Reader comments · France: Far-right mayor refuses to officiate at same-sex wedding · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


France: Far-right mayor refuses to officiate at same-sex wedding

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Aug 2013, 2:11pm

    So what is taking the French authorities so long to prosecute the Mayor of Arcangues back in June? Idle words or what?

    1. Craig Smith 25 Aug 2013, 10:40pm

      nobody should be obliged to officiate at a wedding. What difference would it make if she refused to officiate a wedding of a hetrosexual couple because the woman was in prison for fraud 5 years ago. Officiators should have the right to choose who they accept to marry much as the couple choose who to ask to marry them. It should be agreed contractually not by force of the engaged!

      1. jonnielondon 25 Aug 2013, 10:47pm

        She has been hired as on official to perform certain duties of which marriage is one of them. If she is unable to perform her duties then she should be released from employment.

        1. Craig Smith 25 Aug 2013, 11:39pm

          It is a task she can do, not HAS to do. There is no law that states that this is the case. And frankly, if it was your wedding, would you really want an officiator who has her attitude? I’d want an officiator who genuinely gives their blessing, not somebody who does it begrudgingly.

          Either way, forced or unwilling, i wouldnt want her at my wedding. So why drag her name through the mud and why not just move on. I’m a gay man, and i’m thinking that this is gayness gone too far! It seems only the gay community would scream homophobe from the rafters when they could just move on and live their life in peace, married by somebody who GENUINELY wants to perform the wedding. Live and let live.

          1. If she doesn’t want to, then nominate another person to do so and keep quiet. If she gave those reasons and then didn’t even nominate someone else to marry them then she should be judged on basis of discrimination. Not only she spoke against the law (acted on basis of discrimination) but she also did not allow the wedding to go through. This is probably ilegal.
            An anti-semithic mayor would probably be unwelcomed to, and if spoken against them she would probably be judged. So why should this be any different?

        2. No wrong, officiating at weddings is an additional job for which she would be paid by the couple. The state does not employ her to do it.

      2. What utter rubbish, she is paid to do a job, do it or resign. Can you pick and choose what you will do in your job, no, neither can she. The spiteful bigot also refused to pass the job to someone else.

      3. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Aug 2013, 2:15pm

        The point is, she refused to even find another person qualified to marry them. That’s what’s at issue here. She should lose her job for that lone not because she refused to marry them as a matter of conscience.

        1. Craig Smith 26 Aug 2013, 10:16pm

          I agree she should be reprimanded for that, the point that I am arguing is that if it was another person who refused to hold a gay wedding on the grounds of personal belief, but they did find a person to officiate, then would people here still be calling her a biggot?

          You cannot take the rights of one person away to give it to another! You may not like it, but people have rights, wether or not you choose to agree with them.

          1. Craig, No one is taking her right to believe away, no where in the bible does it way two men cannot marry so this belief is a made up one to suit her own personal taste.

            Using religion is not an excuse to not do the job you are being paid for.

            Here is the definition for you:
            Bigotry, is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats other people with fear, distrust, hatred, contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person’s ethnicity, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics.

            Anyone who said no would be a bigot as they are demonstrating intolerance.

  2. Helge Vladimir Tiller 25 Aug 2013, 2:12pm

    BOMPARD-for the time being, the worst IDIOT in France !

  3. according to director of communication of the municipality of Bollène, Jean Vallier, president francois hollande at the last congress of mayors had recognized the right of mayors to refuse to officiate at gay marriages if they had consciousness objection.
    however mayors cannot escape the duty of delegating other councillors to preform the ceremony. so it looks like she still intends to challenge the system

  4. If your religious views stop you from performing your job, it’s time to find a new job. It’s ridiculous to expect the law to change for everyone else to match your narrow point of view.

    1. Just outdated superstitions hiding ignorant prejudice

    2. Craig Smith 26 Aug 2013, 10:21pm

      Lets use medical as an example. Lets say your surgeon had an infection, HIV as an example. You would be screaming from the rafters demanding a different surgeon right? Lets say you were the person with HIV, the surgeon would still be forced to do surgery on you. You cant use this stigma argument to justify taking somebody’s rights away.

