Virginia's Judicial Lynching of Gays

No, this is not another post about Bob McDonnell's "lynching" of Judge Verbena Askew during the reappointment hearings back in 2003. Instead it's another look at the judicial lynching of gay spouses that happens likely nearly daily somewhere in Virginia where homophobic judges are allowed to ingnore the Canons of Judicial Conduct at will even thought Canon 3 provides in relevant part as follows:

*
CANON 3. A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY.

*
Judicial Duties in General. The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge's other activities. The judge's judicial duties include all the duties of the judge's office prescribed by law. In the performance of these duties, the following standards apply.

*
Adjudicative Responsibilities.
*

5. A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not permit staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so. This Section 3B(5) does not preclude proper judicial consideration when race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, or similar factors, are issues in the proceeding.

*
6. A judge shall require all persons appearing in proceedings before the judge to refrain from manifesting, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, against parties, witnesses, counsel or others.
*
E. Disqualification.
1. A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where: a. The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party's lawyer, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;

*

These dictates have certainly been ignored in my own divorce case and in those of many others gay spouses I have heard from who came out later in life after being married. Here's one individual's comment on his experience:

*

There is a lot of hoopla about gay men coming out early, and good for them, I say. Yet there are many many men who married because it was the expected thing, because it was the only thing. And they face hard hard choices.

*
I opted to come out. I lost nearly everything and everyone, including wife, kids, family, friends, job, court cases. Faced with similar choices, a friend and former co-worker (who worked for the same religious-based organization I had) drowned himself. The pain is real. folks. Awfully, terribly real.

*

Losing everything and suicides - does any of this mean anything to many Virginia judges? Sadly, it means nothing to I suspect a majority of Virginia's judges. Indeed, in my view, judges who punish LGBT litigants for failure to adhere to the judge's personal anti-gay religious views are the norm as opposed to the exception. Something needs to be done and judges who cannot put their anti-gay religious bias aside need to simply be removed from the bench. It's really that simple. And someone needs to see that the Canons of Judicial Conduct are actually enforced for a change.