If your beliefs prevent you from fulfilling the duties of your job, then you should probably consider changing jobs.
Snowflakes are going to codify being a snowflake into law.
Yeah! I can’t even call you gay in certain states because of these snowflake laws. To make it worst they want that level of control at a national level. Damn snowflakes. Don’t go all angry dragon on me now.
/s
Removed by mod
I disagree on this one. You believing in same sex marriage and forcing someone else to marry you isn’t much different than the other way around.
A minister isn’t working for someone else who has a policy on birth control or anything like that where you would have known when taking the job was selling it. They’re more or less self employed/running their own business. They shouldn’t be forced to do something they’re against any more than someone should be forced to be straight. The government isn’t banning gay marriage. They aren’t saying anyone ordained isn’t allowed to marry gay people. They’re just saying someone who doesn’t want to doesn’t have to. You sure as hell know in this day and age you could find someone ordained that would marry you. Why you would even want a minister/priest/whatever who is against gay marriage to be forced to marry you instead of finding someone else seems idiotic anyhow, unless you have some childish vendetta against “them gay haters” and you just care about making some homophobe suffer over your wedding instead of just enjoying yourself on your day.
Tldnr: It seems pretty stupid to force someone to marry you against their will. How about they force you to marry straight against your will?
This law isn’t about ministers or priests or anything. Those people already aren’t forced to marry anyone that’s against their conscious. This is about public officials, people that are hired and usually take an oath to uphold the law, the law that says gay people can marry. What if a public official refused to register someone to vote or to get a driver’s license because they were black or a woman and that was against their beliefs? At that point, if those are your beliefs, maybe you need to quit that job.
Did you read the article or law? It doesn’t deal with getting a marriage license. It specifies performing a wedding. Where are you getting your info from?
Uhmm it’s because it’s their job to marry you. If you have to be forced to do your job get a new one that you are comfortable with.
If I were a county clerk there, I’d refuse to marry hetero weddings.
Just kidding, I’m not a trash human being that would do that based on, well, anything. I think discrimination is a piece of shit thing to do regardless of the claimed underpinnings.
This law doesn’t allow county clerks to refuse giving out marriage licenses. It specifies performing a wedding ceremony. It won’t force someone to perform a wedding against their will.
I swear, people on here are so overly PC they won’t even read anything. They’ll just automatically upvote anything that looks pro gay at face value and down vote anything that looks anti gay.
…a thing that they could already do, if they so chose.
It’s about the message. The shitty, Christian supremacist message.
I would imagine the goal is to get this to the supreme court so the current ruling is over turned.
Our Supreme Court is a joke and should be changed.
This whole debate is about the wrong thing. Let each church perform its marriages. Make no laws about whether the state, other churches, or anyone needs to recognize the marriage. Attach no rights or privileges to marriage. Get the government all the way out of marriage.
Parents can have custody of children without marriage. People can own property together without marriage. People can get healthcare without marriage.
So you’d be forced to use a church to get married, or pay higher taxes because the government won’t provide you a secular option? This is not a solution…
Also, giving churches this sole power will only lead to arranged / child marriages, because Christians love that shit.
People deserve the right to a courthouse marriage, and the government shouldn’t let an official’s superstitions interfere with their duties.
Why does the government need to be involved in the religious union?
If you need rights or protections from the government, get those separately. Why does a religious wedding need to be involved? Why should a religious wedding be involved in how much you pay in taxes? If you want to declare joint/family tax filing, why get the church involved? Just fill out and submit a form with the involved parties. If it’s two random adults who live together, and want to save on taxes, why include being married as some weird hurdle?
Want to prevent pedos fucking kids? Then don’t make an exception because of religious marriages. Make the law apply to everyone in all cases.
If you want a religious union and you’re gay, do that in a church that welcomes gay weddings.
People deserve the right to a courthouse marriage
People deserve a right to whatever they want to do to live their lives. Marriage just simply shouldn’t interface with a government function on any level. Legal rights to property can be hashed out with legal agreements that already exist. This would also allow all the marriage-related and child-related complexities added to the tax code to go away.
It makes the legal/emotional/religious/belief overlap not exist in a government sense, neuters the power the domestic terrorist fundie crazies would have in attempting to make everyone’s lives more painful, and removes legal noise from laws across the nation. (Oversimplification of course, there would be pitfalls that would need addressing to fill in gaps that would appear.)
Marriage as a religious function is just a holdover tradition that can continue on unabated without it feeling left out.
That’s fair enough so long as it’s countered. When same-sex marriage came out here way back, officials had the right to their beliefs like everyone else and could opt out of breaking their beliefs etc. Knowing this, there was also a surge of officials that focused on same-sex marriages. Now it’s as simple as,
“Do you do this one or the other or both?”
“The other one. But this person does this one.”
Pretty rare to find anyone that gives a fuck, though. I’d say there’s more lean toward same-sex just because of how many same-sex only people popped up at the start.
So what. Only the most worthless shitheads would let this law dictate to them how they’re going to perform marriages. The good officials won’t let it corrupt them. And as someone who’s performed gay marriages since the 80s when it wasn’t “legal,” I believe it doesn’t matter what law they pass about it. There are many ways around unjust and corrupt laws such as this one, and it won’t stop gay people from getting married no matter what. In fact it will probably bring more gay couples out of the woodwork.
