Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

High Court Judge who criticised same-sex marriage had promised to ‘keep a low profile’ on subject

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. A judge who openly declares that minority interests are not worth bothering with shouldn’t be a judge. How can we trust any decision he makes in a court in future?

    1. We can’t.
      Which is why he must be removed as a judge.
      The below link is the correct place to complain about judicial misconduct anf to demand his sacking.

      https://ojc.judiciary.gov.uk/OJC/complaintlink.do

  2. Judges have no business stating personal opinions or being involved in any way with any lobby group. Exactly how is this impartial?

  3. He’s a British Scalia

  4. He is not fit for purpose a a judge if he is meddling in the legislative process.

    He needs to be sacked.

    How is a judge disbarred from his profession.

    This bigot cannot be trusted to be impartial and cannot continue as a judge.

    1. Mumbo Jumbo 26 Dec 2012, 6:22pm

      The self-obsessed bloviating tosspot has clearly breached the agreement he had with his professional watchdog to hush his stupid gums on this subject

      You can report him to the Office of Judicial Complaints here:

      http://goo.gl/55WRZ

      1. I’m glad he didn’t keep his mouth shut. Now everyone knows he’s a “self-obsessed bloviating tosspot”

  5. Hopefully this unwelcome and unprofessional interfering will do him no good. He may well be worried about straight marriage but SSM will not have an adverse affect on this. By scapegoating a minority he has revealed his blatant homophobia with this ignorant statement.

  6. Garry Cassell 26 Dec 2012, 4:24pm

    Unfit for a judge….get rid of him…scum…why would anyone trust him to render a fair trial…..no way!!!..Just out right wrong…Wonder why people distrust the supposedly justice system?? Do we need any further proof of why people don’t trust?

  7. Let’s discover what other 0.1% minorities should not be protected by law? How about those with Cerebral Palsy….interesting! Would this “Judicial Revue” by the judge indicate that it would be open season on those who used to be called “Spastic”? And his figures????? 0.1% … but didn’t Kinsey indicate that one man in every fourteen might be homosexual? And have not other studies indicated that the figure might be 1:10. So now we’re dealing with 7-10% of the population who are not worth protecting in law. What a very strange man; one who clearly follows the radical legal solutions of a Hitler!

  8. I am writing to the Office of JUdicial Complaints to request that this judge be sacked.

    His bigotry means he cannot be trusted to be an impartial judge.

    Google the Office of Judicial Complaints to see how you can request he be removed as a judge.

  9. Over 10 % of the population is gay and he is no judge.

  10. Below is the link to complain about Coleridge and to request his sacking, for judicial misconduct:

    https://ojc.judiciary.gov.uk/OJC/complaintlink.do

    1. Thanks. Done.

  11. I call for his immediate suspension and eventual dismissal from his post. The judiciary are not allowed to involve themselves in politics. This is a clear breach of the rules. More worryingly the BBC yet again have a feature article that only discusses 1 side of the argument. The against side.

    You can complain to the BBC here http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

    And you can complain about the judge here. http://judicialcomplaints.judiciary.gov.uk/contact/contact.htm

    1. THe link you supply to make a complain to the OJC is incorrect as that is a link to complain about the OJC.

      To complain about Coleridge you need to use:

      https://ojc.judiciary.gov.uk/OJC/complaintlink.do

      1. Oops, I stand (okay I am on the sofa so not really standing) Corrected

  12. Presumably, he behaves normally when sorber.

  13. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Dec 2012, 6:38pm

    I’ve no doubt the usual whiners will be spinning it. Calling for his removal will embolden them to scream the ‘abuse of religious freedom’ mantra which is at the heart of Coleridge’s opposition, not realising that he’s not supposed to be showing bias to either side as a sitting judge.

    He should be removed immediately. It’s clear this taints his judgement in cases brought before him. He should recuse himself if he’s using religious beliefs to promote his opposition through the Marriage Foundation. It’s none of his bloody business and neither are the divorces or marriages of hetero couples, let alone ministers Those are personal decisions for those involved, not his or anybody else’s to make.

  14. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Dec 2012, 6:42pm

    The Office of Judicial Complaints had better take a closer look at his involvement. He’s not only involved but started the bloody foundation himself. How much clearer does it get? He shouldn’t even be involved at all.

  15. I just had a horrible thought, maybe this guy is looking to be sacked. A nice gold plated pension and no doubt a 6 figure pay-off! If he is sacked we must make sure this guy gets what anyone else who is sacked gets……….NOTHING!

    I have made my complaint against him, I urge you all to do the same. I believe anyone has a right to say what they wish, but this must be tempered by what position you hold in society. A judge who is clearly homophobic and even worse, can get his facts so completely wrong is not fit to be a judge and should not be speaking out on one side of a debate, or another.

  16. Robert (Kettering) 26 Dec 2012, 7:42pm

    This “judge” is frankly too biased and bigoted, in my lowly opinion, to judge a flower show let alone a trial?

    Who on earth made this joker a judge?!

  17. Over at the Guardian, people, you can help fight left-wing (yes!) bigots there, on the following thread:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/26/voters-back-gay-marriage-poll

  18. My message at:
    https://ojc.judiciary.gov.uk/OJC/complaintlink.do

    Mr. Coleridge has publicly declared that the number of gay and lesbian people in the UK is 0.1%. This is false, ridiculous, and far below the number that do exist, and his quoting such a number is part of a malicious campaign on his part to ensure that gay and lesbian people are not permitted to marry.