      She was wrong to fail to nominate another councillor, and she should be reprimanded for that, but that bit aside, she has rights too. You cant take a persons rights away to give it to someone else.

      1. Only if you’re Carole Malone. Or you intend to have unprotected sex with your surgeon.

      2. There is nothing physically wrong with this woman. She is simply refusing to do her job and expects the job to change to match her attitudes. That is not the way it works. This would be like a cop refusing to break up a fight because he’s decided to become a pacifist. If you refuse to do your job, get out of the way so someone else can do it for you.

  5. The Vile C You Next Tuesday – religious beliefs my fat hairy arse!

    She’s a spineless Fascist just like her husband – Superstition is not an acceptable excuse for being SO inhuman

  6. Robert in S. Kensington 25 Aug 2013, 3:59pm

    It proves that not having state religion doesn’t deter the bigots one iota.

    Considering the vociferous opposition in the UK during the Marriage Bill debate, ours was a lot more civilised, no violent street demonstrations, nobody killed.

    I can’t get my head around religious nutters working for local government paid for by the taxpayers and refusing to carry out the responsibilities of their job requirements.

    Imagine if someone working in the private sector as a matter of conscience refused to work with someone who was of a different race or didn’t want to carry out certain aspects of their employment. They’d be shown the door a bit sharpish. Arrogant delusional loons.

  7. Skoda hater 25 Aug 2013, 5:07pm

    I am a government social worker. The Great Orbiting Hare told me not to visit families with a Skoda in the drive. It is an abomination in the eyes of Hare (book of Hare IV: 6). I have tried to raise this point at various management and Union meetings but just get laughed at.

  8. This to shall pass. Spit into the wind Mme. Bompard, and watch & feel what happens to you.

  9. She must have asked for a fertility test from every heterosexual couple she ever married before then!

  10. There is still a deep strain of Catholic provincial France which never reconciled itself to 1789 and secularism. Tough. Public money means acting according to the public will or you’re out. Or should be.

  11. Relieve her of her duties as mayor vitement!

    She clearly doesn’t wish to carry out her duties.

    1. Craig Smith 25 Aug 2013, 10:38pm

      nobody should be obliged to officiate at a wedding. What difference would it make if she refused to officiate a wedding of a hetrosexual couple because the woman was in prison for fraud 5 years ago. Officiators should have the right to choose who they accept to marry much as the couple choose who to ask to marry them. It should be agreed contractually not by force of the engaged!

      1. What is the big problem with that particular woman wanting to get married? The mayor should not have an opinion about this, it’s non of her business if the woman was in prison or committed fraud. Everyone should have the right to get married as long as it comes from consenting conscious adults.

        1. Craig Smith 26 Aug 2013, 12:35am

          If she stopped the ceremony and banned it then yes she should be reprimanded, but if all she did was refuse to officiate due to her beliefs then that is not an excuse to drag her name through the mud. To the hetrosexual community this is just ammunition for them to give us a bad name. The couple should have just found a new officiator and moved on.

          Frankly, if you cant do your homework on the person you are asking to officiate for you, and choose somebody with a history of being “Right wing” then thats your own stupidity. There are plenty of other people who could have done the job. But the fact remains that there is no law saying that somebody MUST officiate at a wedding. To say there is is to imply that if she refused because she was abroad on a holiday would be a reason to harass her. If she blocked the wedding as in stopped other people from officiating then yes, throw the book at her, but if she simply declined to officiate then thats the couples problem. not hers.

          1. bobbleobble 26 Aug 2013, 1:32am

            Did you actually read the article? She DID refuse to appoint someone else to officiate. She has effectively prevented these two from marrying in their home town. There were not plenty of other people who could have done because she refused to delegate.

            Plus when there’s something that comes up in my job that I don’t want to do you know what? I do it because it’s part of my duties and if I refuse point blank then I’m likely to get the sack. This isn’t a popularity contest, I don’t care if straight people hate me because I want to be treated like everybody else. Society will never change if we meekly run away whenever someone attacks us. We need to be strong and stand up to prejudice not cower in a corner hoping for scraps from the hetero table.

