Magistrate sacked over views on adoption to same sex couples plans legal action

First topic message reminder :


Richard Page, 69, who served as a magistrate in Kent, told the BBC last year it would be better for a man and a woman to be the adopted parents.

The Judicial Conduct Investigations Office deemed this serious misconduct.

His lawyers say they will bring an employment tribunal for discrimination over his religious beliefs.

Mr Page, who served in Sevenoaks and Maidstone, sat on the Kent Central family panel and was a magistrate for 15 years. He was sacked earlier this month.

This followed a BBC interview in March 2015 in which he had said that it was his duty as a magistrate to act on the evidence alone, and that there had not yet been a proper analysis of the effects that placing children with same-sex couples had on the child's well-being.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-35796557


A child is better off in a stable home environment with a mother and a father... so it stands to reason that an adopted child should only be placed in the best environment for them too, which would be with mother and my father adoptive parents.

The doctor can't find your brain cell Tommy

Or is it an example of how lefties have such limited mental capacity that they can only hold one thought/idea at a time...!?

Not this old chestnut again Tommy ffs.

I'm sorry to do this to you as I don't like to but.....
You have no children, haven't worked with children, or studied case studies, or looked after them as a nanny, as I have (all of above) so how do you know what you think is right for children??


You're talking utter pig shit.

eddie wrote:Not this old chestnut again Tommy ffs.

I'm sorry to do this to you as I don't like to but.....
You have no children, haven't worked with children, or studied case studies, or looked after them as a nanny, as I have (all of above) so how do you know what you think is right for children??


You're talking utter pig shit.

+1

eddie wrote:Not this old chestnut again Tommy ffs.

I'm sorry to do this to you as I don't like to but.....
You have no children, haven't worked with children, or studied case studies, or looked after them as a nanny, as I have (all of above) so how do you know what you think is right for children??


You're talking utter pig shit.

Nothing changes.

He doesn't speak from actually understanding and knowing children!
Children just love and want to be loved.
Played with
Tickled
Fed
Clothed
Cuddled when they're crying
Taught right from wrong
Spoken to as little people
Told that "they're the bestest ever in the world!"
Assured over and over that whatever they do you'll love them
Kept warm and safe and secure and tickled

Now tell me; do you have to be a "specific gender couple" to do any of that?????
Or just a loving parent?

eddie wrote:He doesn't speak from actually understanding and knowing children!
Children just love and want to be loved.
Played with
Tickled
Fed
Clothed
Cuddled when they're crying
Taught right from wrong
Spoken to as little people
Told that "they're the bestest ever in the world!"
Assured over and over that whatever they do you'll love them
Kept warm and safe and secure and tickled

Now tell me; do you have to be a "specific gender couple" to do any of that?????
Or just a loving parent?

Just a loving parent.  With you 100% on this one.

It's not about what I think... it is about the op.. the magistrate making a decision based on the evidence... him subsequently being sacked for not doing the 'right' thing . and the findings of one of the latest and most comprehensive studies...!


Come on eddie... you don't have to have kids to have an opinion on what might be best for kids...!

Thought you were better than trying a lame argument than that!!!

Actually Tommy I think you'll find I'm very much of the opnion that until you've been there/seen it/done it, your opnion isn't worth as much as those that have....??

Have you not heard me say to Veya/Ben/Quill that until they've lived in the Uk they couldn't possibly KNOW what it's like to be in the UK etc??

And you've agreed with me.

So Tommy, seriously, your argument is like a piss in a teapot on this one: not even gonna be considered mate.

Tommy Monk wrote:
It's not about what I think... it is about the op.. the magistrate making a decision based on the evidence... him subsequently being sacked for not doing the 'right' thing .  and the findings of one of the latest and most comprehensive studies...!


Come on eddie... you don't have to have kids to have an opinion on what might be best for kids...!

Thought you were better than trying a lame argument than that!!!

He never made a decision based on evidence but an opinion

As again how do you explain why there is many children today and previously now as adults who are happy and healthy being raised by gay parents and singles parents?

He never presented evidence but bullshit based on his own bigoted views

Hence why rightly, he was sacked

Great day for equality

eddie wrote:He doesn't speak from actually understanding and knowing children!
Children just love and want to be loved.
Played with
Tickled
Fed
Clothed
Cuddled when they're crying
Taught right from wrong
Spoken to as little people
Told that "they're the bestest ever in the world!"
Assured over and over that whatever they do you'll love them
Kept warm and safe and secure and tickled

Now tell me; do you have to be a "specific gender couple" to do any of that?????
Or just a loving parent?

