Clerk's office defies order; no same-sex marriage licenses

a reply to: diggindirt

First, it doesn't matter what rules were in play when they were hired. Things change. Rules change. Daily operations and responsibilities change. If you can't be counted on to change and adapt then I guess you got to go. It's not like they can't do it, they refuse to do it. They are choosing to fail. Therefore they choose to lose their position.

Second, they are hypocrites because they are cherry picking this one rule to follow and claiming religion. Which shouldn't matter anyway because this is a secular job not religious. Christians do not own marriage nor the authority to dictate the rules of it when it's under the office of Government. If they want to play Boss of Marriage then let them do it from within the church. But the Government isn't under church rule.

Third, I don't know what the proper way to remove them would be. The fact that you can have someone who refuses to do their job even when ordered by a court and you can't remove them just shows how dysfunctional the system is. But then, if they really had such conviction to their principles they would quit working for the secular institution they don't agree with rather than cause problems within it. But of course that is really their plan. It's to be as much of a problem as possible because that is what they are, problems.

originally posted by: [post=19697938]JohnFisher
I'll give you this much. You'd make a fine propagandist.

Yet I'm nothing compared to the propaganda pushed by the Church and Religion in General. They are without doubt the masters of deception.

Besides, what I'm saying is true. It's also logical and rational. That's not propaganda, that's just being honest. You won't get that from the church.

But thanks anyway.

originally posted by: JohnFisher
That's really pretty much all untrue.

Nope. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and every other group have different rules for marriage and it means different things in their religions. Buddhists for example have always allowed for gay marriages, and most religions require both partners to be of the same faith. A marriage between a Christian and a Jew is not recognized by either religion, and can only be recognized through a state issued marriage. If this woman were following the convictions of her religion she wouldn't give that couple a marriage certificate either. From the perspective of her church that's equally as bad as a homosexual marriage. She would still be in the wrong in that case, but atleast she would be consistent.

a reply to: Aazadan

some christian churches won't recognize a marriage between a christian and a jew, not all...
a couple that went to the church I went to was a jew and a arab, and well, they finally ended up our church because such a marriage wasn't allowed in their religions. although well, Arafat had a christian wife.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: JohnFisher
That's really pretty much all untrue.

Nope. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and every other group have different rules for marriage and it means different things in their religions. Buddhists for example have always allowed for gay marriages, and most religions require both partners to be of the same faith. A marriage between a Christian and a Jew is not recognized by either religion, and can only be recognized through a state issued marriage.

You are incorrect about the Christian view of marriage. Yes, we are told not to be unequally yoked, and that obviously makes complete sense because how can two people with different values, morals, and ways of living truly act as one? That's a miserable time. However, once you're married, you're married. You've made your bed. Jesus teaches that God's plan for marriage is between one man and one woman. There are only two valid reasons for divorce given in the New Testament. The first is sexual immorality. The second is if your spouse is not a follower of Jesus (unequally yoked), and only if he/she chooses to divorce you, then you may accept the divorce and be done with it. If you become justifiably divorced or if your spouse dies you are eligible for marriage again.

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: mOjOm
I truly have no answers and while I don't agree with their principled stand, I do have human compassion for a person whose morals are being questioned through no fault of their own.

It is completely her own fault.

It is not the big gov.

It's her.

She needs to grow up and realize that the world has evolving standards that aren't going to appease her opinions 100% of the time, and that she is going to have to be mature and just do her job or get back to cooking and washing dishes with her first husband like her god intended, lest she continue hypocritically citing text from her religious book.

a reply to: DeadFoot
Of course it is her fault for believing as she does.
Of course it is government's fault---they are the ones who changed the law in the midst of her term as clerk.
Have you no deeply held convictions that could not be swayed by the "world's evolving standards"?
And just so you understand---there isn't just one clerk in the country who is protesting this ruling in this manner.
I think it might not be the clerks who need to "grow up and realize" some truths. Your attitude could use a dash of maturity toward your fellow humans who hold beliefs different than your own.

This is nothing more than legal insubordination.

Now that the courts have ruled, this is now a civil rights issue. And her denial of those rights constitutes harm and damages to the seekers of license as allowed by law.

It is the 50's and 60's all over again. Hopefully it doesnt take as long for this to course correct. But she will have to leave public office or face public humiliation.

It really doesnt have anything to do with her beliefs, no more than it did during the race riots.

