This homophobic magistrate was just p...

This homophobic magistrate was just paid $325,000 by her state for refusing to marry gay people

There are 48 comments on the Queerty story from Feb 20, 2018, titled This homophobic magistrate was just paid $325,000 by her state for refusing to marry gay people. In it, Queerty reports that:

Gayle Myrick used to work as a magistrate in Union County, North Carolina. Now, she's sitting pretty on a huge pile of cash.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Queerty.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Melvin

Boca Raton, FL

#1 Feb 21, 2018
This is great news!!!

Congrats to Gayle Myrick!!!
Melvin

Boca Raton, FL

#2 Feb 21, 2018
I love it when the good team scores!

WOO HOO!!!

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#3 Feb 21, 2018
Melvin wrote:
I love it when the good team scores!

WOO HOO!!!
Yup, you love it when it's on the taxpayers dime. Got it!
Hudson

New York, NY

#4 Feb 21, 2018
Melvin wrote:
I love it when the good team scores!
WOO HOO!!!
Since when is the public servant who refuses to do their job, is dismissed, and then suckles at the taxpayer teat, the good team?

The reality is that the only reason NC didn't appeal is that the appeal would cost more than the settlement, and the chances of the state recovering costs from this bumpkin were between little and none at all.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#5 Feb 21, 2018
Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Since when is the public servant who refuses to do their job, is dismissed, and then suckles at the taxpayer teat, the good team?
When she stands up for personal choice and freedom.
Hudson

New York, NY

#6 Feb 21, 2018
Wondering wrote:
When she stands up for personal choice and freedom.
No, Wondering, she stands in the way of both of those things when she refuses service as a public official. The reality is that the only reason the state didn't pursue the case further was expense. They easily could have won, but the expense was greater than simply settling, and the likelihood that they could recoup costs form this bumpkin are somewhere between little and none.

It isn't my fault that you do not understand rational thought.
Melvin

Boca Raton, FL

#7 Feb 21, 2018
Imprtnrd wrote:
<quoted text>Yup, you love it when it's on the taxpayers dime. Got it!
Glad to see tax dollars going to a worthwhile cause for once!

She deserves every penny!
Melvin

Boca Raton, FL

#8 Feb 21, 2018
And the headline of this article is a total lie. She wasn't paid because she refused to marry gay people. She was paid because the duties of her job changed and rather then go against God's law and her faith and "marry" homosexuals, she resigned. She was paid because she was forced out of her job due to no fault of her own. IN GOD WE TRUST

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#9 Feb 21, 2018
Lets see. Paid $325,000 for NOT doing the job!

What do the pay the magistrates that actually do their jobs?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#10 Feb 21, 2018
Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Wondering, she stands in the way of both of those things when she refuses service as a public official. The reality is that the only reason the state didn't pursue the case further was expense. They easily could have won, but the expense was greater than simply settling, and the likelihood that they could recoup costs form this bumpkin are somewhere between little and none.

It isn't my fault that you do not understand rational thought.
When will you display some rational thought? Let me know and I'll watch for it.

I somewhat agree that she should perform the duties of her office. Especially after the SCOTUS included same sex couples in marriage laws. A public servant should serve the public.

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#11 Feb 21, 2018
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>

When will you display some rational thought? Let me know and I'll watch for it.

I somewhat agree that she should perform the duties of her office. Especially after the SCOTUS included same sex couples in marriage laws. A public servant should serve the public.
Somewhat Agree?!?! Just what the ____ does that mean?

Should she do her job or not? Why should she get a payout for resigning because she did not want to do the job as required?

When will you display some rational thought? Let us know by actually posting it.
Rainbow Kid

New York, NY

#12 Feb 21, 2018
Melvin wrote:
<quoted text>

Glad to see tax dollars going to a worthwhile cause for once!

