Sorry if it came off that way, as it wasn't meant to be patronizing at all. I have strong moral sensibilities and I don't find the phrase troublesome.
What I meant was, I am concerned that unless she can find a legal basis for maintaining her objection, she may find herself out of a job. That's not uncommon -- I know vegetarians who refuse to handle meat, and were dismissed from jobs where meat handling was required, for example.
> When she was elected by the people in her community - implying she shared the community's values - at the time that she signed on for this position, the firm foundation of real marriage was already in existence. This is effectively changing her job description in the middle of her term. She wasn't elected to "marry" two men or two women.
I understand and agree.
I'm only noting that, given that the law is the law until it's overturned, she may find her position untenable, which would be a shame.
I support her objection, as I said before.
There are a very few times that civil disobedience is called for. This is definitely one of those times.
Unfortunately, you’re right. The clerk is on weak legal ground and will probably lose her job. That doesn’t mean I don’t applaud her and wish her well. BTW, the leftists routinely violate laws they disagree with, but that’s beside the point.
People need to understand there’s no middle ground on this gay versus real marriage thing. If a government legalizes gay marriage, then it has to actively oppose real marriage. What I mean is, it can no longer give real marriage any special treatment whatsoever. That means rewriting school curriculum to give gay “marriage” equal treatment.
Gay “marriage” isn’t the end result. Gay marriage is only an incremental step in a process to restrict the religious, association, and free speech rights of anyone who disagrees.
It used to be legal to work to the Irish. It wasn’t right, but it was legal.
It’s legal for gays to marry in NY. It isn’t right, not by any moral, religious, economic, societal, or even historical standard, but its the law in NYC.
There were plenty of outlaws in Germany who harbored Jews at the risk of losing their own lives and property. I think today we call them heroes.
Anne Frank’s family was ratted out at the time by a law abiding and alert citizen.
Rosa Parks was jailed for not riding in the back of the bus.
This isn’t meat handling. What vegan would take a job in meat handling and then object to it - some lawyer’s son no doubt?
This is marriage, which isn’t a legal institution, but a religious one co-opted by governments. You want civil unions? Be my guest, but it isn’t marriage.
This isn’t about ‘rights’ for the gay lobby here - this is about power.
Orwell said this would happen. So did Huxley.
In the 70’s, the hippies teaching these books to us in public school classrooms thought it would be republicans and fat cats bringing all of this on. Turns out it was the hippies that are doing it to us. They were using those books like Hitler used Mein Campf.
This generation - the Boomers - they will be remembered by history as a generation of locusts.
They came, consuming everything including the rule of law, and died demanding special circumstances, even with their last breath. They left nothing but obligations to their children, who were raised either by homosexuals, Nickelodeon, or the Disney Channel, a nation of lawyers and dependents, wondering when the next big thing was coming along so they could feast upon it like baby spiders eating their mother.
I hope future generations don’t judge us to harshly for deciding to bring them into this world. By then, history may have already been erased or rewritten perhaps, to ease the pain of realizing what has been lost.