Oregon judge refuses to perform same-sex marriages, cites First Amendment right to religious freedom

[n2doc]

Source: Oregonian

Marion County Circuit Judge Vance Day, a former chairman of the Oregon Republican Party, took steps Thursday to create a legal defense fund in an apparent response to his decision not to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies.

Day took action because of what he described as "deeply-held religious beliefs," KGW reported.

"It's an exercise of his religious freedom rights under the First Amendment," Day spokesman Patrick Korten told the news station.

In recent months, Day has not performed any marriage ceremonies, KGW reported. His courtroom is in Salem.

Read more: http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/09/oregon_judge_refuses_to_perfor.html

---

Another nutcase who needs to go down.

[Historic NY]

1. Then he shouldn't be a judge.

[marble falls]

2. If I assert my religious belief to not work Sunday to my boss, he will fire me.

[former9thward]

36. He will be in for some trouble if that is all there is.

For example, if the employer requires the employee to work on the Sabbath or Sunday, and if the employee has a sincerely held religious belief to attend church and worship with fellow believers on that day, then the employee should advise the employer of this belief. The employee should state the belief not only verbally but in writing, and refer to any biblical or religious-based references that form the basis of this belief. The employee should also advise the employer as to why this belief conflicts with the employer's practice. An employee cannot claim religious discrimination if the employer is unaware of the belief being violated.

Accommodation

Once the employee advises the employer of the sincerely held religious belief, the burden shifts to the employer to accommodate that belief. The employee should suggest accommodation alternatives. In the example of working on the Sabbath or Sunday noted above, the employee can offer to work on an alternative day or suggest other employees who may work the Sabbath or Sunday shift.

The employer must undertake efforts to accommodate the employee's religious belief. An employer cannot establish a zero tolerance policy against accommodating religious belief and practice. The employer must take seriously its obligation to accommodate the belief.

Undue Hardship

Once apprised of the employee's sincerely held religious belief, an employer is required to accommodate the belief unless to do so would be an undue hardship on the employer's business. An undue hardship means more than mere inconvenience. An employer cannot claim that employee morale, as a result of the accommodation, is itself undue hardship. Minimal expense is not undue hardship. Undue hardship is determined case by case. The employer must undertake serious attempts to accommodate the employee's belief.

http://www.lc.org/resources/workplace.htm

[SheilaT]

53. Most shift work jobs require you work the shifts, whenever they occur.

Anyone who has such a strong need to attend religious services on a Sunday had best take a job that doesn't have Sunday hours. Period.

I would love to see hospital employees, airline flight attendants, police officers, and 7-11 clerks everywhere (just to name a few) insist on taking Sunday morning off to go to church. I mean, people don't take jobs without knowing what the hours and days of work are going to be.

[chillfactor]

3. oh good god...

how many of these nutcase bigots are going to be crawling out from hell's depths...

[beac]

11. Far too many. Alas, I am sure this is just the beginning.

Every fundie nutjob in government will be crawling out to try and grab the spotlight (and some gofundme cash.)

[RKP5637]

14. Hmmmmmmmmmm ... looks like it's time to open those fabled FEMA camps they whine about. n/t

[jberryhill]

43. .

[RKP5637]

45. Yep!!! n/t

[smirkymonkey]

68. Exactly, just so these nutcases can have their 15 minutes, millions of dollars of taxpayer dollars

will be wasted, not to mention the time of the courts. What a clustef***k!

[Jamastiene]

67. I don't know, but I see a business opportunity here.

With so many of them willing to go to jail for their hatred, oops, I mean "beliefs," America is going to need lots more jails to house them all. Someone should start making modular Christian jail cells just for them. They could turn a nice profit.

[thebighobgoblin]

4. Off to jail, then

If they want to be Christian martyrs, then we should help them out and whisk them off to the slammer.

