Interracial couple denied marriage license
- Thread starter InternetAuthor
- Start date
I am in no way "backing" up this guy in his views, merely stating that he shouldn't have to do what he personally doesn't believe in.
agreed. who is to say he is wrong? if freedom of expression is an issue, it's not like he's the only guy around that has the ability to marry people, so he should have the right to marry those who he feels acceptable, in his discretion. it'd be different if he was the only person that was allowed to perform marriages, but that isn't the case.
and immoral? according to who? is it hypocritical for an atheist to call a racist immoral? depends on who you ask. everyone makes their own decisions and forms their own beliefs according to their experiences. as long as no one is hurt (and fuck feelings, there was no damage done here as they could have gone down the street and gotten married) then let people believe what they want and live by those beliefs. you all expect the same of everyone else.
this doesn't seem to be a legal issue, just a moral one. morals are relative, and besides that, last time I checked, no one would vote wf as an authority on morals.
quote from justice of the peace:
"I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."
He lets them us his bathroom. See, that proves he's not a racist. They're just like everyone else!
"I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."
He lets them us his bathroom. See, that proves he's not a racist. They're just like everyone else!
zimok, he shouldn't have to do something he doesn't believe in? Weren't you just saying that nothing in life is gauranteed? Your argument applies to you too once you start using it to tell someone (turbolapp) not to feel a certain way. I think I agree with you but it leads me to think that if someone wants something in their life they should fight for it and if someone thinks something is wrong they should yell about it. In this case all parties are doing that so what else can possibly happen?
As far as morals are concerned it is really irrelevent -- an individual's priority is establishing/maintaining/improving the quality of their life. Morals are a form of social manipulation to serve that purpose. We try to project them on to others, but we all have a secret moral get out of jail free card for ourselves in our minds. That's where the problem is; each person wants to be an individual but also protect themselves from the individuality of everyone else. Think about it -- turbolapp can think what she wants but only if it doesn't upset your ideas. It's a contradiction in our survival instinct or something like that...
As far as morals are concerned it is really irrelevent -- an individual's priority is establishing/maintaining/improving the quality of their life. Morals are a form of social manipulation to serve that purpose. We try to project them on to others, but we all have a secret moral get out of jail free card for ourselves in our minds. That's where the problem is; each person wants to be an individual but also protect themselves from the individuality of everyone else. Think about it -- turbolapp can think what she wants but only if it doesn't upset your ideas. It's a contradiction in our survival instinct or something like that...
Armchair lawyer, eh? Well, let's get technical...
a) You are correct, it's perfectly legal to recuse oneself.
b) It's also perfectly legal in our state to fire any of your employees on a whim.
In either of the above scenarios, the shit becomes illegal if the action can be proven to have taken place due to racial prejudice and/or a shit-ton of other reasons.
And, a Justice of the Peace isn't anything like a priest when it comes to... Well, anything. They are public officials and are bound by the same rules of judicial conduct as our judges.
Our Code of Judicial Conduct:
cjc.asp
In short, if the dumbass had simply turned them away with a BS excuse: all would be good.
I don't even think he's a "racist" - just stupid.
Let's see here. The power is "vested in him by the state of Louisiana" to marry people. The laws of the State of Louisiana (or anywhere else in the US) do not preclude interracial marriages. Therefore, his opinion should mean fuck-all, since he is simply acting on behalf of the state - a state that has laws protecting any marriage between a man and a woman regardless of race. If he chooses not to honor the laws of Louisiana, then Louisiana should pull his license so that he can no longer perform marriages.
I don't understand why this is so complicated. It's ok that he doesn't agree with interracial marriage. But he can't let his personal beliefs interfere with his duties while acting on behalf of the State of Louisiana.
I don't understand why this is so complicated. It's ok that he doesn't agree with interracial marriage. But he can't let his personal beliefs interfere with his duties while acting on behalf of the State of Louisiana.
