Author Topic: Louisiana judge quits. (Read 2102 times)

Dee · « **Reply #30 on:** November 07, 2009, 08:18:02 AM »

No one is shouting anything William but you. Post # 10, post # 18, and post # 24, you have stated the JP is REQUIRED UNDER LAW, to perform the marriage, and say that we are wrong, and you are right. Produce the Law. If it exists, I am sure you can find it on the Internet.
Most here don't seem too anxious to accept your word as law on the matter, and most here seem to grasp the gist of the situation with the JP. You don't seem to.
NOW! Where did you get your information on the duties of the JP? And stop trying to reverse the question for me to answer, to get the heat off yourself, it doesn't work. Is it just what YOU THINK, which I suspect it is, or do you have a source that no one else has like Swampy many times does.

slim rem 7 · « **Reply #31 on:** November 07, 2009, 08:56:31 AM »

i ain t in thier shoes so won t judge them either way..in fact in public office im hired to serve the people..
all the people ..now i might ask them if they have considered the difficulty of marriage as it is ..
then add the trouble of both sides mabe condeming the marriage an you really taking on a job ,,to pull off a successful marriage in this day of quick devorce.. but id just do what all the people have hired me to do.. uphold the law..slim
my wifes son, married a real sweet girl ,,who i think is mabe african or polinesian or something..but i ll let her tell me that ,, if she deems it important..right now she is just a right sweet girl an mother..they not a thing wrong with thier kid ..i know that..slim

Graybeard · « **Reply #32 on:** November 07, 2009, 12:29:03 PM »

As shown in the quote below the JP's wife NOT him told them he would not marry them because they are a mixed race couple. His wife can say what she wants as she's not the JP he is and what she says can't really be reflected back on him unless he too said it. The whole thing is BS. It's just more of the same old BS that's ruining this country at a rapid pace. The skids are greased and we're on a steep down hill ride to hell.

Quote

Beth Humphrey, who is white, has said she and her now-husband, Terence McKay, who is black, received their marriage license from the parish clerk of court, where they also got a list of people qualified to perform the ceremony. When she called Bardwell's office on Oct. 6 to ask, Humphrey said the justice's wife told her that Bardwell wouldn't sign the license because they were a "mixed couple."

Dee · « **Reply #33 on:** November 07, 2009, 12:44:03 PM »

I guess the lesson learned here GB, is don't let an idiot answer the phone huh?

SM Bob · « **Reply #34 on:** November 07, 2009, 02:58:15 PM »

I don't know why this couple didn't just go somewhere else to get married and
be done with it. These days someone speaks their opinion and the other
person gets offended. Oh, call the media! Call the lawyers! Call Morris Dees
of the Southern Poverty Law Center! Call Al Sharpton! Call Jesse Jackson!
He said something I didn't like! Although I might not agree with the J.P.'s
opinion but, he has a right to it. If you don't like the service at some place go
to another one. That applies to a Church, a restaurant, a motel, and even
some place that performs marriages. Just my .02

Robert

powderman · « **Reply #35 on:** November 07, 2009, 02:58:46 PM »

Quote from: gypsyman on November 06, 2009, 08:13:17 AM

Because they found a lawyer that smells money!! gypsyman

YEP. POWDERMAN.

Mohawk · « **Reply #36 on:** November 07, 2009, 05:58:21 PM »

A JP is allowed to perform marriages BUT he is not required to. I know many JP's that have been on the bench for over a decade that have never performed a marriage. When asked they simply say they don't perform marriages. Their duties are primarily small civil claims, warrants, and minor traffic/property crimes. In addition, when the JP performs a wedding he/she charges what they want, because they can since it is a benefit of the office not a requirement of the duties. Example, only a state district judge or higher(appeals judge, supreme court judge) can waive the 72 hour waiting period after a marriage license is bought in Texas. The judges CAN waive them but it is not their required duty to do so or even hear the reason of the couple requesting it. What Dee has said about the duties and non-duties of a Texas JP are correct.

williamlayton · « **Reply #37 on:** November 07, 2009, 07:24:47 PM »

Well---I guess my response went into cyberspace.
Dee
I responded with the thought that as an elected official he must uphold the law and the constitution. I said equality under the law.
Now don't go around waving your arms and saying I don't give reasons for my opinion.
The shoe is on the other foot and you must show me reason---other than your opinion--why he can disregard the law and say he won't do it.
The undelying reason--according to a friend who lives in this area is because he became so blatantly racial.
he set hisownself up for the fall.
Now--give me the reasoning of, other than opinion, how an elected official can say they won't do something that is legal because they are prejudiced against a race.
Please.
Blessings

Graybeard · « **Reply #38 on:** November 08, 2009, 12:50:34 AM »

