Texas is not exactly a bastion of human rights. I know this because I live here. If she can refuse to perform same-sex marriages, then it seems she would also be justified in refusing to perform marriages for people of color, or mixed-race marriages. Conservative theists of all stripes, can always rationalize excuses for their many hatreds.
Hensley's recusal from performing same-sex marriages is not, in my view at least, based on her "Christian" beliefs. I'd change my tune if anyone could tell me that Jesus said something about same-sex anything, but this is Old Testament stuff. It's why so very many Christians prefer the OT, with its bigotry, hate and punishments, to the love and forgiveness of the New Testament. What harm does love between gays and lesbians cause? None that I'm aware of.
For the last decade, the Sovereign Christian Theocracy of Texas has consistently acted in favor of individuals' idiosyncratic, adlib "sincerely held religious beliefs" over THE LAW. That is, as long as that religion is Christianity.
If she loses this case, which I doubt, she will probably follow the custom and quit the bench and run for public office so she can do even more theocratic damage to what little of democracy is left in the SCTT.
The only proper marriages are sacramental performed within the confines and with the blessing of the holy Catholic Church.
This judicial Har-lot shouldn't be performing marriages at all! And your priest has to use all of the right words! None of this "good enough" crap. In Latin! My God forbids any other weddings! This woman promulgates Satan's deception and adultery! Burn the witch!
Is their god a god of love and forgiveness or a god of loopholes and legalities? ←That is almost a rhetorical question. Conservatives and Evangelicals like to scream "woke mind virus," but it seems to me that their slow infection of government is more like cancer...
There's only one cure: radiation. From orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
The compelling government justification is that she’s a governmental official and by discriminating according to her religious beliefs she is establishing an official religion. As a judge, she is also supposed to be impartial in her duties, discriminating in this duty most likely is an indication that she is discriminating in other duties that demand impartiality. She ought to be removed from the bench over her zeal to be a bigot. There’s no justice in her position, and her decisions will be tainted from now on. She’s ineffectual at best, but mainly just the opposite of fair.
Of course, she will win since the GOP has games the systems across the board in their favor to install an anti-democratic, un-American, and unconstitutional theocratic dictatorship. Four years of Trump was enough to destroy our country.
Believers are told to obey all earthly laws and authorities and why in their own book (see Romans 13:1-5). Just saying.
Short answer to the question? Yes. She can and should be punished for disobeying the law. Any judge who can't or won't do the job they are required to do by law should be immediately removed from the position.
Perhaps Hensley should become a minister if her religion is so important to her. That might also prove difficult for her due to her own religion's teachings (1 Timothy 2:12, a rather misogynistic bit of scripture that should be illustrative of how Christian bigotry can be employed against HER. Irony, indeed).
What a tired joke this line of 'reasoning' is. "I'm facing consequences for my bigotry, you must be bigoted against my religion like I'm bigoted against you!" It's very childish and the judge should just offer her a binkie and a nap.
I wish I had known about this during my 20 years as a paramedic in Washington DC. At the time I was a practicing Christian and wouldn't you know it, I could have discriminated against all those gay / trans patients of mine. I'm guessing this gives firefighters and police officers the right to refuse to save life and property of gay / trans people as well. Maybe 911 operators should be allowed to ask if the caller or the patient they're calling for is gay or trans. It would really reduce the volume of calls we had to run. Even as a Christian, I would never have even considered refusing to care for someone because of their sexual orientation. Now that I'm an atheist, it angers me even more that Christians are allowed to get away with this crap. I have witnessed patients refusing care because the paramedic or firefighter was black. I'm guessing if this judge had to call 911 and a gay paramedic responded, she would have to refuse care for fear of being contaminated and her god rejecting her. The more I see this crap from people, the more I love my dog.
This behavior has its roots in the degradation by the deniers in the GOP of the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause. If these people can't separate their religious beliefs from their job as a public servant then they are in the wrong profession. We have a separation of powers so that no one part of the government becomes too powerful and if that is too much for these religious bigots then we must have the remedy of removing or sanctioning them.
Interesting (to me, anyway) that Texas law overrides religious beliefs when it comes to making Justices of the Peace perform inter-racial marriages. That fact seems to make it harder to claim for Hensley and her supporters that this is a case of "religious freedom."
Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 101–650, title IV, § 404, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)
Now we can all note here that the Oath of Office Judges take does not say with the exception of one religion when it conflicts with the law. She was in violation of here oath and there should be no questions as how her case will end. However in Texas one really doesn't know for sure.
Texas is not exactly a bastion of human rights. I know this because I live here. If she can refuse to perform same-sex marriages, then it seems she would also be justified in refusing to perform marriages for people of color, or mixed-race marriages. Conservative theists of all stripes, can always rationalize excuses for their many hatreds.
