Posted on 03/07/2017 8:14:00 PM PST by Olog-hai
A small-town judge who says her religious beliefs prevent her from presiding over same-sex marriages was publicly censured by the Wyoming Supreme Court on Tuesday.
But while the court said her conduct undermines the integrity of the judicial system, it does not warrant removal from the bench. In a 3-2 decision, Justice Kate Fox wrote that Judge Ruth Neely violated judicial conduct code but removing Neely would “unnecessarily circumscribe protected expression.”
“Judge Neely shall either perform no marriage ceremonies or she shall perform marriage ceremonies regardless of the couple’s sexual orientation,” Fox wrote. […]
Neely, who’s not a lawyer, is a municipal judge in Pinedale, a town of about 2,000 residents, and a part-time circuit court magistrate in Sublette County, a rural county rich in outdoor recreation and oil and gas. The majority of her work as a magistrate is to perform marriages. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
“Neely, who’s not a lawyer”
==
I’d chalk that up in the plus column for a judge!
I expect she could still conduct marriages of her own choosing apart from her office, they can’t forbid her or order her whom to marry in her private capacity. In most states pretty much anyone can conduct a ceremony. Might require a bit of paperwork, eg. registering with the county - but it would be a great eff you to The Powers That Be.
But the Wyoming Supreme Court will get on its knees for Islam, right?
There is no freedom of thought in this country.
but,.....but,.....
“Neely, who’s not a lawyer”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It’s not even a requirement to be a U.S. Supreme Court Justice.
This judge should be commended. Why are we quiet!! Queer marriage is non existent abomination in the eyes of GOD!!
They don’t see what a joke it is for them to refer to “the integrity of the judicial system.” The judicial system exists to enforce the ever-shifting whims of the elite. In carrying out that mission, the last thing they have (or could use) is “integrity.”
ABA members closing ranks to support the illicit edicts of their fellow members.
Better, but she shouldn’t be punished at all.
No Freedom of Association or Freedom of Religion, either. All protected UNALIENABLE Natural Rights embedded in our Constitution, too. There is no Natural Right to sodomize others and such an irrational, meaningless, vile act which is learned from child abuse should never be promoted in a “Just” Law. All unjust laws, which sodomy promotion is—are “null and void”.
Congress and the Courts literally threw out the Constitution a long time ago. They should all be in prison for Treason. No Just Law can promote the filthy vice of sodomy or baby-killing-——yet, the “legal” “system” allows our Justice (virtue) System to become a Vice system and promote theft and slavery (socialism, Marxism, welfare) and killing human beings (abortion, illegal wars) and sodomizing others. Very sick vice system, not unlike islam or the kabbalah (Freemasonry).
I don't think that Judge Neely cared about the couple's sexual orientation - I think that she just didn't feel that it was actually possible to marry two dudes.
Regards,
Does the Constitution explicitly forbid that?
For that matter, does the Constitution explicitly forbid, say, twiddling one's fingers?
It is not my intent to promote sodomy - rather, I'm just asking you to explain your logic.
Regards,
Endowed by their creator to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Naughty naughty Neely (slaps her on wrist).
Sounds like Someone is looking visibly over their shoulders.
We ultimately can’t have any “integrity” worth squat if we deliberately do evil things.
It is probably little noticed today that the bible had a wise answer in Old Testament practice here. If it isn’t flagrant (it didn’t get two or more witnesses) it skates. It’s a sin before God yet and it can thus still incur retribution, but the society doesn’t need to get exercised to the point of civil penalties at that point. At that point it is still a matter for preachers.
America tried to go all-or-nothing on this, with a law that looked into closets and bedrooms, and the result was a ghastly decision. Because the premises were ghastly too.
Your mix of church and state never did work. This world is a proving ground and some space to err is required or it will not fulfill its purpose.
Heaven is only really at home in heaven. On earth it can only visit.
Yeah... that was lost.
I think the long term upshot of this “gay marriage” thing will be the separation of marriage and state. People won’t want canons of marriage that are this loose.
I’d sooner see the state back out of “marriage” and establish a “registered household” concept. That wouldn’t even depend on sex at all. “Marriage” would become a private concept once more, and people could say they are married in the Catholic church or in the Baptist church if they want. But justices of the peace could only carry out “Householdings.”
“It is probably little noticed today that the bible had a wise answer in Old Testament practice here. If it isn’t flagrant (it didn’t get two or more witnesses) it skates.”
Two or more witnesses are to establish the veracity of testimony when it exists. Just because a crime is committed in secret does not mean that the Law ignored it.
Do you think that when someone was murdered in secret, and there were no witnesses, that the murderer just “skated”?
It is exactly the invention of the so-called “right to privacy” that abortion and sodomy were declared legal rights by the Supreme Court.
But a correct understanding of the assumption of privacy is that not all things done privately / secretly are legal or moral.
We have a presumption of innocence. Searching what is “private” requires reasonable cause. But, upon such cause, and upon finding evidence of a crime committed privately / secretly, the judiciary is supposed to follow the law and render justice against the criminals.
Witnesses are not required.
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.