She has been arguing that, as a Christian, she should not have to follow state rules about judicial impartiality.
A Texas judge is asking a federal court to overturn marriage equality in the U.S., arguing in a lawsuit filed on Friday that marriage for same-sex couples is unconstitutional because it was legalized in a decision that “subordinat[ed] state law to the policy preferences of unelected judges.”
The case involves Judge Dianne Hensley of Waco, Texas, who has been involved in years of legal proceedings to try to win the right to not perform marriages for same-sex couples while still performing them for opposite-sex couples. She claims that, as a Christian, she should not have to follow state judicial ethics rules about impartiality.
Sharkticon @lemmy.zip - 21hr
It seems completely logical to me that if a judge claims her Christianity is so vital to her being that she cannot perform duties that don't align with her Christianity then she cannot give fair and impartial judgments to anybody who is not also a Christian. Anybody of any religion that's not Christianity in her courtroom should call for her recusal. Anyone not Christian for whom she has made judgment should call for mistrals.
Not even to mention the fact that can she truly be impartial to other sects of Christianity?
212
YoSoySnekBoi - 21hr
I think if she wants to argue that Christianity is so central to her being that she cannot make impartial decisions, she should be permanently dismissed, as she is clearly not fit for the position. There are plenty of Christians out there capable of impartiality, she is the problem, not her religious preference.
120
Sharkticon @lemmy.zip - 21hr
I'm not entirely sure other Christians are capable of impartiality considering the long long history of Christians getting special treatment in our judicial system. You don't have to scratch the surface very hard to find a plethora of disgusting rulings that mentioned Christianity as a mitigating circumstance which allowed for lessened penalties.
30
YoSoySnekBoi - 21hr
Oh, don't get me wrong, the establishment of Christianity in the US is horribly corrupt. I suppose I'm arguing to judge these pieces of shit by their character, not their religion. I'm not even Christian, I just believe it's dangerous to start applying mass generalizations to any group of people. Religion has no place in justice, either in protecting or hurting someone's case.
27
Triumph - 20hr
Religious belief is a choice. There's no problem criticizing people for their choices.
9
MOARbid1 - 20hr
At this point, I don’t trust anyone that is religious. It has been proven time and again that they will act in the interest of their god, over the interest of humanity.
12
Tollana1234567 @lemmy.today - 7hr
most of them think the same way, especially the evangelical types.
1
captainlezbian @lemmy.world - 1hr
Yeah. I know Christians who can, but many can't. Like, how many Christians really understand that the justification to deny Alaskan native sovereignty was that they weren't Christians? I hold anti Christian sentiments, I've seen how they've oppressed everyone around them and cried foul at the sort of inconvenience they'd demand other religions experience.
1
SacralPlexus @lemmy.world - 21hr
There are plenty of Christians out there capable of impartiality
[citation needed]
13
YoSoySnekBoi - 21hr
Anthony Kennedy, one of the most influential supreme court justices in establishing gay rights in the US, was Catholic.
Despite what MAGA would have you believe, it is possible to be both Christian, and not a hateful asshole (though it seems to be getting more rare by the day).
33
SacralPlexus @lemmy.world - 20hr
Excellent examples, thanks. Your last line nails on the head where my thoughts are at these days.
9
justOnePersistentKbinPlease - 20hr
Prime Minister Paul Martin was excommunicated from his family church when he legalized same sex marriage some 20 years ago.
He also got the supreme court(of Canada) to rule on it first to head of Stephen Harper and PP(aka Milhouse) inevitable challenge of it.
Pierre Trudeau(Justin Trudeau's dad) was a practicing Roman Catholic when as Justice Minister when he legalized homosexuality almost 60 years ago.
19
SacralPlexus @lemmy.world - 20hr
Excellent history lesson, cheers.
5
Arghblarg - 20hr
I did not know those facts, thank you. Whatever other flaws Paul Martin may have had, that took some personal conviction which I respect. And very astute of him to head off future challenges in that way.
4
BackgrndNoize @lemmy.world - 2hr
More like many of them are capable of feigning impartiality, well at least you have juries. But I'm sure there's some fucker there as well to stack the decks when needed
1
fonix232 - 21hr
And any actually faithful Christian should call for her recusal as well, since she's clearly just using religion to justify her lack of impartiality, since the Bible very specifically states that the rules of God do not override the rules of the land and Christians should follow the Bible without either breaking the local laws or by trying to change them.
