Posted on 08/31/2015 11:43:17 AM PDT by don-o
The U.S. Supreme Court this week faces the first religious objection to reach the justices since the decision declaring a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.
A county clerk in Kentucky is asking for relief from a lower court order directing her to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. Her lawyers filed an emergency application directed to Justice Elena Kagan, who handles such requests from that part of the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
She’ll lose. It doesn’t matter is she objects to the marriage. All that matters is that the government allows. A license does not signify your personal approval - just that the requirements of the government have been met. Her job is solely to see that government rules are followed.
If I help someone on their tax return, and they are homosexuals, they will still be eligible for married filing jointly. My opinion of their morality is irrelevant.
I suspect this case is being taken where others (baking cakes) have not because it will be easy to slap down the religious objections.
When she was hired, this was not a requirement. The government is required to make accommodations for religious convictions. They brought this on her. She did not take a job and then change the requirements. They did. This is wrong to make her choose between her job and her religious convictions. To force her would be the government choosing one believe favorable over another. Isn’t that the very thing the homos claimed to be against? They should make accommodation for people’s conscience. People could avoid the draft by being objectors. So let them avoid issuing these licenses. They should not lose their employment over it. Even if the evil favoring government wants to make it a condition of future hires, it is fundamentally WRONG to lay this on someone who was hired prior to this evil ruling.
Excuse my typing flubs. I should have previewed my post.
And who you gonna serve? Bob Dylan said it well,
"It may be the devil
It may be the Lord,
Buy you gotta serve somebody."
I'm not saying she shouldn't be willing to go to jail. She should be prepared to do so, if necessary. More importantly, we need to stand and keep that from happening, come what may. She needs a large, armed security detail, ready to stop anyone who would pretend they have a right to deprive her of her religious liberties. If we are unwilling to do that, then we all need to kneel and accept the chains of slavery.
The religious liberty argument should only be part of the argument.
A “gay marriage” license is a fraudulent document. There is no such thing. It’s imaginary. By definition, only a man and a woman can marry. It’s a fact of nature.
The other thing is that without real marriage and the natural family, not a single clause of the stated purposes of the U.S. Constitution can possibly be fulfilled. “Gay marriage” is destructive of the foundations of the rule of law in this country.
I believe Ms. Davis holds an elected office, and as such has sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. As wrong as the gay marriage decision was, I fear Ms. Davis's only recourse will be to resign.
There is no right to marriage in the US Constitution.
The government should make an accommodation for her. Otherwise the so-called constitutional position is that Christians are not fit for that position unless they ignore their own conscience. We do still have a First Amendment don’t we?
The hideous part of this phony issue is that it was pushed on the basis of the homo’s freedom of conscience. Now it is the great oppressor of other people’s freedom of conscience. Marriage recognition as a civil policy should never have to deny the physical realities of human sexuality and procreation/family. In denying reality, government is oppressing good citizens. It is elevating delusional people to special protected status. It is moving toward denying even the reality of what is male and what is female. We have lost our collective minds.
I would face my maker fine, “Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar’s.”
Jesus did not launch a government or party, He did not try to form a nation on this planet.
This clerk can’t argue her religion has been violated because her job asks her to perform a task she does not agree with any more than a Muslim can complain that if they work in a pork processing plant they must interact with pork.
She can find another job.
Really do her job, because her Christian beliefs do have something to say about what is being forced upon Americans. What is your job, I know garbage collector, because you believe that the persons beliefs and values man nothing. Hopefully the Supreme Court does hear the case because the Issue of Gy Marriage Shall not infringe upon the religious convictions of others. If the homos and lesbos want to be married let in be a damn civil union. next there will be some yahoo who wants to marry his daughter, or dog or goat. Get the picture when will it stop, incest, pedophilia, bestality, polygamy and so on and so forth!
“I suppose it all comes down to how dearly one holds his convictions, doesn’t it?”
Not really. If she feels she cannot do her job correctly and issue a license to anyone who qualifies, then she should QUIT.
I find much of welfare immoral, and dislike many of our tax laws. But if your job is to enforce the laws, you should either enforce them or quit.
If she was wearing a burkha, there would be an instant accommodation for her “religion”.
Her state voted against homo marriage. Four of the Supreme Justices found this wrong. Essentially one justice is robbing this woman of her job or her religious freedom. She is being forced to choose between them. The Gaystapo strikes again. They’re as phony in their “principles” of freedom as they are in their practice of sexuality.
If you’re religion won’t let you do your job you’re free to get another job.
She can and has done her job. The state voted to define marriage as between one man and one women WHICH IS THE ONLY NORMAL WAY TO DEFINE IT AND 100% THE FUTURE OF CIVILIZATION. A divided Supreme Court overstepped and demanded unnatural marriage be recognized nationwide. That is evil. But it does not have to require other people to violate their conscience. An accommodation could be made except that perverts like to impose their perversion on others. See Genesis 19.
“I find much of welfare immoral, and dislike many of our tax laws. But if your job is to enforce the laws, you should either enforce them or quit.”
I’m with you. It sucks that her job description changed, but that happens. Mine has changed too, a couple times. Once I decided I could live with the change and stuck it out, another time I couldn’t and so I quit.
Sorry you are incorrect. Job requirements change it happens every day in all jobs. Her religious beliefs do not allow her not to do her Job. The religious exemption is nonsense for many reasons but let’s just take one. She refuses to issue any licenses at all since the ruling so it’s just nonsense.
She will not win her case. Ones religious freedom is not infringed by job requirements. If her religion compels her not to perform her job then she needs to find other employment.
Legally this is pretty open and shut, and she won’t win.
No worries I make typos and misspellings all the time
Sorry but your argument is not based upon any legal precident. Yes the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage like abortion and Obamacare before it is based on garbage... However like it or not someone cannot refuse to perform the duties of their job and claim their religion prevents them from doing so and expect to keep said job.
Her religious rights are not being infringed, she is free to practice her religion as she sees fit, but if her religion says she can’t do her job then she needs to find other employment.
She’s not going to win, and it’s laughable to think she will or that her practice of religion is being infringed.
She has refused to issue marriage licenses not only to homosexuals but to all couples and that’s her job. She is not doing her job, and as such should be terminated. The argument the job requirements changed is irrelevant. Job requirements change all the time, if you are unwilling to perform your duties you need to seek other employment.
If you religion says you can’t do something then you need to find a position that doesn’t require you to, you can’t just decide you are not going to do the job you are paid to do.
She won’t win her case and she is free to practice her religion, just not in that job.
She’s got no legal leg to stand on. Free exercise of religion does not mean you can refuse to do your job requirements.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.