Christian Right activist Mat Staver, last seen lying about the Southern Poverty Law Center’s “Hate Tracker,” is furious that Andrew McDonald may soon become the chief justice of the Connecticut Supreme Court.
That’s because McDonald is openly gay — he’d be the first such chief justice in any state in the country — and Staver believes a gay judge can’t possibly rule objectively on any number of religious liberty issues.
He made the comments during a radio interview on Thursday.
“Here’s the problem with it beyond the issue of the morality of this,” Staver said. “Beyond the issue of other consequences is the fact that what we typically see is someone’s identity, their being, completely wrapped up in their sexual practices, meaning that — do you think that if you had an Aaron and Melissa Klein or a Jack Phillips bakery or anything else like that where you have the LGBT clash with religious freedom or freedom of expression come before this judge, do you think this judge is going to be open and fair irrespective of what he does to rule based on the Constitution and the rule of law? I don’t think so.”
… Staver asserted that McDonald, or any other gay judge for that matter, is likewise incapable of delivering objective rulings in cases involving LGBTQ rights or religious freedom.
“The question is: are you going to get a fair shake out of this individual who identifies as someone based upon his sexual practices, who is identified and identifies himself based upon certain behavior?” Staver said. “Are you gonna get a fair shake? I don’t think so. So that is a real problem in this nomination of this appointment of this individual.”
It’s the same kind of bigotry we saw when Donald Trump claimed an Indiana judge with Mexican heritage couldn’t rule on Trump University cases because Trump is a racist and that might work against him.
“I think it has to do with, perhaps, the fact that I’m very, very strong on the border — very, very strong on the border,” Trump said at the time. “He has been extremely hostile to me. Now, he is Hispanic, I believe.”
Curiel never took the bait and there’s never been any evidence of his personal beliefs, whatever they are, affecting his judgments. Similarly, Staver didn’t offer any proof that McDonald would immediately rule against any conservative Christians in his courtroom. That’s hardly surprising. Staver never has proof for his irrational claims.
But if he’s worried that certain groups of people might look down upon conservative Christians, then a gay judge with a solid reputation is the least of his worries. Is there any description for a judge other than “old white Christian male” that Staver wouldn’t have a problem with? He’d find faults with anybody who wasn’t predisposed to agree with him on everything.