(February 25, 2012 at 8:27 am)Rhythm Wrote: While I can understand her position, and I can appreciate that she has found a way to a voice her opinion on such matters, her seat as a judge may not be the best platform for activism. That's all I'm saying. Can't get angry with the church-lady for refusing to marry homosexuals, and then applaud this judge for making exactly the same decision in reverse.
The difference here is that the "church lady" is required by law to marry gay people. This judge isn't required by law to do any marriages. If your job description says you have to do something, then you are required by law to do it, or to find another job.