Rowan KY Clerk Sued For Not Issuing Marriage Licenses

Interesting scenario of the Vegas dealer. Except in that in the Vegas case, the dealer changed their view...the job itself did not change. The employer cannot be expected to accommodate the dealer's new beliefs, but rather the employer could offer the dealer another position at the casino IF they want to be nice are are so inclined.

In the case of the clerk in Kentucky, her religious beliefs did not change, rather the law was changed after she was hired. Should she lose her job because she has a religious objection to the new law? I suggest that the county should offer her a position elsewhere in the county...problem solved. She keeps a job and the county can hire a new clerk to issue the licenses.

 

So you do want to sue her for her religious beliefs. You said "and her" . Do we sue all people who are grandfathered or just christians?

 

She should be sued for refusing to perform the duties of her job. Her religion is completely irrelevant. She could be refusing for any reason, and it wouldn't matter. One does not refuse to perform one's job and not expect consequences.

This isn't a religious issue. This is an administrative issue.

If I were a baseball fanatic and refused to work during baseball season, I could expect to lose my job. And claiming that I was fired because my employer "hates baseball" or is "out to get baseball fans" or otherwise try to make this a baseball issue, would be disingenuous. This would not be a baseball issue.

 

yes, if they choose not to issue ANY, they would not be discriminating.... but I am betting they will make sure the laws are clear very soon as if no one can get married, gonna be a lot of upset people

 

People can still get married even if the Government is not involved. The did it until the mid 1800's without the Government issuing licences. The Government only got involved to mainly stop inter-racial marriages, so the premise is based off of racism. Maybe it is time to end a practice created for the purpose of racism.

 

if you put on your tax return your married and your not legally, you can go to jail... so no... it's not the same

if you claim your married on insurance applications... you would be in trouble too I am sure....

.

 

Nobody is being sued or fired for their beliefs. The issue is not performing the job you were hired to do, and discrimination by a government employee.

 

no, want to sue her for using a government position to force her religious beliefs on the citizens, denying them the right to marry

same as a Christan that would work at the IRS and denying all other religions religious exceptions stating they do not believe it's a real religion

.

 

Remove the "married" status on tax returns. End Government benefits or 'perks' based on marital status. Isn't it a form of discrimination in itself? Basically, get the Government out of the marriage business. They have no reason to be involved in a basic contract unless there is a dispute over the contract that needs to be decided by courts. However, in those cases Government involvement is for contract reasons and not marriage reasons.

 

No they can't. Marriage is a legal institution. Without the legal recognition it's just a nice ceremony.

Marriage laws are so entrenched in every legal aspect of society that ending legal marriage simply isn't going to happen.

 

If it is State law that County Clerks in that State must issue marriage licences, I have not issue with her being fired (if appointed) or recalled (if elected) for not doing her job.

 

?? If what were true. What is not true. Regardless, this comment makes no sense in relation to my post.

The point of the founders was to maintain freedom of religion as well as various other freedoms. This does not work very well if the state is allowed to force one religious perspective on others through law.

 

I disagree. Marriages happened looooong before Governments got involved. Offering benefits to someone based on their marital status is discrimination. I have no doubt that it will eventually become a major issue just like SSM.

There is absolutely NO reason why the Government is involved in marriages. Society will still function without the Government being involved in marriages. Just as the Government does not oversee business contracts, they do not need to oversee marriage contracts.

 

True. It would make no difference. I also think this will be more and more of an issue.

 

This is exactly the kind of solution I propose with both private and public employees. This is all about employers and owners managing their resources in such a way as to ensure compliance with all state, federal and local laws that impact their business, including civil rights laws. You don't necessarily have to fire everyone who will not offer a license, decorate a cake, or arrange flowers, you just have to make sure that the service is provided equally and the quality is not compromised. Employers are held accountable for the end result and they figure out how best to get there. They are entitled fire staff who will not perform all functions of the job, if that is what makes business sense, and they alter job duties or get creative with staffing options, if that makes business sense.

 

One of the main reasons government became involved in marriage was the practice of a number of religions and men to simply declared themselves divorced, pay the church to agree with them, and walk away with all assets and not pay any type of child support.

The unsupported families then became burdens on the government.

Has this changed to the point where governments can back away from marriage?

 

yeah right, this clerk has that much power, talk about the tail trying to wag the dog... not

so if someone in the IRS denies Christian Church's a tax free status as they do not believe in their religion, we should remove all religious exceptions from the tax code too? is that not discrimination too?

.

 

There isn't anything to disagree about. Without a marriage license you aren't married.

There are THOUSANDS of laws entwined with marriage and over 1,400 benefits.
-"

The government does oversee business contracts. Who do you think enforces them?

 

States stated issuing marriage licences as a way to prevent miscegenation, or inter-racial marriages by common-law. This started around 1863. At that point, anybody could get married, but in order to marry someone with a different skin color, permission must be achieved from the State (i..e marriage licence).

It wasn't until 1929 that marriage licence became normal with the passage of the Uniform marriage and Marriage Licence Act (later established as the Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act). Basically, Government issued marriage licences for all couple wish to be married has only been around for less than 100 years.

Even so, with all of the laws currently in place in regards to child support, yes, the Government is not needed. If the Government stopped issuing marriage license today, it would change nothing in regards to public burden.

- - - Updated - - -

Most County Clerks are elected officials, so yes, they have that much power. I believe you are confusing the word "clerk' as a bona fide secretary.

 

If it is one of your job requirements to issue said licenses and you fail to do so, you should be fired, sued, or both. Your religious beliefs do not give you the right to violate your job requirements.

 

History would disagree with you. So we have what happened historically vs. your opinion on what would happen.

Opinion of Guy on the internet vs. historical precedent. Forgive me for going with history on this one.

 

Shes not forcing her beliefs on anyone. The town cant find someone else to issue it? Why are you forcing your beliefs onto others especially after leftists stated it was not ok to do it to grandfathered muslims?

 

Marriages have happened long before Government involvement. It is called common law marriages. Even George Washington (and everyone else from that era) was married without a marriage licence.

Governments do not oversee contracts. They are not reviewed by the Government. The are not enforced by the Government. They are not enacted by the Government. The Government's only involvement is deciding disputes over contracts if one arises via the court system. If no issues arises, there is no Government involvement. Even if issues arise, the Government may not get involved if the dispute is arbitrated outside of the court system.

 

Have you read the thread and thread title? Leftists want the clerk sued..Im hoping you guys do so we can befin suing muslims and watch the hypocrisy unfold.

 

.

This is a bogus arguemnt
No one is forced to have a gay marriage
No one is forced to perorm a gay marriage
No one is forced to have a job dealing with gay marriage
Anyone is free to keep their religious views as their own personal religion