County Clerk Resigns Instead of Issuing Gay Marriage Licenses

[Stripe]

Oh, I didn't realize you were pro-fundamentalist-Muslim-in-government.

So if a Muslim fundamentalist chef working at the White House quit their job because they were required to make a dish containing pork, you wouldn't be glad that they resigned?

Meanwhile, in reality...

 

[genuineoriginal]

If you can't serve everyone in your community that your job requires, then you should resign your job.

If a county clerk refuses to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple, they are unfit for the job and should be fired immediately.

Similarly, if a county clerk refuses to issue a marriage licenses to a same sex couple, they are unfit for the job and should be fired immediately.

Just as if a county clerk refuses to issue to issue a marriage license to a married couple where at least one member of the couple had a prior marriage that was not officially annulled by the Catholic Church, they are unfit for the job and should be fired immediately.

You are one more idiot that can't tell the difference between a person's skin color and another person's sexual perversions.

 

[Stripe]

ITT: Evolutionists expose their bigotry and instead of correcting their bigotry accuse others of bigotry.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Some states to are doing their best to uphold religious views on same-sex marriage.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has determined that country clerks are able to refuse to perform same-sex ceremonies if it violates their religious beliefs.
http://americannews.com/breaking-gay-couples-in-texas-just-lost-their-right-to-get-married-in-texas/

And that is how it should be.

 

[Ktoyou]

If you can't serve everyone in your community that your job requires, then you should resign your job.

If a county clerk refuses to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple, they are unfit for the job and should be fired immediately.

Similarly, if a county clerk refuses to issue a marriage licenses to a same sex couple, they are unfit for the job and should be fired immediately.

Just as if a county clerk refuses to issue to issue a marriage license to a married couple where at least one member of the couple had a prior marriage that was not officially annulled by the Catholic Church, they are unfit for the job and should be fired immediately.

This is a sloppy slippery slope! Race is an artificial construct, sex is not!

Banning marriage based on so called 'race' is subjective and presumptuous; there is no such thing as two kinds of humans!

Sex is a real genetic difference, and to call interracial marriage as comparable to homosexual unions is disturbing and bigoted against ethnic difference. Sex is a very different matter, there is no sense in a family union between persons of the same sex.

The Court may have ruled, yet I believe the Court misapplied the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment. I think this is an insult to all those the Amendment was made to protect!

 

[Stripe]

This is a sloppy slippery slope! Race is an artificial construct, sex is not!

Banning marriage based on so called 'race' is subjective and presumptuous; there is no such thing as two kinds of humans!

Sex is a real genetic difference, and to call interracial marriage as comparable to homosexual unions is disturbing and bigoted against ethnic difference. Sex is a very different matter, there is no sense in a family union between persons of the same sex.

:thumb:

 

[Jose Fly]

Three County Clerk Employees Quit Over Gay Marriage

The telephone in the Decatur County Clerk Office rang nonstop Thursday morning, and a steady stream of people came into the small room.

Over and over again, people praised the decision of the three workers who have decided to step down from their positions rather than hand out same-sex marriage licenses.

Clerk Gwen Pope and employees Sharon Bell and Mickey Butler all said they were resigning because the Supreme Court's decision to allow same-sex marriages clashed with their religious beliefs. Their last day will be July 14.

Currently, Decatur County's clerk office will not issue a same-sex license, the employees said.

Cool. The fewer fundamentalist Christians in government, the better.

 

[Tinark]

This is a sloppy slippery slope! Race is an artificial construct, sex is not!

Banning marriage based on so called 'race' is subjective and presumptuous; there is no such thing as two kinds of humans!

Sex is a real genetic difference, and to call interracial marriage as comparable to homosexual unions is disturbing and bigoted against ethnic difference. Sex is a very different matter, there is no sense in a family union between persons of the same sex.

And yet none of that has to do with the job requirements. If people's religious beliefs conflict with the job requirements, then the proper response is to quit the job or not apply for it in the first place. Just as I wouldn't expect someone whose religious beliefs require pacifism to join the armed forces, I don't expect someone whose religious beliefs disagree with same sex marriage or interracial marriage to take on a county clerk job.

The Court may have ruled, yet I believe the Court misapplied the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment. I think this is an insult to all those the Amendment was made to protect!

You are allowed to think that, but the only opinion that counts, from a legal perspective, is those 9 people who obtained their positions on the SCOTUS.

 

[Stripe]

The fewer fundamentalist Christians in government, the better.

Bigot.

 

[Stripe]

The only opinion that counts, from a legal perspective, is those 9 people who obtained their positions on the SCOTUS.

Nope. There are plenty of things that the courts rule OK, but are wrong. This indicates that there is a higher standard of what is legal.

 

[Tinark]

Nope. There are plenty of things that the courts rule OK, but are wrong. This indicates that there is a higher standard of what is legal.

In your opinion. I and most others don't share it which is why we have a court sytem to determine which opinion becomes the law of the land.

 

[Stripe]

In your opinion. I and most others don't share it, which is why we have a court sytem to determine which opunion becomes lae.

However, if the courts pass an opinion that says stealing is OK, we know that stealing is still wrong.

This is clear evidence that there is a higher authority.

 

[Tinark]

However, if the courts pass an opinion that says stealing is OK, we know that stealing is still wrong.

This is clear evidence that there is a higher authority.

The vast majority of people don't like to get stolen from, so therefore there is almost no dispute about it. Additionally, it is already settled law.

When there is a disagreement, we must have a method to determine which side prevails. Countries throughout history have already tried and continue to try the theocratic method to determine which side prevails and it has led to horrific consequences. Your method rightfully belongs in the dustbin of history.

