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.
The separation of Church and State is built into the 1st Amendment.
Yet, it says NOTHING about it. Weird.....
Quote:
While not implicitly stated, the courts have consistently ruled in favor of such a separation since any favoritism or perceived favoritism toward any singular religion would be a violation of the Establishment Clause in terms of how that clause is interpreted (through the decades, mind you) by the SCOTUS.
As I said...it's easier to go along and get along.
Quote:
It was decided very early on to avoid religious entanglements by staying out of religious affairs.
HOWEVER, "staying out of religious affairs" does not, nor did it ever, mean that religion is allowed to do whatever it wants without government interference.
Nor did the framers mean that private citizens could not express their religions in public. That is a lie that the left has bought into.
In some states, it is optional for judges to perform marriages. But if they do it at all they have to do it for anyone. It is not legal to deny those services based on (ir)religion or sexual orientation for example. What a judge in such a state can do, is stop performing marriages at all, if the judge does not want to make reasonable accommodation for or service all comers.
I recall that Texas is such a state, if I'm not mistaken; there are others. If the FFRF is expending resources on this then it's likely that Kentucky is not such a state.
You must have missed where Vizio found and posted the job description.
I saw the statute regarding marriage. Did you post the statute with the job requirement for judges? I may have missed it.
It's in the statute, read through the subsections. Forgot the exact one. Judges are the second 'solemnization' group listed. The reason why is he is acting in a ceremonial, NOT LEGAL fashion. Same as a Priest, or a Minister. The Judge is NOT LEGALLY not enforcing these individuals right to marry. It is all completely unrelated to LAW. It is solemnization.
In short, he can not perform the ceremony if he provides reasonable allowance (such as him recommending the next county over which is like a 10 minute drive).
It's relatively new but so far, there are no grounds for a lawsuit. The reason the Kim Davis got in trouble is completely unrelated and different... and note, she legally DOES NOT have to sign the marriage certificate in her county. She associates do.
Honestly, I just got tired of people thinking they knew the laws of this state with all the FFRF references. I don't support this judge, kim davis, or the Ark thing. But people don't know the laws (posted the law about the 'tax break' the Ark got which is based off a tourism incentive began in 2003.. one I might add that Churchill Downs also benefited from after it's last renovation as well as the Bourbon Trail which includes stops at Makers Mark Distillery, Jim Beam, etc...)
I posted the state statue KRS for everyone to read. If people choose not to read the law, then not much one can do.
Actually the state statute does not address the issue as it only states who MAY perform marriages. The pertinent issue as stated in the cited article is: "By refusing to provide secular ceremonies, Trigg County sends a message of religious endorsement. However, according to the Constitution, it is illegal to condition a government benefit on a religious test. 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.."
They don't want to end up like those people at Charlie Hebdo, or France in general, relative to the backlash for "disrespecting" their Religion. The FFRF is lucky the Christians don't roll that way anymore.
My prediction is...it's gonna end up like that, though. The hornets will leave you alone...until you keep poking at the nest.
What in Christianity changed that you all don't "roll" that way anymore?
Did jesus change his message somewhere along the line?
Black people are lucky Christians don't "roll" like they use to.
Women are lucky Christians don't " roll" like they used to.
Actually the state statute does not address the issue as it only states who MAY perform marriages. The pertinent issue as stated in the cited article is: "By refusing to provide secular ceremonies, Trigg County sends a message of religious endorsement. However, according to the Constitution, it is illegal to condition a government benefit on a religious test. 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.."
Trigg County is not refusing to perform the ceremony. This judge doesn't want to be the one to do it. There are other options. Big difference legally. In no way will these peoples marriage be denied.
One can ask to be married by anyone who can legally preside over the ceremony but they don't have to do it.
As I said...it's easier to go along and get along.
Nor did the framers mean that private citizens could not express their religions in public. That is a lie that the left has bought into.
On the contrary, it is a lie that you (and those who think like you) have bought into that public -paid servants can pick and choose when and how to do the job they are appointed and paid to do with religious beliefs as an excuse for that.
Ignorance of this is no longer an excuse since the Kim Davis case (the judge was himself a religious man) - the principle was there and the law has backed it up. Religion is not an excuse for lawbreaking.
The FFRF needs to be classified as a hate group. That's all they are.
We already know what your definition of "hate" is, Jeff. In fact, you've literally turned the word inside out and now use it as an accusation against anyone who stands in the way of your religion's desire to rule over the lives, customs, and cultures of ALL Americans regardless of individual beliefs.
Instead of simply admitting that your particular brand of Christianity is filled with hatred, bigotry, and prejudice, you try to make it appear as though anyone or any agency that takes a stand against your religion's unadulterated fascism are the ones who are filled with hate.
Except ... the FFRF isn't running around trying to incite hatred against Christians and they certainly aren't advocating that Christians refusing to obey atheist rules be put to death -- which is a lot more than I can say for YOUR side of the argument. And one of your genocide-approving merchants of hate damn near became the GOP nominee for president which only goes to show just how bad a shape this country is in.
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.
