Why should calling an otherwise illegal practice a religious practice make it legal?

[PaintMyHouse]

Remember, this question is important and no one's tried to answer it:

Why can a religious person claim the right to be above the law but a non-religious person can't...

...for the very same law and the very same disagreement with the law?

The question is bogus, it's a matter of conscience, not religion.

Is there a conscience clause in the Constitution that allows an atheist to violate the rights of others if his conscience so dictates?

Not taking an action can never be a violation of anyones rights. Also an atheist has just as much right to claim conscientious objector status as a Quaker.

con·science
[ˈkänCHəns]

NOUN

1. an inner feeling or voice viewed as acting as a guide to the rightness or wrongness of one's behavior:

Notice there's no mention of religion in the definition.

So religion is just a smokescreen.

Call it anything you want, you will anyway, she told the judge she wasn't issuing marriage licenses as a matter of conscience. A judge is refusing to perform faghadist marriages, I don't see the feds dragging him into court.

He has options, she doesn't.

 

[BULLDOG]

Americans have the right to equal treatment under the law, the State of Kentucky has generally recognized the right to be married , then it can not deny the right to some and not to others..


.

Exactly who is the State of KY denying?

Kentucky Governor to Christian clerks: Perform gay ‘marriages’ or lose your jobs


The official posture of the state of Kentucky is that its citizens can get married. While it is true that those clerks who refused may be sanctioned by the state the federal courts can take judicial notice of the fact that 119 counties in Ky issue marriage licenses and one does not. They can an also consider the fact that its chief executive officer considers the clerk' action to be unlawful.

Now if this issue was about imposing the law in a PRIVATE setting then I would share your concern.


.

So the short answer is the State is denying no one. The faghadist and everyone else has 119 places to get a license. The individual performance of an elected official is a State concern, not the feds.

I guess that's why the governor released this statement.

Governor Beshear Releases Statement On Clerks Refusing To Issue Marriage Licenses
"Our county clerks took an oath, as elected officials, to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Kentucky and to provide important duties in their communities. This oath does not dictate what our clerks must believe, but it certainly prescribes how they must act in carrying out their duties as elected officials. Same-sex couples in Kentucky are now entitled to the issuance of a marriage license by every county clerk, based on Friday’s ruling by the United States Supreme Court. While there are certainly strongly held views on both sides of this issue, the fact remains that each clerk vowed to uphold the law regardless of his or her personal beliefs. I appreciate the clerks who are fulfilling their duties, issuing licenses to all couples, and I would expect others to execute the duties of their offices as prescribed by law and to issue marriage licenses to all Kentuckians.” reads the statement by Gov. Steve Beshear.

So I guess you're agreeing that it is a State matter?

Actually it is both, with federal law having greater authority. The governor agrees with federal law as well.

 

[OKTexas]

Considering she wasn't issuing licenses to anyone, there was no discrimination. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of a great piece of propaganda, even if it is BS.

Thus she was discriminating against everyone. That only makes it worse.

Your oxymoron just makes you a moron.

I guess a baker doesn't have the right to stop offering wedding cakes to everyone, just to avoid providing them to gay weddings.

A baker isn't on the public payroll.

The clerk didn't discriminate against anyone either, but that doesn't seem to matter.

The clerk isn't doing the job she was hired to do.

Neither is your dear leader, he doing what he sees fit, equal protection would afford the clerk that same right.

 

[BULLDOG]

Remember, this question is important and no one's tried to answer it:

Why can a religious person claim the right to be above the law but a non-religious person can't...

...for the very same law and the very same disagreement with the law?

The question is bogus, it's a matter of conscience, not religion.

Is there a conscience clause in the Constitution that allows an atheist to violate the rights of others if his conscience so dictates?

Not taking an action can never be a violation of anyones rights. Also an atheist has just as much right to claim conscientious objector status as a Quaker.

con·science
[ˈkänCHəns]

NOUN

1. an inner feeling or voice viewed as acting as a guide to the rightness or wrongness of one's behavior:

Notice there's no mention of religion in the definition.