20
wheezy @lemmy.ml - 11min
A lot of Christians will. Evangelicals though. It's insane to me how Evangelicals will be the first to judge all Muslims for something like ISIS and then turn around and essentially want "Christian Sharia" in their own town. It's projection really. They want strict interpretation of religious laws but just for the laws that favor the existing structures of hierarchy.
1
fodor @lemmy.zip - 17hr
Right but if all the judges in the district are Christian, then people are denied services. So she's gotta be fired. There's no other option.
4
CharlesDarwin @lemmy.world - 12hr
Given that nearly 1/3 of the population is not even xtian, that'd be pretty wild. And that's before, as you point out, you start considering other sects.
2
BrianTheeBiscuiteer @lemmy.world - 18hr
If you can't be impartial then you can't be a judge. I mean jet pilots can't wear glasses, librarians can't be illiterate, dog groomers (reasonably speaking) can't be allergic, priests can't have a wife. You don't get to have a job just because you want the job.
55
falseWhite @lemmy.world - 17hr
Pedophiles can't be presidents.
Oh wait... It's the USA we're talking about. Sorry.
16
cybervseas @lemmy.world - 22hr
Why can’t you just let people be happy?
43
ChicoSuave @lemmy.world - 21hr
She has been arguing that, as a Christian
That's why
44
partial_accumen - 13hr
She claims that, as a Christian, she should not have to follow state judicial ethics rules about impartiality.
That sounds like she is not qualified to be a judge then. If she's using her religion to guide her legal decisions, will she also deny a heterosexual couple a divorce because she believes it goes against her interpretation of christianity?
42
Tollana1234567 @lemmy.today - 7hr
shes essentially KIM DAVIS but with a law degree.
2
zebidiah @lemmy.ca - 1hr
..... And a lifetime appointment
1
YoFrodo @lemmy.world - 21hr
Of course its some Texas asshole
40
supersquirrel @sopuli.xyz - 21hr
Texas is a deathcult desperately trying to fool people into thinking it is only just another shithole drowning in cruelty.
19
Tollana1234567 @lemmy.today - 7hr
they lure naive/stupid non rich people to thier state with the promise of no income tax.
1
Sanctus - 21hr
Great news! Her bitch ass doesn't have to marry a woman! Your fucken non-problem is solved you galaxy class cunt
38
NotSteve_ - 21hr
Now Judge Hensley, who has also refused to perform marriages for same-sex couples since Obergefell was decided, is asking federal courts to end marriage rights for same-sex couples.
Apparently she already refuses to but it needs to be applied to everyone forcibly! Truly the land of the free that Americans keep telling everyone it is
28
curbstickle - 16hr
Dont you get it, the fact that she can be asked is clearly targeted harassment against her as a Christian!
sigh
I wish I had a way to accurately convey how much I loathe this trash.
7
MelodiousFunk @slrpnk.net - 20hr
galaxy class cunt
This wretch can't even sniff constitution class, let alone galaxy class.
4
whotookkarl @lemmy.dbzer0.com - 15hr
In a just world she would be disbarred
28
RagingRobot @lemmy.world - 15hr
Why doesn't she get a job at the church if she feels so strongly about it. We don't need her judging people
15
turdburglar - 12hr
oh she judges people at church too, to be sure
2
CharlesDarwin @lemmy.world - 12hr
Well, she can judge people, but just in the sense of giving them side-eye; the kind of judging that has no real effect...and she'd have lots of opportunities to do that with the other church ladies.
1
ProfThadBach @lemmy.world - 17hr
Jesus fucking Christ. Why can't Texas be its own country and be the right wing Christo-Fascist hell hole they want to force on the rest of us? Just fucking leave already.
15
Bristlecone @lemmy.world - 16hr
For real, secede already you worthless rednecks! Let's make a straight trade for Puerto Rico so we don't have to change the flags
6
Bristlecone @lemmy.world - 16hr
Funny as fuck for her to whinge about unelected judges while she submits this to the supreme Court... And by funny I mean she's a fucking piece of shit, obviously
14
JackbyDev - 19hr
If your religion overrides your ability to judge fairly, then you cannot uphold your duty as a judge and should step down.
14
Gates9 @sh.itjust.works - 17hr
Wacko, Texastan
12
AbidanYre @lemmy.world - 19hr
You want to enforce Christianity? Go be a pastor not a judge, you fucking cunt.
11
captainlezbian @lemmy.world - 1hr
But pastors only have control over believers, whereas judges get to decide how even members of other religions get to live. /s
2
NewNewAugustEast @lemmy.zip - 12hr
Government should not be involved in marriages.
