Clerk Jailed for Refusing to Give out Gay marriage licences

[smillie's garden]

yes it will
but the injunction ordered on her conflicted with her religious beliefs..........isnt that the whole point? Her job,the injunction and her religious beliefs are all connected,the injunction itself issued on her by the court told her that she had no right to hold those religious views in her job and she must basically abandon them and issue the marriage licenses

She can hold her religious views but, constitutionally, she may not inflict them on others. She could have deputised others in the office to issue the licenses, but instead Ms. Davis chose to grandstand. Did she refuse licenses to straight couples who were wearing clothes woven of different fabrics, also an abomination in the Old Testament?

 

[Diego Napier]

yes it will
but the injunction ordered on her conflicted with her religious beliefs..........isnt that the whole point? Her job,the injunction and her religious beliefs are all connected,the injunction itself issued on her by the court told her that she had no right to hold those religious views in her job and she must basically abandon them and issue the marriage licenses

Or the as the injunction conflicted with her religious beliefs then she should've allowed one of her deputies to act on her behalf? The court would've realised there was a reasonable alternative approach she could've taken. It's her intransigence that has led to the contempt order.

 

[El Presidente]

yes it will
but the injunction ordered on her conflicted with her religious beliefs..........isnt that the whole point? Her job,the injunction and her religious beliefs are all connected,the injunction itself issued on her by the court told her that she had no right to hold those religious views in her job and she must basically abandon them and issue the marriage licenses

If a doctor had religious beliefs that prevented him/her from operating on gay or black people, do you think that would be acceptable too?

 

[pastafarian]

If a doctor had religious beliefs that prevented him/her from operating on gay or black people, do you think that would be acceptable too?

i never said whether or not it was acceptable i just pointed out that in this USA case there is a conflict between religious freedom and the gay legislation.
Over here i suspect discrimination laws would kick in,but we are talking about the USA here and its oddities.

if people want to say thats the end of religious freedom in the USA they will just have to lump it,so be it

 

[pastafarian]

She can hold her religious views but, constitutionally, she may not inflict them on others. She could have deputised others in the office to issue the licenses, but instead Ms. Davis chose to grandstand. Did she refuse licenses to straight couples who were wearing clothes woven of different fabrics, also an abomination in the Old Testament?

I believe she refused to issue any licenses at all including to gays,straights or people wearing funky fabrics

 

[El Presidente]

i never said whether or not it was acceptable i just pointed out that in this USA case there is a conflict between religious freedom and the gay legislation.
Over here i suspect discrimination laws would kick in,but we are talking about the USA here and its oddities.

if people want to say thats the end of religious freedom in the USA they will just have to lump it,so be it

Fair point.

I don't see how her religious beliefs prevented her from allowing her deputies to grant the licences.

It comes across to me that she's using religion as a flag of convenience from which to hide her bigotry.

 

[drew]

What i don't get is why they can't sack her, if it has been all the way to the supreme court then surely they have grounds?

Not sure but it might have something to do with being elected into the post.

 

[Pork Knuckle Pete]

i never said whether or not it was acceptable i just pointed out that in this USA case there is a conflict between religious freedom and the gay legislation.
Over here i suspect discrimination laws would kick in,but we are talking about the USA here and its oddities.

if people want to say thats the end of religious freedom in the USA they will just have to lump it,so be it

It's not a conflict in the slightest. None of us have absolute freedoms in the US or the UK, we all tread a balance between ourselves and others. Take free speech, which I support. It's only as free as long I don't harm someone with, say, lying. Same with this woman and her religion.

 

[pastafarian]

Fair point.

I don't see how her religious beliefs prevented her from allowing her deputies to grant the licences.

It comes across to me that she's using religion as a flag of convenience from which to hide her bigotry.

i may be wrong here but i dont think her religious beliefs strictly prevented her from allowing her deputies to grant the licences,which they said they would do,she has just claimed they might not be valid.

"But her lawyers said she would deny them that authority, raising questions about the validity of any licences they might issue"

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Doesn't the US constitution REQUIRE the separation of church and state?

