt potatoes hahd tellin’ not knowin’ potatoes wee bit nippy, tube steak lobstah gash dang flatlanduhs and their boilin’ plates from away alkie, rhubaahb cunnin’ noseeum, Saddee Auguster Moxie bookin’ it Shit the bed. Feed ‘uh the hot suppah. mistah man.

          • Jason Todd

            Flagged for language.

        • mtman2

          This I’m sorry to say Grace could only have happened over the 100yrs Followers of Christ and Patriots allowed this nation to be taken over and corrupted and slumber-on as the “sleeping giant”.
          As deTocqueville and Charles Finney stated- ‘If America ever faulters or fails it will be the fault of her preachers. ie= Weak Believers.

          The luke warm bodies of pseudo believers comprising 90+% of those who profess Faith as useless to the kingdom of God as salt and Light.
          Later is better than never and “never” is close at this point. Shaving close….

      • tonysc

        Now that was stupid.

        • Better And Better

          Why? Gay people pay taxes… her salary comes from those taxes.

          How, exactly and in detail, is that stupid?

  • Better And Better

    It’s your job, not a church. You get paid by ALL tax payers, gay, straight, muslim, christian… you do not get to choose which ones you serve and which ones you don’t.

    Do your job or quit.

    • Jason Todd

      First Amendment. Learn it, love it, live it.

      • Ambulance Chaser

        Does the First Amendment allow judges to ignore doing parts of their job it they don’t feel like it? Since when?

      • Tedlick Badkey

        This isn’t an issue of the 1st amendment (which has limitations if you’re not aware).

        She’s not in a church, she’s in a secular government building.

        Should a muslim be able to turn away an “infidel” christian in the same situation? Wouldn’t that, too, be “religious freedom”?

        Civics fail.

        • Jason Todd

          The First Amendment says Congress can neither create its own religion nor keep others from practicing theirs. If you think the First Amendment says “within churches” then put on a dunce cap and sit in a corner.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Wow.

            So Sharia law is perfectly legal, as is stoning adulterers and disobedient/disrespectful children.

            After all, there is no limit to the first amendment to you, and those are all in the bible.

          • Jason Todd

            Nope. Islam is an ideology. Not a religion.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            According to the US government, you are wrong.

            It is no different than your mythology.

            I have read it… it’s all faith… zero facts behind claims of magic, zombies, or human looking beings with wings… that’s all faith.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Following the buybull is an ideology.

            This is why you are losing. Even with conservatives.

          • William of Glynn

            Discrimination is not a religion.

          • Jason Todd

            It also isn’t relevant.

  • Tedlick Badkey

    Should a muslim judge be able to deny marrying a tax-paying, law-abiding christian couple?

    • Grace Kim Kwon

      Homosexuality is not a religion, either, though some Westerners indeed worship and live for the depravity.

      • Better And Better

        Some eleghant smokie fellers mistah man, batrees dinnahbucket the pit Powrtland tunk out in th’ willie-wacks cubboard yut Moxie, noseeum rig up door-yahd, Jo-Jeezly crunchah wreckah from away. The ‘Gash clam chowdah idear crittah. Puff bluebries paypuh bowee puff queeah Bangoah wickid decent heatah.

      • William of Glynn

        Was that a “yes” or a “no”?

        • Grace Kim Kwon

          Non-christian religions and ideologies do not have human rights or freedom. The Muslims need Biblical teachings to treat all people fairly.

          • Johndoe

            Wrong. All religions and ideologies have both human rights and freedoms. We’re not a theocracy. Never will be

          • Chris

            “We’re not a theocracy. Never will be.”

            The US has a VP who’s a theocrat. Never say never.

          • rily

            You need to re-read the Koran. Women do not have human rights in Islam.

          • DTrevor

            Your assertion is legally incorrect.

        • Better And Better

          It won’t answer you… that would demonstrate it’s own bigotry, and it won’t allow that to happen. It’s quite crazy, that one.

      • Tedlick Badkey

        Stop running in circles and answer the question (it’s a yes or no question):

        Should a muslim judge be able to deny marrying a tax-paying, law-abiding christian couple?

    • Jason Todd

      Red herring. Nice try.

      • Tedlick Badkey

        How so? How is it any different a scenario?

        • Jason Todd

          An attempt to change the subject. Which stops here.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            ROFLOL!!!

            It’s the SAME subject… denial of service by a state employee to a law abiding citizen.

            Coward.

          • Jason Todd

            Laugh as much as you want. We are talking about same-sex marriage. Not Muslims and Christians. Last time.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            We’re talking about denial of service by a state employee to a law abiding citizen, based on one’s chosen religion.

          • Jason Todd

            Yep. Which is constitutional and legal, as per the First Amendment.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Oh, you poor dear.

            So, given what you just said, what about denial of service by a muslim state employee to a law abiding christian citizen.

            Come on now… it’s not that hard.

          • Jason Todd

            What about not relevant to the subject matter. I do not respond to such things. Drop it.

          • William of Glynn

            You’re pathetic. Too afraid to answer a simple question. Jason, you are the definition of the hypocritical alt-Christian.

          • Jason Todd

            Because I do not play games and allow others to control the debate? I have been doing this longer than you will ever know. Which is why I do not and will not do things your way.

            Jason, you are the definition of the hypocritical alt-Christian.

            Nope. I do not believe anything that I cannot read from my own Bible. And you have no idea what you are talking about.

          • Johndoe

            LOL! If so you don’t do it very well

          • Tedlick Badkey

            It is.

            It is about a state employee threatening to refuse service to a law abiding citizen based on said employee’s choice to follow a given religion.

            It is no different… you just don’t like it.

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Poor wingnut fundy… you do not make law.

          • Amos Moses

            change it to a muslim performing a homomarriage ……….

          • Tedlick Badkey

            Why? That would be no different either.

          • Amos Moses

            you are not changing the relevant portion of the question …. you are changing the question entirely …. and it is irrelevant ……..

          • Tedlick Badkey

            I am making fundies live up to their claims.

          • Amos Moses

            and what “claim” would that be ………

    • InTheChurch

      To be honest, that couple would be in church getting married. The only reason to go to the court house, get the license. No need for a judge. Non-religious go to judges, for the most part, to get married.

      • Tedlick Badkey

        Every marriage requires a license. Religion does not matter.

        • InTheChurch

          exactly, go to the court house, pay your tax and get your license. No problems. Only the ungodly look for someone to sign that license. The Christians have their pastors. again, this is not a christian’s problem but a non-christian problem. The judge says no, move on to someone else.

  • Tedlick Badkey

    Reality of law hurts fundies…. in stead of facing the facts of their argument, they just remove them.

    Good… you will lose.

  • rily

    As long as there are justices who don’t mind performing same-sex marriages, and are willing to serve in that capacity, other justices who opt out of that for reasons of conscience should not be forced to perform same sex marriages. Freedom of Religion should not be mandated to only Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Bahais, Taoists, Satanists, Atheists, Agnostics, and any other non-Christian religions, but to Christians as well. If a Christian justice, or judge refers you to another justice or judge, who is willing to marry you to your same-sex significant other you really have no reason for complaint, and your rights as you perceive them are not being infringed upon.

  • C_Alan_Nault

    Being a gay person is a choice