This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
– U.S. Constitution, Article VI, Paragraphs 2 & 3
But, as always, christianist theocrats want special rights:
A Virginia lawmaker who recently led the fight to block an openly gay man from becoming a judge General District Court judge in Richmond insisted on Thursday that the move had nothing to do with nominee’s sexual orientation, but he was concerned about “bias” in cases between “a homosexual and heterosexual.”
During an interview on CNN with Republican Virginia state delegate Robert Marshall, host Brooke Baldwin compared the struggle for LGBT rights to discrimination against African Americans and asked the lawmaker why he voted to block Richmond prosecutor Tracy Thorne-Begland from becoming a judge in a misdemeanor court.
“We don’t accept everybody who is nominated. Moreover, he would preside — he could preside as a district judge for a marriage of two guys if he wanted to, in violation of the law,” Marshall opined. “Moreover, if you have a bar-room fight between a homosexual and heterosexual, I’m concerned about possible bias.”
“Why would a homosexual – why would a gay person be more likely to be biased in the bar room example than say, you would?” CNN contributor Marc Lamont Hill wondered. “I mean, to be quite frank, I would be more concerned you would be biased against the gay or lesbian person in that case.”
“I wouldn’t apply to be a judge,” Marshall explained. “I am an advocate.”
Well, I agree that a word that begins with “a” and ends with “e” is a proper description of Marshall – though I think it is actually a word with one fewer letter than “advocate.”
“When I was in public school … we all said, ‘Keep us from temptation.’ This was because we said the Lord’s Prayer. Nobody, nobody — should go where they’ll be tempted. That includes me, that includes you, that includes you, that includes a prospective judge.”
Tough shit if the prospective judge – you know, someone who is supposed to apply the law – recognizes the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Lawrence v. Texas as having decided that you, the CNN-oid and any and all prospective judges in any state can indeed engage in – what a cute euphemism – “temptation,” eh?
Would you like Paul Cameron’s phone number?
We all know what the study said (actually, anyone with a brain knew it loooooooooong before the study) about who ferocious homophobes are really attracted to – and Cameron just admitted it. Why don’t the two of you just shut up and shack up?
And be sure to send pictures to Bob McDonnell.