That’s the recommendation of the Ohio Supreme Court’s Board of Professional Conduct. In their opinion, judges should not be allowed to marry only opposite-sex couples or even forego marrying anyone in order to avoid marrying same-sex couples. Either marry same-sex couples or find a new job:
A judge’s oath to support the constitutions of the United States and the State of Ohio requires the judge to recognize and adhere to binding court interpretations of the same. A judge’s unilateral decision to refuse to perform same-sex marriages based on his or her own personal, religious, or moral beliefs ignores the holding in Obergefell and thus, directly contravenes the oath of office.
In other words, Christian judges who want to be faithful to their God and their conscience need not apply. Religious liberty and the freedom of conscience is not allowed as a judge. We are watching religious liberty and the freedom of conscience erode before our very eyes and yet few hear the alarm going off. We said it would happen, and it’s happening left and right. This is just the beginning.
Everyone on the left said that giving rights to gays and allowing same-sex marriage wouldn’t affect anyone. It was a lie. The effects have been immediate. Think of all the professions that Christians are being excised from by the threat of the law: judge, county clerk, florist, wedding photographer, wedding cake baker, wedding planner, adoption agency. The list will continue to grow. People outside of the law and wedding industry are already starting to lose their jobs simply for believing in natural marriage. I fear this trend will only grow in the coming years.
HT: The Blaze
Thinking to Believe 
September 1, 2015 at 5:12 am
Jason,
You said:
“Everyone on the left said that giving rights to gays and allowing same-sex marriage wouldn’t affect anyone.”
Though I would not describe myself as “on the left”, you would probably consider me as such. so I want to comment.
In my case, I realized that a Supreme Court decision that declared same sex marriages a constitutional right would, certainly, affect many people, such as wedding cake makers, and those who work for the departments that issue licenses. It is one of the reasons I had hoped the Supreme Court would not go that far.
But they did. Will the next case be about whether a pastor must marry a gay couple. I often listen to radically left radio, as well as Limbaugh and some commentators that make Limbaugh look like a communist sympathizer. Believe me, the far left is planning to make it mandatory that pastors marry gay couples.
Which will most likely bring all this to another Supreme Court Case where the constitutional guarantees regarding religion will clash with the new constitutional rights regarding gay marriage. My guess, maybe it is a hope, is that the Supreme Court will not require pastors to marry gay couples. That, of course, would cause the exit of many pastors from marring anybody. The Supreme Court justices are very smart and very cognizant of how their decisions affect others. I would think they will be very, very reluctant to allow same sex marriage rights to trump the established rights regarding religion.
However, those who work as bakers and license makers seem to have lost this fight.
Randy
LikeLike
September 1, 2015 at 12:35 pm
Religious liberty is not an excuse to discriminate against others but it is used for that purpose at every opportunity. In this way they show their intolerance to other people as was used so often when whites didn’t want to serve negroes in their restaurants, did not want them sitting in front of the bus with the righteous whites, did not want them to use the same toilet facilities or drink from the same water fountain, go to the same church, same school as white folks. Religious folks do exactly the same thing with the religious liberty card to express discrimination against those they disagree with in their zeal of Absolute Certainty.
It has nothing to do with God; it has only got to do with one group of people taking liberties they are not entitled too by trying to put religion on a plateau it has no right to assume.
Why protest against others using religious liberty? Christianity has almost everything going its way – culture and art for the last two millennia have been subject to its influence. It is in the home, it permeates society, and it recruits young. But religion is losing the war on every front.
But you all are still whining about your perceived self righteousness, the disguise for discrimination and intolerance but sure to complain when that same intolerance and discrimination is shown against Christians in the Middle East and other non-christian religious countries.
Mat 5:43-44 “You’re familiar with the old written law, ‘Love your friend,’ and its unwritten companion, ‘Hate your enemy.’ I’m challenging that. I’m telling you to love your enemies. Let them bring out the best in you, not the worst. When someone gives you a hard time, respond with the energies of prayer, for then you are working out of your true selves, your God-created selves. This is what God does. He gives his best. 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
46-47 to everyone, regardless: the good and bad, the nice and nasty. If all you do is love the lovable, do you expect a bonus? Anybody can do that. If you simply say hello to those who greet you, do you expect a medal? Any run-of-the-mill sinner does that.
If Pastors do not want to marry same sex partners then perhaps their license for performing any marriage may be stricken and their marriage ceremonies rendered worthless. This is what will happen if you want only the rain to fall on your nice people and keep the sun from shining on those you consider unjust. The government builds mass transit freeways to serve all citizen travelers, elevators take all people to the top of the building, the electric grid is not just for Christians or people of religious bent and social security, the police, the military protect everybody. Take a lesson from Government if you cannot learn from the words of Jesus.
