- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- news@lemmy.world
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.
You must log in or register to comment.
Am I a bad person for kinda wanting this to happen so I can go to my gay cousin Trump lover and say I told you so?
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.
“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.
You should be aware of what the inquisition actually was.
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.
This individual is unqualified to be a judge. Perhaps a job in a church would suit her. You cannot belong to a cult and be unbiased. And christians are required by their religion, to be the most biased they can be, or burn in hell.
Christians and catholics are categorically unqualified to be judges. Their religion explicitly states that only God possesses the authority to judge the souls of others. It is outright heresy. Thankfully, we know what to do with heretics.
Bust out the pitchforks, gentlemen.
I’m gathering kindling for the pyre as we speak!
How do you even become a State judge without knowing the US Constitution?
The same way you become president without knowing anything about civics
Up until a decade ago the Constitution officially said nothing about gay marriage. Roe was precedent for half a century.
Corruption? Or faking it till they don’t need to like a lot of fascist now
Abolish the abrahamic religions
Abolish the religions. Full stop. All of them. It’s time for mankind to pull its big being britches up and get to work bettering itself.
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
A partical judge shouldn’t be a judge. Clearing stating she has biases and won’t be fair.
Unfortunately, republicans have been telling on themselves for decades. To great success.
Completely agree. It’s disgusting.
Equality is disgusting?
It’s disgusting that she can’t separate her religion from her job. She shouldn’t be in that position then. I was agreeing with OP.
For what it’s worth, I read your reply like you meant it, but I see the ambiguity.
I see it now, but I didn’t when I posted it.
lol! What a zigzag in terms of up/downvotes. I read the original comment to mean that you sided with the piece of shit judge proposing this
Yeah, when I posted it, it was obvious to ME what I was talking about. I have since seen the ambiguity but it’s already there
deleted by creator
Love is disgusting?
Idc anymore, do it or don’t do it, they obviously didn’t care enough to get out and vote
