Posted on 06/12/2015 7:23:09 AM PDT by xzins
A measure allowing some court officials to refuse to perform gay marriage responsibilities because of their religious beliefs became law in North Carolina on Thursday, with the state House voting to override the governor's veto of the bill.
The Senate had voted to do the same with Republican Gov. Pat McCrory's veto a week ago. Thursday's House vote of 69-41 was just over the three-fifths majority needed. Ten House members were absent and didn't vote.
The law, taking effect immediately, means some register of deeds workers who assemble licenses and magistrates to solemnize civil marriages can decide to stop performing all marriages if they hold a "sincerely held religious objection."
The law "protects sincerely held religious beliefs while also ensuring that magistrates are available in all jurisdictions to perform lawful marriages," House Speaker Tim Moore, R-Cleveland, said in a statement.
Gay rights groups and Democrats who opposed the bill said after the vote that litigation challenging the law was likely to come soon. Republicans supporting the measure said federal laws provided religious accommodations to government officials, in keeping with the U.S. and state constitutions.
Before North Carolina, only Utah had passed such a similar exemption for court officials, earlier this year.
McCrory's decision put him at odds with social conservatives aligned with Republicans. Concerned Women for America accused McCrory of betraying state residents and forcing court officials to violate their consciences.
"It's hard to believe that any governor - much less a conservative one - would veto a bill protecting the religious freedoms of his constituents," North Carolina Values Coalition Executive Director Tami Fitzgerald said.
Three Democrats joined all but three Republicans present in voting for the override.
(Excerpt) Read more at abc11.com ...
“Same sex marriage will be every bit as divisive as abortion.”
Nope. It’s worse already. It’s one thing to argue about human lives; a whole ‘nother thing to argue about deviant proclivities. You wanna redux a scene from The Exorcist? Get between a determined deviant and their debauchery of choice.
One down, 49 to go.
What about a muslim taxi driver refusing to accept a passenger carrying booze?
First, he’s not a government official. But it’s easy enough to call another cab. Plus, I doubt that a muslim would refuse a ride from a passenger carrying booze. In most states, I think it is illegal to have open bottles in a vehicle.
I get that he’s not a public official but why should they be treated differently than a private citizen. There have been several cases of mzslim taxi drivers refusing passengers carrying booze. They created quite a stink here on FR.
What about a Christian baker forced to bake a cake with the words “Support Homosexual Marriage” on it?
There’s the rub. Are you ready for both sides of the coin?
The answer: allow accommodations
They have government funds backing them, or the ACLU, or some of them are not all that badly off in terms of personal worth. The average “open homosexual” is often not too badly off.
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.