Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-29-2015, 10:25 AM
 
6,324 posts, read 4,305,226 times
Reputation: 4333

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
No the problem is using the concept of all encompassing freedom from discrimination to force others to give up their beliefs.
No one is making her give up her beliefs. She can BELIEVE whatever she wants. Her actions, on the other hand, are a different matter.

Her religious beliefs do not give her a special dispensation to break the law. If she's so worried about upsetting her crotchety god, she can resign.

Instead, she's maintaining her office in a deliberate and willing attempt to act as a roadblock to gay marriage.

No one can force her to believe any differently than she does, but that doesn't mean the whole world has to bend over backwards to accommodate her beliefs.

Funny, though, how laws only matter when you happen to agree with them; when those laws allow you to practice whatever bigoted and hateful beliefs you might have (i.e. open discrimination en masse just to coddle a few nasty fundamentalists (not to mention lousy businessmen)). But when those laws rein in your beliefs and stop you from using them as weapons, suddenly "the Supreme Court is not the Supreme Being" and believers should just ignore the laws.

Which is why, as I keep saying, religious fundamentalism has been, and always will be, a clear and present danger to all of us who value individual freedom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-29-2015, 10:57 AM
 
63,521 posts, read 39,812,429 times
Reputation: 7812
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina View Post
. . . religious fundamentalism has been, and always will be, a clear and present danger to all of us who value individual freedom.
It cannot be summarized better. Fundamentalists actually think their God wants them to dictate to everyone else and enforce whatever laws they THINK their God wants them to obey. Of course this is entirely counterproductive to their God's stated desires for it to be voluntary. Regrettably such contradictions and inconsistencies abound within fundamentalist beliefs and practices . . . so they hardly notice. They are very dangerous indeed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2015, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Self explanatory
12,601 posts, read 7,186,836 times
Reputation: 16799
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
It cannot be summarized better. Fundamentalists actually think their God wants them to dictate to everyone else and enforce whatever laws they THINK their God wants them to obey. Of course this is entirely counterproductive to their God's stated desires for it to be voluntary. Regrettably such contradictions and inconsistencies abound within fundamentalist beliefs and practices . . . so they hardly notice. They are very dangerous indeed.
Not unlike ISIS. Very scary stuff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2015, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Kansas
25,752 posts, read 21,905,003 times
Reputation: 26363
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
She is not being asked to give up her beliefs. She is just being asked to do her JOB serving the PUBLIC. Her beliefs have nothing to do with her job. Her beliefs apply only to HER. She is not being asked to have a SSM. What about this do you have difficulty understanding, Jeff????
It is not unusual, well in other circumstances other than gay marriage issues, for religious accommodation to be made: WYSK: Workplace Religious Accommodation and Reasonable Accommodation for Religious Beliefs | Nolo.com

I still confused by the "fundy" since it is a majority of Christians as well as people of other faiths that hold homosexual "unions" to be against the Bible and/or biological design. Many still believe that it is a mental illness. Of course, I understand that currently the agenda is to destroy "Christians".

The agenda, one more time: Reasonable Accommodation for Religious Beliefs | Nolo.com add https://www.intellihub.com/it-begins...exempt-status/ and Gay Activist Hate Against Christians » Americans for Truth

I am big supporter of civil disobedience and without it, we, as a country would not exist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2015, 11:26 AM
 
63,521 posts, read 39,812,429 times
Reputation: 7812
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
She is not being asked to give up her beliefs. She is just being asked to do her JOB serving the PUBLIC. Her beliefs have nothing to do with her job. Her beliefs apply only to HER. She is not being asked to have a SSM. What about this do you have difficulty understanding, Jeff????
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
It is not unusual, well in other circumstances other than gay marriage issues, for religious accommodation to be made: WYSK: Workplace Religious Accommodation and Reasonable Accommodation for Religious Beliefs | Nolo.com
You are being disingenuous. The reasonable religious accommodation refers to allowing for personal life demands to intrude on the time demands of the job . . . NOT the essential functional demands of the job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2015, 12:01 PM
 
Location: West Virginia
16,610 posts, read 15,566,014 times
Reputation: 10843
Well, she has now taken her case to the Supreme Court.

Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, who opposes to gay marriage for religious reasons, asked the nation’s highest court on Friday to grant her “asylum for her conscience.”

Kentucky clerk asks Supreme Court to intervene in marriage case | Fox News

Justice Kagan will be the justice that will decide whether the lower court order should be stayed while the case is presented to the full court.

Stay tuned for further news.
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2015, 02:19 PM
 
Location: Caverns measureless to man...
7,588 posts, read 6,596,051 times
Reputation: 17966
Kagan will spend twice as much time typing her ruling as she will deciding what to say. This is a slam dunk. I expect the appeal to be rejected no later than Wednesday, and attorneys for plaintiff filing suit immediately afterward and requesting an immediate summary judgment. Which they will probably get, so this clerk could be found in contempt before the end of the week.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2015, 03:42 PM
 
6,324 posts, read 4,305,226 times
Reputation: 4333
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
It is not unusual, well in other circumstances other than gay marriage issues, for religious accommodation to be made: WYSK: Workplace Religious Accommodation and Reasonable Accommodation for Religious Beliefs | Nolo.com
There's a HUGE difference between someone getting a pass to ignore corporate policies and someone who thinks their religious beliefs allow them to break the law. A corporate policy is not a law.

Title VII does not grant anyone the right to ignore laws -- especially laws like the one which allows gay marriage.

