If she said her religion prevented her from issuing marriage licenses to black people would you support her on that?
This is not an open and shut issue. On the one hand she does have the right to her religious beliefs. On the other hand she was elected to carry out the duties of the county clerk, one of which is to issue marriage licenses. If her religion prevents her from doing her job then I don't see how she can keep it. Anymore than the Muslim grocery clerk who refuses to ring up pork or liquor on religious grounds.
This IS an open and shut issue.
She entered into the job in full faith and acknowledgment that she and the state were simpatico with the standards and expectations of her abilities and the State’s requirements.
Even if she were not a Christian, she has the right and obligation to refuse an illegal order.
As to you muslim example; if a muzzie were hired and allowed to refuse pork products, but later was told he MUST handle them or be fired, would he have a right to sue?
You bet your Mohamed he would.
Ok, can ANYONE show me a Kentucky Statute that would authorize her to issue a marriage license to two sodomites?
Cordially,
” If her religion prevents her from doing her job then I don’t see how she can keep it.”
Can the Supreme Court fire her? The bigger issue is that the Supreme Court has opened the door to new class of criminals. If she can be held in Contempt then how many other US “citizens” will be subjected to punishment?
We do not redefine the meaning of clearly understood words just because the Supreme Court says so.
Your argument would compel obedience to a Supreme Court diktat that "black" now means "slave."
We do not allow people to force different meanings of words on us, and we do not give a sh*t if they claim to have the mandate of government behind them.
Anymore than the Muslim grocery clerk who refuses to ring up pork or liquor on religious grounds.
If he is given the job with the implicit understanding that he won't be forced to violate any of his religious beliefs, then he has a legitimate legal argument for breach of contract.
That is what this situation is. It is a breach of the implicit societal contract with this woman.
so let me get this straight. your position is that any public servant who cannot in good conscious enforce an edict of the gov’t courts should resign?
and btw, by definition: resignation == surrender.
“On the other hand she was elected to carry out the duties of the county clerk, one of which is to issue marriage licenses”
Yes, but the “marriage licenses” she has the official duty to issue are Kentucky marriage licenses, NOT Federal marriage licenses, and Kentucky marriage licenses do not apply to — and, therefore, it is ludicrous to issue them to — same-sex couples.
By proxy (SCOTUS) FedGov has it’s position on the subject; Kentucky remains unmoved.
I’ve got a bad feeling this thing’s going to be hammer-and-tongs down to the last man standing.