          2. Are you for real? when something is passed into LAW
            you obey the LAW and uphold the LAW she is in a position of power and because of her personal beliefs she’s choosing to break the LAW and as such deserves a big,heavy book to be chucked at her and as the commentator below said if they refused to perform a duty that is part of their job then guess what? job..

      2. That’s an awfully long way of saying “I disagree with equal marriage”

      3. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Aug 2013, 2:21pm

        And how many Mayors and others so delegated to marry people have refused to marry a divorced couple in France for instance or someone with a criminal record?

        I bet you anything Lillian Ladele married a divorced couple during her tenure but yet refused to conduct a CP for a gay couple. Matters of conscience wouldn’t come into play in such a scenario and has more to do with blatant homophobia. Conscience my arse, a very selective one at that when it only relates to a gay couple as is the case with this French Mayor.

  12. That There Other David 25 Aug 2013, 9:15pm

    €75000. Hit them in the pocket and they’ll soon learn to follow the law.

  13. Craig Smith 25 Aug 2013, 10:34pm

    This issue needs to change. People should not be obliged to officiate weddings. If the couple want to get married, i’m pretty sure that she was not the only person who could do it.

    If religion is a barrier for some people, fine, fair play, move on and find another officiator. Stop bad mouthing everyone who doesn’t want to officiate a gay wedding.

    1. bobbleobble 26 Aug 2013, 1:37am

      People should do the jobs they were hired or in her case elected for. If they will not then they need to go. If her religion interferes with her job that’s her problem not this couple’s. If we appease the prejudiced then nothing will ever change. Time to grow a pair Colin and stop accepting second class status.

    2. You know what Mr Smith?…you are an idiot.

      Point finale!

    3. Robert in S. Kensington 26 Aug 2013, 2:29pm

      What if there is no other person in a small town to marry them? Why should they have to spend money and travel elsewhere to find someone who will? She’s paid to marry people regardless of their gender under the law. If you didn’t do your job satisfactorily because there is an aspect of it that you reallyi don’t like doing? What next, allow all people in the workforce to not do their jobs properly because they don’t agree with specific tasks expected of them for which they are paid to do? Once you start allowing government employees to opt out of tasks they have a conscience issue about, then it opens up another can of worms. If you don’t like your job, find another.

    4. Hey Smith – take a hint no one agrees with your vile opinion – so go crawl under a self loathing rock you T W A T !

    5. and if she refused to officiate at a wedding between a black woman and a white man – is that acceptable too? DICKHEAD

      1. Craig Smith 26 Aug 2013, 10:25pm


  14. I say gone with the pigs. Fire her.

  15. The mayor has to be held to account for her actions! She has a position, and the mandate for the position may have changed but it does not absolve her of her civic duties. Her refusal to delegate the duty compounds her insubordination or which she should be removed from office.

    I realize this is upsetting for the couple, but on the bright side… when an some one is found to officiate at their wedding at least they will have the knowledge they weren’t married by a bigot. That fact alone has be be worth a little longer wait for a better and happier more memorable day to start their married Life..

  16. So,this mayor because of her beliefs chooses to defy French LAW,OUI MADAME C’EST LA LOI FRANCAISE!…She is actively and defiantly breaking the LAW so here’s what happens to people who break the LAW,Madame,they lose their jobs,they forfeit rights,benefits and privileges,they are fined,brought before courts and depending on the severity of their crime because that’s EXACTLY what this ‘mayor’ has done,committed a crime for you Madame it’s adieu la valise,adieu liberte,adieu bonheure et bonjour tristesse et une petite tour en PRISON.

