This isn’t the first time the state’s definition of marriage has changed, merely the most recent and most ridiculously impossible so far. I guess my point was that the state’s fairly recent acceptance of no-fault divorce would seem to violate a great many Christian’s beliefs, and I wondered if any clerks refused to issue civil marriage licenses after that change.
“Changing the accepted understanding, and the conditions consented to by the employee requires at the very least a re-negotiation of the implicit contract.”
That’s a good point, and of course I would never fire anyone over non-acceptance of ‘gay marriage.’ But as before, the state’s version of marriage can only ever be whatever judges, pols, or the voting majority decide it is at any one time. To the state in the modern era marriage has obviously always been mutable.
Freegards
As is the meaning of words like "natural born citizen", "Freedom of Speech", and "Arms."
It is our duty to make sure they understand that we regard the meanings as written in iron until they get our permission to change them.
That is the entire point of "consent of the governed."