Come on eddie...!

Put away the fluffy bunnies and pink unicorns... and the whisky...!


Kids need a lot more than that!

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:He doesn't speak from actually understanding and knowing children!
Children just love and want to be loved.
Played with
Tickled
Fed
Clothed
Cuddled when they're crying
Taught right from wrong
Spoken to as little people
Told that "they're the bestest ever in the world!"
Assured over and over that whatever they do you'll love them
Kept warm and safe and secure and tickled

Now tell me; do you have to be a "specific gender couple" to do any of that?????
Or just a loving parent?

Come on eddie...!

Put away the fluffy bunnies and pink unicorns... and the whisky...!


Kids need a lot more than that!

As again how do you explain why there is many children today and previously now as adults who are happy and healthy being raised by gay parents and singles parents?

Tommy Monk wrote:

eddie wrote:He doesn't speak from actually understanding and knowing children!
Children just love and want to be loved.
Played with
Tickled
Fed
Clothed
Cuddled when they're crying
Taught right from wrong
Spoken to as little people
Told that "they're the bestest ever in the world!"
Assured over and over that whatever they do you'll love them
Kept warm and safe and secure and tickled

Now tell me; do you have to be a "specific gender couple" to do any of that?????
Or just a loving parent?

Come on eddie...!

Put away the fluffy bunnies and pink unicorns... and the whisky...!


Kids need a lot more than that!

I haven't had a whisky Tommy lol but I'll put away the fluffy bunny

Tell me, what have I missed off my list? I'll answer each and every one I've missed.

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:
It's not about what I think... it is about the op.. the magistrate making a decision based on the evidence... him subsequently being sacked for not doing the 'right' thing .  and the findings of one of the latest and most comprehensive studies...!


Come on eddie... you don't have to have kids to have an opinion on what might be best for kids...!

Thought you were better than trying a lame argument than that!!!

He never made a decision based on evidence but an opinion

As again how do you explain why there is many children today and previously now as adults who are happy and healthy being raised by gay parents and singles parents?

He never presented evidence but bullshit based on his own bigoted views

Hence why rightly, he was sacked

Great day for equality

Great day for equality...!!!???


While his evidence based opinion in the case was not given any equality...!

Instead he was persecuted for daring to have an equally legitimate opinion... all in the name of equality...!

eddie wrote:Actually Tommy I think you'll find I'm very much of the opnion that until you've been there/seen it/done it, your opnion isn't worth as much as those that have....??

Have you not heard me say to Veya/Ben/Quill that until they've lived in the Uk they couldn't possibly KNOW what it's like to be in the UK etc??

And you've agreed with me.

So Tommy, seriously, your argument is like a piss in a teapot on this one: not even gonna be considered mate.

Just for you to consider whilst considering my other points

Come on eddie... you don't have to have had a chicken to have an opinion as to whether battery or free range is best for them...


But it's not about me or my opinion... it's about the op and a conclusive study...

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didge wrote:


He never made a decision based on evidence but an opinion



He never presented evidence but bullshit based on his own bigoted views

Hence why rightly, he was sacked

Great day for equality

Great day for equality...!!!???

As again how do you explain why there is many children today and previously now as adults who are happy and healthy being raised by gay parents and singles parents?
While his evidence based opinion in the case was not given any equality...!

Instead he was persecuted for daring to have an equally legitimate  opinion... all in the name of equality...!

Yes a great day for equality that a person has been sacked as they are unfit to server the office given to them

His evidence was made up bullshit tommy, as countless children raised by gay and single parents prove he is a bigoted imbecile

So again how do you explain why there is many children today and previously now as adults who are happy and healthy being raised by gay parents and singles parents?

Tommy Monk wrote:


Come on eddie... you don't have to have had a chicken to have an opinion as to whether battery or free range is best for them...


But it's not about me or my opinion... it's about the op and a conclusive study...

Tommy raising a child is not like talking about whether a chicken is tastier/healthier to eat. It's a tad more complex and has a myriad of complexities about it!

I never speak down to you and I never think you're stupid, but in this, you stubbornly hold this view that a bay couple are somehow going to raise a child in "the wrong way"

Just tell me what fears you have for this hypothetical child, raised by wolves, I mean gay people...?

