[Mr Rogers]

“How many times are you going to ask the same stupid question?”

Really. So county clerks get to impose their religious views regardless of the law?

I’ve met people who believe it is immoral to ride horses. They claim all riding is inhumane. Should such a person be allowed to refuse me a permit for a horse shed and corral?

There are people who believe it is immoral to own dogs. Should a government official be allowed to refuse to issue a dog license because their religious belief objects to owning dogs?

Should they be allowed to tell me to move to another county if I want to ride a horse?

Just how much power to you want to give government officials?

[Ray76]

Is it your position that society has no say in what has legal sanction?

[Responsibility2nd]

Really. So county clerks get to impose their religious views regardless of the law?

________________________________________

What law was Mrs. Davis in violation of? I can cite for you all manner of Kentucky State Laws that she was following.

But if she was violating any law, please list it.

Oh, I get it now. You mistakenly think a SCOTUS order is law.

(Holy Crap!)

[caww]

"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."....

[fluffy]

Nobody is imposing anything, there are plenty of clerks around. Reasonable accommodations are to be made for matters of conscience for any government employee, it has always been thus.

Your other hypotheticals are just getting increasingly desperate. If reductio ad absurdum is going to be your only argument then you’re not really thinking about this.

[DiogenesLamp]

So county clerks get to impose their religious views regardless of the law?

They get to impose the law as it has been for a few thousand years, not as it has been since some idiot judges presumed to claim the 14th amendment guarantees faggot marriage.

This is a "Change" in the law. You may be familiar with the word "change" because it is a major factor of Liberal philosophy.

It is not "conservative", and if you support enforcing these pretend legal CHANGES in the law, then you don't grasp the nature of conservative principles; that things are not "CHANGED" for light and transitory reasons.

If we were Liberals, we would not hesitate to defy this. They simply have more guts than do we. That's why they win and we lose.

[Louis Foxwell]

How does your brain allow you to equate riding horses with sodomy?