RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages.

RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

slvemike4u -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 5:11:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact From what you're seeing in the news reports, mike, is there a possible compromise? Maybe a transfer for this woman to some kind of other department where her interaction as a county employee doesn't mess with her religious beliefs? From my understanding of the tale...no one is looking for a compromise,that is why I mentioned the possibility that this was a set up to begin with.By that I mean the couple knew of this woman's stance...and went there looking for the issue that they found.I'm not blaming them for doing so....but this sounds like one ,or possibly both,sides have decided to stake out their position and test the courts on this issue...which is of course made easier to do what with someone else picking up the legal costs [:)]

LadyPact -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 5:27:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LanceHughes I think you are very mistaken. The right to marry / fuck was reserved to the Lord / Baron / King / Sheik, etc. There's a "strengthen the stock" component that has been with us since there WAS any type of over-lord. The religious component and the governemnt component have NEVER been far from each other. To this day, The Queen is head of the Church of England. And let's not forget its founding by Henry VIII who (to put it frankly) was tired of the Pope telling him (Henry) whom he could and couldn't fuck. I wonder who issues marriage licenses (if there is such a thing) in China. We're looking at this from different angles. I think you are seeing it from the perspective of "who can we fuck" and I'm looking at it from "who do we choose to stop fucking". That's where we screwed this all up. Volumes and volumes on divorce law. We just don't know how to treat each other, Lance. We just don't.

DesFIP -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 5:34:21 PM)
It would be reasonable to allow her to not give out licenses to gay couples? Would it also be considered reasonable for her to not give out licenses to couples of different races? Having to make an appointment makes same sex couples second class citizens. If she cannot in good conscience do her job, then she needs to step down. No different than a midwife who is heavily Catholic and refuses to counsel couples on birth control. Fine if you work for a Catholic agency, not fine when you take public monies.

slvemike4u -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 5:35:26 PM)
Agreed....fully . Edited to remove an inadvertent question mark.

HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 5:36:50 PM)
[sm=goodpost.gif]

EternalHoH -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 5:37:02 PM)
This behavior started with the pharmacists who refused to dispense the morning after pill. Same moral objections. But then again, a pharmacy (at this stage) is a private business.

Kirata -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 5:40:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HeatherMcLeather She says it's a matter of religious freedom, but since she herself isn't actually engaging in the sinful activity, nor actually facilitating it, wouldn't signing be covered by "render unto Caesar", "do unto others", "let he without sin cast the first stone" and "judge not lest ye be judged"? Exactly. The achilles heel of the "Bible-believing" Christian Right is that other people can read it too. K.

slvemike4u -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 5:42:47 PM)
Yeah....this woman has a civil service job and feels ,simply by claiming it as a "belief", she has the right to decide which of the laws of her state she has to deal with. The folks footing the bill for her legal costs see this as a chance to make a larger point...I think,feel and believ they will be disappointed .

EternalHoH -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 5:43:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LanceHughes The government (at any level) should NOT be issuing marriage certificates (nor the gloss of domestic partner registraions.) Never should have been issuing what is basically a religious document. BINDING contracts? You bet! The trouble is we base an awful lot of secular laws on the presence of this religious certificate (taxes, inheritence, adoption, child custody, etc). To me, it is equally flawed to be basing secular laws on a religious document. Probably why the states got involved with issuing licenses in the first place. Sure, keep the ceremony religious if you want, but the legal ramifications of marriage defined by a religious exercise???

farglebargle -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 6:01:51 PM)
Well, MARRIAGE is defined in New York -- and has ALWAYS been defined in New York as a civil contract. So everyone who says their religious "laws" should apply to a civil contract??? Don't we call that shit, "Sharia"?