Lord Foul wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/new-study-on-homosexual-parents-tops-all-previous-research





And Vic... he said he was basing his judgement on the evidence alone... although he was then sacked because the authorities tried to claim it was because of his religious bias... so he is now bringing a claim of religious discrimination...


His evidence based decision has been twisted into a religious based decision by the authorities on their desire to sack him for doing what he genuinely believes is in the best interests of the child and for not bowing down to the progressive pc agenda...


If they are going to try to sack him because of his perfectly reasonable religious beliefs and only because of that... then that is definitely a case of religious discrimination!!!

the Family research council  

thats as amusing as didge and ragga quoting PETA as a "reliable/unbiased source"



Sorry tommy ...you have just destroyed any slight credibility you may have had......

I haven't ever quoted anything from PETA.

veya_victaous wrote:

Stormee wrote:

I will NEVER get used to it.

Can you not see the danger we are lazily, speddily going headlong into?
muziz are not of any benefit to us islanderz.

You Beter cause Most of us Dont want YOU on our Planet Fuckwit
 

Get it through Your HEAD there is NO YOUR island anymore!!
it is OUR planet and we Will destroy EVERY single Fuckwit that thinks like you.
Dont care if it is You or ISIS to me you are the same. the Quicker you are removed from existance the better.

It's not your planet.

Raggamuffin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Stormee wrote:

I will NEVER get used to it.

Can you not see the danger we are lazily, speddily going headlong into?
muziz are not of any benefit to us islanderz.

You Beter cause Most of us Dont want YOU on our Planet Fuckwit
 

Get it through Your HEAD there is NO YOUR island anymore!!
it is OUR planet and we Will destroy EVERY single Fuckwit that thinks like you.
Dont care if it is You or ISIS to me you are the same. the Quicker you are removed from existance the better.

It's not your planet.

it is Our Planet.

and Just like the road user that doesn't 'share the road'  is taken off the road by force if necessary so should those that will not share the planet should be removed from it by force if necessary.

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's not your planet.

it is Our Planet.

and Just like the road user that doesn't 'share the road'  is taken off the road by force if necessary so should those that will not share the planet should be removed from it by force if necessary.

Its not your planet, to claim ownership is based upon ignorance. We are just one of countless other species that resides on this plent

I have told you all before, sassy is a PROTECTED SPECIES, she can say anything.

ALL of these reports have some bias in them IMO.
EVERYONE on here is biased on something.

I am entitled to be biased as anyone.

I detest ]EDITED for homophobic content] and before the sob sisters pc brigade gang launched themselves onto us normal souls most people did because ]EDITED for homophobic content]
Kidz need a proper normal upbringing with a REAL mum and dad not ]EDITED for homophobic content]

Just imagine the poor little soulz at school getting ribbed by othuz, IMAGINE that which they say.
Imagine them walking up the aisle with 2 daddiz, or 2 mummiz,, it is NOT NATURAL.

All those wordz you call me are meaningless to me.

I want common decency, quite simpul.

I can't find where Sassy wishes me dead, someone show me please.


2nd WARNING Stormee...dont go there......You are quite capable of expressing your views in a proper manner, without the calculated abusive language...

Stormee wrote:I have told you all before, sassy is a PROTECTED SPECIES, she can say anything.

ALL of these reports have some bias in them IMO.
EVERYONE on here is biased on something.

I am entitled to be biased as anyone.

I detest turd burglars and before the sob sisters pc brigade gang launched themselves onto us normal souls most people did because of it being, unnatural, unhealthy and filthy.
Kidz need a proper normal upbringing with a REAL mum and dad not perverted deviantz.

Just imagine the poor little soulz at school getting ribbed by othuz, IMAGINE that which they say.
Imagine them walking up the aisle with 2 daddiz, or 2 mummiz,, it is NOT NATURAL.

All those wordz you call me are meaningless to me.

I want common decency, quite simpul.

I can't find where Sassy wishes me dead, someone show me please.  

I detest homopbic abuse, which you have just done again Stormee, which could land you in the basement.

Its up to you if you do not like homosexuals, but there is no right of you to be offensive towards them

That is bang out of order and against the rules

Didge wrote:

Stormee wrote:I have told you all before, sassy is a PROTECTED SPECIES, she can say anything.

ALL of these reports have some bias in them IMO.
EVERYONE on here is biased on something.

I am entitled to be biased as anyone.

