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 own experience, for one. I cannot walk into the DMV and expect to test for a driver's license 5 days a week. Services are limited.
As for judges? You'e the one making the assertion they cannot deny the service--I'm asking you to back up your assertion that no judge has ever done that.
I haven't made any such assertion, so why would I need to back it up?
As for judges? You'e the one making the assertion they cannot deny the service--I'm asking you to back up your assertion that no judge has ever done that.
I poked around a little. The Trigg Co. site has a section on marriages...requirements for obtaining a license, undergoing the ceremony, situations where a license or ceremony may not be granted, and it was silent on this particular matter.
The attorney for the FFRF had this to say:
Quote:
FFRF lawyer Andrew Seidel wrote Alexander and informed him in no uncertain terms that his actions were a blatant First Amendment violation. Seidel told Alexander that by not conducting secular weddings, Alexander was effectively imposing an unconstitutional religious test on the people of Trigg County.
“By conditioning the receipt of a marriage license from Trigg County on an agreement to have a religious ceremony, the County is violating the rights of nonreligious couples to equal access to government benefits.”
He further reminded Alexander that under Kentucky law, he is the sole “secular option” to get married in Trigg County, and therefore any ceremonies he conducts must be secular by default. He asked for “written assurances” that he not turn away non-religious couples in the future.
Alexander’s only comment on the matter so far came in the form of a chat with Mehta. He not only confirmed that he doesn’t perform secular weddings, but won’t perform LGBT weddings either.
...and I don't consider that the final word. This is from a lawyer who clearly knows far more about the law than do I, and one who hopefully has looked at the local statutes concerning this, but another judge, should this come to trial, may well not agree with Seidel.
I poked around a little. The Trigg Co. site has a section on marriages...requirements for obtaining a license, undergoing the ceremony, situations where a license or ceremony may not be granted, and it was silent on this particular matter.
The attorney for the FFRF had this to say:
...and I don't consider that the final word. This is from a lawyer who clearly knows far more about the law than do I, and one who hopefully has looked at the local statutes concerning this, but another judge, should this come to trial, may well not agree with Seidel.
So, we're kinda back to "not sure...?"
I would suggest that the lawyer for the FFRF is biased. Believe it or not, not all lawyers are equal, nor are they all honest. Did you know that?
The complaint is not that a judge would not marry them at a time of their choosing, whether during business hours or not.
ok. Perhaps a better illustration would be that my daughter failed her first driver's test. She had been driving for some time with no issues. She knew how to operate the motor vehicle, but the examiner would not give her a license after riding with her. It was largely subjective. The examiner had the freedom to deny the license based on her personal experience.
ok. Perhaps a better illustration would be that my daughter failed her first driver's test. She had been driving for some time with no issues. She knew how to operate the motor vehicle, but the examiner would not give her a license after riding with her. It was largely subjective. The examiner had the freedom to deny the license based on her personal experience.
Passing the driving test is a condition to being issued a driver's license. While the test is somewhat subjective, the examiners have very specific guidelines. And most importantly, your daughter failed the driving test based on the examiner's evaluation of her driving, not because the examiner felt it would violate his/her religious beliefs for your daughter to be issued a driver's license.
I would suggest that the lawyer for the FFRF is biased. Believe it or not, not all lawyers are equal, nor are they all honest. Did you know that?
While I think he would stand by his statements and I have no reason to believe he doesn't believe this or interpret the law in this case in this way, he wouldn't be the final arbiter of such things. This would either fall to a judge, or be clearly outlined in the policies of that particular county (which I haven't been able to find.)
At any rate, that is why I said what I said about what the lawyer said. See what I'm saying?
Passing the driving test is a condition to being issued a driver's license. While the test is somewhat subjective, the examiners have very specific guidelines. And most importantly, your daughter failed the driving test based on the examiner's evaluation of her driving, not because the examiner felt it would violate his/her religious beliefs for your daughter to be issued a driver's license.
Agreed. LIkewise, the issue of a marriage is up to the officiant.
Agreed. LIkewise, the issue of a marriage is up to the officiant.
As has been pointed out, this is dependent upon the actual regulations of whichever specific city, county, etc. is in question, and I don't think we have ascertained that for Trigg Co. yet.
But sure, a person can refuse to do whatever job they signed on for based on religious grounds, etc. But unless they are excepted from certain regulations, or the regulations are not clear on the issue, or the regulations state they must, as part of their official job duties, issue a marriage license (or whatever the case may be) given that the person or people seeking the license (or whatever it may be) have met all the other requirements, then that person shouldn't expect to be able to keep their job (as they are refusing to do it) and by rights should be terminated.
really, as someone else (mensaguy?) pointed out, the only pertinent question here is whether a judge or county official may pick and choose who they serve or not to serve and whether they can be excepted from certain aspects of their job based on religious grounds.
I would argue that we don't know whether this is the case for this judge in this county. Therefore, this discussion is really meaningless and NOBODY gains any ground until we know...
Agreed. LIkewise, the issue of a marriage is up to the officiant.
If the officiant is not a government employee, I agree.
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.