You've been told but are too thick headed to listen to anything not said by yourself. Read what Mohawk just posted. Folks in law enforcement field have spoken and you aren't listening.

williamlayton · « **Reply #39 on:** November 08, 2009, 02:29:23 AM »

GB
One of us is thickheaded---I believe it to be you.
I have said that it is a violation of the law to refuse on the basis of race---and it is---and he did. That makes him in violation of law.
He understood that and resigned.
Now the law has spoken and if you don't get it--well, anywho.
Blessings

Dee · « **Reply #40 on:** November 08, 2009, 02:36:54 AM »

William in the few years that I have corresponded with you, and attempted to have dialogue with you, I cannot think of a time when your condescending air "did not REFUSE" to accept someones expertise or knowledge, on a topic. I have also NEVER KNOWN YOU, to PRODUCE FACTS, only your own opinions, which were right, regardless of the facts. At least in your mind. You have even TWISTED what you MEANT, when you had no defense while claiming others MISUNDERSTOOD what you meant, although EVERYONE knew precisely what you said. You fool no one but, YOURSELF William. THIS IS AN OLD TRICK OF YOURS WILLIAM. WON'T WORK! GB. HE IS HOPELESS!
Your much exaggerated descriptions of me shouting, and waving my arms around just as you have done in your last two posts is as always, your attempt at portraying you as the wise, and calming one, and me or someone else the hysterical one. Oh yes, and YOU the poignant one, I believe you have described yourself in the past.
It is like someone speaks, and it never resounded in your ears. Like it never happened. Everyone here sees what you are NOT doing, and ARE doing.
Forget it William, I know, and I should have known from past experience, you will never admit to being wrong, or misinformed. It is beyond your capability and grasp. After all. You are WILLIAM.
Yes! Like I said. Forget it. You can't do it, and it is boldly apparent. Finished with ya on this one Bro.

Graybeard · « **Reply #41 on:** November 08, 2009, 02:54:46 AM »

Just ignore him Dan. He's merely a swampman clone. If they say it then it must be right just cuz they said it. Didn't you know GOD passes all knowledge thru them and them alone and the rest of us are expected to bow at their feet and take what they say as the gospel.

Both are too stupid to listen to what anyone else says and expects the world to take all they say as fact even tho like ivory soap 99.44% of the time it's pure BS based on personal belief.

Swampman · « **Reply #42 on:** November 08, 2009, 03:07:42 AM »

Praying for you.

Dee · « **Reply #43 on:** November 08, 2009, 09:58:07 AM »

I have already GB but, I will leave this morcel of wisdom also:

Proverbs Chapter 9 verse 8. "Reprove" not a scorner, LEST HE HATE THEE: "REBUKE" A WISE MAN, AND HE WILL LOVE THEE.

Words indeed to live by. I was corrected the other day on a thread, and because I showed my but on the thread, I apologized to the man on that same thread. None are above reproach. Well, maybe not all here are.

williamlayton · « **Reply #44 on:** November 08, 2009, 11:42:21 AM »

What he did that was illegal was refusing based on race.
Others have said he could have said he was going fishing or unavailable---he could have declared that he does not perform weddings.
I said I admired him for resigning and obeying his Conscience.
You two ---read what I said.
He was wrong--he was challenged, for refuising, based on race. If taken too court he would have been crucified.
Now, I knew/know you two could not admit that you could possibly be wrong--neither ever has.
Based on this fact, who is hardheaded?
Blessings

Dee · « **Reply #45 on:** November 08, 2009, 11:58:18 AM »

Graybeard · « **Reply #46 on:** November 08, 2009, 12:22:45 PM »

Quote

He was wrong--he was challenged, for refuising, based on race. If taken too court he would have been crucified.

One last time for those who apparently can't read, if necessary have your wife read it for you and explain it to you.

He did NOT refuse his wife did for him. What he might or might not have done or said in the past aside in this case they spoke with his wife not him and she told them he would not marry them on that basis. He did not say that to them. Clearly you haven't read the article or have a problem with reading comprehension. It's already been established he was not under legal obligation to marry them either. If he had been the one who said no and that it was race related then federal law comes into play but he did not in this case.

Davemuzz · « **Reply #47 on:** November 08, 2009, 01:18:30 PM »

I'm no attorney.....but:

1) If the JP's wife worked for him, isn't she an "extension" of him? IE: If she say's "the boss" won't marry you because you are an interracial couple, is that any different than the words coming from his mouth? I don't think it is.

2) If the JP marries only same race couples, then decides to stop when interracial couples come in, then begins again when same race couples come in, and so on, I think you can establish a trend here. Seems pretty simple. Any attorney worth their salt could do something this simple and establish a pattern of discrimination.