She deserves every penny!
North Carolina punished the taxpayers $325,000 to support her trashy BS
.
The taxpayers will get midterm revenge
Hudson

New York, NY

#13 Feb 21, 2018
Melvin wrote:
And the headline of this article is a total lie. She wasn't paid because she refused to marry gay people. She was paid because the duties of her job changed and rather then go against God's law and her faith and "marry" homosexuals, she resigned. She was paid because she was forced out of her job due to no fault of her own. IN GOD WE TRUST
She was paid because the state elected to settle rather than continue the suit they would have won, albeit at higher legal costs than it took to settle.

Her job didn't change, she was still obligated to the same oath of office. The law changed, and being a bigoted imbecile, she elected to project her religious beliefs onto others.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#14 Feb 21, 2018
DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>

Somewhat Agree?!?! Just what the ____ does that mean?

Should she do her job or not? Why should she get a payout for resigning because she did not want to do the job as required?

When will you display some rational thought? Let us know by actually posting it.
Well, yes, I think she should do her job or at least see that it gets done. Accommodations were made for Kim Davis, no reason they can't be made for this magistrate as well.
Melvin

Boca Raton, FL

#15 Feb 21, 2018
Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
She was paid because the state elected to settle rather than continue the suit they would have won, albeit at higher legal costs than it took to settle.

Her job didn't change, she was still obligated to the same oath of office. The law changed, and being a bigoted imbecile, she elected to project her religious beliefs onto others.
Nope she was just obeying God.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#16 Feb 21, 2018
Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
She was paid because the state elected to settle rather than continue the suit they would have won, albeit at higher legal costs than it took to settle.

Her job didn't change, she was still obligated to the same oath of office. The law changed, and being a bigoted imbecile, she elected to project her religious beliefs onto others.
I have a news flash for you. Not everyone that refuses to officiate a same sex marriage is a 'bigoted imbecile.' Only a bigoted imbecile would think that. When the law changed, their religious beliefs were projected onto her. See, puppy, there are two sides to every story, especially when discussing conflicts between two protected groups.
Hudson

New York, NY

#17 Feb 21, 2018
Melvin wrote:
Nope she was just obeying God.
Nope. God says not to judge others, and to treat them as you would be treated.

Paul also had some interesting thoughts on obedience to civil authority relative to religious belief.

Anyone who defends her actions as obedience to God is an ignorant hypocrite who doesn't have passing knowledge of the Bible.
Hudson

New York, NY

#18 Feb 21, 2018
Wondering wrote:
I have a news flash for you. Not everyone that refuses to officiate a same sex marriage is a 'bigoted imbecile.' Only a bigoted imbecile would think that. When the law changed, their religious beliefs were projected onto her. See, puppy, there are two sides to every story, especially when discussing conflicts between two protected groups.
Actually, Wondering, that is exactly what they are if they have sworn an oath to uphold the law, and refuse service against that oath.

If the office, or the law, had become so offensive to her that she felt she could not in good conscience perform her duties, then she has an obligation to herself, her constituents, and her oath to resign the office.

I'm glad I could help you with that.
Melvin

Boca Raton, FL

#19 Feb 21, 2018
Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. God says not to judge others, and to treat them as you would be treated.
She didn't judge anyone she just resigned so she wouldn't have to insult God and disrespect the
sanctity of marriage by "marrying" homosexuals.
Melvin

Boca Raton, FL

#20 Feb 21, 2018
Hudson wrote:
<quoted text>
If the office, or the law, had become so offensive to her that she felt she could not in good conscience perform her duties, then she has an obligation to herself, her constituents, and her oath to resign the office.
That's exactly what she did! Can you read and comprehend English?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Law Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Massena man accused of Lacey Yekel murder heade... 2 hr Lol 17
News Benton funeral directors sentenced in fraud case 5 hr read the fine det... 12
News The Latest: Ellison says he won't quit race ami... 8 hr SirPrize 4
News Mayor calls on Government to protect illegal im... 9 hr Billyfartfundies 10
News Appalachia doctor, wife face drug, fraud charges 12 hr Eric Varner 3
News Gov. Brown declares, 'California will fight thi... 16 hr Me Too 64
News Tennessee Unemployment Holds Steady For 3rd Con... 16 hr Joey DeDominicis 1