    It is outrageous that a High Court Judge should make such declarations in a public debate. It is outrageous that he should even hold such views, personally!

    Black people may marry.
    Asian people may marry.
    Disabled people may marry.
    Deaf people may marry.
    Blind people may marry.
    People with Learning Difficulties may marry.

    But this High Court Judge is using his office to seek to ensure that gay and lesbian people may NOT marry.

    Please strip him of his office, and do not permit him to be retired on some inflated pension.

    Thank you.

    —————–
    & I answered “Yes” to question re. Disability, Reason: “gay”!

  19. It’s interesting to note that one of the other patrons of Sir Paul Coleridge charity (Marriage Foundation) , Baroness Butler-Schloss was one of the 4 HoL members to raise an amendment in the equality act to allow Catholic adoption agencies to refuse applications from gay couples.

    I suspect the Marrage Foundation is another wing of the C4M group, very pro Catholic and very anti gay, particularly very anti same sex marriage.

    Here’s an article written a little while ago suggesting that Sir Paul Coleridge has a blind spot on SSM

    http://www.thelawyer.com/is-gay-marriage-the-marriage-foundations-blind-spot/1012407.article

  20. Sounds like he is more suited to doing ‘charity’ work (where he can enjoy a certain amount of immunity from the Equalities Act) than being a Judge where there might be a risk he would at some time have to consider being impartial.

    He correctly identifies that change in the Churches will come from within. You can’t outlaw religious democracy

  21. From BBC: “Sir Paul last year launched independent charity Marriage Foundation to support married couples but said the charity did not take a stance on gay marriage.”

    That’s because if the charity did have a stance, and campaign in politics it might well be in breach of Charity Commission regulations.

    http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/

  22. I think the Marriage Foundation may well be in breach of Charity Commission regulations. Charities are not allowed to interfere in politics

    http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/

  23. but you but mind taking taxes etc from the 0.1% how can you ever treat a gay case fairly when you express such views.

    he live in another world far removed from we every day people experience. Marriage hew wants to come to South London to see how many girls have children out of wedlock. The family for many that does not exist.

    1. Robert in S. Kensington 27 Dec 2012, 2:36pm

      I dare say he blames gays and equal marriage for out of wedlock children. If he really cared about marriage, he should be thrilled that gay people want to embrace it to set an example to those who don’t and those already married. The bottom line is, religion is deeply in the mix. That’s where it’s all coming from. His Marriage Foundation is nothing more than a front for religious nutters. Who is funding it I wonder, the Christian Institute?

  24. Sorry, but this judge is no longer fit to fill the position he is in….
    No matter what the Office of Judicial Complaints thinks about it!
    This judge clearly is not prepared to rule everyone equal and to have equal rights!

  25. Craig Nelson 26 Dec 2012, 11:22pm

    Due to the separation of powers doctrine judges should not intermingle in current political controversies and, indeed, any remarks made about political matters should display reserve and discretion – entirely lacking here.

    The idea that small minorities don’t deserve protection is very scary – coming from a judge (!). The legality of control orders and the 5 held at Bellmarsh concerned groups smaller than 0.1% yet there is an expectation that each case (in law and presumably in politics) people’s needs are considered fairly [that is on its merits not as an expression of how small the group is].

    I do agree he is trying to get himself sacked so he can point to the terrible persecution that opponents of SSM can expect – even though judges getting involved in day to day politics is very foreign to our traditions.

  26. “0.1 percent of the population”
    What a joke. It’s at least sixty times that. Has the standards required to hold such a position as his dropped so much in recent times?
    That’s the equilevant as describing that the distance from here to north America as being one hundred miles.
    What an idiot!

  27. I dread to think what kind of decisions he has made based on his views. It does not matter what the % is we should be able to marry the person we love without bigots and homophobes banging on whatever drum they can think of. .

  28. GulliverUK 27 Dec 2012, 8:21am

    It seems to have been picked up by the mainstream press with reports of lawyers and former cabinet ministers critising him.

    Clearly if he had already agreed to take a low profile on this he’s broken his word. However, it is his comments and all they represent which will probably have done for him now. I wouldn’t expect him to be sacked (too much scandal in that) but as far as family court is concerned he’s clearly got views which will disqualify him from serving the all citizens equally and without bias. Perhaps commercial law or copyright law would be a more suitable position for his talents ? :)

  29. Robert Brown 27 Dec 2012, 9:50am

    How can he honestly judge on equality issues with views such as this?

    http://www.rainbow-citizen.com

  30. “Recycle rubbish?” Well, himself and the Archbishop of Westminster certainly do!

  31. NutjobsareeverywheretheUNtoo 27 Dec 2012, 1:33pm

    He should not be using his non elected public office for political debate! He should concentrate on giving decent sentences to those brought before him

  32. darkmoonman 27 Dec 2012, 6:50pm

    It’s not a unique problem. Here in the satte of Washinton (USA), Thurston County Superior Court Judge Gary Tabor has notified court personnel that he will not marry same-sex couples. This is clearly in breach of his duties as a professional and of the civil office that he holds.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all