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.
No tryanny is being forced to do something against your will or be punished. That's what the clerk is facing.
Just like the "tyranny" I'm facing being "forced" "against my will" to get up and go to work and do my job if I want a paycheck. In other words, you don't have problem with this particular case, you have a problem with free-market capitalism. You want this country to be a socialist utopia where all are provided for equally no matter what their economic contribution to society or their employer.
That's great, but political rants against the man are off topic for this thread and this subforum. There's a politics one just around the corner if you want to debate this idea.
If my boss suddenly came in and gave me a NEW job duty that violated my morals, you betcha I would protest.
Let's keep in mind that this is not a new job duty the clerk has been assigned. She is merely being instructed to continue doing her existing job duties, but she has been instructed not to discriminate.
In addition to this, the issue of legality and discrimination has been extensively litigated. Virtually every court, including SCOTUS, has said that this is a legal requirement.
Let's keep in mind that this is not a new job duty the clerk has been assigned. She is merely being instructed to continue doing her existing job duties, but she has been instructed not to discriminate.
In addition to this, the issue of legality and discrimination has been extensively litigated. Virtually every court, including SCOTUS, has said that this is a legal requirement.
Except that this is a new form of marriage that has never been done previously in our country. The clerk would be willing to give a marriage license to someone regardless of their sexual preferences, but she just doesn't feel she can give one to 2 people of the same gender.
The ploy you're trying to use is a common one on the P&C forum.
"Why complain about this if you don't complain about that?"
First of all, that isn't usually any truer there than it is here.
The point is any of those other things aren't pertinent to this discussion about one particular issue.
You want to address what you keep trying to sneak in, go over to the P&C forum.
This thread is about an elected official picking and choosing what laws to obey based on conscience, right?
Except that this is a new form of marriage that has never been done previously in our country. The clerk would be willing to give a marriage license to someone regardless of their sexual preferences, but she just doesn't feel she can give one to 2 people of the same gender.
It's the same duty, not a different one. Somewhat modified, but not greatly.
The clerk is a government employee, and the government rules are that same sex marriage is legal.
It's all good though. In time she will resign or be fired.
No, it's not. It's about a county clerk refusing to obey an order from a federal judge. You know, contempt of court.
Since so many fundamentalists lack even a basic knowledge of how our system works, they will probably not understand anything beyond, "But she's a Christian and it's gay marriage! "
They obviously believe they can ignore oaths, job requirements, SCOTUS decisions and orders from a federal judge. Special Snowflake Syndrome. It's no different from Paris Hilton thinking she didn't have to follow the law.
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.