Posted on 07/13/2015 6:11:34 PM PDT by markomalley
Ever since the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage was legal everywhere in America, there’s been no shortage of stories of judges and law clerks who flat-out said they would resist the ruling anyway they can. A judge in Denton County, Texas said that he would not be one of those people, but before he officiates, there’s still a catch: a form acknowledging his disapproval.
James DePiazza was reportedly on vacation at the time of SCOTUS’s decision on Obergefell v. Hodges, and decided that while he would comply with the law, he now requires all couples to sign a waiver noting his objection to marriage equality
“Judge DePiazza prefers to NOT conduct same-sex ceremonies, but will not decline anyone who chooses to schedule with him,” says the form, which bears this caveat the couple needs to agree to:
“While we may not necessarily agree with, we acknowledge Judge DePiazza’s position that he prefers not to conduct same-sex marriages and agree not to address the topic of same-sex marriages with Judge DePiazza before, during or after the ceremony.”
You can read the judge’s form here.
I’m thinking a $100,000 fee appropriate.
His involvement should be
Hello. I now pronounce you it and it. Good day.
I applaud this effort. Frankly, I think this is the way for all involved....bakers, florists, etc.....to do it. No emotion. Doing what you’re paid to do. But not approving of everything.
Not every action we take has to be either a condoning of, or a condemning of, someone.
That’ll learn ‘em.
Sounds to me like he is going to do is this:
Do the two of you wish to be married to each other under the laws of the State of Texas and agree to abide by the marriage laws of the State of Texas?
((signs license and leaves quickly))
A bit silly, and guaranteed, there is a loophole (they’ll bring it up in a court of law, with a different judge), and if the couple decides to bring it up in front of the judge that makes them sign the form, what is the judge going to do about it? They break the deal, then what?
Nice. Hits them where is hurts. Wish it didn’t have to be this way, but they forced the issue.
Make 150 page tome and require initials, by both homos, at each paragraph and at the bottom of each page.
Then have an 8 page privacy disclosure, requiring the same.
Finally, a non-disclosure agreement should be required.
Then copies should be sent via “Certified Mail” which are sealed by a notary....
And dont anyone start about the “copies”/Notary thing.
It’s part of the joke....
The best part will be when polygamous unions are contracted for.
They should even require counseling by various types of indifferent to the whole thing and wait for those reports before engaging in an activity which clearly violate religious conscience.
He walks out without comment and they forfeit the $100 fee.
If sanctuary cities can wholesale ignore federal immigration law, as are many states, other states can ignore same sex marriage.
From a legal standpoint, if someone is forced to perform a marriage ceremony under durress (threat of lawsuits, etc.), wouldn’t that invalidate the legality of the “marriage”?
Well that’s just silly and quite the playground way of doing it. Just stand up and don’t do it ... or do. But this is silly and infantile.
This just seems petty.
Do it, or don’t do it. But these silly games will just push the American people farther away from us.
I strongly recommend that FR Members and others work to get Government out of Marriage. Work to get your state legislature to pass Shield Laws to protect anyone who does not want to provide a service to anyone cannot be sued or prosecuted for any reason not related to providing such service.
All laws related to marriage licensing should be done away with and replace with After the Fact - DIY on line Contract Registration done even via a phone app. Or at a DIY kiosk at a Country Clerk’s office.
Any certification or licensing process used in granting a person the authorization to marry a couple should be done away with — Clergy can marry people in a Church or Temple in the eyes of God. The marriage can be registered by the couple and witnesses on line or at the County Clerk computer Kiosk. And as a way to further get citizens out of the line of legal harassment... such a Kiosk would have a notice — you must bring your own computer / Internet savvy coach or assistant if you are not familiar with such.. County/City/State employees are not authorized nor required to assist you.
Get Americans Out of the Line of Fire of the WAVE of Legal Harassment that is coming even stronger and will be an avalanche in the near future.
Obviously, if they say something before or during the ceremony. But the agreement says they’ll stifle saying anything after, too. I guess all he can do then is walk away.
I don’t know yet, but maybe I agree with this. Because that’s what the homos want with this, attention.
No, no, no. It’s the state’s responsibility to uphold the values and traditions of the past.....I guess that only works as long as people who fully believe in those ideals hold state power. Unfortunately government, our government, is not static but fluid in terms of those long-held values and traditions. Allowing the state to grant the ‘privilege’ of marrying, and that’s what a LICENSE conveys, we have allowed the state to dictate terms and definitions of marriage. How can anyone logically complain about what has transpired?? By all means, get Government out of Marriage.
He could state his objection DURING his wedding ceremony and end it with pronouncing the couple husband and wife.
yes, they want attention, acceptance, and to put Christians in a box.
This seems to defeat all that cleanly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.