These are contracts between citizens. Nothing more. Consenting adults that need a way to manage the outcome if the contract needs to be disolved.
There is nothing more to do.
And all citizens are equal, male or female, it doesn't matter because you cannot discriminate who gets to enter into a contract.
10
CharlesDarwin @lemmy.world - 12hr
Who is going to enforce the terms of the contract, if not the government?
3
NewNewAugustEast @lemmy.zip - 12hr
That's my point. The government manages and arbitrates contracts. Not marriages in the religious sense. And a contract has to apply equally to all citizens.
7
CharlesDarwin @lemmy.world - 12hr
I think that's how it works now, and has even prior to gay marriage being the law of the land, but the religious busybodies think their particular religion should somehow have a say in what is a government institution (and merely because of cultural inertia, I guess? xtians seem to think they own the very concept of marriage, which is....hilariously provincial, but that's what xtians seem to excel at).
2
tal @lemmy.today - 18hr
I think that that would open a can of worms well beyond this issue, considering that religion in general can tell adherents to do things that aren't mandated by secular law.
I also have a pretty difficult time swallowing this in that any Christian mandate isn't on not performing marriages, but on not engaging in homosexual sex yourself. "I don't want to facilitate people in doing things that would be prohibited them if they belonged to my own religion" seems like a pretty wildly unreasonably broad reading of any sort of freedom to practice religion on the judge's part. If she herself was obligated by the job to participate in lesbian sex, okay, then I could see her maybe having an argument for some kind of exemption.
What happens if you have, say, Muslim building inspectors? Are they allowed to not approve a meat-packing plant because it processes pork and if the people who are eating its output were Muslims, as the inspector is, they'd be violating rules of their religion? I mean, that's on par with what she's asking for.
EDIT2: Well, okay, there's that one Old Testament verse somewhere about how you have to execute practicing homosexuals. That's the extent to which I can think of the Bible having a mandate regarding someone else engaging in homosexual sex. But even without looking at her complaint, I am very sure that the argument she is trying to make is not "I should be excused from not executing practicing homosexuals".
“If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. If a man lies with his father's wife, he has uncovered his father's nakedness; both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death; they have committed perversion; their blood is upon them. If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. If a man takes a woman and her mother also, it is depravity; he and they shall be burned with fire, that there may be no depravity among you. If a man lies with an animal, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall kill the animal. If a woman approaches any animal and lies with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.
6
HorikBrun - 20hr
I would like to ask the federal courts to end texas judges nationwide.
5
CircaV @lemmy.ca - 1hr
They’re going to strip abortion rights (done), then LGBTQ2A++ (in progress), then interracial marriage. You know it.
4
Triumph - 20hr
By that "logic," no federal court finding is valid.
4
MehBlah @lemmy.world - 17hr
How dare these uppity broads thinking they can just leave anytime I have one too many drinks and have to show her whose boss.
/s
3
ameancow @lemmy.world - 1hr
I don't think anyone is taking this constant assault step-up as seriously as they should.
We thought Roe Vs Wade was safe, now nobody even talks about it anymore. Project 2025 outlined all of this and how to accomplish it and so far they've been following the playbook to great success.
And we're here "LOL AT THE FUNNY LADY."
Yah it won't pass or even be considered. Today.
But next time someone with more power and influence raises it with a stronger case or argument, most of us will have tuned out as it gains more and more traction. Like they did with everything else so far.
After same-sex marriage they will go after interracial marriage. I dare some fucker to tell me that's hyperbolic, I already know the pretense and argument they will use to "ease" in the long dick of dicking americans.
3
brown567 @sh.itjust.works - 6min
I misread the title by missing the word "equality" and was intrigued by the idea of a Texas judge calling for the abolishment of marriage XD
MicroWave in news @lemmy.world
Texas judge asks federal court to end marriage equality nationwide
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2025/12/texas-judge-asks-federal-court-to-end-marriage-equality-nationwide/She has been arguing that, as a Christian, she should not have to follow state rules about judicial impartiality.
A Texas judge is asking a federal court to overturn marriage equality in the U.S., arguing in a lawsuit filed on Friday that marriage for same-sex couples is unconstitutional because it was legalized in a decision that “subordinat[ed] state law to the policy preferences of unelected judges.”
The case involves Judge Dianne Hensley of Waco, Texas, who has been involved in years of legal proceedings to try to win the right to not perform marriages for same-sex couples while still performing them for opposite-sex couples. She claims that, as a Christian, she should not have to follow state judicial ethics rules about impartiality.
