Summary

Syracuse City Court Judge Felicia Pitts Davis refused to officiate a same-sex wedding, citing religious beliefs.

Another judge, Mary Anne Doherty, performed the ceremony.

Pitts Davis’ actions, considered discriminatory under New York judicial ethics and the Marriage Equality Act, are under review by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-63 points
*

Officiating a marriage is a “performance”. A kind of art. It’s not substantially different than giving a speech, acting on stage, or playing music. And forcing people to perform something they don’t believe in, is wrong.

Would it be right to commission a Muslim painter to paint Mohammed, then sue them when they refuse on religious grounds? Would it be right to tell them they have to do it, because they chose to paint portraits for a living?

If it was simply signing another document on a stack with a dozen others, that would be different. There is no art or creativity there. But telling somone they have to give a performance they aren’t comfortable with, is wrong. You don’t force actors to do love scenes against their will. This is substantially the same.

permalink
report
reply
63 points
*

Forcing someone? She’s employed in a public service position and paid by the public means she serves people in all aspects codified by the job. If you can’t, stop collecting your paycheck and go work in the private world, where you can deny anything you want because of your silly religious beliefs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-41 points

Judges are allowed to perform weddings. They aren’t required to. It’s not their job. You need to pay one, unless they’re willing to do it for free. But that’s up to them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

That is not true. It is literally their job. Where are you getting this idea that judges aren’t required to officiate weddings in New York? The article even says she’s violating discrimination laws.

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

No. A priest, sure. They should only offer religious marriage to those who conform to the religion, whatever it is.

State licensing of the relationship, if offered at all, needs to be offered without discrimination. That is separation of church and state. An official of the state must officiate according to the law, not their own personal beliefs.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

Agreed. But the performance of a ceremony shouldn’t be needed at all by the state.

And in this case it almost isn’t. She could have simply been a silent witness to vows, and signed the form.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points
*

She wasn’t being commissioned. She’s a judge. It’s her job. If a Muslim wanted a job at a butcher shop, that Muslim would have to be willing to handle haram meat as part of their job. You don’t commission a butcher shop and you don’t commission a judge.

Also, a marriage is a legal contract. This has nothing to do with art.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-28 points

Judges are allowed to perform weddings. It’s not part of the job. Their job managing court proceedings. If you want one to show up to your wedding on the weekend you usually have to pay them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

That is simply not true in New York and I have no idea why you are talking about this like you’re some authority.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

This was a court proceeding, look at the actual article. The marriage happened in court.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points
*

Per the NY bar, “you can get married by signing a written contract of marriage witnessed by two or more people. The contract must be acknowledged in front of a New York judge by the parties and witnesses.” Doesn’t sound like much more than acknowledging the process and signing the form by the judge. Is that art?

If you’re not willing to do part of a job (officiating at all NY-legal marriages) then don’t take the job. Or quit when you realize you won’t do the job.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Doesn’t sound like much more than acknowledging the process and signing the form by the judge. Is that art?

Judging by the picture in the article, the judge wasn’t just a passive participant who was standing nearby and watching, or sitting in an office and signing a document.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Yes, because in order for the marriage to happen, you need an officiant to ask some questions of both parties and confirm that they know what they signed and that it was all above board. That is not a performance, that is standard court procedure and the minimum requirement to get married.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-19 points

As I said if it was simply signing the next paper in the stack you’d be right. But she was asked to perform the wedding. That’s something else entirely.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points
*

Officiating a marriage is a “performance”.

What kind of bullshit argument is this? Taking the job is agreeing to make those “performances”, as they are part of the job.

Would it be right to commission a Muslim painter to paint Mohammed, then sue them when they refuse on religious grounds?

What nonsense is this? Obviously he shouldn’t have taken that commission!! If he does, it’s perfectly reasonable to sue him for not doing the job he accepted and was paid for.

If it was simply signing another document on a stack with a dozen others, that would be different.

Nope, same thing. Part of the job.

Part of American democracy is that religion and governance is kept separate. What she is doing is undermining the democracy she works for. To favor her religious beliefs instead.
Unfortunately that is all to common for Christians, and they feel entitled to shit on everybody else.
But would you also find it OK if she issued death penalties for working on a Saturday? Should we just accept that?
Religion has no place in public service, and it’s particularly despicable that a judge doesn’t respect that. Her job is literally to uphold the law.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-23 points

Those performances are notpart of the job. The job allows judges to perform weddings. It doesn’t require it. They have actual trials to run most of the time. That’s their job. They do weddings on their off hours, their iwn time. If you want one to perform your wedding you have to ask, and usually pay them to show up. Even when doing them at the courthouse, they’re donating their time. It might even be tax right off.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

So hilariously wrong it hurts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Crushingly idiotic take. You can argue that almost anything done with professional competence is a form of art. It’s her fucking job. She can live her life according to her backward, dark age mythology on her own time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-21 points

Judges do perform weddings on their own time. They are allowed to do them. It’s not part if their day to day 10 to 4 job.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Judges do perform weddings on their own time.

No, they perform them during business hours.

They are allowed to do them. It’s not part if their day to day 10 to 4 job

Yes, it actually is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You are partially correct. Judges are allowed to perform marriages in their off hours as they are ordained to do so.

Big HOWEVER here…

Courthouse weddings are an offered service of the state. These judges are officially on the clock to perform these services which are booked through government infrastructure meaning that when they are performing this service they do so as government employees operating on Government funding. This is provided by the Government as a means to make marriage accessible to all protected legally marriagable couples. When a judge is engaged this way this is specifically what they are being paid by the government to employ their time. They cannot spend their time on other matters.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

Nothin but a lil troll

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I wish I had realized that sooner. Also, I see they pulled the “some of my best friends are homos” card.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Additional issue - how can I trust a judge not to be biased if they can’t get past their own bigotry and do part of the job they were hired to do?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-19 points

They aren’t hired to perform weddings. They are hired to judge court proceedings. As a judge, they’re granted the ability to perform weddings on their own time. But that’s up to them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*

Ok, so you don’t know ny state law at all. Cool!

Edit: for anyone else who doesn’t know ny state law and didn’t want to read the article to read how she violated it: “Judges are authorized, but not obligated, to perform marriages. Judges who choose to perform marriages may not unlawfully discriminate when deciding which couples they will marry.” As she married a hetero couple right before them and then walked out in the middle of her shift when it was this couple’s turn, there’s going to need to be clearly documented extenuating circumstances for this to have been anything but a violation of her duty.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

You either need to do more or less drugs. I’m not sure which.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Wasted time reading this thread, you write with the arrogance of the uninformed convinced it’s deep thinking.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 10K

    Posts

  • 197K

    Comments