[Warpy]

5. If he wants that protection, he needs to step down as a judge

and open a church, instead. You're sworn to uphold the law as a judge, Buster, and if you can't do your job, let somebody else have it.

[RoccoR5955]

6. He is no longer qualified to be a judge

if he cannot uphold OTHER people's rights.

[tomm2thumbs]

7. money money money money... deeply held financial beliefs more like it

I bet if you look into his finances, there are a few stories to tell

[closeupready]

19. Oh yeah. That pizzeria gofundme boondoggle

was just too tempting. Easy money.

[V0ltairesGh0st]

8. these people are literally a disease

WTF !!! ... fuck this shit if they all have to be arrested kicking and screaming so be it ! Tennessee judge, Oregon judge... obvioulsy they picked today to do this.

[sulphurdunn]

9. Now I think I understand

why the Romans threw people like these to the lions.

[RKP5637]

15. Years ago I used to be neutral about religion, but the more I see these people in action I

can see why the Romans did what they did.

[Downwinder]

10. Every case he has had should be closely examined

to see if his religious beliefs improperly colored his judicial decisions.

[jtuck004]

12. +1. n/t

[RKP5637]

32. Definitely! It's probable he can not separate his biases from his ruling and hence unfit

to be a judge.

[Downwinder]

44. His statement is testimony to his biases.

[LibDemAlways]

13. A judge performs civil ceremonies. No one is

asking him to perform a religious ceremony. If he wants to act in a religious capacity, he needs to become a minister.

I'm a public school teacher. If I refused to teach a gay student on religious grounds, I'd be fired immediately. Public employees have an obligation to act on behalf of the public. No public official gets to pick and choose who they will and will not serve.

[Javaman]

16. disbar him. period.

let's see how quickly he changes his tune when he's threatened with that.

[noiretextatique]

17. get yourself and your "beliefs" off the bench

since you are unfit

[Backwoodsrider]

18. rule of law

All 7 judges of the Supreme court like the rule of law. The judges on the Supreme Court do not like it when a person goes against one of their decisions. This wont end well for the Marion county judge.

[dorkzilla]

20. Oh goody, another idiot who want some of those sweet fundie dollars

Gofundme is the Right's new collection plate!

[smirkymonkey]

69. On the bright side, I see a lot of fundies going broke for all this foolishness.

Serves them right.

[classof56]

21. Well, the current chair of Oregon's republican party thinks radioactive waste is really-really good

And should be scattered over all of us. Also requested urine samples from Oregonians so he could analyze their pee and prescribe cures for what ails 'em. Guess I shouldn't be surprised at what "Judge" Day is up to, but on behalf of all sane Oregon citizens, I feel I must apologize.

[Samantha]

22. Where is the line drawn how far one's right to religious freedom reaches?

It reaches to the point where it threatens another person's civil liberties, and from there no farther.

Sam

[eggplant]

23. So he doesn't want to perform same-sex weddings.

He's actually not required to perform any weddings. He has the privilege of officiating at any wedding he chooses. This is no different than anyone allowed to officiate.

This case is completely different from the absurdity going on in Kentucky. Let's keep our focus here.

[Angry Dragon]

26. +2,300

[tularetom]

35. Exactly, the issuance of a marriage license by a clerk is a "ministerial act"

It requires no judgment or discretion. If the applicants are who they say they are, of age, and not already married, she has no choice, she must issue the license.

A judge performing weddings is totally discretionary, it is not within the scope of his duties and he is not required to do it at all.

This judge may indeed be as much of a fundamentalist nutcase as Kim Davis, but he isn't violating any laws by not performing same sex weddings.

Apples & tomatoes.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

24. When will these morons figure out that their deeply-held religious beliefs don't trump civil laws.

If this judge doesn't know that. he should be impeached immediately!

[Angry Dragon]

25. Many in this thread are trashing this judge

We can not force clergy to preform same-sex marriages
How can we force judges to preform same-sex marriages if they have strongly held beliefs against them??

