Oregon Judge Investigated for Gay Marriage Policy

547

While Kentucky court clerk Kim Davis has garnered the national spotlight for the last week, she’s not the only judicial officer struggling to square her job duties with her religious convictions. In Oregon, Marion County Judge Vance Day is facing the same conflict. When a 2014 federal court ruling legalized same-sex marriage in Oregon, Day told his staff to refer gay couples to other judges. Realizing that was going to create a firestorm, he announced later in the year that he would no longer be performing wedding ceremonies of any kind.

A reasonable person might see this as a welcome opportunity for compromise. Day abdicated himself from the situation altogether. Gay couples in his district were still able to get married, and Day was able to remain on the right side of his religious beliefs.

But of course, that’s never good enough for the intolerant left. Day is now being investigated by the Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability for his refusal to perform same-sex ceremonies. According to his critics – including gay rights activist Jeana Frazzini – his recusal opens up questions about his ability to preside over a fair court. “Taking that kind of a step really calls into question how an LGBTQ person could expect to be treated in a court of law,” she said. “It goes beyond marriage and gets to serious questions about judicial integrity.”

Wait, so does that mean that any judge who was an activist for gay marriage should also be investigated? Wouldn’t that bring up questions about how impartial they would be with Christian defendants? Or does it only matter when it goes the other way? Ah, right, right. Of course.

No Room to Hide

This only proves that the LGBT movement – working in tandem with an organized atheist network – is not interested in finding a satisfying middle ground. They want compliance, and they are not going to settle for anything less. Their flags say words like “tolerance” and “love,” but they don’t think anything of forcing Christians to betray their beliefs. You WILL comply or else.

Why is that obvious? Because there are so many ways in which these two opposing forces could find compromise. Day’s solution is the simplest, but it’s not the only one. We could have gone the civil unions route, thus taking religious conviction out of the equation. We could have left these decisions to the states.

Instead, the Supreme Court – obviously eager to make their mark on what they consider a major civil rights issue – came out with a ruling that is as unconstitutional as it is nonsensical. And it has had all of the predictable effects that critics were mocked for proposing. It’s not just Davis and Day. Across the country, private business owners are being jailed and fined for refusing to betray their convictions.

This is a full-scale war on Christianity, no matter how laughable liberal writers find that idea. Gay marriage is only one front in this all-encompassing war. The era of religious persecution is upon us, and dark times are ahead.