3) If there is a separation of Church and State, and marriage is a Legal contractual agreement when performed at a JP's office, why is GOD even brought into the argument?

4) Who elected the JP to be judge of the universe? Who put him in charge of pre-determination of how yet to be born children will be received into this world? In ten to fifteen years this guy will be dead and have to answer to his maker about his life choices. This couples yet to be born children will know of him only through stories. Will these children be as successful as Hallie Berry? How about Mariah Carey?

Does this JP's thinking pre-date the civil war? Is he a dinosaur? Will he be on Alzheimer care in a few years?

No one has a contract on tomorrow. And when that judgement day comes, you will answer to your maker. So, did you treat your fellow man as you wish to have been treated? Did it permeate your thoughts as well?

Hey....I'm just sayin.

Dave

dukkillr · « **Reply #48 on:** November 08, 2009, 03:57:19 PM »

1) Yes
2) Yup
3) Because some people must make their religion everyone's business
4) No one (4b) No one (4c) Not likely (4d) Not likely
[5] Yes [5b] Not technically, but figuratively, yes [5c] Probably
[6] Your fellow man, or your fellow white man? [6b] Yes

I actually think these are complicated issues. It reminds me of pharmacists who won't sell products they believe lead to abortions. People should be able to comfortably exist in life without their beliefs being invaded by another persons'. Of course this cuts both ways.

In both instances, you wonder why they take a job that would put them at odds with their beliefs. In this case the judge should simply have made a policy to not do marriages, or do all marriages. I don't think it's his job to be the gate keeper for who gets to marry who. I also wondered if he refused poor people, black people, people with more kids than they can afford already, and any number of other marriage arrangements that lead to statistically disadvantaged kids. Does he make sure to interview each couple to see if they are even going to have kids? Obviously he doesn't, which leads me to believe this was nothing other than base racism, the kind I didn't think was around much anymore.

Dee · « **Reply #49 on:** November 08, 2009, 04:31:01 PM »

dukkillr, you have led a very sheltered life if you believe base racism is getting rarer. You need to visit Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. Oklahoma City, South Oak cliff a suburb of Dallas Texas, Houston on so on. The racism comes from both sides of the isle. The black every bit as prejudice as any white could ever be, and the Mexican also. Even in many areas the Mexican and the black hate each other. In Los Angles the Mexican gangs move the blacks out of their neighborhoods because they want their housing as their population grows. They do it by force and intimidation. In Chicago, the Russians against any race that bucks them, and they fight for supremity in crime profits. When down in the south, or these other areas, and I used to go there several times a week. I have seen it for myself, and EXPERIENCED it for myself. I have PERSONALLY SEEN, trucks get loaded, or unloaded according to the color of skin, waiters wait on customers according to color of skin, and in the north in Chicago, according to the accent one spoke in, or color, or both.
The entire matter concerning the JP, IS about base racism. From the very beginning. All that the man need to have said, or in this case according to GB, his wife could have said, was that he had other plans, and the problem would have never been a problem. You have a President sitting that is BASE RACIALISTIC, concerning not only COLOR, but RELIGION, and CULTURAL.
In parts of New Mexico, the Indians hate the whites, AND the Mexican, and they them. In the north west the whites and Native Americans hate each other.
Our own government show PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. It is called AFFIMATIVE ACTION.

dukkillr · « **Reply #50 on:** November 08, 2009, 04:34:59 PM »

Quote from: Dee on November 08, 2009, 04:31:01 PM

dukkillr, you have led a very sheltered life if you believe base racism is getting rarer. You need to visit Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia. The racism comes from both sides of the isle. When down there, and I used to go there several times a week. I have seen for myself, and EXPERIENCED it for myself.
The entire matter concerning the JP, IS about base racism. From the very beginning. All that the man need to have said, or in this case according to GB, was that he had other plans, and the problem would have never been a problem.

I would say that at least in the midwest, this type of open racism is extremely unusual. I have been to each of the states you listed, and even there I never saw something or someone so blatant. Obviously there are crazies everywhere, but this is a long time professional in a public position...

Dee · « **Reply #51 on:** November 08, 2009, 04:45:50 PM »

I too have been a long time professional in a PUBLIC POSITION. Like 20 plus years in just one. They kill over race in this country. Always have. Nothing has changed.

williamlayton · « **Reply #52 on:** November 08, 2009, 06:20:18 PM »

Thanks for admitting you were wrong Dee. That took a lot.
Blessings
Bill

Mohawk · « **Reply #53 on:** November 08, 2009, 07:47:52 PM »

I was born and raised in South Oak Cliff in Dallas, Tx. Racism has always been a problem there between all races. And all it does is bring down the area. I sold my home in '94 for 50k, cash, just to get out of there! There was a diner off of Illinois Blvd I used to eat at daily before going on duty for over two years. Racism was so bad the cook stabbed the waiter thirteen times one night after work and there went my discounted steak and eggs forever. I attended the trial and it was all about race. So sad and what a shame.

