|
Real0ne -> RE: Kim Davis' lawyers file new appeal over same-sex marriage license order (11/5/2015 8:25:30 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Actually, the two issues are unrelated.
The issue here is she is refusing to issue marriage licenses on the grounds of her religion, which is not protected under the constitution. There are officers of the Hindu faith in the US military, and must, regardless of their beliefs, treat Sikhs with the same respect as due other members of the Armed Services.
The constitution protects her right only in the private sector, as a public administrator or elected she is required by law to follow the laws, both federal and local.
If this is a problem, she can resign.
For her to win the case, she would have to prove the laws of the United States, as well as the constitution are based on Christian moral law, which has been tried in the past and lost.
Private only? So then according to you the constitution does not protect free speech nor search and seizure in public? Because if it does protect our liberties, it does protect against warrant-less search/seizure in public, and it does protect free speech in public, and since liberty refers to protections [in]public then you have a lot of explaining to do why the constitution is cherry picking since there is no phrase or clause to that effect in any of the constructive documents nor history in either US or UK law?
So then you think that she has to give up her religion for the state? Tell that to all nazis they hung after the Nuremberg trials because they did not exercise conscientious objection [religion] to the holocausting the jews.
Its seems your version of law is contradictory if not hypocritical.
Resign? The gubblemint has an obligation to legislate law based upon it legitimate jurisdiction. Maybe the gubblemint is operating outside its jurisdiction and either needs to change it procedures or get out of the marriage licensing business? Unless of course you can show how a court of the US can legislate with respect to religion?
|
|
|
|