LikeLike
September 1, 2015 at 12:45 pm
Who cares if a Pastor performs marriages? He brings nothing special to the table when it comes to marriage. Can any Christian tell me what part of “know” they don’t understand from Jesus when he spoke the following:
Matthew 5:40-47
40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Love for Enemies
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?
LikeLike
September 2, 2015 at 1:08 pm
Evidently it goes both ways:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/06/the-fired-lesbian-teacher-fighting-back-against-the-catholic-church.html
LikeLike
September 3, 2015 at 12:27 am
Randy,
I agree that there are those who want to force pastors to marry same-sex couples, and I’m sure there will be lawsuits about it. My guess is that the lawsuits will come in two stages: First, same-sex couples will sue pastors/churches for refusing to rent out the church for their same-sex ceremony. They will win. Then, there will be lawsuits against ministers for not agreeing to officiate these ceremonies.
Will they win? I don’t know. It happened in Denmark (http://bit.ly/1PMR2hz). Of course, Denmark and the U.S. are different. We have greater religious freedom laws and a separation of church and state. But, what we have seen is a quick erosion of our religious freedom, particularly in the area of conscientious objection. We’ve already seen how the government is forcing government employees to be involved with same-sex marriage. We’ve seen the same thing in the private sector when it comes to business. Whenever religious freedom has come up against gay rights thus far, gay rights are declared superior. So why think that when it comes to the religious realm, that religious freedom will suddenly win the day and pastors will not be forced to officiate same-sex weddings? Granted, with a Supreme Court that just invents law rather than interpreting it, all things are possible. I’m just not holding my breath given what we’ve seen thus far.
Jason
LikeLike
September 3, 2015 at 12:33 am
Frank, it’s not the same. It has always been Catholic teaching that homosexuality is wrong. The only reason she got hired was because the people who run the school are bad Catholics. She shouldn’t complain about the firing any more than an unrepentant adulterer should complain the s/he was fired.
In the case of the state, they just changed the rules, and now they are expecting everyone to walk in step with it despite religious beliefs and conscientious objections.
Jason
LikeLike
September 3, 2015 at 8:51 am
Jason,
Regardless of how you happen to feel or what you think about adultery or homosexuality or fornication you can’t rationalize discrimination as not being discrimination. Whether you rape a prostitute or a nun it’s still rape. If someone commits gluttony or envy or adultery or idolatry do you deny them equal housing or equal employment opportunity? Are we to employ double standards? If you want to coax your argument by referring to “bad catholics” then you’re walking on quicksand. Which is the greater sin? You or anybody else, including Pope Francis [Does he fit your definition of a “bad catholic”?], in this realm simply isn’t authorized or qualified to make that determination [1 Timothy 2:1-6]. As it teaches in Psalm 51 all sin is against God’s Law & between God and the sinner. We inflict offense upon God so ultimately it’s His forgiveness we must seek. He calls the judgment, no one else. It’s to Him that we’re accountable. If you decide to in your own estimation warn a brother or sister about what you see as “the error of their ways” there aren’t any laws against altruism; free speech is a protected right under our Constitution and you just like everybody are entitled to your opinion but don’t be unduly surprised or offended when they see you as ignorant, arrogant, overbearing and wrong-headed while sincerely urging you to mind your own business. Consider the speck and the log [Matthew 7:1-6].
– Frank
LikeLike
September 3, 2015 at 9:36 am
What this argument is really about is Secularism vs Religionism and Religionism is losing on every front. Religion is a failed science.
Marriage and same sex marriage is automatically a religious issue because “sex” is what Religion uses to claim its rightful platform to argue about and control.
This school year, 2015, the Provincial(State) Ontario Government in Canada announced that a new “Sex Ed” curriculum will be introduced. And lo and behold out come the religious proselytes attacking it because of Religion, the religious troops holding signs that proclaim “Respect Religious Values”.
“……..Building confidence for those relationships will come in Grade 6, then consent in Grades 7 and 8. By Grade 9, students will know who to turn to if they or their friends are experiencing abuse. They’ll review red flags, such as jealousy, isolation, intensive pressure and constant monitoring via text, e-mail or social media. And in Grade 10, students will learn about being an ethical ex: be respectful and don’t spread lies – or your former partner’s nude selfies – online…….”.
But religion is more than just a belief, religion wants to impose a universal morality which is why it has always attracted the kind of person who thinks other people’s private lives are their business. And giving respect to this “Religious Values” mentality is exactly what’s got us into the mess that we’re in.