It seems completely logical to me that if a judge claims her Christianity is so vital to her being that she cannot perform duties that don't align with her Christianity then she cannot give fair and impartial judgments to anybody who is not also a Christian. Anybody of any religion that's not Christianity in her courtroom should call for her recusal. Anyone not Christian for whom she has made judgment should call for mistrals.
Not even to mention the fact that can she truly be impartial to other sects of Christianity?
I think if she wants to argue that Christianity is so central to her being that she cannot make impartial decisions, she should be permanently dismissed, as she is clearly not fit for the position. There are plenty of Christians out there capable of impartiality, she is the problem, not her religious preference.
I'm not entirely sure other Christians are capable of impartiality considering the long long history of Christians getting special treatment in our judicial system. You don't have to scratch the surface very hard to find a plethora of disgusting rulings that mentioned Christianity as a mitigating circumstance which allowed for lessened penalties.
Oh, don't get me wrong, the establishment of Christianity in the US is horribly corrupt. I suppose I'm arguing to judge these pieces of shit by their character, not their religion. I'm not even Christian, I just believe it's dangerous to start applying mass generalizations to any group of people. Religion has no place in justice, either in protecting or hurting someone's case.
Religious belief is a choice. There's no problem criticizing people for their choices.
At this point, I don’t trust anyone that is religious. It has been proven time and again that they will act in the interest of their god, over the interest of humanity.
most of them think the same way, especially the evangelical types.
Yeah. I know Christians who can, but many can't. Like, how many Christians really understand that the justification to deny Alaskan native sovereignty was that they weren't Christians? I hold anti Christian sentiments, I've seen how they've oppressed everyone around them and cried foul at the sort of inconvenience they'd demand other religions experience.
[citation needed]
Anthony Kennedy, one of the most influential supreme court justices in establishing gay rights in the US, was Catholic.
Harry Blackmun, the majority opinion writer for Roe v. Wade, was heavily involved in church and gave several sermons.
Despite what MAGA would have you believe, it is possible to be both Christian, and not a hateful asshole (though it seems to be getting more rare by the day).
Excellent examples, thanks. Your last line nails on the head where my thoughts are at these days.
Prime Minister Paul Martin was excommunicated from his family church when he legalized same sex marriage some 20 years ago.
He also got the supreme court(of Canada) to rule on it first to head of Stephen Harper and PP(aka Milhouse) inevitable challenge of it.
Pierre Trudeau(Justin Trudeau's dad) was a practicing Roman Catholic when as Justice Minister when he legalized homosexuality almost 60 years ago.
Excellent history lesson, cheers.
I did not know those facts, thank you. Whatever other flaws Paul Martin may have had, that took some personal conviction which I respect. And very astute of him to head off future challenges in that way.
More like many of them are capable of feigning impartiality, well at least you have juries. But I'm sure there's some fucker there as well to stack the decks when needed
And any actually faithful Christian should call for her recusal as well, since she's clearly just using religion to justify her lack of impartiality, since the Bible very specifically states that the rules of God do not override the rules of the land and Christians should follow the Bible without either breaking the local laws or by trying to change them.
A lot of Christians will. Evangelicals though. It's insane to me how Evangelicals will be the first to judge all Muslims for something like ISIS and then turn around and essentially want "Christian Sharia" in their own town. It's projection really. They want strict interpretation of religious laws but just for the laws that favor the existing structures of hierarchy.
Right but if all the judges in the district are Christian, then people are denied services. So she's gotta be fired. There's no other option.
Given that nearly 1/3 of the population is not even xtian, that'd be pretty wild. And that's before, as you point out, you start considering other sects.
If you can't be impartial then you can't be a judge. I mean jet pilots can't wear glasses, librarians can't be illiterate, dog groomers (reasonably speaking) can't be allergic, priests can't have a wife. You don't get to have a job just because you want the job.
Pedophiles can't be presidents.
Oh wait... It's the USA we're talking about. Sorry.
That's why
That sounds like she is not qualified to be a judge then. If she's using her religion to guide her legal decisions, will she also deny a heterosexual couple a divorce because she believes it goes against her interpretation of christianity?
shes essentially KIM DAVIS but with a law degree.
..... And a lifetime appointment
Of course its some Texas asshole
Texas is a deathcult desperately trying to fool people into thinking it is only just another shithole drowning in cruelty.
they lure naive/stupid non rich people to thier state with the promise of no income tax.
