Stop having judicial tyranny from the SCOTUS?
Of course not- she is the wrong religion
And some religions are more equal than others
But, but, but the only laws that are important to this Admin and it’s sheeple are the ones that the Dems agree with. Any law that a Dem disagrees with is ‘bad law’ and can be broken. I have had this argument with Leftist relatives. I tell them ‘if you don’t like a law, then go through the proper channels to change it’. Crickets.....they don’t think it is a bad thing to break a ‘bad law’.
Life of the mother
Self defense...
Conscience objector....
Put it into law. No law should make criminals of 50% of the population.
Apparently not...
Sure there is. Just treat em the way you do moslems when they demand public accommodation at airports and universities to wash their dirty feet, not to handle pork at the check stand, not to have a dog in a cab, etc...
Or do only camel jockeys get special treatment?
NOT accommodating anyone with a different point of view is the ultimate goal! I realized this when watching the news last night and a gay man who was just married said through tears “now I feel like a person!”
So, we have the concept, almost universally found among all cultures and times, that the state should recognize, encourage and support family formation. And that, all other things being equal, a child is best raised by its biological parents. And that marriage between a man and a woman usefully channels behavior into supporting future generations.
All of this, according the US supreme court, is a violation of the Constitution. We must allow the union of two men or two women as a “marriage” to preserve the “dignity” of these people.
It’s a stamp of approval that they want. Accommodation? no way. The entire purpose is to delegitimize and crush any opposition.
Interesting how within ten weeks of the court decision a Christian was jailed in America. No, there’s more to it than that. But this may be the tip of the iceberg.
liberals, democrats, socialist, don’t accommodate, they demand to be accommodated to. rinos also demand accommodation from most of us but are happy to accede to the liberals, democrats and socialist.
You can accommodate when you are one of many. If she was a deputy clerk, she could be excused from duties she has a moral objection to. Some other deputy could do them.
But she’s not a deputy. She is head of the office. The office has to do this. She must exercise her power in order to see that it is done.
There is no way to accommodate her objections with her job responsibilities. She is responsible for every license that comes out of her office.
How do you accommodate judges who have no understanding of natural law, moral law, constitutional law, state law, or the proper relationship of judges to legislators to administrators?