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.
Perhaps you can tell us what you think SHOULD be happening in Rowan County, Kentucky.
The Supreme Court has ruled that everyone must be treated equally in the issuance of marriage licenses under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, so that is settled. Done. Over. Gay people can get married.
Under Kentucky law, the County Clerk is charged with issuing marriage licenses.
That the scenario. That's the law. That's the way it is. The Governor said he is not authorized to change the rules, and there is no indication that the legislature wants to change the laws, so we have to assume that the rules will stay the same.
Under those conditions, what do YOU think should be happening? How do those gay people go about getting the license the Supreme Court says they are entitled to get? Do you think they should be denied what the Court says they are entitled to? What outcome would make you happy?
We can all see that you think all gay people should quit having anal sex, but that's not really the point. What do you really think should happen in Morehead, KY, right now? How do you think this issue should be resolved?
The law should be amended to allow for religious objections. Then a different clerk can issue the licenses or the court could appoint someone. As long as the gay couple get their license then is it really so important that a specific person sign off on it?
I hope you will get an honest and thoughtful answer, but I am doubtful. I suspect that he would just want those sinful people to be denied what is lawful because he thinks it would please his God. It is a pathetic lack of concern or consideration for others who are sinners in his mind. I hope i am wrong.
OTOH there is a pathetic lack of concern for someone who simply did not want to go against her moral beliefs. So on your side, let's see the horrible oh so horrible consequence is that the gay couple has to be a bit inconvenienced and drive down the road for their license. OTOH, your side applauded Kim Davis going to jail and thinks she should lose her source of income. Some people even said she should be imprisoned for life! Seems pretty unbalanced to me.
The law should be amended to allow for religious objections. Then a different clerk can issue the licenses or the court could appoint someone. As long as the gay couple get their license then is it really so important that a specific person sign off on it?
And if everyone decided that they had an objection?
This is why religion has to stay out of government. Thankfully the judge made the right call.
I'm waiting to see Kim arrested again on Monday. If she doesn't continue to object then she has no religious convictions at all and was just in it for the attention.
I hope you will get an honest and thoughtful answer, but I am doubtful. I suspect that he would just want those sinful people to be denied what is lawful because he thinks it would please his God. It is a pathetic lack of concern or consideration for others who are sinners in his mind. I hope i am wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
The law should be amended to allow for religious objections. Then a different clerk can issue the licenses or the court could appoint someone. As long as the gay couple get their license then is it really so important that a specific person sign off on it?
IF it were possible, that would have been done. But it is not and she even prevented any of her other clerks from issuing licenses. She was not concerned about her religious freedom, she wanted to prevent the religious freedom of gays to marry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
OTOH there is a pathetic lack of concern for someone who simply did not want to go against her moral beliefs. So on your side, let's see the horrible oh so horrible consequence is that the gay couple has to be a bit inconvenienced and drive down the road for their license. OTOH, your side applauded Kim Davis going to jail and thinks she should lose her source of income. Some people even said she should be imprisoned for life! Seems pretty unbalanced to me.
Losing her income pales in comparison with some of the things Christians with strong convictions have endured and continue to endure in some parts of the world. If it really is about her religious convictions she should be willing to endure whatever consequences arise from it. But she cannot impose consequences on gays by her refusal to do her job. That is the part you seem not to get. Religious convictions are NOT a reason to impose negative consequences on others, no matter what you think of them or their status as sinners.
Then let the court appoint someone who won't object. Throwing someone in jail because of their religious convictions was a really bad call.
The judge offered her the ability to not issue the licenses as long as the deputy clerks issued them, she refused. It's not about her personal religious convictions, it is about imposing her beliefs on others.
Her lawyers filed a petition Friday with the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals asking the court to halt an order by a district judge requiring that marriage licenses be issued to all couples seeking them,
If this was about HER beliefs then she has already been accommodated by allowing her to not have to issue any licenses, why is she now wanting no one in the office to issue them either?
IF it were possible, that would have been done. But it is not and she even prevented any of her other clerks from issuing licenses. She was not concerned about her religious freedom, she wanted to prevent the religious freedom of gays to marry.
Losing her income pales in comparison with some of the things Christians with strong convictions have endured and continue to endure in some parts of the world. If it really is about her religious convictions she should be willing to endure whatever consequences arise from it. But she cannot impose consequences on gays by her refusal to do her job. That is the part you seem not to get. Religious convictions are NOT a reason to impose negative consequences on others, no matter what you think of them or their status as sinners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Then let the court appoint someone who won't object. Throwing someone in jail because of their religious convictions was a really bad call.
If the judge had that as an option he would have taken it. She holds an elective office. Perhaps it would help you to understand the situation if you took a civics class.
Perhaps you can tell us what you think SHOULD be happening in Rowan County, Kentucky.
The Supreme Court has ruled that everyone must be treated equally in the issuance of marriage licenses under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, so that is settled. Done. Over. Gay people can get married.
Under Kentucky law, the County Clerk is charged with issuing marriage licenses.
That the scenario. That's the law. That's the way it is. The Governor said he is not authorized to change the rules, and there is no indication that the legislature wants to change the laws, so we have to assume that the rules will stay the same.
Under those conditions, what do YOU think should be happening? How do those gay people go about getting the license the Supreme Court says they are entitled to get? Do you think they should be denied what the Court says they are entitled to? What outcome would make you happy?
We can all see that you think all gay people should quit having anal sex, but that's not really the point. What do you really think should happen in Morehead, KY, right now? How do you think this issue should be resolved?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
The law should be amended to allow for religious objections. Then a different clerk can issue the licenses or the court could appoint someone. As long as the gay couple get their license then is it really so important that a specific person sign off on it?
I see two problems.
First, there is no indication that either the Governor or the legislature is interested in changing the law. Second, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that some county would have no deputy that wants to do it.
The judge offered her the ability to not issue the licenses as long as the deputy clerks issued them, she refused. It's not about her personal religious convictions, it is about imposing her beliefs on others.
If this was about HER beliefs then she has already been accommodated by allowing her to not have to issue any licenses, why is she now wanting no one in the office to issue them either?
That was explained earlier to Jeff and his reply in post 750 should be Re read by others.
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.
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.