We’ve given religion ideas that are above its station and we persuaded it that it’s something it’s not. When the truth is that faith is nothing more than the deliberate suspension of disbelief. It’s an act of will. It’s not a state of grace; it’s a state of choice.
Religion always wants it their way. Cohabitation between same sex couples for example and they have their arguments why it is forbidden, by their mythological Cosmic Tutor, the one you call God now and then.
A Tutor that some of our neighbors believe in is essentially an invisible person, a creator deity who created the universe to have a relationship with one species of primate, humankind. And he’s got galaxy upon galaxy to attend to but he’s especially concerned with what we do, and he’s especially concerned with what we do when naked.
And he almost certainly disapproves of homosexuals cohabiting, because the ancient Preachers (Prophets) disapproved of it culturally, hence religiously, hence Godly decreed, but not only homosexuals, heterosexuals cohabiting as well; and in particular everything to do with that precondition of life itself, everything “sexual”. Co-habitation is forbidden without the express permission of God’s religious, self-appointed messenger preachers on earth who MUST sanctify all human life interactions: who to love, what to wear, foods to eat, places to worship, when to worship, when to work, tithes to give, when to have sex, where to have sex and with whom to have sex.
God’s will, so called, is revealed in the “holy” scriptures. The sacred book formulates the will of God and specifies what is to be given to the clergy. Clergy become parasites. “… All things of life are so ordered that the clergy is everywhere indispensable; at all the natural events of life, at birth, marriage, sickness, death. Not to speak of ‘sacrifice’ (meal–times)… .” Natural values become utterly valueless. The Clergy sanctifies and bestows all value. Disobedience of God (the clergy) is ‘sin.’ Subjection to God (the clergy) is redemption. Clergy use ‘sin’ to gain and hold power. Sex without Clergy permission is sinful, lust, fornication, adultery yada, yada
The fight is “Secularism vs Religionism and of Religionism sin, sex, God are the scapegoats for the religious mindsets of the ancients of ten thousand centuries past.
Religion cannot change because of the limits the ancients have set and can only change by dying to a living, thriving, reasoning, common sense, secular world. Religion is a destructive force; it cannot be a constructive force. Witness the religious wars of the past and current religious conflicts around the world, religious factions fracture all humanity in its path.
Religious civilization is not a progressive force, it is a regressive force; it does not give impetus, it retards. The great civilizations were not a religious accomplishment, it was an accomplishment that Religion expropriated and subsequently lost when it drained, through the forced proselytization the source of the intellectual vitality that propelled it. What other religious civilization has risen since? What other religious successes can we cite?
Religious Ideology is engaged in an explicit campaign of destruction and expropriation of cultures and communities, identities and ideas. Wherever religious civilization encounters a non-religious one, it attempts to destroy it. This is a pattern that has been recurring since the advent of religion hundreds of centuries ago, and is amply substantiated by the historical record.
If the “foreign” culture cannot be destroyed, then it is expropriated, and revisionist historians claim that it is and was spawned by the particular religion of the generation, as is the case of most of the religious “accomplishments” cited by believers.
Even today in Kentucky, the judge presiding over the hearing on a motion to hold a Contempt of Court Order against the Clerk, Kim Davis for refusing to obey the Law to issue marriage licenses, had to have extra police security to escort the Judge to the court…why do you think that the police considers religion to be a destructive force operating under the guise of religious liberty in light of them to taking the precaution of “extra security to escort” the judge? Are they protecting the judge from the flowers the secularists might throw at the judge? Or from secularists taking palm branches down the road to meet him shouting, Blessings on the one who comes in the name of the LAW & TRUTH? I don’t think so.
LikeLike
September 3, 2015 at 10:56 am
Frank:
I like your analogous sentence: I states something quite profound actually.
“Whether you rape a prostitute or a nun it’s still rape.”
Leo
LikeLike
September 3, 2015 at 11:51 pm
Frank,
You’ve missed the point. My point is that a person who takes a job with an institution that requires employees to be sexually pure (as they for the past 2000 years) should not complain when she gets fired for not abiding by the rules. That’s always been the rule. That’s quite different than a person who took a job when the rules did not include “you shalt issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples,” and now there is no accommodation for her conscientious objection to the new rule, particularly when this country has a history of honoring the liberty of conscience.
As for “bad Catholics,” I am referring to those who ignore key elements of their purported faith. If you claim to be a Catholic but you do not believe Catholic doctrine and do not abide by it, then you are a bad Catholic.
Jason
LikeLike