0
15

[–] libby 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago 

I don't think a compelling religious argument can be made against issuing a license. I could see a justice of the peace refusing to marry a gay couple and I think that may even be legally defensible the same as a pastor not wanting to. But I'm pretty sure there's no religious prohibition on giving a license to gay people. Could a DMV clerk use this argument?

0
19

[–] labajada 0 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago  (edited ago)

They can refuse but it would be an impeachable act and I doubt they would have a legal defence to the termination. They swear/affirm to follow the constitution of the United States of America. Do your job or step aside.

0
2

[–] libby 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I think you might be right too. The courts would most likely have to settle this. I don't think it's clear that their first amendment rights wouldn't win out here. I think there's a strong argument that they shouldn't since it's civil ceremony and not a religious one. The law is rarely straightforward though and judges bring their own biases to the table.

[–] [deleted] 3 points 0 points (+3|-3) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] morrwin ago 

They could ask you to conform for taking the DMV license picture for example. If you turn up straight form the gay parade or crosdressed...

0
2

[–] FiftyShadesOfBlack 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I don't think a justice of the peace, required to respect the Constitutional rights of citizens, could legally refuse to perform a gay marriage for any reason (now).

0
0

[–] libby ago 

I suspect not as well, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if they successfully argued they could. I could see our courts upholding something like that.

0
1

[–] Tipman79 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I don't think the Justice of the Peace refusal would be legal. Justice of the Peace is a government office. Literally a representative of the of the government and completely different than a Pastor which is a privately held, religious position. A Justice performing a marriage is a civil service offered by the government the same as issuing a license or providing disaster relief through FEMA. It's not something they can choose not to do based on religious ideology.

1
0

[–] libby 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I don't think their refusal would be right, but it may well be legal. I'd have to look at the case law relating the first amendment as it pertains to public workers and marriage case law too. Rarely are legal matters as open and shut as you'd like them to be. Remember, we're not talking about how the law ought to work but how it actually does.

1
0

[–] Shinobi 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion or impeding the free exercise of religion. If the JP has religious objections, then one would think he/she would be OK with the refusal.

0
5

[–] pythagorean 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

What if someone decides that their religion prohibits women from driving, and that person also works for the license office. Do you think they'd be justified or get to keep their job if they refused to issues licenses to women?

1
8

[–] bf 1 point 8 points (+9|-1) ago 

/u/JustSomeFaggot posts about faggots a lot. I just thought it was a username, but now it's confirmed OP is a faggot.

0
14

[–] JustSomeFaggot [S] 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

I don't know what you expected.

0
4

[–] bf 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Too be completely honest I thought it was just an OP is a faggot joke username, but if it's not cool. How's the supreme court decision treatin' ya :D

0
0

[–] cat_tail_moustache ago 

Dan Savage?

0
3

[–] 1rash 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Many clerks are ignoring his request.

I don't think they are ignoring so much as they are afraid of being sued.

0
1

[–] Crazyjoe33 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Or not giving a fuck. At least, that's what I hope.

0
2

[–] brbpierogies 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

That doesn't seem to be a very good example of separation of church and state. He's silly.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] TheAgeofKite 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Not only that, marriage pre-dates any Abrahamic religion, it's a global, non-religion-specific union. Religious opposition to it is bogus and immature.

1
1

[–] ShinyVoater 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

The governor issued an executive order saying they can't be punished if they do. So yes, unless the federal government wants to come in and start crap.

0
9

[–] pythagorean 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

Which they surely will, because they're illegally discriminating against people.

0
0

[–] ilikeskittles ago  (edited ago)

On an aside...I think the whole fact that you have to get a license to get married absurd. None of the governments business who you marry or don't marry or live with, etc. Now if you want to have an actual ceremony and whatever religious or other institution you chose to perform said ceremony doesn't wish to marry you for whatever reason....that's their business.

0
0

[–] OM3G4UN17 ago 

Can we please rip religion from government for fucks sake. Not everyone is the same religion and hold the same feelings and beliefs.

[–] [deleted] ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] mukt ago 

Arguer for law department for a state, not exactly upholder of it.

load more comments ▼ (6 remaining)