One of California’s eight newest judges is the first openly transgender person to be appointed to the bench in the Golden State, officials said.
Andi Mudryk, 58, will serve as a judge in Sacramento County Superior Court, filling the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Benjamin Davidian, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said Friday in announcing a batch of judicial appointments and nominations.
“I’m humbled, honored and I’m thrilled,” Mudryk told The Times on Friday. “I’m grateful to Gov. Newsom for creating a vision of California for all.”
Mudryk has lived in Sacramento since 2009 and said she feels proud to serve the community.
She pledged to use her experiences to ensure that everyone who appears before her is welcome in the court system.
Mudryk said her experiences as a transgender woman, a person with a significant disability, the parent of an adult Black man, and the descendant of Jewish Holocaust survivors spurred a legal career spent advocating for the civil rights of all people….
Victoria Kolakowski became the state’s first openly transgender judge when she was elected to the Alameda County Superior Court in November 2010, according to Equality California….
This March 25 Yahoo News story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Severe mental illness should disqualify anyone from serving as a judge or other government official.
Disqualified from the start
I don’t think gender-confused people are fit to serve in important capacities, such as judges and physicians, or in any leadership roles in our society.
Fr. James Martin, S.J. would ask why you hate some of God’s children when the church teaches that LGBT people should be accepted with compassion and respect and not suffer unjust discrimination and when the example of Jesus in the Gospels is that he reached out to those on the margins instead of excluding them. You should be prepared with an answer in case one of his lemmings tries to play gotcha.
Prepare for Fr. Martin– Here is my reply: Sorry, I strongly feel that gender-confused people suffering from a peculiar psychiatric disturbance, are unfit to serve as leaders in our society. My opinions are objective and rational, not based on childish notions of hatred and bigotry. I do not consider the views of Fr. James Martin, S.J., to be of any value. I believe he is an immoral and heretical priest. I do not care what anyone else thinks, nor do I have to answer for my beliefs, nor “justify” my beliefs to anyone else. I stand on my own convictions.
Bishops will be silent about this. Abortion yada yada, but LGBT crickets.
What, if any, will her transgender status have on her ability to render good judicial decisions?
Presenting oneself as a man when one is a woman, or a man saying he is woman when he is a man and forcing others to go along with it, for one thing, is a crime. It is called “fraud”, unless one is innocent of any crime and someone is trying to murder him/her, and he/she is trying to get away, which is a rare exception. In comedy everyone knows it is not for real and are not forced to say the person is what they are not.
The person in the article does not seem to know the differences.
Not a crime. You are making things up.
Fundamental mental imbalance.
Tell me, would you want him teaching your children?
I’d rather have Putin making rulings than that man.
No matter how much they try to hide it, they still look like their real/birth sex.
High positions in our society are very serious. They are not “Mickey Mouse” jobs to give away to any social misfit, to pacify his or her feelings of anger and inferiority, due to their problems in life, and perceptions of “discrimination.”
Social misfit. Nope. Judge not lest you be judged.
Not too long ago, a psychiatrically disordered man who showed up for work wearing a woman’s dress, heels, hairdo and lipstick, assuming a new woman’s name, would be fired and referred immediately for medical help.
We need to pray to St. Anthony that we can get the statue of St. Jude returned! Please pray !
last i checked fraud was when someone presented a false face to the world. if someone likes wearing dresses it’s somewhat irrelevant.
even from a religious standpoint, lets not pretend the morality of the new testament is some great feature, unless you all think paul was right to admonish slaves who ran away and advise them that it was goodly to return to their master and accept their beatings.
jesus said that how one treated the least of his people was how they treated him.
christianity is founded on the law of agape, one does not have to like or agree with another persons life choices, one has merely to accept them and let god alone judge their merit.
and before anyone brings up the old law, are we still stoning children for talking smack to their parents? who here has mixed thread cloths? there’s a reason jesus freed us from the old law, just as there’s a reason that he told peter that what was held on earth would be held in heaven, because jesus is god and he knows that even morality can shift so he allowed us to change when circumstance permits.
the true narcissism is the false belief that surgery is the power of god, it’s merely a tool that was given to man by god’s grace. there is no power man can achieve to that is not given by god.
or do you want to tell me fixing a hair lip is seizing the power of god.
“if someone likes wearing dresses it’s somewhat irrelevant.” Using the word “someone” deliberately avoids the pertinent issue. If a man likes wearing dresses, it is a mental health consideration.
What would you say about an adult man or woman who liked wearing Underoos in public as outerwear? Or is that also “somewhat irrelevant’ in your mind?