“California’s Supreme Court voted Friday to prohibit state judges from belonging to the Boy Scouts on grounds that the group discriminates against gays,” reports the Blaze. I know this sounds like another piece of crazy, progressive legislation, but I believe California, got it right this time. Let me explain why.
“The court said its seven justices unanimously voted to heed a recommendation by its ethics advisory committee barring judges’ affiliation with the organization.
In 1996 the state Supreme Court banned judges from belonging to groups that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, but made an exception for nonprofit youth organizations.
The Supreme Court’s Advisory Committee on the Code of Judicial Ethics in February recommended eliminating the exception to enhance public confidence in the judiciary.
The group allows the participation of openly gay boys but continues to prohibit gay and lesbian adults from serving as leaders,” reports the Blaze.
Firstly, the California Supreme Court voted unanimously in favor of this legislation. The legislation does not prohibit the participation of gay boys, only leaders, and that is what this organization is all about, the boys, not the leaders. In addition, the legislation was passed in the interest of upholding the integrity of the judiciary system. I know of few more noble causes than the integrity of the justice system. If the judges are involved with this organization it could cause the people to question the integrity of the judges, regardless of the judge’s personal beliefs. Therefore if the judges are not connected with this organization there is much less cause for doubt of their integrity amongst the people. We must remember that judges are only human, and no matter how good their intentions are, it is difficult for us to set aside our personal biases and beliefs.
In addition, this legislation was supported by “the California Judges Association,” according to the Blaze. “‘The only remaining exception to the general rule is membership in a religious organization,’ said Fourth District Court of Appeal Justice Richard D. Fybel, chair of the Supreme Court’s Advisory Committee on the Code of Judicial Ethics.
One other exception — belonging to a military organization — was eliminated as well, because the U.S. armed forces no longer restrict military service based on sexual orientation,’”Fybel added, according to the Blaze. These exceptions are what make this legislation acceptable in my mind and not just another piece of progressive legislation. The exceptions allow for people’s religious beliefs, which is the main reason that people ‘discriminate’ against gays.
“Of 47 states that ban judges from joining discriminatory groups, 22 states, including California, include a bar on groups that show bias on the basis of sexual orientation. California was the only one of those states that made exceptions for youth groups,” reports the Blaze. Judges have until Jan 21, 2016 to comply with the legislation.
This legislation is acceptable because it is in the interest of upholding the integrity of the justice system, while still allowing people to comply with the religious beliefs, thus not violating their first amendment rights.