 

[Stripe]

The vast majority of people don't like to get stolen from, so therefore there is almost no dispute about it. Additionally, it is already settled law.

And yet, if the courts were to say that stealing was OK, they would be doing wrong; a clear indication that they are subject to a higher authority.

 

[Tinark]

And yet, if the courts were to say that stealing was OK, they would be doing wrong; a clear indication that they are subject to a higher authority.

Except they can't since it is already settled law with hundreds of years of precedent and clear, unambiguous statutory language. If any were to try they would be overridden by the legislature. Judges can be removed if they attempt to usurp the authority of the legislature and can be held in contempt. You seem to be under the strange impression that judges can form any legal opinion they desire and are accountable to no one. They can not.

See the process to remove judges here:

http://www.judicialselection.us/judicial_selection/methods/removal_of_judges.cfm?state

The higher authority is the legal precedents and statutory laws.

It is true that it is theoretically possible for the US government to be overthrown and new rulers put in place that legalize theft. That would then be the new law and the new rulers would be the new authority. Such a society would soon self implode into a mess of violence, however, and would collapse under its own chaos.

 

[Stripe]

Except they can't.

Sure, they can. And have.

And even if they couldn't, the point still stands.

If the courts were to say stealing was OK, stealing would not be OK, because there is a higher standard.

 

[Tinark]

Sure, they can. And have.

And even if they couldn't, the point still stands.

If the courts were to say stealing was OK, stealing would not be OK, because there is a higher standard.

What's the relevance? It makes no difference on the ground (in our actual lives here on earth, the only life which we all know exists) whether there is a "higher standard" or not, especially considering that no one agrees on what the exact details of the "higher standard" are or whether such a standard even exists. The fact that we do know is that we live in a world run by humans and only humans. It is humans who create laws, enforce laws, interact with each other, and make decisions relevant to anyone else's lives, all within the confines of natural laws. There appear to be no other outside forces at play in this Earthly life of ours.

Given these facts, the best way to move forward is to try to live with each other peaceably and butt out of other people's personal business so that we can all lives our lives according to whichever standard we wish so long as we don't infringe on anyone else's ability to do so.

These county clerks are hired to serve everyone to help us all live peaceably together and pursue happiness as we each see fit. It is right for them to resign when they are unable to fulfill this basic role as directed to them by the courts and required of them by their employers.

 

[Stripe]

The fact that we do know is that we live in a world run by humans and only humans.

Nope.

The fact is we all know that when men make rules that say we can steal or murder, there is a standard by which we can say those regulations are not legal.

The evidence points to a lawgiver who is not a man.

 

[Tinark]

Nope.

The fact is we all know that when men make rules that say we can steal or murder, there is a standard by which we can say those regulations are not legal.

That's your belief and opinion which I and many others disagree with.

The fact that we can agree on is that when men make rules that say we can steal or murder, all of our lives and our children's lives become more miserable as a result. Nothing more is needed than that to outlaw them and arrest people who engage in these actions. Your "higher standard" is irrelevant.

The evidence points to a lawgiver who is not a man.

As I already said, everyone disagrees about the details on that and even disagrees that such a standard exists. It therefore becomes irrelevant since living in a society with provably less misery for myself, my children, and my fellow neighbors resulting from the actions of others is a sufficient standard by itself. Nothing more is necessary. Anything else you want to add to that is perfectly fine _for your own life_. You don't get to add anything to it for my life or anyone else's life, however. That's what living in a pluralistic society with our own freedom of thought, conscience and moral code is all about. History has proven that such societies are by far the best to live in, even for religious fundies like you since you yourself are screwed when the wrong theocrat gains power and decides to ruin your life and the lives of those you care about.

Gay marriage increases the happiness of some while contributing to the misery of none. For you and others like you who want to live your life by what you believe to be a "higher standard", you are free to not participate in any gay marriages.

 

[Stripe]

That's your belief and opinion.

Fact, actually. No matter what a court says, murder and stealing will always be wrong. This is clear evidence that there is a higher standard.

Which I and many others disagree with.

Because of the implications.

The fact that we can agree on is that when men make rules that say we can steal or murder, all of our lives and our children's lives become more miserable as a result. Nothing more is needed than that to outlaw them and arrest people who engage in these actions.

You're outlawing stuff because of how people feel? :AMR:

Your "higher standard" is irrelevant.

Except it is real.

As I already said, everyone disagrees about the details on that and even disagrees that such a standard exists.

That people argue is not evidence.

It therefore becomes irrelevant since living in a society with provably less misery for myself, my children, and my fellow neighbors resulting from the actions of others is a sufficient standard by itself.

Your "less misery" is also founded on your demand that you be allowed to murder unborn children.

Nothing more is necessary.

So you're just going to ignore the evidence and demand that everyone abide by your standards?

Anything else you want to add to that is perfectly fine _for your own life_. You don't get to add anything to it for my life or anyone else's life, however. That's what living in a pluralistic society with our own freedom of thought, conscience and moral code is all about.

The law does not operate according to what people want.

History has proven that such societies are by far the best to live in, even for religious fundies like you since you yourself are screwed when the wrong theocrat gains power and decides to ruin your life and the lives of those you care about.

It does not take a theocrat to install evil.

Gay marriage increases the happiness of some while contributing to the misery of none.

Your "misery" and "happiness" standard is bunk.

For you and others like you who want to live your life by what you believe to be a "higher standard", you are free to not participate in any gay marriages.

There is no such thing as a gay marriage. Marriage is the lifelong, monogamous union between a man and a woman with the aim being to build a family.

This right has been available to everyone the whole time. Pretending that we are denying any rights is completely untrue.