LGBT Group in Texas Objects to Christian Judge Because He Can't Be Objective to Gays
U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled Sept. 22 that a ban on drag shows at West Texas A&M University put in place by university President Walter Wendler could remain in effect amid an ongoing legal challenge.
In the ruling, Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee and former attorney with First Liberty Institute, a religious liberty advocacy group, said drag performances containing “sexualized expressive conduct” are not protected under the First Amendment.
Following the ruling, which conflicted with court decisions in Texas, Montana, and other states blocking state and local bans on exposing minors to drag performances, an LGBT pride group based in Lubbock, Texas, voiced its “extreme disappointment” with the ruling, and specifically cited the judge’s religious beliefs as cause to suspect the ruling might not be “fair and impartial.”
In a Sept. 24 statement, Lubbock PRIDE spokesman Nick Harpster pointed to LGBT opposition to Kacsmaryk’s nomination “due to his past comments on both [LGBT] and contraceptive rights,” and “questioning how someone with his beliefs could possibly be fair and impartial when encountering cases of this nature.”
“Judges are supposed to set any personal beliefs and opinions aside and rule on cases with impartiality and fairness,” Harpster wrote. “From this decision, it is fairly clear that this was not the case …”
The group also took exception to the judge's ruling that the First Amendment “does not prevent school officials from restricting ‘vulgar and lewd’ conduct that would ‘undermine the school’s basic educational mission’ — particularly in settings where children are physically present” and suggested the judge’s ruling could “incite animosity towards the drag community.”
“We continue to see this type of language used in order to incite animosity towards the drag community and the [LGBT] community as a whole,” said Harpster. “To present drag performances as sexual in nature and to make the claim that children are in some way harmed by a drag performance, especially one that is marketed as family-friendly, is ludicrous and boldly inaccurate.”
He also cited Wendler’s use of “overt religious references” in his decision to ban the performance at West Texas A&M and shared “a reminder that all people are protected under the law, and your personal beliefs cannot mandate who gets to exercise their freedom of expression.”
“We cannot stand idly by and allow the religious beliefs or personal opinions of a judge, a legislator, or any person in the position of power to infringe on the civil liberties or human rights of an entire community of people,” he wrote.
Described by The Washington Post as a “devout Christian,” Kacsmaryk, 45, was involved in another controversial ruling in April when he temporarily suspended the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's approval of the chemical abortion drug Mifepristone, a ruling which was later partially reversed and could ultimately land in U.S. Supreme Court.
Lubbock Pride, which hosts an annual “family-friendly” pride event for “people of all ages,” held a “Teen Drag Race” in 2017 and has held “story hour” events featuring men wearing women’s clothing while reading books to children.
About time. This judge isn't being opposed because of his religion. He's being opposed because time and time, his rulings have shown an ugly bias. This is a secular courtroom. It doesn't matter what his personal religious feelings are. This is not a theocracy.
God calls LGBT an Abomination. It shouldn't even be legal. The worst mistake the West made was legalizing homosexuality.
As a deeply involved, practicing Christian, I agree with your 1st statement. As a citizen of the "world" and especially of the USA, I don't think I can agree with your 2nd. The USA is a secular nation, albeit based on J/C principles. The main tenet of our government is individual freedoms. Do we h...
So, let's reverse all this. Should we throw a pro-LBGTmnohq or practicing lesbian off the bench because of their beliefs? Judges are supposed to judge by the LAW not their personal beliefs. Just because American law "was" based upon Judeo-Christian standards does not make it wrong.
American law was never based on Judeo-Christian standards. The US is secular by law, which is why there is no mention of any gods in the US Constitution.
First of all, it's naĂ¯ve to think that personal beliefs are not the central reason why someone gets a judgeship.
Second, Conservative Christians showed just how much personal belief mattered when they justified voting for Trump because he would put conservative justices on the bench who would overt...
Also: The Pope Says it might be alright to bless gay couples but being gay is a sin ??????
Comments