Termyn8or -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 6:13:01 PM)
FR In the application of rights and laws, we technically have no rights. This is not a bad thing, I will clarify. We just had an issue with osmeone who was ordered to push flu shots at a job in a drugstore. Everyone here hijacked the shit outta that thread into the efficacy and safety of the flu shot, when the post had nothing to do with it. The OP did not want to push people into getting the flu shot for personal reasons. My advice was to do it anyway, and added that many people are asked to do alot worse for money. Her personal beliefs have nothing to do with it except for one simple issue, do your job or quit, or get fired. It really is that simple. People get fired for all kinds of shit today, why not county (or whatever) clerks ? You are fired for insubordination and that's that, see the welfare office for details. Well perhaps one warning, but no more. And smalltown USA means shit, these people work for the county. I'm still against Gay marriage though. Not that it should be illegal, but you know it's just going to make divorce lawyers richer :-) T^T

Real0ne -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 6:55:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u From today's NY Times ,a clerk in Ledyard NY( for the uninitiated that is basically bumfuck NY..lol)refuses to sign same-sex marriage licenses.Usually this does not pose an issue as their is a deputy in the office who issues these licenses by appointment. So,what seems quite predictable and inevitable a lesbian couple showed up last month without an appointment did not want to wait.This is a small town clerks office....with limited hours,nine per week. Basically the clerk feels she is protected by New York law...which " protects my right to hold both my job and my beliefs". The couple argue that the law requires all clerks in New York to provide marriage licenses to all couples...including same sex. Gov.Cuomo is on record as saying that clerks do not have the right to pick and choose which laws they will "enforce". again predictably both sides of this argument are being represented by advocacy groups representing the diametrically opposed POV's...as an aside I do wonder were these groups not to show up footing the bill for these legal challenges would folks be a bit more reasonable in their positions. cha ching!

HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 7:06:57 PM)
quote: This behavior started with the pharmacists who refused to dispense the morning after pill. Same moral objections. Not really. The pill actually causes the termination of the pregnancy, so dispensing it can be construed as causing the termination. Signing a marriage licence for a same sex couple doesn't in any way cause, or even facilitate, the homosexual activity. That couple was having sex before they met the clerk, and will be having sex whether they get the licence or not, all the clerk's signature does is establish a specific legal status for the couple's relationship. So there really isn't any viable moral objection that I can see in this case.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 8:11:31 PM)
I'm a bit confused by the article. Does the couple live in Miami or nearby Springfield? The reason I ask is because if they are from Miami, it would be more indicative of a "set up," where they knew the situation and tried to make an issue of it. Not that it makes much difference, but I am curious about that. Regardless, the clerk could have avoided the whole thing by "delegating" (her words) ALL marriage licenses to the deputy and requiring ALL people seeking a license to make an appointment. There is always a lot of talk on these boards about how "private businesses" can choose to discriminate in this way. No one would say that if they were discriminating against a minority couple, or a couple of two different races. Yes, a church can refuse to perform wedding ceremonies, but they also can refuse to marry people who are not of the same faith. They aren't a "public" business. The term "private business" is kind of an oxymoron. If you serve the public, you may be privately owned, but you still cater to the public. Marriage is not a religious thing. When the "over lords" and kings and such controlled it, they were the government at that time. Early days of the Bible, marriages occured and they had little to do with religion. So the concept that marriage in and of itself is mixing government and religion is false. Both sides seem to be intentionally pushing a test case. The town clerk will likely lose her case, although the ruling may come down that all marriage license applicants are required to make an appointment. In any case, I think that the guy who is running against her will likely take her position. For Christ's sake, she works a whole nine hours a week, yet the article makes it appear as though she has done so much, managing three town databases and keeping their website up to date. If all that takes just 9 hours a week....well, I don't think it would be difficult for anyone else. Oh, and the pill does not cause a miscarriage unless specifically used for that purpose with larger doses. Birth control pills essentially fool the body into thinking it is already pregnant thereby preventing fertilization of a new egg. It will be interesting to see how this case plays out in the courts.

HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/28/2011 8:28:19 PM)
quote: Oh, and the pill does not cause a miscarriage unless specifically used for that purpose with larger doses. Birth control pills essentially fool the body into thinking it is already pregnant thereby preventing fertilization of a new egg. It's the "Morning After" pill we were talking about, sorry, I should have been more specific. From what I understand, that works by either preventing the release of an egg <in which case it is no more objectionable than regular birth control> or by preventing the implantation of the egg in the uterine wall, therefore after conception, which is the basis of the religious objections to it. quote: It will be interesting to see how this case plays out in the courts. Yes indeed!

