Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My first question is, why is this judge still on the bench, she should have been removed in 2019.
But after the Supreme Court Ruling in 303 Creative she feels that she can choose which weddings she can presided over.
Quote:
Since Waco judge Dianne Hensley received a public warning from the State Commission on Judicial Conduct for refusing to perform same-sex marriages in 2019, she’s waged a public battle against the state agency.
She’s long claimed the governmental body violated state law by punishing her for actions taken in accordance with her religious faith. Now, she has submitted a brief arguing that the recent Supreme Court ruling in favor of a business owner who refused services to same-sex couples will help her case.
After Hensley was warned by the judicial conduct commission, she filed a lawsuit claiming the investigation and warning “substantially burdened the free exercise of her religion, with no compelling justification.” She seeks damages of $10,000. She has been represented by the First Liberty Institute, a high-profile religious liberty legal group based in Plano. The legal group also has strong ties to suspended Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.
My personal belief is that people who have a strong religious conviction against performing these ceremonies shouldn't be forced to do so as long as someone else within that jurisdiction can do so. If you are a typical leftist, I'm sure you want this woman forced into your way of thinking, but religious accommodations should be made as long as someone else can perform those particular ceremonies.
My personal belief is that people who have a strong religious conviction against performing these ceremonies shouldn't be forced to do so as long as someone else within that jurisdiction can do so. If you are a typical leftist, I'm sure you want this woman forced into your way of thinking, but religious accommodations should be made as long as someone else can perform those particular ceremonies.
I just think that government employees should perform the work for which they took an oath of office. Reminds me of the clerk in Alabama that refused to issue licenses because of her strong religious convictions, they were so strong that she was divorced three times.
If you have religious convictions that are so strong that you can't do the work, then don't apply for the job.
I just think that government employees should perform the work for which they took an oath of office. Reminds me of the clerk in Alabama that refused to issue licenses because of her strong religious convictions, they were so strong that she was divorced three times.
If you have religious convictions that are so strong that you can't do the work, then don't apply for the job.
I agree! A public servant needs to serve the public in the capacity of the job which they are being paid to do.
If this were a minister with a religious ceremony, and a couple that wanted to be married by him/her was a union that his belief did not support, I would be on the side of the minister.
If some part of a job involves what you consider a religious violation of your faith, find something else!
I feel that God knows one's heart, thus there is wiggle room. I don't think that God would want people turned away in his name.
I am not a liberal, and this is not a liberal vs conservative thing, but a being a decent human and doing your job thing.
Last edited by AnywhereElse; 07-14-2023 at 02:21 PM..
My personal belief is that people who have a strong religious conviction against performing these ceremonies shouldn't be forced to do so as long as someone else within that jurisdiction can do so. If you are a typical leftist, I'm sure you want this woman forced into your way of thinking, but religious accommodations should be made as long as someone else can perform those particular ceremonies.
I was thinking the same. Why would anyone want a cake, a website, a marriage or anything made or performed by someone that doesn't want to do it?
It shouldn't be that difficult to find someone that would be happy to bake you a cake, design a website or marry you.
I can't imagine working with someone that you had to take to court in order to force them to work for you. It is not going to be a happy time and you certainly will not receive their best efforts.
What if they had the job long before the ruling changed? It hasn't been that long.
Speaking of God, the Bible says different. Very different.
Job descriptions change over time, as do the duties of a particular job. So one decides which is more important, their job or their faith.
Not everyone follows your "Bible". Your God must be the angry one, mine God is not. I follow the Golden Rule, yeah, it isn't talked about too much by Christians today:
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a biblical concept spoken by Jesus in Luke 6:31 and Matthew 7:12; it is commonly referred to as the "Golden Rule." "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets" (Matthew 7:12). "Do to others as you would have them do to you" (Luke 6:31).
"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.