Rowan Clerk refuses Same Sex Marriage License

[TheHuckster]

Actually, he was asked about being a conscientious objecter, and he said it was a basic human right that should be allowed for those in any office.

He said it's a human right for government employees. Davis is a special case where, because she's an elected official, there isn't much one can do about refusal of duties besides imprisonment, where under most circumstances that would be a rather overboard reaction to someone refusing to do their job in a clerical capacity.

But, if you consider the more general scenario, in which someone should be free to voice their objections to do a certain part of their job, then I understand what the Pope is saying. It is to let their objections be heard and, if there's a serious conflict that prevents them from doing their job, to terminate them (or the person in question should resign) rather than throw them in a jail cell.

On the surface, a situation in which if someone objects to their job's duties, they are thrown in jail, is a scary one. And I would vehemently disagree with a situation which is that simple, where just because they refuse to do their job that isn't a life-or-death circumstance, they are imprisoned.

In Davis's case, it's different, since she didn't merely voice her opinion, but became obstructive and repeatedly disruptive to the whole thing. That's more than just exercising conscientious objection.

unfortunately, it seems to be true- the visit was apparently to show support for nuns who are opposing a mandate that contraception coverage be offered by healthcare plans offered under the ACA.- he is more-or-less agreeing that religious concerns trump the law. This makes me EXTREMELY disappointed.

One thing I need to point out: There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with a law, and supporting that it be changed, which is what the nuns and the Pope are doing. They aren't saying they should defy the law, they are merely saying they want the law changed. I mean, seriously, have we gotten to the point where we can't tell the difference between merely voicing opposition to a law on the grounds that it's against their religious beliefs and outright defying the law? The nuns are doing the former, which is perfectly valid and encouraged in a democracy, even if one disagrees with them. Davis is doing the latter, which isn't valid.

[Gravekeeper]

According to the Vatican he didn't "meet" with her so much as she was at the airport send off the Pope gives whenever he leaves a city. She "met" him briefly in a line along with about 50 other people and he didn't really recognize who she was or what she was doing. It was actually someone in the Vatican's Washington office that inexplicably invited her to the send off.

The Vatican has issued a statement pretty much saying that neither they nor the Pope in any way endorse or support her.

[Greenday]

So basically the Kim Davis/Pope thing was a non-story as I figured the whole time. Shocker.

[Akasa]

I saw a story where the Pope snubbed the Bishop? Cardinal? Who arranged the meeting. They tried to stand up and shake his hand as he passed, and the Pope wouldn't even look at him.

[Estil]

If no one else is gonna ask this, I will. Why couldn't she just have been fired for failing to do her (sworn?) duty? That's how it works in most any other job.

[Ghel]

As I recall, it's an elected position. She would have to be impeached (or the equivalent) or voted out.

[Shangri-laschild]

As I recall, it's an elected position. She would have to be impeached (or the equivalent) or voted out.

Correct, they couldn't just fire her and I believe it was something where they were on break so it would have required a special session to handle it right away which would have costed tax payer money.

[Tama]

Not to mention the uber-conservatives would have made her even more of a martyr than she was before. Somebody could have said it was religious discrimination.

[Estil]

Doesn't sound like a position really worth having an election for. :P

[s_stabeler]

yes, but in America, a lot of positions are elected that would be filled by appointment elsewhere. I know of places in America, for example, that have elected coroners.(as a matter of fact, while elections for school boards/governors (whatever is appropriate for your country) are fairly common globally- though not usually for the whole board- I think the US is the only one where the members of the school board HAVE to be elected by popular vote.(I don't know if it is a popular election of the parents, or of the community- I live in the UK, where Parent Governors are elected by a popular vote of the parents of the kids attending the school)

Basically, in America, if it's a government post, then, if the relevant entity decides to, it can be filled via election. (yes, that includes the Federal Government. they just don't tend to except the mandatory ones.)

[HYHYBT]

Not by the parents. It's on the general election ballot. It may vary, especially since my town is a bit odd in that, despite a population of only about 5,000, it has its own school system, but for school board purposes, as with the city council, the town is divided into four or five wards which each elects its own member.