Judge Dismisses Suit Challenging Law Allowing Magistrates to Opt-Out of Officiating ‘

Angel4Truth

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
Judge Dismisses Suit Challenging Law Allowing Magistrates to Opt-Out of Officiating ‘Gay Weddings’

RALEIGH, N.C. — A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging a North Carolina law that allows judges to opt out of officiating “gay weddings” because of their religious convictions.

U.S. District Judge Max Coburn, nominated to the bench by Barack Obama, ruled on Tuesday that the plaintiffs in the case lacked standing, as well as proof that they personally have been harmed by the law.

“The court … finds that Plaintiffs lack standing by virtue of the fact that their claims are merely generalized grievances with a state law with which they disagree,” he wrote.

As previously reported, S.B. 2 was introduced last year by Sen. Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, to allow magistrates to recuse themselves from officiating over the services, as well as to permit register of deeds workers to opt out of issuing licenses due to religious objections.

The bill came with one condition: that the individual remove themselves from the marriage business altogether.

“Every magistrate has the right to recuse from performing all lawful marriages … based upon any sincerely held religious objection,” it read in part. “Such recusal shall be upon notice to the chief district court judge and is in effect for at least six months from the time delivered to the chief district court judge.”

Republican Gov. Pat McCrory vetoed the legislation after being urged by homosexual advocacy groups to do so, but his veto was subsequently overruled by a majority vote.

While reports state that no one has been denied a “marriage” license since the law was passed, two homosexuals and their partners filed suit against the legislation last December. An interracial couple sued as well.

“Senate Bill 2 expressly declares that magistrates religious beliefs are superior to their oath of judicial office,” attorney Luke Largess from the law firm Tin, Fulton, Walker and Owen argued. “The law spends public money to advance those religious beliefs. That is a straightforward violation of the First Amendment.”

While Coburn agreed that “there exists the potential that a citizen could suffer real or emotional harm as a result of S.B. 2,” he said that the specific plaintiffs in the case had no standing in the matter.

“As Plaintiffs have made no allegations of an ‘injury in fact’ that might otherwise allow them to assert standing in this case, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden of showing they have standing to bring Due Process and Equal Protection claims,” he wrote. “Accordingly, because Plaintiffs lack standing to bring their Fourteenth Amendment challenges, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over them and this action must be dismissed.”

Berger applauded the outcome.

“We appreciate the court recognizing the plaintiffs failed to identify even one North Carolinian who was denied the ability to get married under this reasonable law, which protects fundamental First Amendment rights,” he said.

The plaintiffs state that they will appeal the matter to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Only an estimated five percent of judges in North Carolina—32 out of 670—have recused themselves since the enactment of the statute.
Click to expand...

Feds gone wild. This isnt America anymore kiddies.
 
M

MrDante

New member
Those same magistrates all take an oath of office swearing to treat all people equally and justly. Refusing services to a minority is pretty much the opposite of that oath.
 
Angel4Truth

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
MrDante said:
Those same magistrates all take an oath of office swearing to treat all people equally and justly. Refusing services to a minority is pretty much the opposite of that oath.
Click to expand...

Its not constutional to force a person to go against conscience, especially when reasonable accommodation can be made (another officiate)

Equal treatment would allow for freedom of religion, but equal isnt the perverts goal these days, its to ride roughshod over others and smash down their conscience and they think God, so their conscience doesn't bother them anymore- but He cannot be mocked.

What a man (or woman) reaps they sow.

Ecclesiastes 8:11 Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed quickly, therefore the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to do evil.
 
M

MrDante

New member
Angel4Truth said:
Its not constutional to force a person to go against conscience, especially when reasonable accommodation can be made (another officiate)
Click to expand...
the magistrates swear to treat everyone justly and equally. They don't swear to treat everyone justly and equally except for a list of minorities.

Equal treatment would allow for freedom of religion, but equal isnt the perverts goal these days,
Click to expand...
No it isn't, the perverts want he special right to discriminate. Worse perverts are trying to use religion to justify their petty prejudices.


its to ride roughshod over others and smash down their conscience and they think God, so their conscience doesn't bother them anymore- but He cannot be mocked.

What a man (or woman) reaps they sow.
Click to expand...
and you sow prejudice, discrimination and hate.

Ecclesiastes 8:11 Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed quickly, therefore the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to do evil.
Click to expand...
yep, wanting to be able to discriminate and blame your religion is certainly evil
 
genuineoriginal

genuineoriginal

New member
MrDante said:
no it makes you a homosexual. Trying to label minorities as perverts only serves to mark you as a pervert.
Click to expand...
There are many people trying to say being black (a minority) is no different from being a homosexual (a sexual pervert), but according to your logic that marks those people saying both blacks and homosexuals are minorities as perverts.

Here is a definition for you:
Perversion is a type of human behavior that deviates from that which is understood to be orthodox or normal. Although the term perversion can refer to a variety of forms of deviation, it is most often used to describe sexual behaviors that are considered particularly abnormal, repulsive or obsessive.​

Homosexuals are proud to claim that 3.5% of the population are homosexual and 6.5% are bisexual.
That deviates from the heterosexuality of the 90% normal people.
 
M

MrDante

New member
ok doser said:
which is a perversion of normal sexuality
Click to expand...

no it's a normal variation of human sexuality.

I get that you desperately want to label people you have chosen to hate as perverts. I suppose you think doing so somehow makes you morally superior to people who hate blacks or Jews or the handicapped but it doesn't. Quite the reverse actually
 
M

MrDante

New member
genuineoriginal said:
There are many people trying to say being black (a minority) is no different from being a homosexual
Click to expand...
I don't know anyone who says that.


Both are minorities and both have a long history of being maligned and discriminated against


(a sexual pervert), but according to your logic that marks those people saying both blacks and homosexuals are minorities as perverts.
Click to expand...
Did you read what was posted???



Here is a definition for you:
Perversion is a type of human behavior that deviates from that which is understood to be orthodox or normal. Although the term perversion can refer to a variety of forms of deviation, it is most often used to describe sexual behaviors that are considered particularly abnormal, repulsive or obsessive.​

Homosexuals are proud to claim that 3.5% of the population are homosexual and 6.5% are bisexual.
That deviates from the heterosexuality of the 90% normal people.
Click to expand...

so according to you because blacks account for only 12% of the population of this country meaning they deviate from 88% of "normal" people.
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
MrDante said:
so according to you because blacks account for only 12% of the population of this country meaning they deviate from 88% of "normal" people.
Click to expand...

and according to you, blacks are "variants" of normal :darwinsm:

wot a tard!

:mock:traci
 
M

MrDante

New member
ok doser said:
it's not normal

less than 2% of the population are gay

they're outliers, not within the range of normal
Click to expand...

you are confusing the norm with normal.

Being a numeric minority doesn't make one abnormal it just makes you different from the majority.


8% of the population is left handed.
2% of the population have green eyes
7% of the population have perfect pitch


these like homosexuality are normal variation of the human species.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top