Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rowan Clerk refuses Same Sex Marriage License

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 6
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 6 template Next
  • #1

    Rowan Clerk refuses Same Sex Marriage License

    Citing her Christian beliefs as a reason.

    I figured this kind of stuff would happen. If there's one thing I despise, it's those who think they're being brave warriors standing up for righteousness instead of the bigoted asswipes they really are.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    It's not just you guys. Here in Canada, a bus driver is pre-emptively saying that he'll quit if he's the one asked to drive a rainbow-covered bus for Calgary's Pride celebrations.

    Comment

    • #3
      If the person says, "I'm sorry, I can't do this because of $belief, let me pass you on to the next clerk who will be happy to help you," I don't really have a problem with it. It's stupid, but people are allowed to be stupid.

      If the person says, "I'm sorry, I can't do this because of $belief and because I'm the only one authorized to do this, it sucks to be you," they deserve to be fired for failure to perform their duties.
      Faith is about what you do. It's about aspiring to be better and nobler and kinder than you are. It's about making sacrifices for the good of others. - Dresden

      Comment

      • #4
        A) Thats not how the right to religious freedom works.
        B) This woman has been married four times like any Good Christian(tm)
        C) She's been ordered by the courts twice now. Arrest her for contempt already.

        -.-

        Comment

        • #5
          This is local news for me. The FB feed on this story via the local news is awful. The fact that pro-marriage sentiment out numbers the anti is wonderful, but the antis are so vitriolic, it's like a bad parody.
          I has a blog!

          Comment

          • #6
            Originally posted by Andara Bledin View Post
            If the person says, "I'm sorry, I can't do this because of $belief, let me pass you on to the next clerk who will be happy to help you," I don't really have a problem with it. It's stupid, but people are allowed to be stupid.

            If the person says, "I'm sorry, I can't do this because of $belief and because I'm the only one authorized to do this, it sucks to be you," they deserve to be fired for failure to perform their duties.
            bingo. (with one caveat- if waiting for someone who would actually do it would cause significant delays, then the person whose beliefs interfere with their job needs to suck it up and do whatever it is ( issue the marriage license, whatever) anyway.)

            Comment

            • #7
              What gets me is that issuing the marriage license affects her in no way, she is simply enabling what she perceives as a sin. Which, really, is no different from working as a cashier in a grocery store that sells condoms to minors, filing paperwork for a law office that specializes in divorces, or even taking orders for pizzas (as it is also a sin to mix meat and dairy- pepperoni, anyone?). She needs to either suck it up or find another job, as the world isn't going to change just for her.

              Comment

              • #8
                Originally posted by Aragarthiel View Post
                Which, really, is no different from working as a cashier in a grocery store that sells condoms to minors, filing paperwork for a law office that specializes in divorces, or even taking orders for pizzas (as it is also a sin to mix meat and dairy- pepperoni, anyone?).
                Back when I was working at a drug store, we had a cashier who was Jehovah's Witness who asked not to sell cigarettes. He had a pin on his uniform stating this, and while we had to schedule things so that there was at least one other person to ring, it wasn't a huge problem. I wasn't sure why he couldn't ring cigarettes, but could, say, ring Christmas ornaments and other items he and other Jehovah's Witnesses were also against, but I didn't really ask him about it. He was appreciative of the store's consideration and was polite and respectful about it, too.

                I think the thing I'm trying to say is, if you're able to find a job where the employer is able to accommodate your spiritual or religious obligations, even if the employer has to make special arrangements to do so, that's great, and I commend the employer for granting them. But employers shouldn't be required to accommodate anyone's special obligations, especially if doing so requires some extra consideration.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Originally posted by TheHuckster View Post
                  But employers shouldn't be required to accommodate anyone's special obligations, especially if doing so requires some extra consideration.
                  Well, also a drug store is a private business. This moron is a government employee. Employers are obligated to accommodate certain employee obligations ( least, up here they are ) but that's within logical reason. Also, said obligation can't be one that utterly prevents you from doing your job.

                  This woman on the other hand, is basically saying something like she needs everything to be halaal but would still like to keep her job cooking bacon.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...?intcmp=hplnws

                    She's asking the Supreme Court for "asylum for her conscience".

                    I have no words.
                    I has a blog!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Kheldarson View Post
                      "asylum for her conscience"
                      Does that sound to anyone else like "I feel guilty about this, am I allowed to not feel guilty anymore?"

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Kheldarson View Post
                        http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...?intcmp=hplnws

                        She's asking the Supreme Court for "asylum for her conscience".

                        I have no words.
                        In front of Kegan? Good luck to her. =p

                        Also, whats with people like this and not understanding how the First Amendment works? Its not a carte blanche to do whatever the fuck you want because you said "Jesus". Nor does it shield you from the consequences of your stupidity.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          I'll at least give her minor credit that she stopped issuing all licenses rather than issue a same sex marriage license, from what the article says, but she's STILL being unreasonable. ( the conditions of her job have changed- if she feels that she can no longer do her job in good conscience, the remedy for that is to resign her job, and to find another job, NOT to only do the parts of her job her conscience allows her to do.)

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            And an interesting turn of events: http://www.wowktv.com/story/29919005...e-sex-marriage
                            I has a blog!

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              I'm guessing that she's continuing to fight rather than resigning because they are hoping for a win to set legal precedence for people being able to discriminate in the name of religion.

                              While to some extent I get the argument about people being able to pass off the marriage licenses to someone else who's working there, I have trouble agreeing with it when you look at the big picture. A lot of people used the same arguments against interracial marriage. Looking back, should people have been able to use their religion to refuse to issue licenses to interracial couples? http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/0...gious-Beliefs# Once we start allowing discrimination of protected classes due to religion, it opens things up to problems.

                              I was looking through stuff about that online and came across all the lovely people who are trying to claim there are no correlations because there's no religious argument against interracial marriage. That's funny because there actually was. And there are others who are trying to claim that it's different because race is protected in the constitution but gays aren't. Well race wasn't originally a protected class either so that's fairly irrelevant as well.
                              Last edited by Shangri-laschild; 08-31-2015, 03:41 PM.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 6 template Next
                              Working...
                              X