I detest turd burglars and before the sob sisters pc brigade gang launched themselves onto us normal souls most people did because of it being, unnatural, unhealthy and filthy.
Kidz need a proper normal upbringing with a REAL mum and dad not perverted deviantz.

Just imagine the poor little soulz at school getting ribbed by othuz, IMAGINE that which they say.
Imagine them walking up the aisle with 2 daddiz, or 2 mummiz,, it is NOT NATURAL.

All those wordz you call me are meaningless to me.

I want common decency, quite simpul.

I can't find where Sassy wishes me dead, someone show me please.  

I detest homopbic abuse, which you have just done again Stormee, which could land you in the basement.

Its up to you if you do not like homosexuals, but there is no right of you to be offensive towards them

That is bang out of order and against the rules

You Didge are saying to the management 'to put me in the basement', this is your crafty way of doing things, I am disappointed in you for saying this.

Is it OK to wish someone dead on here?

Remember Didge, 'people who live in glass houses should not throw stones'.

Is it OK to call other forumuz nasty names and swear at them?

Be careful about suggesting rule breaking Didge it could come back and bite ya bum.

BTW, when I first came here and looked at the rules, I reckoned you and some othuz broke every one.

'Glass houses', Didge??????

Stormee wrote:

Didge wrote:


I detest homopbic abuse, which you have just done again Stormee, which could land you in the basement.

Its up to you if you do not like homosexuals, but there is no right of you to be offensive towards them

That is bang out of order and against the rules

You Didge are saying to the management 'to put me in the basement', this is your crafty way of doing things, I am disappointed in you for saying this.

Is it OK to wish someone dead on here?

Remember Didge, 'people who live in glass houses should not throw stones'.

Is it OK to call other forumuz nasty names and swear at them?

Be careful about suggesting rule breaking Didge it could come back and bite ya bum.

BTW, when I first came here and looked at the rules, I reckoned you and some  othuz broke every one.

'Glass houses', Didge??????

Er no, I am telling you that your abusive homophobic language is bang out of order and breaks the rules

And even worse you are poorly attempting to defend that.

Its wrong full stop, act like a grown up and apologise or delete the offensive words, as I have not reported it, but when they are seen, you will get in trouble, which as seen you seem to care little about

That is your choice and your failing

So I suggest you stop acting like a child

I have always felt sorry for you Didge playing the keyboard warrior.

This is a cowardly way of sh** stirring from you, Didge.

Beware The Ides Of March.

I am really disappointed in you.

Stormee wrote:I have always felt sorry for you Didge playing the keyboard warrior.

This is a cowardly way of sh** stirring from you, Didge.

Beware The Ides Of March.

I am really disappointed in you.

I really do not care what you think of me stormee

What matters is I am not going to stand by whilst you make such disgusting homophobic comments and since you cannot grow up, now I am going to report you so in order that you learn

You only have yourself to blame

Beware The Ides Of March, Didge.

You will now bear the mark/stigma of Judas.

Stormee wrote:Beware The Ides Of March, Didge.

You will now bear the mark/stigma of Judas.

Seriously grow up

When a certain poster wished you dead, they were out of order and I will speak against that.

Now you are out of order, showing I do not favour anyone, but will speak out when something is wrong

Didge wrote:

Stormee wrote:Beware The Ides Of March, Didge.

You will now bear the mark/stigma of Judas.

Seriously grow up

When a certain poster wished you dead, they were out of order and I will speak against that.

Now you are out of order, showing I do not favour anyone, but will speak out when something is wrong

I believe through reading books over many years and remembering some of it that someone who acts as you do,

Didge, from this day henceforth will be AKA Judas.

You are just the sort I would have relished having in my regiment.

Stormee wrote:

Didge wrote:


Seriously grow up

When a certain poster wished you dead, they were out of order and I will speak against that.

Now you are out of order, showing I do not favour anyone, but will speak out when something is wrong

I believe through reading books over many years and remembering some of it that someone who acts as you do,

Didge, from this day henceforth will be AKA Judas.

You are just the sort I would have relished having in my regiment.

You can call me what you like Stromee

Water off a ducks back as they say

The fact remains you were utterly wrong to be offensive towards homosexuals

There is nothing wrong with views, but you were deliberately using derivative words

That is against the rules, so suck it up.

Its also impossible for me to have betrayed you, as the moderation team is not the enemy

Judas will be all over the internet today.

Didge wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Great day for equality...!!!???

