I had a nicer headline originally but you know, this better expresses my feelings.
The United States Supreme Court yesterday denied the Kentucky clerk’s appeal wherein she claimed that she should not be forced to perform her job because of her religious beliefs.
As a Christian, she has vowed to obey the Bible, which says gay couples should not get married. (It actually doesn’t say that at all, but that has never stopped True Believers). She is still refusing to do it. 
As a clerk, she is supposed to certify marriages and not discriminate, but she is claiming that God’s Law supercedes American law. (It actually doesn’t, but that has never stopped True Believers.)
All the standard hypocritical nonsense is there — for instance, she’s been married herself four times (which actually is prohibited very clearly in the Bible).
Bigotry in the name of religion is still bigotry. If her religious order was against, say, interracial marriage, she would not have the right to deny marriage licenses to interracial couples either. I assume her religion also says that marriages should be between people in her own religion, yet this woman grants marriage licenses to people from every religion and no religion all the time.
No, this is just plain bigotry.
I blame the Hobby Lobby case for some of this, wherein the Supreme Court decided that businesses can have religion (WTF?) and thus discriminate on the basis of it. The Supreme Court views this case differently for one major reason: This is not a business. Seriously. Businesses always win in the Supreme Court these days.
But back to this woman: I’m sure she has firmly held beliefs. But if those beliefs prevent her from performing her job, then she should resign. Issuing marriage licenses is part of her job requirements.
Can you imagine if you refused to perform part of your job because your religion said you couldn’t do it? How long do you think you’d keep your job?
ventrellaquest.com 
You are correct, sir. As a public official, she doesn’t gain the same rights and 1st Ammemdmemt protections in her job that private industry gains.
You seems stuck, though, on this issue of business with religion. The Supreme Court has spoken on this matter, and they’re not wrong. A privately held business can certainly be an extension of the owners’ lives, and therefore their religion(s). While their religion might be bunk, no government should have the power to force a business (and therefore the people owning/operating it) to go against their religious beliefs. Being free imeans also allowing the freedom for people to be jerks.
And yes, you have seen the Supreme Court rule on the side businesses a lot lately (actually, they were ruling for freedom, and business just happened to be the argument at the tune) and I believe that will continue to happen – and that is a good thing!!!
It’s hard enough to succeed in business now. We don’t need more government red-tape (regulations and costs) weighing-down innovation and our ability and willingness to capitalize on opportunity.
This new fad of hating business and financially successful people has got to end. I swear, this country is full of whiners and weaklings that just want the government to do everything for them… “Waaaa…protect me! Waaaa…give me a job! Waaaa…give me an easier job! Waaaa…pay me more! (Without me providing greater value.) Waaaa…I shouldn’t have to work! Waaaa…tax the rich and feed me and give me a free phone…waaa! Waaa!’
As a society, we’ve got to stop complaining about our lives, stop focusing on trying to get the “rich people” to give us their money (because apparently the douchebags in the world think that if someone has a lot of money, they somehow deserve it instead) to take care of us, and focus on providing greater value in the world and becoming successful ourselves.
Business is not your enemy.
And anyone who tries to use the excuse that “Oh, it’s unfair; oh, it’s just too hard” once again needs to stop whining and go do something.
LikeLike
You know I disagree with you on this, of course. If you open a business, we expect you to follow our rules, which include paying your taxes, having a safe working environment, obeying all laws, and not discriminating. Don’t like our rules? Don’t open a business.
I know libertarians hate all the rules, but that OK — you have the right to hate them. You don’t have the right to ignore them just because you don’t like them. Fight against them if you must, the same way people fought for them, through political and legal means.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And the rules allow for businesses to discriminate on religious grounds. That’s one of the many things that makes it different than government. Come on Mike, you know damn well there’s a big difference between Public and Private establishments. And so says the Supreme Court. They obviously agree with my way of thinking on this one.
LikeLike
When you open a business, you get to decide whether you’re going to service a private clientele or whether you’re going to serve the public. Once you make the decision to open to the public, you have chosen to offer public accommodation. Said accommodation cannot be discriminatory. Simple as that.
LikeLike
Except that it can, according to the Hobby Lobby ruling. Yes, there are limits, but a business is allowed to discriminate on religious grounds. A public servant cannot.
LikeLike
Hope you’re happy, mister. I created an account just so I could post on YOUR BLOG. Any rate; court is 11:00 a.m. Thursday, she and her entire staff have to go explain themselves.
LikeLiked by 1 person
These days my preference, when the whole “religion/politics” debate comes up, is to refer to Peter Montgomery’s “12 Rules For Mixing Religion And Politics”. There’s a (heavily) annotated version on the People For The American Way website (here: http://www.pfaw.org/media-center/publications/12-rules-mixing-religion-and-politics), but you will find it on all sorts of religious web sites as well.
LikeLike
That went pretty much the way I figured it was going to go. What surpises me is the speed in which it got through the courts and to the supremes. I wish EVERYTHING moved that quickly in our legal system
LikeLike
Well, she lost in the lower court — that doesn’t take too long — and the upper courts just refused to hear the case. The Supremes didn’t take the case at all, meaning the lower court’s opinion stands.
LikeLike
Just to clarify:
The Hobby Lobby case allowed a company to not invest in an insurance policy that it felt violated its religious beliefs. This is WAY different from a blanket statement that it held that businesses can discriminate on the basis of religion. A business cannot refuse to hire atheists or Muslims or Christians or hang signs saying “No Mormons will be served” or anything like that.
LikeLike
Pingback: You don’t have a right to a job! |