LafayetteLady -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/29/2011 1:11:11 AM)
As a point of fact, Catholics are against all forms of birth control except the rthym and ever popular "pull and pray" method. They don't approve of condoms or diaphrams which are barrier methods. Guess they miss the point that homosexuals having sex is the ultimate form of birth control. That isn't meant to be snarky to homosexuals, but to Catholics. I'm a Christian. Yet I support the rights of homosexuals and the right for women to choose for themselves whether to have an abortion or keep a baby. I also support every one's right to prevent pregnancy. If I were the town clerk, I would have insisted that everyone make an appointment for a marriage license. But that is just because I could be sure to have some kind of "congratulatory" gift to give them on the upcoming wedding; candy, flowers. Just something nice to make them feel special. I mean if the town only needs to have her there 9 hours a week, there probably aren't that many people applying for marriage licenses. So my view would be to give them something nice to wish them well and to thank them for choosing my podunk town to get married in.

kalikshama -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/29/2011 5:48:21 AM)
quote: There is always a lot of talk on these boards about how "private businesses" can choose to discriminate in this way. No one would say that if they were discriminating against a minority couple, or a couple of two different races. Yes, a church can refuse to perform wedding ceremonies, but they also can refuse to marry people who are not of the same faith. Before I read this I was just thinking about how, in 1987, a military chaplain where we were serving in Okinawa refused to marry us because my fiance and I were different flavors of Christianity. I thought this was odd, but no big, moved on to the next chaplain. For the civil part of our marriage, we had to fill out forms/pay fees on base, at the American Consulate, the mayor's office, and a translator. All that these people cared about was that our forms were filled out correctly and we paid the fees. It would have been ludicrous for these civil servants to object to his Protestantism/my Catholicism, him being German/me Irish, him from Iowa/me Massachusetts. If my religion proscribed alcohol, I would not work as a bartender. And if the restaurant obtained a liquor license after I'd been working there, well, things like that happen, time to move on.

LadyPact -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/29/2011 5:55:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama Before I read this I was just thinking about how, in 1987, a military chaplain where we were serving in Okinawa refused to marry us because my fiance and I were different flavors of Christianity. I thought this was odd, but no big, moved on to the next chaplain. For the civil part of our marriage, we had to fill out forms/pay fees on base, at the American Consulate, the mayor's office, and a translator. All that these people cared about was that our forms were filled out correctly and we paid the fees. It would have been ludicrous for these civil servants to object to his Protestantism/my Catholicism, him being German/me Irish, him from Iowa/me Massachusetts. If my religion proscribed alcohol, I would not work as a bartender. And if the restaurant obtained a liquor license after I'd been working there, well, things like that happen, time to move on. I was actually thinking something rather similar. This really is something that changed since her most recent re-election. As much as it would kind of suck to have to give up something that a person would be dedicated to, it might really have been the best option for her once the law went into effect.

farglebargle -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/29/2011 6:03:43 AM)
Rose Marie Belforti 12/31/2011 Town Clerk in NYS is an elected position. If they don't hire a full-time deputy clerk to make sure people can get licenses issued in a timely manner, then I suspect they'll just elect a new Town Clerk. One who won't waste the town's money on needing to hire people because she can't fulfill her elected duties. That aside, I wonder what she'd do if you showed up at a town meeting and recited parts of the DIY D&C manual into the record. She's gotta maintain those minutes by law....

subrob1967 -> RE: Rights collide as town clerk sidesteps role in gay marriages. (9/29/2011 6:57:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: windchymes If the clerk's refusal to sign a marriage certificate for a gay couple is based on her religious beliefs, then that goes against the separation of church & state laws that we have, no? I see this as a precedent....you accept the job, you are required to sign ALL marriage certificates, please date and initial that you have read and understand this. If they won't sign, current employees can be reassigned to another position, new applicants won't get the job. Another example of someone twisting the constitution to suit their own needs.....and guarantee entry into heaven, lol. No, because there isn't one specific religion that is against homosexuality, Separation of Church & State deals specifically with the State sponsoring one religion over the rest... That being said, the Clerk is a fucking bigot and needs to get fired for discrimination.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625