  17. @ Craig,
    There are two issues. I wouldn’t want a homophobe presiding at my wedding either but she has identified herself as a bigot. She is paid by the state and is not permitted to choose which parts of her job she feels are agreeable. She also tried to prevent to couple getting married by refusing to appoint another person to do the job. It is right that she is now being confronted, which would not have happened if the Lesbian couple had simply walked away. That is not what any civil rights movement means. Surely it cannot be hard for you to put yourself in the position of these two women. Having been turned away from their own local Mairie, they surely felt insulted and angry enough to dig their heels in. I would have done the same. The rule of the bigots must end now.
    “So why drag her name through the mud”? The mind boggles.

    1. As a matter of interest, Craig, what action would you advise a black couple to take if they were turned away from a government building on the whim of a bigoted official?
      I am sure there are lots of mayors with colour prejudice but they are not allowed to state their beliefs or withhold services. It should be different for Gays in your mind, should it?

      1. Craig Smith 26 Aug 2013, 10:00pm

        They were not turned away from a government building, she simply refused to do it herself, stop blowing it out of proportion. She was in the wrong to fail to suggest another officiator. Thats it. Can any of you lot seriously say to me that you would want this woman to officiate at your wedding? Why would this stupid couple choose this woman, knowing her beliefs and knowing that she is far right to officiate?!

        What would you needed surgery and found out that your surgeon was carrying a dangerous infection. You would complain and argue that you want to choose your surgeon on “Moral beliefs” because you don’t think they should be doing surgery, despite the risk being minute. A photographer can turn down jobs, “i’m busy”, “i have another booking” or “That is not my specialist area” to name a few reasons. She was wrong to fail to name another officiator, that is it.

        Choose another, and move on. No need to make a song and dance over it.

        1. But is it a matter of “choosing” this woman? My understanding is that you get married by the mayor of the town you live in (sort of like the way you had to be married by your parish priest in the not-so-distant past). What about this couple’s right to be married in their home town?

          You’re elected a mayor in France, you perform the roles a mayor is expected to perform, one of which is registering civil marriages.

        2. I would also suggest that it’s Mme Bompard, by refusing to delegate her duties to someone else, who has escalated the issue to song-and-dance level.

    2. Craig Smith 26 Aug 2013, 10:09pm

      Ok, lets put this another way. Lets say you have children, you want them to go to school at the best place. You have no choice in the matter where they go, and the government put them in a school that has really bad performance ratings. You would want the right to argue to the government about where they get put right? You would want your rights as a person to be upheld wouldn’t you? Well what about her rights? The fact of the matter is that over 50% of the worlds population hold a religion. I’m not saying they are wrong or right, but if they truly believe in something, then why should they not have the same rights as you. You cant demand to have rights given to one group at the expense of taking it away from another. What needs to be done is a happy medium. That happy medium needs to be people of faith who choose to exclude themselves from things such as gay weddings are protected, whilst the couple that want to get married can do so under another officiator.

      1. Craig. Legislation must combat these age-old bigotries. I will once again make a comparison with the black civil rights movement. Mormons believed until the 1970s that people of colour were inferior in the eyes of God. In the 1950s schools in certain parts of the US were segregated. Religious beliefs were used to justify this. Doubtless you would defend this position.
        It’s an easy accusation to make but I’m afraid you sound like a self-loather. Someone who puts someone’s right to discriminate before human rights. Go read some history books. Equality laws must be abided by everyone, especially those in positions of power.

  18. In Belgium, in 2003, the same thing as now in Bollène, France, happened once. The refusing mayor was destituted by disciplinary measure, with loss of pension. Since then, all is quiet in Belgium.

  19. If she cannot do the job that she was elected to do, FIRE HER!!!

  20. Saw her photo first and thought: Lesbian. WTF?

  21. It’s really pretty simple, a Mayor, Government Official, Civil Servant or other publicly funded person has the legal obligation to represent EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN.

    You don’t get to pick and choose who in your electorate you can represent, it doesn’t work that way. You either agree to represent every citizen or you get out of that job and give it to someone who can.

    There just needs to be one more law – one which states that a person receiving public funds as payment has no opportunity to claim “personal beliefs” in refusing to carry out their job. It’s pretty easy, if you do not provide services to ALL TAX PAYING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, you are in breach of contract and can be fired.

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