Unfortunately though, I would’ve rather seen the issue challenged on the basis of the so-called discrimination. If we can’t defeat the “logic” that says you can’t distinguish between a man and woman ever, then the underpinnings of the Supreme Court’s decision remain in place.
It looks like playing it “smart” didn’t stop the court from dropping the anvil on her. If she was going to get hammered either way, she may as well have attacked the real problem with the ruling. Our end goal is not to stop the government from issuing all marriage licenses. And in a way, this tactic weakens her religious objection, since her religion would not prevent her from issuing them to opposite-sex couples. Only denying same-sex couples would allow the issue of religious objection to be tested head-on.
I don't see how she can refuse to perform the required duties in a government job. Hobby Lobby and Chick a fils are privately owned businesses. Now I would think they could run them as they see fit but we know that isn't altogether true. They have to conform to several laws concerning discrimination, payroll taxes, etc., etc.
But listening to the talk shows into the evening (interrupted by football), someone was saying that one or several judges should have recused themselves because they had performed gay marriages.
That was probably the Supreme Court judges, 2 I believe. I agree; she/they should have recused themselves but we know that the SC is activist now so that dog wouldn't hunt.
But there might have been something about the judge who put her in jail.
They were going to get her any way they could. As I said elsewhere, those couples could have easily gotten a license in the next county over. But they aren't about that or accommodation. They are about vengeance, and they got it with Kim in spades.
She sounds pretty determined. I looked up Revelation 2:10 which would seem to apply to our times and is strengthening.