Posted on 09/03/2015 4:13:30 PM PDT by Isara
WASHINGTON – Sen. Ted Cruz has gone further than most 2016 contenders in promoting “religious liberty,” honoring bakers and florists who’ve refused services to gay couples and denouncing the Supreme Court for “lawlessness” in legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide.
But when it comes to the Kentucky county clerk who is defying a federal court order by refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, Cruz has struck a more measured tone than many of his rivals.
In a Facebook post tonight, he condemned a “war on faith” and said there needs to be a way to work around religious objections to federal and state law.
“We should make it possible for believers, such as Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis in Kentucky, to hold government jobs without having to violate their religious beliefs,” wrote Cruz. “We can work together to come up with alternative ways to ensure that government functions are accomplished without infringing on religious liberty.”
Other 2016 contenders have explicitly endorsed Davis’ actions.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said Davis is entitled to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
“I don’t think anyone should have to choose between following their conscience and religious beliefs and giving up their job and facing financial sanctions,” he said. “I absolutely do believe people have a First Amendment right, a constitutional right. I don’t think the court can take that away.”
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee spoke with Davis on Wednesday and offered his prayers and support.
“I let her know how proud I am of her for not abandoning her religious convictions and standing strong for religious liberty,” he said in a statement his campaign issued. “She is showing more courage and humility than just about any federal office holder in Washington.”
---
(Excerpt) Read more at trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com ...
They always accommodate Muslims, why not Christians
Cruz is correct. I’m tired of hearing the Supreme Court is the law of the land. They are not legislatures but they think they are. Instead they are more like the decree of the land. And Five of the nine are real idiots.
She should sue the government.
The government changed the content of her employment.
When she was first employed she understood and accepted the job requirements and they did not require her to perform acts that conflicted with her moral or religious beliefs.
Now the government demands that she perform a duty that was not part of the original job and that she finds morally unacceptable..
So where is the Trumpster on this CNN? If fact where are the Trumpster backers in most of these Ky Clerk threads?
A woman went to jail today over her religious beliefs due the lawlessness of the Courts. We know that Trump was wrong when the Confederate Flag issue was being debated and he had no clue about the “10th Amendment”, so what’s his excuse this time?
He spends a day proclaiming he signed the almighty “loyalty” pledge. Yeah, that was the most important thing today.
If you want to see real leadership in action, turn on Mark Levin next hour who will have Ted Cruz on, a guy that understands the Constitution and the 10th Amendment and the dangers of an out of control court. Meanwhile, Trump is thinking about how great it will be to nominate his sister to the SCOTUS.
Jury nullification puts juror conscience above the law.
When a judge sets aside a jury verdict he needs nothing more than his conscience.
Conscientious objectors put conscience above the law.
In each of these cases there is no legal punishment for refusal. In the cases where a job must be done like a conscientious objector other remedies are taken and the war is still fought.
I don't know, but I'd feel like a hypocrite if I were her and I would quit that job. But she won't, she'll sue who she can, get her five minutes of fame
My job duties have sure changed through the years and if I don't like it then I can find employment elsewhere.
Aren’t you all high and mighty. Fact is this a constitutional crises, a direct violation of constitutional rights. If this stands, whats next? Can you be punished for discrimination if you refuse a sexual advance for no other reason then the person making the advance is a homo?
Thanks for the post.
What a mess this administration has created for our country both morally and legally. How will we extricate ourselves from this?
Others here have posed some very valid questions. If you are a Christian that doesn’t believe in divorce can you refuse to issue a marriage license to a divorcee? If you are a muslim who works at a school cafeteria can you refuse to work on the day they serve hot dogs? Can muslim women refuse to remove their burkas for DL photos? Does Sharia law apply in the US if you are a muslim? If you are an animal rights activist can you refuse to issue dog licenses if you are a city clerk?
Surely the rules changed after she took the job. But so it also was true for the bakery owner, the florist and wedding photographer. I’m sure they never thought they could lose their business over gay marriage.
Was this woman jailed because of her religious beliefs? Or was it because she failed to follow a court order? Or was it because she failed to perform the job she was elected to do? I don’t know anymore. Does anyone?
This is why following our Constitution is so important. This could have been avoided if that was a priority. So much has gone wrong in this government from the top on down to the voters I have little hope left that we can unravel this mess.
bttt
She released a statement ssying she got saved 4yrs ago and is now following Christ. Even still she is not breaking the law.
Not high and mighty. She obviously has her own ideas of what is and what isn’t God’s laws. Just an observation.
In fact, I agreed with the baker who didn’t want to bake a wedding cake for a wedding between two men.
The bakery is a privately owned company. You do business with who you want.
This woman is paid with public funds. The law is the law whether you or I agree with it. They pay her to do a job and she should do it or find another job.
When a judge sets aside a jury verdict he needs nothing more than his conscience.
conscientious objectors put conscience above the law.
All true. Still and all, though, a Catholic judge has to grant a divorce to a couple who meets the requirements of the law, even though the Catholic Church does not recognize divorce of married couples.
Meanwhile all kinds of impatient persons are trying to compress complex situations into single sound bites.
Notice one thing. Cruz and Trump have been quite studious not to criticize one another in public.
Think something might be cooking, hmmm????
She has a colorable claim that there isn’t ANY Kentucky marriage law. And if the all powerful USSC has a beef with that, then hold the Kentucky legislature in contempt for not implementing it — not the clerk in contempt for failing to carry out a farce.
Hucksterbee proved the old adage that a broken clock is right twice a day.
“WE” will not “EXTRICATE OURSELVES” at all.
If we open our hearts and minds to the Lord, HE will show a way.
And on the way there will be some things that you’d never expect to see, things that cut across man’s rules... shoot, they might even cut across the Constitution itself.
No, she is an elected official. She can be impeached. But to put her in jail for her constitutional protected religious beliefs is totality against what this country was all about. If this stands, where will the judicial control end?
This isn’t about being reasonable. Reasonable long ago left the barn.
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.