Clerk Jailed for Refusing to Give out Gay marriage licences

[BadFish]

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?

 

[Stat Brother]

Jail is exactly the right place for her.

It's her job to give the licences, if she feels she can no longer do her job she should leave.
This has been all the way up to The Supreme Court and every step of the way she's been told to 'crack on', and every step she basically said 'this one law doesn't apply to me'.

Fine be THE martyr for all the whack job American's who have no concept of democratic rights and freedoms, FOR ALL, but being that martyr comes at a cost.

 

[BadFish]

Jail is exactly the right place for her.

It's her job to give the licences, if she feels she can no longer do her job she should leave.
This has been all the way up to The Supreme Court and every step of the way she's been told to 'crack on', and every step she basically said 'this one law doesn't apply to me'.

Fine be THE martyr for all the whack job American's who have no concept of democratic rights and freedoms, FOR ALL, but being that martyr comes at a cost.

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?

 

[gregbrighton]

Apparently because she can't be fired as she is an elected official. This lady really is no position to judge lesbian and gay people as she has been divorced and remarried three times and bore children out of wedlock. Religious hypocrisy.

 

[BadFish]

Apparently because she can't be fired as she is an elected official. This lady really is no position to judge lesbian and gay people as she has been divorced and remarried three times and bore children out of wedlock. Religious hypocrisy.

Surely then they could organise someone else to do the marriage licences until her term of office is up. Seems like a load of hassle and expense for little reason.

 

[Woodchip]

Surely then they could organise someone else to do the marriage licences until her term of office is up. Seems like a load of hassle and expense for little reason.

Welcome to American justice. Completely whack.

 

[Pork Knuckle Pete]

The article says she was jailed for contempt of court. This is slightly different to being jailed for refusing to do her job.

 

[Gwylan]

Surely then they could organise someone else to do the marriage licences until her term of office is up. Seems like a load of hassle and expense for little reason.

They have now ... although there seems to be some dispute as to whether the licences are legal as they've not been signed by her. And, apparently,. she can't be removed from office until the legislature impeaches her (and it's not sitting at the moment).

Regardless of the ins and outs of this case, what I don't get is what happens if a court official is incapacitated in some way. Suppose she was in a serious car crash and in hospital for 10 months - is it really the case that no-one in that county could get married during that period? That's what all the commentators seem to be saying but it's a strange system

 

[BadFish]

They have now ... although there seems to be some dispute as to whether the licences are legal as they've not been signed by her. And, apparently,. she can't be removed from office until the legislature impeaches her (and it's not sitting at the moment).

Regardless of the ins and outs of this case, what I don't get is what happens if a court official is incapacitated in some way. Suppose she was in a serious car crash and in hospital for 10 months - is it really the case that no-one in that county could get married during that period? That's what all the commentators seem to be saying but it's a strange system

Yep very odd.

 

[El Presidente]

She was empowered to allow her deputies to grant the licences instead, but refused to do so.

 

[pastafarian]

well ive listened to our politicians banging on over the past few years how important Freedom Of Religion rights are for all religions,which i presume must also mean the freedom of observance.

not entirely true is it?

 

[Gwylan]

well ive listened to our politicians banging on over the past few years how important Freedom Of Religion rights are for all religions,which i presume must also mean the freedom of observance.

not entirely true is it?

Not sure what you mean. No-one is stopping this woman observing her religion; she's not been jailed for her religious beliefs but, as was pointed out earlier, for contempt of court. Refusing a court order will get you jailed no matter what religion you follow or whether you're an atheist

 

[BadFish]

well ive listened to our politicians banging on over the past few years how important Freedom Of Religion rights are for all religions,which i presume must also mean the freedom of observance.

not entirely true is it?

I take your point and this is why I found this story interesting. It is an example of logic that when a law is passed, decision won or an election decided anyone in opposition is expected to immediately embrace the change and dismiss their beliefs. There was a lot of it about on here after the election.

Having said that this is also about inflexibility. Although I am not convinced that this situation would occur outside the USA. Most places would apply a little common sense and find a workable compromise.

 

[BadFish]

She was empowered to allow her deputies to grant the licences instead, but refused to do so.

Ahh, so it is her that is being inflexible.

 

[Woodchip]

Ahh, so it is her that is being inflexible.

Not according to her three ex husbands.

 

[BadFish]

Not according to her three ex husbands.

Maybe that is why they are ex-husbands

 

[Woodchip]

Maybe that is why they are ex-husbands

:shudders:

 

[pastafarian]

Not sure what you mean. No-one is stopping this woman observing her religion; she's not been jailed for her religious beliefs but, as was pointed out earlier, for contempt of court. Refusing a court order will get you jailed no matter what religion you follow or whether you're an atheist

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

 

[Stat Brother]

The article says she was jailed for contempt of court. This is slightly different to being jailed for refusing to do her job.

The nature of the contempt is the court told her to do her job and she refused.

 

[Pork Knuckle Pete]

The nature of the contempt is the court told her to do her job and she refused.

True. But going against a court order, no matter what the original crime, runs a good risk of imprisonment in many countries including the UK.