As again how do you explain why there is many children today and previously now as adults who are happy and healthy being raised by gay parents and singles parents?
While his evidence based opinion in the case was not given any equality...!

Instead he was persecuted for daring to have an equally legitimate  opinion... all in the name of equality...!

Yes a great day for equality that a person has been sacked as they are unfit to server the office given to them

His evidence was made up bullshit tommy, as countless children raised by gay and single parents prove he is a bigoted imbecile

So again how do you explain why there is many children today and previously now as adults who are happy and healthy being raised by gay parents and singles parents?

Did you see the evidence in this particular case...!?

No...!?

So how can you possibly comment on whether the evidence justified his decision or not!?

eddie wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Come on eddie... you don't have to have had a chicken to have an opinion as to whether battery or free range is best for them...


But it's not about me or my opinion... it's about the op and a conclusive study...

Tommy raising a child is not like talking about whether a chicken is tastier/healthier to eat. It's a tad more complex and has a myriad of complexities about it!

I never speak down to you and I never think you're stupid, but in this, you stubbornly hold this view that a bay couple are somehow going to raise a child in "the wrong way"

Just tell me what fears you have for this hypothetical child, raised by wolves, I mean gay people...?

Well if you look at the study then it clearly shows that children fared much worse as a result of their being brought up in a homosexual couple parent environment.


If it is still highly questionable as to the damaging potential to a child by being placed with a same sex couple then we should be erring on the side of caution and not taking the risk to innocent children's lives just to pander to the whims and sensitivities of homosexuals or be doing some social experiment etc...



We all know that a child does best with a mother and a father...

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's not your planet.

it is Our Planet.

and Just like the road user that doesn't 'share the road'  is taken off the road by force if necessary so should those that will not share the planet should be removed from it by force if necessary.

Yes, and the fact that you said "we" will destroy people who think like Stormee suggests that you are not including him in that. it's his planet as much as it's your planet, right?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Didge wrote:

Yes a great day for equality that a person has been sacked as they are unfit to server the office given to them

His evidence was made up bullshit tommy, as countless children raised by gay and single parents prove he is a bigoted imbecile

So again how do you explain why there is many children today and previously now as adults who are happy and healthy being raised by gay parents and singles parents?

Did you see the evidence in this particular case...!?

No...!?

So how can you possibly comment on whether the evidence justified his decision or not!?

I can easily comment where a person who holds beliefs that are complete nonsense is not going to be fair in many cases.

He was rightly sacked, and he is now going to sue the Government so his fall will be twice as big

I didn't know that magistrates dealt with adoption cases.

Morning Rags
#

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/family-law-courts/

Didge wrote:Morning Rags
#

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/family-law-courts/

Morning Didge. Thank you - that makes sense. I always think of magistrates as people who deal with yobs who get drunk on Saturday nights or nick apples from their neighbours' gardens.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:Morning Rags
#

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/you-and-the-judiciary/going-to-court/family-law-courts/

Morning Didge. Thank you - that makes sense. I always think of magistrates as people who deal with yobs who get drunk on Saturday nights or nick apples from their neighbours' gardens.

You are welcome Rags and that made me chuckle  

I think that people are entitled to their views, and even magistrates have their own views on individual issues. However, if his views are a result of his religious belief that homosexuality is wrong, that would be different as it would colour his view right from the start.

I don't think he'll get anywhere with his claim for religious discrimination tbh.

Indeed Rags, and this was not the first time this has come up with him.





A Kent magistrate who publicly opposes adoption by same-sex couples on religious grounds and sits in the family courts has been sacked for serious misconduct.  The decision to remove Richard Page, 69, following an interview he gave on BBC television last year, was authorised by both the justice secretary, Michael Gove, and the lord chief justice, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd.


Page, who had been on the bench for 15 years, had only a month more to serve as a justice of the peace, according to the Christian Legal Centre, which has supported him.  The investigation into his conduct was the second time he had been subject to disciplinary procedures. A statement by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office said: “Mr Richard Page JP, a magistrate assigned to the Central Kent Bench, has been removed from the magistracy. The stories you need to read, in one handy email

The lord chancellor and lord chief justice found that Mr Page’s comments on national television would have caused a reasonable person to conclude he was biased and prejudiced against single-sex adopters; they considered this to be serious misconduct which brought the magistracy into disrepute.



