Posted on 09/06/2015 5:31:12 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Can your religion legally excuse you from doing part of your job? This is one of the questions in the Kentucky County Clerk marriage certificate case. But it also arises in lots of other cases — for instance, the Muslim flight attendant who doesn’t want to serve alcohol and who filed a complaint on Tuesday with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission over the airline’s denial of an exemption.
The question has also arisen before with regard to:
* Nurses who had religious objections to being involved in abortions (even just to washing instruments that would be used in abortions);
* Pacifist postal workers who had religious objections to processing draft registration forms;
* A Jehovah’s Witness employee who had religious objections to raising a flag, which was a task assigned to him;
* An IRS employee who had religious objections to working on tax exemption applications for organizations that promote “abortion, … homosexuality, worship of the devil, euthanasia, atheism, legalization of marijuana, immoral sexual experiments, sterilization or vasectomies, artificial contraception, and witchcraft”;
* a philosophically vegetarian bus driver who refused to hand out hamburger coupons as part of an agency’s promotion aimed at boosting ridership; and more.
And of course it arises routinely when people are fine with their job tasks, but have a religious objection to doing them on particular days (e.g., Saturdays and Fridays after sundown).
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
When you are a Muslim and scream Death to the Infidel’s!
How about mayors who maintain sanctuary cities in defiance of the law.
The question is:
When does a nation let judges arrest Christians?
When does your job morally excuse you from observing your religious beliefs?
RE: How about mayors who maintain sanctuary cities in defiance of the law.
What about Mayors ISSUING GAY MARRIAGE LICENSES when the State and City he lives in did not recognize gay marriage and a referendum prohibited it? (I’m talking to you Gavin Newsom ).
Dear WAPOST:
I dare you to ask that to Muslims who may be “inconvenienced” by giving that elderly American with a dog a cab ride?
Or ask a Muslim in a meat plant that they must work the pork line now?
FU’ you hypocrites!
...... Answer: When you are a Muslim activist.
Why should her name be printed on the marriage licenses?
In the implied scenario, it applies when the job terms change unacceptably after you’ve accepted its responsibilities. They can’t expect you to quit after pulling a form of bait-and-switch. In this case, she had no problem issuing marriage licenses for actual marriages, but since SCOTUS redefined “marriage” such that the KY definition is eviscerated unto meaningless, she understandably is refusing to issue ANY “marriage” licenses because (A) certain applicants are demanding what she cannot in good conscience condone/certify, and (B) the term is now legally so meaningless in that jurisdiction that there is no bounds for what was precisely defined & established to bound. She acted properly: refusing to act on that which has been rendered undefined in law and immoral in conscience.
I used to work with a seventh day Adventist. He had to be home before sundown on Friday I believe it was.
When do you resist an outlaw court?
Article 6 US Constitution says “no religious test” and amendment 1 says freedom of religion.
WaPo can get wrecked.
When unelected non-legislative tyrants force Christians to violate their conscience at the point of a gun.
Why should government cram immoral activity down our throats?
1776!
...around the time liberals started forcing business owners and school kids to pay homage to the god of the anal orifice.
She had religious views, but wasn’t acting as a representative of the church, but trust me, regardless of what SCOTUS judges said, pastors, decons and others will be jailed in the not too distant future.
When the job content changes and the new duties conflict with your religion.
“A couple weeks ago Professors Alan Dershowitz and Sanford Levinson debated Professor Eugene Volokh and David Kopel. The former argued that the Second Amendment has outlived its usefulness. Based on minds changed, they won.”
“Lawyers are destroying American society. Because the Romans also had a glut of law school grads when the Republic fell.”
http://abovethelaw.com/tag/eugene-volokh/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.