Skip to comments.
Texas judges can now refuse to perform same-sex marriages
Fox 4 ^
Posted on 10/29/2025 2:12:54 PM PDT by TigerClaws
AUSTIN - Judges in Texas are now able to refuse to perform marriages for religious reasons, the state's highest court decided Friday.
While the Texas Supreme Court's addition to the judicial conduct code does not include reasoning for the change, it follows a years-long debate over whether judges within the state are obligated to perform same-sex ceremonies. Texas Supreme Court ruling
What we know:
The ruling, amending Canon 4 of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct, was signed Friday, Oct. 24. Click to open this PDF in a new window.
The comment reads as follows:
"It is not a violation of these canons for a judge to publicly refrain from performing a wedding ceremony based upon a sincerely held religious belief."
The ruling is effective immediately.
TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: 2ndpeter2vvs6thru9; genesischapter19; godlessreprobates; homosexualagenda; homosexualpolicy; intercession; judges; lgbt; lgbtq; marriage; romans1; sodomandgomorrah; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
ROE is no longer the law of the land.
Is "gay marriage" the next to fall?
To: TigerClaws
Why does it have to be a religious objection?
Why not just objection?
2
posted on
10/29/2025 2:14:16 PM PDT
by
BenLurkin
(The above is not a statement of fact. It is opinion or satire. Or both.)
To: TigerClaws
I donโt see why this isnโt nation-wide. Religious expression should include refusing to do the devilโs work.
To: TigerClaws
4
posted on
10/29/2025 2:18:20 PM PDT
by
SaveFerris
(Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the Days of Lot; They did Eat, They Drank, They Bought, They Sold ......)
To: TigerClaws
Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution. Always seemed like a 10th Amendment situation to me. If MA wants to legalize it, that's their choice. Other states don't need to go along. But NO! Supreme Court said every state had to join the party!
Meanwhile, the right to keep and bear arms IS mentioned in the Constitution, and it shall not be infringed. But, of course, each state and municipality has their own view of this, and the right gets infringed in a million ways, and everyone just has to deal with it.
5
posted on
10/29/2025 2:19:42 PM PDT
by
ClearCase_guy
(Democrats seek power through cheating and assassination. They are sociopaths. They just want power.)
To: TigerClaws
It'll take the fag lobby 10 minutes to find a Biden/Obama/Clinton appointed Federal judge to overrule this.
To: TigerClaws
I don’t think that “religious conviction” is the best way to frame this.
7
posted on
10/29/2025 2:26:12 PM PDT
by
Cletus.D.Yokel
(The Democrats' official policy is now, โHate, Violence and Murder". Change my mind.)
To: TigerClaws
8
posted on
10/29/2025 2:30:16 PM PDT
by
Salamander
(Please visit my profile page to help me go home again. https://www.givesendgo.com/GCRRD)
To: Gay State Conservative
[the fag lobby]
But DEMOCRAT Barack Hussein Obama sez he knows
what's best for the children! C'mon man!!!
[All pictures are posted for Educational Purposes
in accordance with Fair Use]DO NO HARM, Americans
BUT Be SITUATIONALLY-AWARE (For the thread)
Demand that Democrats STOP
๐๐ฆ๐๐ฆ๐ GROOMING Children
for the LGBTQ+ HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA
9
posted on
10/29/2025 2:32:01 PM PDT
by
SaveFerris
(Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the Days of Lot; They did Eat, They Drank, They Bought, They Sold ......)
To: Salamander
Just bake the goddam cake.
To: DIRTYSECRET
11
posted on
10/29/2025 2:33:44 PM PDT
by
Salamander
(Please visit my profile page to help me go home again. https://www.givesendgo.com/GCRRD)
To: TigerClaws
12
posted on
10/29/2025 2:37:19 PM PDT
by
Engraved-on-His-hands
(If someone says that there are no absolutes, ask them if they are absolutely sure.)