So religion is just a smokescreen.

Call it anything you want, you will anyway, she told the judge she wasn't issuing marriage licenses as a matter of conscience. A judge is refusing to perform faghadist marriages, I don't see the feds dragging him into court.

Several judges have stopped performing marriages. Performing marriages is an authority that judges can use or not. It's their choice. It's always been that way. It's a clerks requirement to issue marriage licenses. That's the way it's always been.

 

[OKTexas]

Exactly who is the State of KY denying?

Kentucky Governor to Christian clerks: Perform gay ‘marriages’ or lose your jobs


The official posture of the state of Kentucky is that its citizens can get married. While it is true that those clerks who refused may be sanctioned by the state the federal courts can take judicial notice of the fact that 119 counties in Ky issue marriage licenses and one does not. They can an also consider the fact that its chief executive officer considers the clerk' action to be unlawful.

Now if this issue was about imposing the law in a PRIVATE setting then I would share your concern.


.

So the short answer is the State is denying no one. The faghadist and everyone else has 119 places to get a license. The individual performance of an elected official is a State concern, not the feds.

I guess that's why the governor released this statement.

Governor Beshear Releases Statement On Clerks Refusing To Issue Marriage Licenses
"Our county clerks took an oath, as elected officials, to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Kentucky and to provide important duties in their communities. This oath does not dictate what our clerks must believe, but it certainly prescribes how they must act in carrying out their duties as elected officials. Same-sex couples in Kentucky are now entitled to the issuance of a marriage license by every county clerk, based on Friday’s ruling by the United States Supreme Court. While there are certainly strongly held views on both sides of this issue, the fact remains that each clerk vowed to uphold the law regardless of his or her personal beliefs. I appreciate the clerks who are fulfilling their duties, issuing licenses to all couples, and I would expect others to execute the duties of their offices as prescribed by law and to issue marriage licenses to all Kentuckians.” reads the statement by Gov. Steve Beshear.

So I guess you're agreeing that it is a State matter?

Actually it is both, with federal law having greater authority. The governor agrees with federal law as well.

Broken record, she hasn't discriminated against anyone, the feds have no business meddling in State matters.

 

[BULLDOG]

Thus she was discriminating against everyone. That only makes it worse.

Your oxymoron just makes you a moron.

I guess a baker doesn't have the right to stop offering wedding cakes to everyone, just to avoid providing them to gay weddings.

A baker isn't on the public payroll.

The clerk didn't discriminate against anyone either, but that doesn't seem to matter.

The clerk isn't doing the job she was hired to do.

Neither is your dear leader, he doing what he sees fit, equal protection would afford the clerk that same right.

The president's authority to prioritize the enforcement of laws is not the same as a clerk refusing to do her job.

 

[BULLDOG]

Kentucky Governor to Christian clerks: Perform gay ‘marriages’ or lose your jobs


The official posture of the state of Kentucky is that its citizens can get married. While it is true that those clerks who refused may be sanctioned by the state the federal courts can take judicial notice of the fact that 119 counties in Ky issue marriage licenses and one does not. They can an also consider the fact that its chief executive officer considers the clerk' action to be unlawful.

Now if this issue was about imposing the law in a PRIVATE setting then I would share your concern.


.

So the short answer is the State is denying no one. The faghadist and everyone else has 119 places to get a license. The individual performance of an elected official is a State concern, not the feds.

I guess that's why the governor released this statement.

Governor Beshear Releases Statement On Clerks Refusing To Issue Marriage Licenses
"Our county clerks took an oath, as elected officials, to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Kentucky and to provide important duties in their communities. This oath does not dictate what our clerks must believe, but it certainly prescribes how they must act in carrying out their duties as elected officials. Same-sex couples in Kentucky are now entitled to the issuance of a marriage license by every county clerk, based on Friday’s ruling by the United States Supreme Court. While there are certainly strongly held views on both sides of this issue, the fact remains that each clerk vowed to uphold the law regardless of his or her personal beliefs. I appreciate the clerks who are fulfilling their duties, issuing licenses to all couples, and I would expect others to execute the duties of their offices as prescribed by law and to issue marriage licenses to all Kentuckians.” reads the statement by Gov. Steve Beshear.

