How do you feel about her refusing to perform gay marriages. And what do you think of the subsequent punishment?

She can have her religious convictions, but she also has a duty under the law which she vowed to uphold. She should have resigned. As for the punishment, there really wasn't any other course they could take.

Originally Posted by Guest

She can have her religious convictions, but she also has a duty under the law which she vowed to uphold. She should have resigned. As for the punishment, there really wasn't any other course they could take.

Exactly my views. It is my understanding that they can't do anything but find her in contempt until the legislature is back in session.

Originally Posted by Guest

Exactly my views. It is my understanding that they can't do anything but find her in contempt until the legislature is back in session.

If she was fined, someone would take care of it and she'd still not budge in following the law.

Religious beliefs are not equal. She will do what she is told or be fired. On the other hand, Muslims are allowed to wear their burkas for their drivers license photos. Employers are also being required to allow certain attire for religious practices. Airlines are providing special meals for the religious. I believe the only religion that has practices that are banned are the Christian faiths. Hey, even traffic is stopped in NYC for Muslims to pray in public.

If she can't perform her job due to religious belief, then they should transfer her to a different department. Do I empathize with her? Yes, but she still has a legal obligation to perform her job or get terminated.

I have an ounce of empathy, but issuing licenses are her job and she took an oath to follow the law.

She should have done the right thing from the beginning and stepped down.

She was wrong in what and how she did it.
Religious prefernce is fine, but if it interferes with the performance of her job then she has an obligation to step down/quit.

There is the issue of the job being an appointment hence not able to be fired. However there was an obilgation on the part of who ever appointed her to demand she perform the job assigned or relinquish the position.

There is no doubt she knew how this was going to end up. Where was the supervision/responsible management?

To allow it to become a media circus is in keeping with the sensationalism allure of the day.

There is more to the story not known.

Originally Posted by Guest

She was wrong in what and how she did it.
Religious prefernce is fine, but if it interferes with the performance of her job then she has an obligation to step down/quit.

There is the issue of the job being an appointment hence not able to be fired. However there was an obilgation on the part of who ever appointed her to demand she perform the job assigned or relinquish the position.

There is no doubt she knew how this was going to end up. Where was the supervision/responsible management?

To allow it to become a media circus is in keeping with the sensationalism allure of the day.

There is more to the story not known.

Actually she was elected, and could not be fired.

Originally Posted by Guest

Actually she was elected, and could not be fired.

I stand corrected...thanx.

I think she's an idiot...first because her job description has her signing wedding applications, and doesn't give her the right to refuse...second because she quotes God as a reason, but then ignores the interesting bit about not judging others as that's in His job description...not hers....she doesn't like gay marriage...since one person says she was elected then just impeach her stupid @ss...

It's about religious rights all around. If a religion allows for a same-sex ceremony and welcome gays into their congregation, that also is a religious right.

To me this is the legal part of marriage and God has little to do with it. Your beliefs and devotion to one another is not something you can buy with a license.

This situation is just the beginning of an assault on religious freedom. the standard defense is going to be its your job follow the rules follow my orders...that's what many of the Nazi said when they were tried.

The Supreme court activist have opened a pandora's box unnecessarily

I support the county clerk

Originally Posted by Guest

This situation is just the beginning of an assault on religious freedom. the standard defense is going to be its your job follow the rules follow my orders...that's what many of the Nazi said when they were tried.

The Supreme court activist have opened a pandora's box unnecessarily

I support the county clerk

So if I robbed you and said that it was within my religious rights and to heck with the law, you wouldn't prosecute?

We cannot live in a lawless society, even if you do not accept the authority.

A marriage license is a non religious issue. A religion or church has every right not to married a same-sex couple. That is their freedom, and it is not challenged here.

The county clerk was totally wrong. She was breaking the law by not giving marriage licenses. Same sex marriage is the law of the land. Keep her in jail.

Keep it simple. She refused to perform the job she was elected to do and agreed to do when she ran for the job.

Religion, sexual preference and anything else is political canon fodder.

She knowingly failed to perform her job!