Reply to But religious accommodation is a thing, right?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "But religious accommodation is a thing, right?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]She should not keep a job which obligates her to violate her religious beliefs.  That's on her, .  [/quote]It's not a "job." She was elected to this position. And the rules were different when she assumed office. Why is this on her?[/quote]
The law is always subject to change. Nobody can decide that they prefer to stick to the law as it stood before some Supreme Court decision. Those who are sworn to uphold the law must uphold it as it stands, not some prior version.

I don't quite understand why the judge did not content himself with telling her subordinates that her order to them was in contempt and that they should give out licenses or be subject to contempt themselves. With all but her son doing so, my personal view is that a nominal fine for each of those two would have been sufficient to assert the law while not martyring them for their version of freedom of religion.

I am FWIW a liberal who thinks she is totally wrong, but I think that as long as people are protected in their equal right to marriage, it would be best if it could be accomplished without making enemies of those who are not yet able to adjust to new ideas. It may feel good to say that she's a bigot and should be punished, but I would take a page from their book and hate the sin but not the sinner.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics