Where did I say soneone in this thread said that?
Lol welcome back.
1 Like
Nobody was. That’s another straw man. She was directing people to other judges who would do the marriage.
So yes. It’s exactly as I said. You want her to submit and go against her own beliefs in favor of your own. Definitely not the “believe what you want, just don’t force it on others” that you said earlier. Quite the opposite.
“Believe what I want, or I’ll force it on you” would have been much more accurate.
1 Like
Did I call it or what?
Who cares what Austin thinks. They need to be annexed and sent back to California.
She is a govt employee, no discriminations.
Then your contribution has nothing to do with this thread and is irrelevant.
Mate, stop making so much sense. It pains me to have to like your posts 
Irrelevant. It’s not a required duty.
It’s funny though. Back under Obama people not doing their duties was considered the cool thing by libs.
2 Likes
LMAO… Are you under the impression that the Texas Commission in Judicial Conduct are all liberals from Austin?
Wait…
You mean the state commission on Judicial Conduct is located in… the state capital?
What a shocker!
Next thing you’ll tell me is that the Governor’s mansion is there, too!
2 Likes
The members are appointment by the Texas Supreme Court from across the state. For instance, Hon. David Hall, the chair and the person who signed this letter is from rural Texas and is a republican (judges run for election in partisan elections in Texas).
The thread is about someone denying a public service to gays
1 Like
Irrelevant, no discriminations.
In Texas, do same sex couples have the lawful right to a marry if they meet certain criteria? Does an elected official who has voluntarily agreed to marry couples have the lawful ability to pick and choose who they will marry based on personal belief, if refusing to do would violate the law? The answers to both of these questions are simple and straightforward. Saying it’s OK because she sends them to another judge is not an excuse.
A judge has legal responsibilities even when performing extrajudicial activities. Her options are to act as a Justice of the Peace for all couples allowed by law, not be a Justice of the Peace, or step down from her appointment and marry whoever she wants. She doesn’t get to pick and choose.
Extrajudicial duties still have requirements. Those were already given. Here’s a refresher.
No it isn’t.
It’s about her not performing the service and referring couples to someone who will.
Nothing was denied.
1 Like
And?
None of those requirements apply to a marriage license.
Do you think there’s a small chance that other judges were on that list, since that’s the crowd she would know?