Wednesday, July 07, 2004
Remarks about gays: protected- Freedom 1 x Homo-McCarthyism 0
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=13660
Mississippi high court: Judge's remarks about gays are protected
By The Associated Press
07.06.04
JACKSON, Miss. — The Mississippi Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment protects comments of a George County court judge who said he believed homosexuals should be put in a mental institution.
The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance last year asked the Supreme Court to publicly reprimand and fine Judge Connie Glenn Wilkerson, citing him for judicial misconduct.
Lambda Legal, a national gay and lesbian rights group, filed the complaint against Wilkerson.
Wilkerson's remarks about homosexuals were published in a 2002 letter to the George County Times, a weekly newspaper in Lucedale.
In the letter, Wilkerson expressed his opinion about a California law that grants gay partners the same right to sue as spouses or family members.
"In my opinion, gays and lesbians should be put in some type of mental institute instead of having a law like this passed for them," Wilkerson said in the letter.
Wilkerson said then that the letter represented his feelings as a human, not as a judge. He said he didn't mean to offend anyone.
Wilkerson was not in his office on July 2, a clerk said, and there was no answer at his home. The Lambda Legal office in Atlanta was closed for the July 4 holiday.
The Supreme Court, in a 5-2 decision on July 1, said it would not punish Wilkerson for the remarks.
Justice Jess Dickinson, writing for the court in Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Wilkerson, said the statements made by Wilkerson constituted religious and political public-issue speech specially protected by the First Amendment.
"Here, Judge Wilkerson expressed his views on a political/public interest issue — the rights of gays and lesbians," Dickinson wrote. "We therefore may not impose sanctions unless we conclude, under the specific facts of this case, that the restraint the Commission seeks to enforce is 'narrowly tailored' to achieve a 'compelling state interest.'"
Dickinson said it was difficult to conclude Wilkerson's comments posed more of a threat to judicial integrity when courts elsewhere have upheld the right of judges to criticize the judicial system itself.
"There are millions of citizens who believe Judge Wilkerson's religious views are exactly correct," Dickinson wrote. "There are still millions more who find his views insulting. Whether he is right is not the issue here. It is, rather, whether this court can — consistent with the First Amendment — prevent Judge Wilkerson from publicly stating these religious views. We hold that, under the facts of this case, we cannot."
=============================
A reckless person wrote:
If this judge had said the same type of despairing comment about Jews or African-Americans would there be the same outcome?
=======
Alessandra--->>> If this judge had said the same thing about pedophiles, would there be the same outcome? What about pornographers? pimps? exhibitionists? (not that these categories don´t all include partly homo and bisexuals).
The color of the skin, that is, one´s race, is not ever equal to the mental/psychological/sexual structure of a human being, which, regarding sexuality, includes attitudes and behaviors,as well. As so many African-Americans have noted, it´s so ugly to highjack their beautiful struggle of civil rights for sexually dysfunctional or disoriented beings, homo/bisexuals.
To freedom of speech, which is really, just a small step more than freedom of thought.
In these dark days of pro-homosexual indocrination and homo-McCarthyism level of attacks on critical views, this is a victory to celebrate!
Mississippi high court: Judge's remarks about gays are protected
By The Associated Press
07.06.04
JACKSON, Miss. — The Mississippi Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment protects comments of a George County court judge who said he believed homosexuals should be put in a mental institution.
The Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance last year asked the Supreme Court to publicly reprimand and fine Judge Connie Glenn Wilkerson, citing him for judicial misconduct.
Lambda Legal, a national gay and lesbian rights group, filed the complaint against Wilkerson.
Wilkerson's remarks about homosexuals were published in a 2002 letter to the George County Times, a weekly newspaper in Lucedale.
In the letter, Wilkerson expressed his opinion about a California law that grants gay partners the same right to sue as spouses or family members.
"In my opinion, gays and lesbians should be put in some type of mental institute instead of having a law like this passed for them," Wilkerson said in the letter.
Wilkerson said then that the letter represented his feelings as a human, not as a judge. He said he didn't mean to offend anyone.
Wilkerson was not in his office on July 2, a clerk said, and there was no answer at his home. The Lambda Legal office in Atlanta was closed for the July 4 holiday.
The Supreme Court, in a 5-2 decision on July 1, said it would not punish Wilkerson for the remarks.
Justice Jess Dickinson, writing for the court in Mississippi Commission on Judicial Performance v. Wilkerson, said the statements made by Wilkerson constituted religious and political public-issue speech specially protected by the First Amendment.
"Here, Judge Wilkerson expressed his views on a political/public interest issue — the rights of gays and lesbians," Dickinson wrote. "We therefore may not impose sanctions unless we conclude, under the specific facts of this case, that the restraint the Commission seeks to enforce is 'narrowly tailored' to achieve a 'compelling state interest.'"
Dickinson said it was difficult to conclude Wilkerson's comments posed more of a threat to judicial integrity when courts elsewhere have upheld the right of judges to criticize the judicial system itself.
"There are millions of citizens who believe Judge Wilkerson's religious views are exactly correct," Dickinson wrote. "There are still millions more who find his views insulting. Whether he is right is not the issue here. It is, rather, whether this court can — consistent with the First Amendment — prevent Judge Wilkerson from publicly stating these religious views. We hold that, under the facts of this case, we cannot."
=============================
A reckless person wrote:
If this judge had said the same type of despairing comment about Jews or African-Americans would there be the same outcome?
=======
Alessandra--->>> If this judge had said the same thing about pedophiles, would there be the same outcome? What about pornographers? pimps? exhibitionists? (not that these categories don´t all include partly homo and bisexuals).
The color of the skin, that is, one´s race, is not ever equal to the mental/psychological/sexual structure of a human being, which, regarding sexuality, includes attitudes and behaviors,as well. As so many African-Americans have noted, it´s so ugly to highjack their beautiful struggle of civil rights for sexually dysfunctional or disoriented beings, homo/bisexuals.
To freedom of speech, which is really, just a small step more than freedom of thought.
In these dark days of pro-homosexual indocrination and homo-McCarthyism level of attacks on critical views, this is a victory to celebrate!
Comments:
Post a Comment