So I guess you're agreeing that it is a State matter?

Actually it is both, with federal law having greater authority. The governor agrees with federal law as well.

Broken record, she hasn't discriminated against anyone, the feds have no business meddling in State matters.

You're right. It's a waste of time trying to have a factual discussion with a crazy right winger.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Kentucky Governor to Christian clerks: Perform gay ‘marriages’ or lose your jobs


The official posture of the state of Kentucky is that its citizens can get married. While it is true that those clerks who refused may be sanctioned by the state the federal courts can take judicial notice of the fact that 119 counties in Ky issue marriage licenses and one does not. They can an also consider the fact that its chief executive officer considers the clerk' action to be unlawful.

Now if this issue was about imposing the law in a PRIVATE setting then I would share your concern.


.

So the short answer is the State is denying no one. The faghadist and everyone else has 119 places to get a license. The individual performance of an elected official is a State concern, not the feds.

I guess that's why the governor released this statement.

Governor Beshear Releases Statement On Clerks Refusing To Issue Marriage Licenses
"Our county clerks took an oath, as elected officials, to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Kentucky and to provide important duties in their communities. This oath does not dictate what our clerks must believe, but it certainly prescribes how they must act in carrying out their duties as elected officials. Same-sex couples in Kentucky are now entitled to the issuance of a marriage license by every county clerk, based on Friday’s ruling by the United States Supreme Court. While there are certainly strongly held views on both sides of this issue, the fact remains that each clerk vowed to uphold the law regardless of his or her personal beliefs. I appreciate the clerks who are fulfilling their duties, issuing licenses to all couples, and I would expect others to execute the duties of their offices as prescribed by law and to issue marriage licenses to all Kentuckians.” reads the statement by Gov. Steve Beshear.

So I guess you're agreeing that it is a State matter?

Actually it is both, with federal law having greater authority. The governor agrees with federal law as well.

Broken record, she hasn't discriminated against anyone, the feds have no business meddling in State matters.

Civil rights are a Federal matter...

 

[OKTexas]

Your oxymoron just makes you a moron.

I guess a baker doesn't have the right to stop offering wedding cakes to everyone, just to avoid providing them to gay weddings.

A baker isn't on the public payroll.

The clerk didn't discriminate against anyone either, but that doesn't seem to matter.

The clerk isn't doing the job she was hired to do.

Neither is your dear leader, he doing what he sees fit, equal protection would afford the clerk that same right.

The president's authority to prioritize the enforcement of laws is not the same as a clerk refusing to do her job.

Really, where does he get the authority to issue work permits to people not eligible for them by law?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

A baker isn't on the public payroll.

The clerk didn't discriminate against anyone either, but that doesn't seem to matter.

The clerk isn't doing the job she was hired to do.

Neither is your dear leader, he doing what he sees fit, equal protection would afford the clerk that same right.

The president's authority to prioritize the enforcement of laws is not the same as a clerk refusing to do her job.

Really, where does he get the authority to issue work permits to people not eligible for them by law?

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right here, although the fight over this is ongoing.

 

[OKTexas]

So the short answer is the State is denying no one. The faghadist and everyone else has 119 places to get a license. The individual performance of an elected official is a State concern, not the feds.

I guess that's why the governor released this statement.

Governor Beshear Releases Statement On Clerks Refusing To Issue Marriage Licenses
"Our county clerks took an oath, as elected officials, to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Kentucky and to provide important duties in their communities. This oath does not dictate what our clerks must believe, but it certainly prescribes how they must act in carrying out their duties as elected officials. Same-sex couples in Kentucky are now entitled to the issuance of a marriage license by every county clerk, based on Friday’s ruling by the United States Supreme Court. While there are certainly strongly held views on both sides of this issue, the fact remains that each clerk vowed to uphold the law regardless of his or her personal beliefs. I appreciate the clerks who are fulfilling their duties, issuing licenses to all couples, and I would expect others to execute the duties of their offices as prescribed by law and to issue marriage licenses to all Kentuckians.” reads the statement by Gov. Steve Beshear.