Hensley's recusal from performing same-sex marriages is not, in my view at least, based on her "Christian" beliefs. I'd change my tune if anyone could tell me that Jesus said something about same-sex anything, but this is Old Testament stuff. It's why so very many Christians prefer the OT, with its bigotry, hate and punishments, to the love and forgiveness of the New Testament. What harm does love between gays and lesbians cause? None that I'm aware of.
It's Texas. Gee. Waddaya think is gonna happen?
For the last decade, the Sovereign Christian Theocracy of Texas has consistently acted in favor of individuals' idiosyncratic, adlib "sincerely held religious beliefs" over THE LAW. That is, as long as that religion is Christianity.
If she loses this case, which I doubt, she will probably follow the custom and quit the bench and run for public office so she can do even more theocratic damage to what little of democracy is left in the SCTT.
"Don't mess with Texas. It's already a mess."
The only proper marriages are sacramental performed within the confines and with the blessing of the holy Catholic Church.
This judicial Har-lot shouldn't be performing marriages at all! And your priest has to use all of the right words! None of this "good enough" crap. In Latin! My God forbids any other weddings! This woman promulgates Satan's deception and adultery! Burn the witch!
Is their god a god of love and forgiveness or a god of loopholes and legalities? ←That is almost a rhetorical question. Conservatives and Evangelicals like to scream "woke mind virus," but it seems to me that their slow infection of government is more like cancer...
There's only one cure: radiation. From orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
What we need is an atheist judge who will only marry secular couples because he/she considers religion irrelevant.
The compelling government justification is that she’s a governmental official and by discriminating according to her religious beliefs she is establishing an official religion. As a judge, she is also supposed to be impartial in her duties, discriminating in this duty most likely is an indication that she is discriminating in other duties that demand impartiality. She ought to be removed from the bench over her zeal to be a bigot. There’s no justice in her position, and her decisions will be tainted from now on. She’s ineffectual at best, but mainly just the opposite of fair.
Of course, she will win since the GOP has games the systems across the board in their favor to install an anti-democratic, un-American, and unconstitutional theocratic dictatorship. Four years of Trump was enough to destroy our country.
Believers are told to obey all earthly laws and authorities and why in their own book (see Romans 13:1-5). Just saying.
Short answer to the question? Yes. She can and should be punished for disobeying the law. Any judge who can't or won't do the job they are required to do by law should be immediately removed from the position.
Perhaps Hensley should become a minister if her religion is so important to her. That might also prove difficult for her due to her own religion's teachings (1 Timothy 2:12, a rather misogynistic bit of scripture that should be illustrative of how Christian bigotry can be employed against HER. Irony, indeed).
What a tired joke this line of 'reasoning' is. "I'm facing consequences for my bigotry, you must be bigoted against my religion like I'm bigoted against you!" It's very childish and the judge should just offer her a binkie and a nap.
I hope the self-righteous hypocrite doesn't use a King James Version of her sacred book. James I had certain leanings she might find objectionable.
To Hensley...
Please name the relevant scripture in any of the 4 gospels where Jesus condemns homosexuals. We'll wait.
I wish I had known about this during my 20 years as a paramedic in Washington DC. At the time I was a practicing Christian and wouldn't you know it, I could have discriminated against all those gay / trans patients of mine. I'm guessing this gives firefighters and police officers the right to refuse to save life and property of gay / trans people as well. Maybe 911 operators should be allowed to ask if the caller or the patient they're calling for is gay or trans. It would really reduce the volume of calls we had to run. Even as a Christian, I would never have even considered refusing to care for someone because of their sexual orientation. Now that I'm an atheist, it angers me even more that Christians are allowed to get away with this crap. I have witnessed patients refusing care because the paramedic or firefighter was black. I'm guessing if this judge had to call 911 and a gay paramedic responded, she would have to refuse care for fear of being contaminated and her god rejecting her. The more I see this crap from people, the more I love my dog.
This behavior has its roots in the degradation by the deniers in the GOP of the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause. If these people can't separate their religious beliefs from their job as a public servant then they are in the wrong profession. We have a separation of powers so that no one part of the government becomes too powerful and if that is too much for these religious bigots then we must have the remedy of removing or sanctioning them.
Interesting (to me, anyway) that Texas law overrides religious beliefs when it comes to making Justices of the Peace perform inter-racial marriages. That fact seems to make it harder to claim for Hensley and her supporters that this is a case of "religious freedom."
Each justice or judge of the United States shall take the following oath or affirmation before performing the duties of his office: “I, ___ ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as ___ under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 907; Pub. L. 101–650, title IV, § 404, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124.)
Now we can all note here that the Oath of Office Judges take does not say with the exception of one religion when it conflicts with the law. She was in violation of here oath and there should be no questions as how her case will end. However in Texas one really doesn't know for sure.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6ec07a204ca1a441161946d07b36d28b93602a549dd51dda72fdd20cfd068ed3.jpg