 

[smillie's garden]

I believe she refused to issue any licenses at all including to gays,straights or people wearing funky fabrics

Indeed, but before the U.S. Supreme Court Decision at the end of June? How about those applicants that worked on the sabbath? Pure hypocrisy!

 

[Westdene Seagull]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-...or-denying-same-sex-marriage-licenses/6748700

Anyone following this story?

Jailing her seems a bit harsh surely if her job has changed and her conscience/beliefs/religion won't let her carry out part of it. They could somehow find a way to relieve her of that particular role. A big decision has been taken over gay marriage but surely we need a little bit of consideration and flexibility for those who disagree?

Because religious bigots should not be tolerated which is exactly what they would be doing if they tried to work around her refusal to issue licences. If that official had been a KKK member ( which is perfectly legal to be ) and refused to issues licences for mixed race marriages would you be happy for a workaround to be found ?

 

[BadFish]

Because religious bigots should not be tolerated which is exactly what they would be doing if they tried to work around her refusal to issue licences. If that official had been a KKK member ( which is perfectly legal to be ) and refused to issues licences for mixed race marriages would you be happy for a workaround to be found ?

I don't think your comparison works for the point i was making. It takes people a while to adjust their thinking in these situation and i think a workaround would have been the best solution rather than a stint in jail. Although she is apparently not open to such a workaround so i suppose my point is moot in this case.

 

[dingodan]

Because religious bigots should not be tolerated which is exactly what they would be doing if they tried to work around her refusal to issue licences. If that official had been a KKK member ( which is perfectly legal to be ) and refused to issues licences for mixed race marriages would you be happy for a workaround to be found ?

Don't you think you are conflating being religious with being racist?

I also think you are confusing someone who wishes to outlaw/ban/forcably stop gay marriage, with someone who does not want to personally sign a marriage certificate for a gay couple.

All the people who are saying that this woman should be in prison are no different to those people who used to say that gays should be in prison.

How about we stop putting people in prison for who they are and what they believe ffs.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It is in the interests of those who oppose equal treatment of folk to have this person in office, in the media and even in gaol in order to keep the 'issue' bubbling away on the media hob. The right wing can then solemnly discuss 'rights' and 'freedoms', invoking the various constitutional amendments, etc.

Separately, me and Mrs Tackle recon that folk who take up eccentric causes to the point of jeopardizing their own 'freedom' and getting thrown in the nick are probably doing so to make themselves better about their own inadequacy. By the sound of this person's background, she has a lifestyle at odds with her own professed beliefs, so getting banged up over a 'cause' is psychologically perfect for her.

 

[gregbrighton]

I don't think your comparison works for the point i was making. It takes people a while to adjust their thinking in these situation and i think a workaround would have been the best solution rather than a stint in jail. Although she is apparently not open to such a workaround so i suppose my point is moot in this case.

So we should wait? How long should we wait?

Sod that. Religious brainwashed people like her rarely change their views. I thought Christians was suppose to be about compassion, love and being hospitable to strangers. She has shown none of that - just bigotry and hatred.

Either she does her job or she should resign. She was jailed because she was in contempt of court.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

No public official should be allowed to put their personal religious beliefs ahead of their duty to do the job that they have been appointed to do.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Don't you think you are conflating being religious with being racist?

Not that aware of but denying a marriage licence on grounds of race, gender, sexuality, nationality, number of legs - all the same as far as I'm concerned.

If she didn't like the idea of issuing licences for gay people to marry she should have resigned.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

It takes people a while to adjust their thinking in these situation

A slightly strange turn of phrase there BF. The law had changed, it is exactly that point she should have been putting her religious convictions to one side to do her JOB ..... or resign.

 

[Diego Napier]

How about we stop putting people in prison for who they are and what they believe ffs.

All very laudable but when their actions have consequences and impact on the lives of others then it isn't that simple, as we know (to take it to an extreme) in the case of one or two Ayatollahs.