Great news! Her bitch ass doesn't have to marry a woman! Your fucken non-problem is solved you galaxy class cunt
Apparently she already refuses to but it needs to be applied to everyone forcibly! Truly the land of the free that Americans keep telling everyone it is
Dont you get it, the fact that she can be asked is clearly targeted harassment against her as a Christian!
sigh
I wish I had a way to accurately convey how much I loathe this trash.
This wretch can't even sniff constitution class, let alone galaxy class.
In a just world she would be disbarred
Why doesn't she get a job at the church if she feels so strongly about it. We don't need her judging people
oh she judges people at church too, to be sure
Well, she can judge people, but just in the sense of giving them side-eye; the kind of judging that has no real effect...and she'd have lots of opportunities to do that with the other church ladies.
Jesus fucking Christ. Why can't Texas be its own country and be the right wing Christo-Fascist hell hole they want to force on the rest of us? Just fucking leave already.
For real, secede already you worthless rednecks! Let's make a straight trade for Puerto Rico so we don't have to change the flags
Funny as fuck for her to whinge about unelected judges while she submits this to the supreme Court... And by funny I mean she's a fucking piece of shit, obviously
If your religion overrides your ability to judge fairly, then you cannot uphold your duty as a judge and should step down.
Wacko, Texastan
You want to enforce Christianity? Go be a pastor not a judge, you fucking cunt.
But pastors only have control over believers, whereas judges get to decide how even members of other religions get to live. /s
Government should not be involved in marriages.
These are contracts between citizens. Nothing more. Consenting adults that need a way to manage the outcome if the contract needs to be disolved.
There is nothing more to do.
And all citizens are equal, male or female, it doesn't matter because you cannot discriminate who gets to enter into a contract.
Who is going to enforce the terms of the contract, if not the government?
That's my point. The government manages and arbitrates contracts. Not marriages in the religious sense. And a contract has to apply equally to all citizens.
I think that's how it works now, and has even prior to gay marriage being the law of the land, but the religious busybodies think their particular religion should somehow have a say in what is a government institution (and merely because of cultural inertia, I guess? xtians seem to think they own the very concept of marriage, which is....hilariously provincial, but that's what xtians seem to excel at).
I think that that would open a can of worms well beyond this issue, considering that religion in general can tell adherents to do things that aren't mandated by secular law.
I also have a pretty difficult time swallowing this in that any Christian mandate isn't on not performing marriages, but on not engaging in homosexual sex yourself. "I don't want to facilitate people in doing things that would be prohibited them if they belonged to my own religion" seems like a pretty wildly unreasonably broad reading of any sort of freedom to practice religion on the judge's part. If she herself was obligated by the job to participate in lesbian sex, okay, then I could see her maybe having an argument for some kind of exemption.
What happens if you have, say, Muslim building inspectors? Are they allowed to not approve a meat-packing plant because it processes pork and if the people who are eating its output were Muslims, as the inspector is, they'd be violating rules of their religion? I mean, that's on par with what she's asking for.
EDIT:
I'd also add that her argument didn't work for Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, and there it was just a private business, not a public official. Ermold v. Davis seems like it'd even more clearly establish a precedent that her argument doesn't work.
EDIT2: Well, okay, there's that one Old Testament verse somewhere about how you have to execute practicing homosexuals. That's the extent to which I can think of the Bible having a mandate regarding someone else engaging in homosexual sex. But even without looking at her complaint, I am very sure that the argument she is trying to make is not "I should be excused from not executing practicing homosexuals".
searches
Leviticus 20:10-16:
I would like to ask the federal courts to end texas judges nationwide.
They’re going to strip abortion rights (done), then LGBTQ2A++ (in progress), then interracial marriage. You know it.
By that "logic," no federal court finding is valid.
How dare these uppity broads thinking they can just leave anytime I have one too many drinks and have to show her whose boss.
/s
I don't think anyone is taking this constant assault step-up as seriously as they should.
We thought Roe Vs Wade was safe, now nobody even talks about it anymore. Project 2025 outlined all of this and how to accomplish it and so far they've been following the playbook to great success.
And we're here "LOL AT THE FUNNY LADY."
Yah it won't pass or even be considered. Today.
But next time someone with more power and influence raises it with a stronger case or argument, most of us will have tuned out as it gains more and more traction. Like they did with everything else so far.
After same-sex marriage they will go after interracial marriage. I dare some fucker to tell me that's hyperbolic, I already know the pretense and argument they will use to "ease" in the long dick of dicking americans.
I misread the title by missing the word "equality" and was intrigued by the idea of a Texas judge calling for the abolishment of marriage XD
I hope DropTheT is proud