It doesn't seem to me to be cut and dried

[mike_c]

27. judges are secular public servants....

This is a judge who is denying some constituents equal protection under the law. I would think that's a violation of his oath of office.

[Angry Dragon]

31. go back and read the last part of the OP and find out how many marriages he is preforming

have a good day

[Skittles]

49. he is trying to force his "religious" views on others

it's bullshit bigotry - simply put, if you can perform the duties of your job, GET ANOTHER JOB

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

28. There's a pretty simple difference between clergy and judges.

Judges are part of the government. Clergy are not.

And NO ONE can be 'forced to perform same-sex marriages'. Anyone who holds a governmental position that requires them to deal equally with gay and straight people is free to resign and find non-governmental positions that allow them to discriminate against people they find inferior or unworthy of equality.

[Angry Dragon]

30. He preforms no marriages

Judges may preform marriages but can decide not to

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

33. Then it's a nonstory.

And he's doing nothing but posing for attention.

[onenote]

37. Seems that way

He's not on the list of judges available to perform weddings. Nonetheless, it's not clear that a judge who doesn't put himself or herself on that list is barred from performing weddings. He seems to have indicated that he won't perform same sex weddings, not that he won't perform any weddings. Unless he opts to be out of the wedding business entirely, he can't pick and choose whose weddings he performs based on the race, religion or gender of the wedding participants.

[eggplant]

46. Bullshit.

Pure and simple. Officiating at a wedding is NOT part of his job. It is a privilege granted to him that he can exercise as he sees fits SEPARATELY from his court duties. He can decide to only marry people named Dave if he so chooses.

Why is this so hard for people to understand?

[onenote]

47. Civil ceremonies -- get it?

Why is it so difficult to see that.

If you think a government official with the governmentally-bestowed privilege to perform civil wedding ceremonies -- NOT religious ceremonies -- could refuse to perform weddings for African Americans or Jews or anyone else based on their race, color, or creed, you're sadly, and completely, mistaken.

Religious officiants performing religious marriage ceremonies is a false comparison.

[eggplant]

48. IT'S. NOT. PART. OF. THEIR. JOB.

Judges, like ship captains and clergy, are given the right BUT NOT THE OBLIGATION to solemnize weddings. And they don't even have to STILL be judges to do it.

Why is it so difficult to see that.

"A person authorized to solemnize marriages must be a priest, minister or rabbi of any religious denomination...a judge or retired judge, commissioner of civil marriages or retired commissioner of civil marriages...a judge or magistrate who has resigned from office, or one of miscellaneous other federal and state judges, justices, magistrates, and retired judges, magistrates or justices. The duties imposed upon the person solemnizing the marriage include conducting the ceremony, insuring the correctness of the facts set out in the marriage license, issuance of the marriage certificate, and returning the license, endorsed with the fact of the marriage, to the county recorder of the county in which the marriage ceremony was performed."

http://resources.lawinfo.com/family-law/who-can-solemnize-a-marriage.html

[onenote]

51. Performing a wedding is performing a service

And as such, it is providing a "public accommodation" and is governed by Oregon's non-discrimination law.

Here is an article explaining this using Texas law. A similar opinion has been issued in Ohio.

http://www.texaslawyer.com/id=1202731264150/Judges-Who-Do-Weddings-Cant-Refuse-SameSex-Couples

Again, if you think a judge, in performing activities not required of him, can engage in racial, religious, gender, or gender identity discrimination, you are mistaken.

[harrose]

56. But that's only if you provide the service to the public at large.

To give you an example, photography is my hobby. It's not my job. I don't get paid for it. It's just something I enjoy doing.

Occasionally, a friend will come to me and ask me to take pictures for them -- and I'll do it. But because I provide a service for some people on an occasional basis doesn't mean that I have to do so for everyone. I'm perfectly well within my rights to say to someone "no, I don't want to take pictures for you." I'm even well within my rights to do so because they belong to <insert racial/ethnic/religious/gender/etc. group here>.*

If I owned a photography business, I couldn't do that, but as a person with a hobby doing it as a favor? Yes, I could. I don't see how a judge performing discretionary weddings is any different.