So I guess you're agreeing that it is a State matter?

Actually it is both, with federal law having greater authority. The governor agrees with federal law as well.

Broken record, she hasn't discriminated against anyone, the feds have no business meddling in State matters.

Civil rights are a Federal matter...

No ones rights were violated, she didn't do a thing that would prevent anyone getting married. There were a minimum of 119 other places to get a State marriage license.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I guess that's why the governor released this statement.

Governor Beshear Releases Statement On Clerks Refusing To Issue Marriage Licenses
"Our county clerks took an oath, as elected officials, to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Kentucky and to provide important duties in their communities. This oath does not dictate what our clerks must believe, but it certainly prescribes how they must act in carrying out their duties as elected officials. Same-sex couples in Kentucky are now entitled to the issuance of a marriage license by every county clerk, based on Friday’s ruling by the United States Supreme Court. While there are certainly strongly held views on both sides of this issue, the fact remains that each clerk vowed to uphold the law regardless of his or her personal beliefs. I appreciate the clerks who are fulfilling their duties, issuing licenses to all couples, and I would expect others to execute the duties of their offices as prescribed by law and to issue marriage licenses to all Kentuckians.” reads the statement by Gov. Steve Beshear.

So I guess you're agreeing that it is a State matter?

Actually it is both, with federal law having greater authority. The governor agrees with federal law as well.

Broken record, she hasn't discriminated against anyone, the feds have no business meddling in State matters.

Civil rights are a Federal matter...

No ones rights were violated, she didn't do a thing that would prevent anyone getting married. There were a minimum of 119 other places to get a State marriage license.

There could have been 10,000 and it wouldn't have mattered. It's not necessary for them to go elsewhere, and that is why both gay and straight couples sued, and won. The Rowan county clerks are now doing their jobs, now that Davis is behind bars.

 

[OKTexas]

The clerk didn't discriminate against anyone either, but that doesn't seem to matter.

The clerk isn't doing the job she was hired to do.

Neither is your dear leader, he doing what he sees fit, equal protection would afford the clerk that same right.

The president's authority to prioritize the enforcement of laws is not the same as a clerk refusing to do her job.

Really, where does he get the authority to issue work permits to people not eligible for them by law?

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right here, although the fight over this is ongoing.

And tell me again which immigration LAW these policies are implementing?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The clerk isn't doing the job she was hired to do.

Neither is your dear leader, he doing what he sees fit, equal protection would afford the clerk that same right.

The president's authority to prioritize the enforcement of laws is not the same as a clerk refusing to do her job.

Really, where does he get the authority to issue work permits to people not eligible for them by law?

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right here, although the fight over this is ongoing.

And tell me again which immigration LAW these policies are implementing?

Common sense, human decency, you wouldn't understand...

 

[OKTexas]

So I guess you're agreeing that it is a State matter?

Actually it is both, with federal law having greater authority. The governor agrees with federal law as well.

Broken record, she hasn't discriminated against anyone, the feds have no business meddling in State matters.

Civil rights are a Federal matter...

No ones rights were violated, she didn't do a thing that would prevent anyone getting married. There were a minimum of 119 other places to get a State marriage license.

There could have been 10,000 and it wouldn't have mattered. It's not necessary for them to go elsewhere, and that is why both gay and straight couples sued, and won. The Rowan county clerks are now doing their jobs, now that Davis is behind bars.

There's only one Rowan county clerk, the one elected by the people of the county, the others are hired flunkies and have no authority on their own. Show me the KY law that says a county clerk must issue marriage licenses.

 

[OKTexas]

Neither is your dear leader, he doing what he sees fit, equal protection would afford the clerk that same right.