“They have therefore removed Mr Page from the magistracy. In 2014 the lord chancellor and lord chief justice issued Mr Page with a reprimand after finding that during a family court hearing he had allowed himself to be influenced by his religious beliefs and not by the evidence.”

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/mar/10/magistrate-sacked-over-religious-opposition-to-same-sex-couples-adopting

Tommy Monk wrote:

http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/new-study-on-homosexual-parents-tops-all-previous-research





And Vic... he said he was basing his judgement on the evidence alone... although he was then sacked because the authorities tried to claim it was because of his religious bias... so he is now bringing a claim of religious discrimination...


His evidence based decision has been twisted into a religious based decision by the authorities on their desire to sack him for doing what he genuinely believes is in the best interests of the child and for not bowing down to the progressive pc agenda...


If they are going to try to sack him because of his perfectly reasonable religious beliefs and only because of that... then that is definitely a case of religious discrimination!!!

I think what you said there will be an important issue if he goes ahead and sues for religious discrimination Tommy.

I have already said that if he does indeed think that homosexuality is wrong, and that's why he's against gay adoption, then his religious views are indeed influencing his decision making. If he had the view that gender roles are important, that wouldn't necessarily be related to his religious views.

However, in this report he is quoted as saying this:

He added: "It isn't that I'm homophobic. As a Christian I think homosexual activity is wrong.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2016/03/13/christian-magistrate-richard-page-sue-michael-gove_n_9452594.html

The question then is - is that view influencing his views on gay adoption, or has it just been assumed that's the case? I can't find any indication that he was sacked because his views were based on his religious faith, so he would have to prove that he was.

The fact he already said "as a 'insert whatever word you want here' I think homosexual activity is wrong" makes him biased from the start.

He didn't even have to say the word "Christian"
The fact he is saying he "thinks it's wrong" makes him already biased to the case.

eddie wrote:The fact he already said "as a 'insert whatever word you want here' I think homosexual activity is wrong" makes him biased from the start.

He didn't even have to say the word "Christian"
The fact he is saying he "thinks it's wrong" makes him already biased to the case.

It looks that way superficially, but it would be interesting to see what he actually says in his claim. He might say that his views on parenting are separate to his views on homosexuality generally.

Are magistrates expected to have no opinions on anything at all? Judges often give their opinion when they're sentencing someone.

This followed a BBC interview in March 2015 in which he had said that it was his duty as a magistrate to act on the evidence alone, and that there had not yet been a proper analysis of the effects that placing children with same-sex couples had on the child's well-being.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-35796557

That was the last paragraph of your opening OP...
then you applied your very own uniquely biased POV to this topic; with this >>>

Tommy stated > A child is better off in a stable home environment with a mother and a father... so it stands to reason that an adopted child should only be placed in the best environment for them too, which would be with mother and my father adoptive parents.

Over here in the states; a judge {magistrate} can't apply his/her own opinion to anything but what the "LAWS" dictate --- but they are allowed during sentencing phase to give the adjudicated human 'their personal opinions' about any given court awarded ruling! AND THEY OFTEN DO~~~

Having 'an opinion' and explaining that openly - to the media/interviewer causes a sense of being biased and that means that regardless of the LAW that magistrate will - set aside the LAW and fall back onto his/her OPINION and that is not what they are put into office to do!

Once established as the 'Judge/Magistrate' one has to set aside their personal feelings and abide by the LAW!  I doubt that that changes from England to America in any other form of translation! 
Deciding whom is a better parent: LGBT or a 'mom & dad' is highly subjective and has to be decided on a case-by-case situation!  Lots of family based interviews - counseling - evaluations etc., etc., et., and even back ground checks for substance abuse &/or criminal records should be used for that adoption process!  

What any given human being/couple does in the privacy of their own home is a HUGE NON YA = none of our fr'kn business and it most assuredly is not any of yours dear Tommy!  

I always thought judges shouldn't be biased - well not openly!

eddie wrote:I always thought judges shouldn't be biased - well not openly!

Unfortunately; as with those other topics we've kicked around the adjudication of the 'AFFLUENT' young men that were:
A.) one was a pervert and caught with child porn
B.) the other was guilty of a DUI incident and killed 4 pedestrians ---

So even a piss-poor attorney is able to be awarded a judicial position or become a magistrate and somewhere along the line they weren't weeded out for their lack of ethics. 

It's disgusting reallyc how on earth they manage to get to be a judge or in a position of law, is beyond me.