In addition, since the clerk works for, and thus by default represents, the government, she will not be granted the same entitlements as someone working for a private company. Her job is not to sit there and judge others and decide, based on arbitrary religious reasons, who should and should not be married. Using her position as a weapon -- to deliberately and knowingly act as a roadblock to gay marriage is wholly unlawful. This is ESPECIALLY true considering you can't go to just any old clerk to receive a marriage license.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
I still confused by the "fundy" since it is a majority of Christians as well as people of other faiths that hold homosexual "unions" to be against the Bible and/or biological design. Many still believe that it is a mental illness.
So what if gay marriage goes against the Bible or biological designs? Why should any gay couple be FORCED to obey someone else's religion? How would you like it if a Muslim forced you to obey Muslim religious laws? Yeah, you wouldn't like it one bit. I'm constantly amazed at how fascistic religion actually is when it bumps up against something like gay marriage. It acts like every other dictator and tyrant throughout human history: "It's perfectly fine, even required, that I shove my beliefs down everyone else's throat, but no one is allowed to shove their beliefs down MY throat -- because my beliefs are special, sacrosanct, and true whereas everyone else's beliefs are false, wrong, and worth less than garbage."

This clerk is not required to issue marriage licenses. The office she holds, however, DOES require issuing marriage licenses -- including gay couples. If she really thinks that her silly, hateful god would punish her for issuing gay marriage licenses, she can and should resign. She does NOT have the right to deliberately block the ability for gays to marry when gay marriage is perfectly legal in her state. Title VII says that a religious exemption is valid only if it does not create an undue hardship on the business. Well, I think this clerk's purposeful blocking of homosexual marriage creates an undue hardship for both the government AND the people whom the government is supposed to serve. Yeah, that's right. The government is not supposed to serve a specific religious rule from a specific interpretation of a specific religion. In the case of the clerk, she IS the government and someone needs to give her a swift kick to the posterior in order to remove her from office.

As for "a majority of Christians as well as people of other faiths" holding that homosexual unions to be against the Bible and/or biological design ... well, guess what.

You must have just awoken from a long slumber considering that a clear majority of Americans has been in favor of marriage equality for several years now. It's just the loud-mouthed fundamentalists making a lot of noise in an attempt to be the squeakiest wheel ever to turn a gear. Fortunately, the only oil they're getting comes in the form of, "Sorry, you lose."

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
Of course, I understand that currently the agenda is to destroy "Christians".
Oh, of course, right? It's simply impossible to believe that maybe, just maybe, people don't want minor religious dogma dictating our secular lives. Just maybe people understand that marriage does not belong to Christianity. In fact, marriage doesn't belong to religion at all. Just maybe people are sick of listening to crybaby fundamentalists who insist that all 330 million of us obey their specific rules from their specific religion. Once THAT door is open, it'll be damn hard to close it again. Of course, that's what they want, a blank check, so to speak. Maybe they'll go after Harry Potter next so that all of Rawling's books are banned in the U.S.A.

And I know MANY of us are sick to death of hearing about these ridiculous apocalyptic "agendas" to destroy Christianity or how much we hate Christians. That gets really old. I mean positively ancient. If you want to believe in your Chicken Little predictions, be my guest. It only makes you look like you're out of touch with reality.

It begins: Liberals and LGBT activists set their sights on Christian Churches in call to remove tax exempt status

And why not? Churches should have lost their tax exempt status the moment the Mormon Church spent $47 million to fight against gay marriage in California. If the churches want to meddle in politics, which they're not supposed to do while being tax exempt, they can pay their fair share like everyone else. Either butt out of politics or pay up. It's that simple.

Gay Activist Hate Against Christians

And what do you expect from gay activists? A big hug and a plate of cookies? You're just lucky that even more homosexuals aren't hating you because, quite frankly, Christianity deserves it. Not since the 60's has such a display of open bigotry and hatred stained the history of this nation. This issue should serve as a clear reminder of the dangers of fundamentalism and theocratic governorship. Fundamentalist religion will strip your freedoms down to the bone -- and then down to the marrow -- until you're left with nothing but ISIS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse View Post
I am big supporter of civil disobedience and without it, we, as a country would not exist.
It's just too bad that SOME people are actually being civilly disobedient in order to bring theocratic fascism to America. That way we can be just like Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia. Yay! It's a crying shame that fundy religion is twisting people into destroying the social progress we've made since the Freedom marches in places like Selma, Alabama. Religious fascists want to reverse all of that progress and allow open racism, bigotry, and hatred against EVERYONE just to bash the homosexuals. This entire issue only serves as a demonstration of why religious fundamentalism is the enemy of every freedom-loving individual in the world. It should also serve as a demonstration of just how morally bankrupt their position is. The desire to bring back the racism and bigotry of the 50's and 60's just because they can't stand homosexuals is so immoral that it makes me want to vomit. Fortunately I haven't eaten in awhile or I'd be watching rivulets of slime ooze down my monitor as I contemplated the complete lack of compassion and empathy emanating from the fundamentalist camp.

Last edited by Shirina; 08-29-2015 at 03:53 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2015, 04:56 PM
 
Location: West Virginia
16,610 posts, read 15,566,014 times
Reputation: 10843
The County Attorney is requesting the state government to charge the clerk with misconduct. That is the first step needed for the legislature to impeach the clerk and remove her from office.

Kentucky County Trying To Fire Clerk Who Won't Issue Marriage Licenses | ThinkProgress
__________________
Moderator posts are in RED.
City-Data Terms of Service: http://www.city-data.com/terms.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2015, 05:07 PM
 
32,516 posts, read 37,070,729 times
Reputation: 32573
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy View Post
The County Attorney is requesting the state government to charge the clerk with misconduct. That is the first step needed for the legislature to impeach the clerk and remove her from office.
Good. If she won't do her job, get rid of her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top