The president's authority to prioritize the enforcement of laws is not the same as a clerk refusing to do her job.

Really, where does he get the authority to issue work permits to people not eligible for them by law?

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right here, although the fight over this is ongoing.

And tell me again which immigration LAW these policies are implementing?

Common sense, human decency, you wouldn't understand...

Surrender noted!

 

[Avorysuds]

You guys wanted more Government and that's what you get... People trying to control others based on their emotions. Limit Government by following the constitution would mean Government has no role in marriage... Meaning this issue would have never existed. Kinda like when Government made blacks slaves and didn't let women vote.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Kentucky Governor to Christian clerks: Perform gay ‘marriages’ or lose your jobs


The official posture of the state of Kentucky is that its citizens can get married. While it is true that those clerks who refused may be sanctioned by the state the federal courts can take judicial notice of the fact that 119 counties in Ky issue marriage licenses and one does not. They can an also consider the fact that its chief executive officer considers the clerk' action to be unlawful.

Now if this issue was about imposing the law in a PRIVATE setting then I would share your concern.


.

So the short answer is the State is denying no one. The faghadist and everyone else has 119 places to get a license. The individual performance of an elected official is a State concern, not the feds.

I guess that's why the governor released this statement.

Governor Beshear Releases Statement On Clerks Refusing To Issue Marriage Licenses
"Our county clerks took an oath, as elected officials, to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Kentucky and to provide important duties in their communities. This oath does not dictate what our clerks must believe, but it certainly prescribes how they must act in carrying out their duties as elected officials. Same-sex couples in Kentucky are now entitled to the issuance of a marriage license by every county clerk, based on Friday’s ruling by the United States Supreme Court. While there are certainly strongly held views on both sides of this issue, the fact remains that each clerk vowed to uphold the law regardless of his or her personal beliefs. I appreciate the clerks who are fulfilling their duties, issuing licenses to all couples, and I would expect others to execute the duties of their offices as prescribed by law and to issue marriage licenses to all Kentuckians.” reads the statement by Gov. Steve Beshear.

So I guess you're agreeing that it is a State matter?

Actually it is both, with federal law having greater authority. The governor agrees with federal law as well.

Broken record, she hasn't discriminated against anyone, the feds have no business meddling in State matters.

She's a marriage license issuer in an official capacity. Marriage is a constitutionally protected right in this country.

States cannot ignore the Constitution.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The president's authority to prioritize the enforcement of laws is not the same as a clerk refusing to do her job.

Really, where does he get the authority to issue work permits to people not eligible for them by law?

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right here, although the fight over this is ongoing.

And tell me again which immigration LAW these policies are implementing?

Common sense, human decency, you wouldn't understand...

Surrender noted!

As I said, you wouldn't understand. It's an enforcement issue but I have no disagreement with you that technically they cannot work here legally. Does that help you out?

 

[Katzndogz]

The Constitution says nothing about marriage licenses at all. The Constitition is as concerned with marriage licenses as it is with driver's licenses.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Remember, this question is important and no one's tried to answer it:

Why can a religious person claim the right to be above the law but a non-religious person can't...

...for the very same law and the very same disagreement with the law?

The question is bogus, it's a matter of conscience, not religion.

Is there a conscience clause in the Constitution that allows an atheist to violate the rights of others if his conscience so dictates?

Not taking an action can never be a violation of anyones rights. Also an atheist has just as much right to claim conscientious objector status as a Quaker.

con·science
[ˈkänCHəns]

NOUN

1. an inner feeling or voice viewed as acting as a guide to the rightness or wrongness of one's behavior:

Notice there's no mention of religion in the definition.

So religion is just a smokescreen.

Call it anything you want, you will anyway, she told the judge she wasn't issuing marriage licenses as a matter of conscience. A judge is refusing to perform faghadist marriages, I don't see the feds dragging him into court.

No, she didn't. She clearly made it a religious issue. Please, at least have a rudimentary understanding of the facts of the case before you start spouting off about it.