To: Gay State Conservative; SaveFerris
>> It’ll take the fag lobby 10 minutes to find a Biden/Obama/Clinton appointed Federal judge to overrule this.
Yep! And it’ll end up in the Supreme Court, which IMO may just be ready to repeal Obergefell, which was HUGE judicial overreach, just as was Roe v. Wade. (Remember Roberts voted against Obergefell last time it came up there...)
So sodomites and lezbos, go ahead and sue! Make my day!
13
posted on
10/29/2025 2:40:30 PM PDT
by
Nervous Tick
(Hope, as a righteous product of properly aligned Faith, IS in fact a strategy.)
To: ClearCase_guy
If MA wants to legalize it, that’s their choice. Other states don’t need to go along. But NO! Supreme Court said every state had to join the party!
Yes, SCOTUS did, but it is the Constitution that says that every state has to recognize the official actions of other stated. If you get married in MA, you are legally married in the other 49 states.
Lot’s of movies from the 40s referred to a wife moving to Reno to get a divorce because Nevada divorce laws were much more lenient than other states, especially NY where it was virtually impossible to get a divorce. Divorced in NV, you were divorced in NY.
14
posted on
10/29/2025 3:04:19 PM PDT
by
hanamizu
To: Nervous Tick
The problem is the Respect for Marriage Act mandates same-sex “marriage” recognition in all 50 states, passed as a Lame Duck session in 2022 so Democrats can impose their will for all.
To: WhiteHatBobby0701
The problem is the Respect for Marriage Act mandates same-sex โmarriageโ recognition in all 50 states, passed as a Lame Duck session in 2022 so Democrats can impose their will for all. How, under the 10th amendment, can the Federal Government make such a law?
16
posted on
10/29/2025 3:14:22 PM PDT
by
gitmo
(If your theology doesnโt become your biography, what good is it?)
To: TigerClaws
This is a big win. One should not be forced to condone or enable behavior that is objectionable to one’s conscience.
17
posted on
10/29/2025 3:24:25 PM PDT
by
JayGalt
(For America!)
To: hanamizu
Yes, SCOTUS did, but it is the Constitution that says that every state has to recognize the official actions of other stated. My big issue is that if you have a firearms permit in AZ, and drive to another state (ex. MA) you can be in big trouble because the states in-between may or may not recognize the official actions of the other state. National reciprocity works for marriage licenses and drivers license, but not gun permits. Makes no sense.
18
posted on
10/29/2025 3:37:20 PM PDT
by
ClearCase_guy
(Democrats seek power through cheating and assassination. They are sociopaths. They just want power.)
To: Nervous Tick
๐๐ ๐๐๐๐โ๏ธโ๏ธ
19
posted on
10/29/2025 3:39:01 PM PDT
by
SaveFerris
(Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the Days of Lot; They did Eat, They Drank, They Bought, They Sold ......)
To: ClearCase_guy
National reciprocity works for marriage licenses and drivers license, but not gun permits. Makes no sense.
I understand and agree, but AZ issues a concealed-firearms permit that allows you to carry concealed in AZ (and those states that choose to recognize AZ’s permits to be valid in their states). California refuses to recognize any state’s CFP. And of course it refuses to recognize the fact that most states no longer require any permit to carry a concealed firearm.
As for drivers licenses, a few states, oddly the ones most opposed to concealed carry from other states, are now under fire for granting commercial drivers licenses for illegal aliens who are killing people with their reckless driving.
It is a symptom of how divided our nation has become. Blue states want us disarmed, have men in girls/women’s sports and bathrooms, and benefits for illegals.
A bit of an oddity for you. I live in MO and it is perfectly legal for me to buy ammunition, in Illinois by just showing my drivers license. A resident of Illinois is required to show something called a FOID to legally buy ammo.
20
posted on
10/29/2025 3:54:51 PM PDT
by
hanamizu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson