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.
Canada has had same sex marriage for a decade now, the sky hasn't fallen in, and people are as free to practice their religion just like before.
We didn't see a great refusal by PUBLIC servants to serve a gay couple, yet the US is obsessed by this, ranging from individuals to States enacting "Religious Freedom" laws.
When you are a sworn PUBLIC servant, you follow that oath you took, serving the public. End of story. If you feel so strongly about your convictions that they are in conflict with public policy and laws you have a choice.... quit your job.
Isn't it hypocritical not to, if you're convictions are such that you won't carry out your sworn duty? Especially if you've already been divorced 3 times.
From the ruling:
“She may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County jail,” Bunning wrote. “She is even free to believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman, as many Americans do. However, her religious convictions cannot excuse her from performing the duties that she took an oath to perform as Rowan County clerk.”
Davis began refusing licenses after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June that all couples have a right to marry regardless of gender. In court, she argued that issuing the forms under her name would violate her religious beliefs, even if a deputy clerk performs the task in her stead.
If you personally don't want to do it, let it end there. Get out of the way, and let other people do the job. I don't agree with abortion. I also don't work at a job that I generally have to deal with it. This is called being obstructive.
My point is that in this country, we have elected officials, such as the POTUS, local mayors, and now a county clerk choosing to ignore laws. No one seems to bat an eye if it's the POTUS or a mayor...but now that it's a county clerk and it's THIS particular law, people are freaking out.
I am simply wondering why?
I would find it extremely ironic if the DOJ "looks into" an elected official doing what the POTUS has instructed them to do already.
I bat my eyes whenever I see, and hear of discrimination against your brothers and sisters in the community. No.... make that a squinky eye....
Some how you dislike this age-old faith-based idea of sanctuary.
Canada has had same sex marriage for a decade now, the sky hasn't fallen in, and people are as free to practice their religion just like before.
We didn't see a great refusal by PUBLIC servants to serve a gay couple, yet the US is obsessed by this, ranging from individuals to States enacting "Religious Freedom" laws.
When you are a sworn PUBLIC servant, you follow that oath you took, serving the public. End of story. If you feel so strongly about your convictions that they are in conflict with public policy and laws you have a choice.... quit your job.
Isn't it hypocritical not to, if you're convictions are such that you won't carry out your sworn duty? Especially if you've already been divorced 3 times.
From the ruling:
“She may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County jail,” Bunning wrote. “She is even free to believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman, as many Americans do. However, her religious convictions cannot excuse her from performing the duties that she took an oath to perform as Rowan County clerk.”
Some of us feel that it is tyranny to force people to do something against their will. Ya know, tyranny was something that our founding fathers fought against so it's kinda important.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,916,433 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Some of us feel that it is tyranny to force people to do something against their will. Ya know, tyranny was something that our founding fathers fought against so it's kinda important.
Except don't you believe in upholding your oath?
I'm willing to bet that the County Clerk have no problem swearing on a Bible that she would uphold her oath of office. Unless you have any evidence that that off of office included her ability to discriminate against any legally recognized group, do you not agree she is obligated to fulfill her oath? You know, the oath that she willingly took?
Of course this is the same clerk, who four times stood front of a pastor and said that her marriage is until death do her part. Apparently three times out of four she didn't mean that either. She is quite religious you know.
Some of us feel that it is tyranny to force people to do something against their will. Ya know, tyranny was something that our founding fathers fought against so it's kinda important.
What about separation of church and state? What about not only freedom of religion, but freedom FROM religion.
Why the personal attack on her? The fact that she has divorced and remarried does not mean that she can't recognize that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
If that really needs to be spelled out, then you need to do more homework.
So you disapprove of a mayor refusing to enforce immigration law?
Only when it's misused.
You do not need my opinions on Immigration, or Sanctuary, or POTUS, or any Mayor in the country. My opinions about them are irrelevant to this Court opinion, and her subsequent actions.
All you need to know is my position, and opinion on this matter. Your brothers and sisters in the community are being discriminated against. My faith does not allow silence in this matter.
You do not need my opinions on Immigration, or Sanctuary, or POTUS, or any Mayor in the country. My opinions about them are irrelevant to this Court opinion, and her subsequent actions.
All you need to know is my position, and opinion on this matter. Your brothers and sisters in the community are being discriminated against. My faith does not allow silence in this matter.
What I am trying to establish is why you apparently have an issue with one elected official ignoring law, while you seem to be happy with other elected officials ignoring law. Why the bias?
I guess it's a matter of what laws you have a moral objection to?
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.