* Not that I would... just trying to illustrate a point.

[Angry Dragon]

38. If you state your beliefs and then live your beliefs, you are not posing

we do not know if this man is posing or not and until we do we have no business stating otherwise

Kim Davis is posing: 4 marriages, affairs wile married, children from that affair

[onenote]

34. Would it be more or less cut and dried to you if he announced he would refuse to perform

weddings for inter-racial couples, or for anyone who is Jewish?

[Angry Dragon]

40. since I have not read that then that is a no starter question

I talked to a gentleman last night that I had not met before
we were sitting in a church having dinner
he mentioned he had an adult daughter that was gay
he said he loved her, had not disowned her, she came over to the house to do laundry all the time
she has a partner she plans to marry
he said he did not believe in same-sex marriage
he was not sure if he would go to the marriage ceremony
but he thought he would go to the reception

to me he did not seem like a bigot, he did not talk like a bigot
just a man that loved his daughter

I asked him if he thought being gay was a decision or was the person just born that way
He answered he just did not know

If you want to jump all over everyone that don't jump on the gay marriage bandwagon soon enough for you then it will be a bigger fight than it should be ..............


I do not pray but I thought to myself that this man I was talking to would find peace in his heart and mind

[Skittles]

50. the man is a bigot

conflicted maybe, because of his daughter, but a bigot absolutely

[Angry Dragon]

62. no

[Skittles]

64. YES YES YES YES YES YES

LEARN TO RECOGNIZE BIGOTRY

DOESN'T MATTER HOW "NICE" HE IS - he thinks straight relationships are superior to gay relationships - THAT IS BIGOTRY

oh and "gay marriage bandwagon" ????? - WTF

DONE HERE

[daleo]

58. He is a bigot

But a sensitive one, who wants to be un-bigoted to close relatives and friends.

On edit - this can change a bigot's mind, in general, though. I have seen it happen.

[Angry Dragon]

61. no

[tabasco]

65. Then you don't know too much about civil liberties

and constitutional rights. Pick up a book.

[Angry Dragon]

66. Does an Oregon judge have to preform marriages??

[JoePhilly]

29. Go become a Minister or Priest sparky.

[truthisfreedom]

39. Another freeloader like Lil' Kim.

Sucking on the government teat while refusing to do their jobs. Resign, freeloaders.

[harrose]

41. A judge is not required....

... as part of his/her job to perform marriages. It's completely discretionary.

[onenote]

52. Not completely discretionary

http://www.texaslawyer.com/id=1202731264150/Judges-Who-Do-Weddings-Cant-Refuse-SameSex-Couples

Similar opinion in ohio.

[harrose]

55. Two points...

1. That's Texas (and, it seems, only in Harris County at that) and Ohio. Can you show me that this is also the law in Oregon (which is where this judge is)?

2. He doesn't do any weddings, as per the OP.

[spiderpig]

42. Fine. Here's the door.

Buh-bye.

[davidpdx]

54. Surprised, but not shocked that this is taking place in my home state

The one thing that hasn't been mentioned is that he was appointed by John Kitzhaber.

[treestar]

57. Jumping on the attention bandwagon

can't do the job, step down.

[restorefreedom]

59. if he doesn't do weddings anyway

then he should stfu, as he is clearly inserting himself into this story for attention.

but i do wonder, what if all judges decided not to perform weddings?

[BigDemVoter]

60. Stupid Ass

I hope he finds himself in the hospital in need of a blood transfusion with nobody but Jehovah's Witnesses to take care of him. Let them refuse to give him the blood transfusion on religious grounds and see how that fucker feels.

[Dont call me Shirley]

63. Let's all refuse to pay for all the government subsidies this judge's church gets.