Gays have this right to marry now. She needs to get over it and save her opinion for her church and her kitchen.

originally posted by: diggindirt
Of course it is her fault for believing as she does.
Of course it is government's fault---they are the ones who changed the law in the midst of her term as clerk.
Have you no deeply held convictions that could not be swayed by the "world's evolving standards"?
And just so you understand---there isn't just one clerk in the country who is protesting this ruling in this manner.
I think it might not be the clerks who need to "grow up and realize" some truths. Your attitude could use a dash of maturity toward your fellow humans who hold beliefs different than your own.

Government's make and change laws. They don't have to get the permission from county clerks before they do so. She works for them, they don't work for her. It doesn't matter if it's every county clerk in the country, they all work for the Government and the Government works for the people and the people's majority and the courts support same sex marriage. Get over it, deal with it, or sit around and cry about it. But the rest of the world is moving forward now, with you or without your.

a reply to: Klassified

Whatever. People will view this through whatever lenses they want. I hope nobody actually thought that once the court ruled it was over. Doubt this will be the last case like that. Wouldn't be surprised if a homosexual clerk refused marriage licenses to heterosexual couples at some point to make a point about this. Enjoy.

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: DeadFoot
Of course it is her fault for believing as she does.

No. She can believe as she wishes BUT she still has to obey the law.

Of course it is government's fault---they are the ones who changed the law in the midst of her term as clerk.

No it's not. Laws change as society changes.

Your attitude could use a dash of maturity toward your fellow humans who hold beliefs different than your own.

THAT is fricken rich. So you're saying that only YOUR beliefs matter?

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

Thomas Jefferson, Letter to the Danbury Baptists

The lady can believe what she wants, go to the church she wants, pray, sing hymns, etc.

If she's not going to do the job she swore to do, as an officer of the Court ... she's probably going to have to face the consequences.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I other words?

Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him.

biblehub.com...

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
a reply to: Klassified

Whatever. People will view this through whatever lenses they want. I hope nobody actually thought that once the court ruled it was over. Doubt this will be the last case like that. Wouldn't be surprised if a homosexual clerk refused marriage licenses to heterosexual couples at some point to make a point about this. Enjoy.

Sure, just dismiss the whole argument because you're on the losing side, that's good. Most people simply view this situation through the lenses of common sense. You should try it.

It's possible there might be a homosexual clerk that will try it, but I doubt it. Why would they and what point would they be making??? They don't typically go out of their way to make themselves look like A-Holes unlike some other groups.

a reply to: intrepid

Yep. I pretty much agree with Jefferson, and oddly as you point out, Jesus.

Strange days indeed; most peculiar.

a reply to: mOjOm

They don't typically go out of their way to make themselves look like A-Holes unlike some other groups.

There are some in every group.
I don't think this woman's behavior is typical, however.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: intrepid

Yep. I pretty much agree with Jefferson, and oddly as you point out, Jesus.

Strange days indeed; most peculiar.

Well I'm agnostic but I thought that was ironic. Even Jesus would have a problem with this childish display of piety, not faith.

originally posted by: mOjOm

originally posted by: Reallyfolks
a reply to: Klassified

Whatever. People will view this through whatever lenses they want. I hope nobody actually thought that once the court ruled it was over. Doubt this will be the last case like that. Wouldn't be surprised if a homosexual clerk refused marriage licenses to heterosexual couples at some point to make a point about this. Enjoy.

Sure, just dismiss the whole argument because you're on the losing side, that's good. Most people simply view this situation through the lenses of common sense. You should try it.

It's possible there might be a homosexual clerk that will try it, but I doubt it. Why would they and what point would they be making??? They don't typically go out of their way to make themselves look like A-Holes unlike some other groups.

What side am I on that lost anything? Whatever, people have views on this topic that won't be changed at this time, and everything else I said is guessing and things that wouldn't surprise me to happen. People like you are the problem in this world. Too many assumptions and haven't the first clue as to what you are posting.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: intrepid

Yep. I pretty much agree with Jefferson, and oddly as you point out, Jesus.

Strange days indeed; most peculiar.

Well I'm agnostic but I thought that was ironic. Even Jesus would have a problem with this childish display of piety, not faith.

I absolutely agree. Jesus also said:

And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

Matthew 6:5-6 NIV

I rather think He would have extended that general concept to all "religious expressions"