People tend to take racism way too far, as has been said, to benefit themselves. Just look at all the officer involved shootings involving officer and suspects being of different races. I'm still waiting for a training class that teaches officers that when a suspect draws a weapon from their waistline make sure they are of the same race as you.

Davemuzz · « **Reply #54 on:** November 08, 2009, 11:18:21 PM »

Quote from: Dee on November 08, 2009, 04:45:50 PM

I too have been a long time professional in a PUBLIC POSITION. Like 20 plus years in just one. They kill over race in this country. Always have. Nothing has changed.

Nothing does change until those in a position of authority do. You profess to be a man of religion? You profess to practice the teachings of Jesus Christ? You are mortal indeed.

Voter apathy is at it's highest ever because elected officals are corrupt. Even those who are still in office under indictment and obviously guilty still refuse to resign. Again, things will not change until those in power change.

If you are in power and don't change, how do you expect those who look up to you to do the same?

It doesn't matter what the rest of the town, City, world is doing. The walk of 1,000 miles begins with the first step.

Dave

Dee · « **Reply #55 on:** November 08, 2009, 11:28:03 PM »

Quote from: williamlayton on November 08, 2009, 06:20:18 PM

Thanks for admitting you were wrong Dee. That took a lot.
Blessings
Bill

Your as goofy as a stomped ant, and as in most all of your posts, this one doesn't make any sense either.

rio grande · « **Reply #56 on:** November 08, 2009, 11:48:00 PM »

Quote from: Dee on November 08, 2009, 11:28:03 PM

Quote from: williamlayton on November 08, 2009, 06:20:18 PM
Thanks for admitting you were wrong Dee. That took a lot.
Blessings
Bill

Your as goofy as a stomped ant.

Red ant, brown ant, or black ant? Makes a difference, you know:)

I'm hearing a lot about "the Law" here, how you must follow it, obey it, don't question it, dadada...
You know, there were laws holding blacks down at one time, and their were laws in Germany at one time (and today!) you might not have cared for, there's laws in Saudi Arabia that are asinine, why is it that the "Law" is so special?
You either love the JP or hate him, based on your own racial beliefs.
And, yes Virginia, there are non-white racists as well as white ones. Believe me, I know.

williamlayton · « **Reply #57 on:** November 09, 2009, 12:02:22 AM »

Dee
You said he could have used some other excuse.That means he didn't have the right too use that excuse.
Good of you to man up.
Blessings

Dee · « **Reply #58 on:** November 09, 2009, 01:34:37 AM »

Quote from: williamlayton on November 09, 2009, 12:02:22 AM

Dee
You said he could have used some other excuse.That means he didn't have the right too use that excuse.
Good of you to man up.
Blessings

William you are now TROLLING. You are only proving to everyone here that not only are you TROLLING, but INTENTIONALLY trying to provoke me, with your failed argument. You are also PROVING TO ALL, that you have no READING RETENTION SKILLS, or that you DON'T READ AT ALL. I have not changed my analysis of the JP's action from beginning to end of my posts.
You are trying to RE-SPIN YOUR MISTAKES, to make them look like MY MISTAKES.
YOU EITHER ARE NOT ABLE TO RETAIN WHAT YOU READ, OR YOU NEVER READ AT ALL, WHAT I SAID "4 DAYS AGO IN Post#19 IN MY "LAST SENTENCE" OF THE POST".

YOU ARE THE EPTIOMY OF THE "SCORNER" TALKED ABOUT IN PROVERBS CHAPTER 9 VERSE 8. YOU SCORN TRUTH, AND REFUSE TO ACCEPT IT, IF IF DISAGREES WITH YOUR THOUGHTS ON ANY GIVEN SUBJECT, AND INSTEAD ATTEMPT TO TWIST IT.
PROVERBS CHAPTER 9 VERSE 8. REPROVE NOT A "SCORNER", FOR HE WILL HATE THEE,: REBUKE A WISE MAN, AND HE WILL LOVE THEE.

YOU HAVE BECOME "ONCE AGAIN" A TROLL. NOW LEAVE ME ALONE, I AM ONCE AGAIN FINISHED WITH YOU. .

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #59 on:** November 09, 2009, 02:51:22 AM »

The org. post said a Judge , then it became a Justice of the peace . So is he one or the other ? Both ?
What would be the purpose of a Judge if he had no choice ? Is it not the ablity of a Judge to decide for himself that , well makes him a Judge and effective ? To take this away would make Judges unnessary .