Kentucky clerk case divides religious liberty advocates

[RandallS]

"Kentucky clerk Kim Davis has become a hero to many conservative  Christians who see her refusal to issue marriage licenses after the  Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage as a litmus test  for religious liberty in an increasingly secular culture. But lost in the uproar are the voices of Christians, some equally  conservative, who disagree with Davis' stance and worry that holding her  out as a martyr will ultimately hurt the cause of religious liberty."

Read the article

[Melamphoros]

"Kentucky clerk Kim Davis has become a hero to many conservative  Christians who see her refusal to issue marriage licenses after the  Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage as a litmus test  for religious liberty in an increasingly secular culture. But lost in the uproar are the voices of Christians, some equally  conservative, who disagree with Davis' stance and worry that holding her  out as a martyr will ultimately hurt the cause of religious liberty."

Read the article

 
I've said it before and I'll say it again: If one's job conflicts with deeply-held religious beliefs, it's time to get off that cross and find another job.

[MadZealot]

" But lost in the uproar are the voices of Christians, some equally  conservative, who disagree with Davis' stance and worry that holding her  out as a martyr will ultimately hurt the cause of religious liberty."

Yep.  I wonder how many of these religious-liberty folks will charge to the defense of the young Muslim flight attendant who refuses to serve alcohol to passengers.
(Edit: actually, I don't wonder.  The above statement was strictly rhetorical.)

I don't even see this as a religious liberty issue, really. This is more about a civil servant failing to perform her job duties (ie, serving the people who pay her salary.)
If I walked into a Sheriff's office for a carry permit, the anti-gun pacifist behind the counter is required to issue me one (assuming I meet the criteria.)  The vegan clerk at Fish & Game cant refuse me a hunting or fishing permit.  
This is more of a "do your job and fuck your feelings" thing, tbh.

[RandallS]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If one's job conflicts with deeply-held religious beliefs, it's time to get off that cross and find another job.

Exactly. To me, that holds for any deeply held beliefs. If you can't do your job because of them, you need to quit that job and find one where you can do your job without violating your beliefs.

[victoreia]

Exactly. To me, that holds for any deeply held beliefs. If you can't do your job because of them, you need to quit that job and find one where you can do your job without violating your beliefs.

 
According to her attorney, she "wants to treat everyone equally, however her conscience does not allow her to."

I really *love* how religious zealots try to justify themselves.

On the up side, the same folks who run the rainbow Equality House across from WBC put up a billboard in Ms. Davis' home town, reminding her we've already refined marriage (because she can't sell her daughter for three goats and a cow). :whis:

[Darkhawk]

According to her attorney, she "wants to treat everyone equally, however her conscience does not allow her to."

I really *love* how religious zealots try to justify themselves.

 
Wow.  She should pull her conscience module and flip it, she's got it wired in backwards.

(I am reminded of Fred Clark's occasional comments that the problem with the conservative evangelical mindset is that they have cognitive dissonance around people's consciences being more merciful and generous than their god.)

[Daecon]

According to her attorney, she "wants to treat everyone equally, however her conscience does not allow her to."

 
That seems incredibly insulting to other Christians.  She's basically saying "I don't really want to be a bigot, but my religion forbids treating gays as if they were actually people."

[veggiewolf]

"Kentucky clerk Kim Davis has become a hero to many conservative  Christians who see her refusal to issue marriage licenses after the  Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage as a litmus test  for religious liberty in an increasingly secular culture. But lost in the uproar are the voices of Christians, some equally  conservative, who disagree with Davis' stance and worry that holding her  out as a martyr will ultimately hurt the cause of religious liberty."

Read the article

 
And, apparently licenses issued by her office aren't valid, as she removed her name from them.

Read the story.

[sailor]

And, apparently licenses issued by her office aren't valid, as she removed her name from them.

Read the story.

 
Assuming Bunning is the Federal judge, I am under the impression from a Volokh article that he doesn't have the authority to let the marriage license form be changed.  Same goes for the governor, but for different reasons.

Apparently if she had gone to state court, the judge there could have changed the forms to remove her name under the state RFFA.

[Castus]

"Kentucky clerk Kim Davis has become a hero to many conservative  Christians who see her refusal to issue marriage licenses after the  Supreme Court effectively legalized same-sex marriage as a litmus test  for religious liberty in an increasingly secular culture. But lost in the uproar are the voices of Christians, some equally  conservative, who disagree with Davis' stance and worry that holding her  out as a martyr will ultimately hurt the cause of religious liberty."

Read the article

I naturally sympathise with Davis. Resignation may seem like a sensible option at first; but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. She didn't know when she became county clerk that it would eventually require her to violate the dictate of her conscience. I really wish, rather, that there were more widespread legal protections for those who cannot in good faith enable same-sex marriage; but in such a way that gay couples that want to be married can do so. Same-sex marriage post-Obergefell does not have to be zero-sum, winner-takes-all; everyone could walk away happy if we let them.

Also, and this is probably just me, but zealot and bigot seem like awfully heavy terms for Kim Davis. Her beliefs are mainstream within a faithful Christian context, and she's going/gone to court to protect her perceived liberties instead of harassing gay couples on streetcorners. That having been said, some of the people at her rallies are... unsettling...

[Altair]

I naturally sympathise with Davis. Resignation may seem like a sensible option at first; but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. She didn't know when she became county clerk that it would eventually require her to violate the dictate of her conscience. I really wish, rather, that there were more widespread legal protections for those who cannot in good faith enable same-sex marriage; but in such a way that gay couples that want to be married can do so. Same-sex marriage post-Obergefell does not have to be zero-sum, winner-takes-all; everyone could walk away happy if we let them.

Also, and this is probably just me, but zealot and bigot seem like awfully heavy terms for Kim Davis. Her beliefs are mainstream within a faithful Christian context, and she's going/gone to court to protect her perceived liberties instead of harassing gay couples on streetcorners. That having been said, some of the people at her rallies are... unsettling...

 
I don't have a problem with accommodating civil servants' religious beliefs, as long as the principle is applied even-handedly regardless of religion or lack thereof, AND as long as such accommodation does not burden members of the public they serve in any way. If there's a means for Kim Davis personally not to issue licenses to same-sex couples that does not involve treating those couples any differently than anyone else, have at it.

But it should be noted that it really shouldn't be that hard for Kim Davis to issue these licenses. As has been noted by others here at the Cauldron (I forget who and in what thread--sorry), she's not officiating at the ceremony; she's merely certifying that according to the laws of the state (not her god), these two people meet the requirements to marry.

As for the term bigot (from the Cambridge English Dictionary): "a ​person who has ​strong, ​unreasonable [bolding mine]​ ideas, esp. about ​race or ​religion, and who ​thinks anyone who does not have the same ​beliefs is ​wrong." There is no rational basis for Kim Davis' beliefs; they are based solely on her religion. Bigotry rooted in religious belief is still bigotry.

No one gives the Nation of Islam (a small African American sect, not to be confused with general Islam) a pass on bigotry because their anti-white, anti-Semitic beliefs are rooted in their religion. Big churches don't get a bigotry pass on anti-gay beliefs either.

[Tom]

I naturally sympathise with Davis. Resignation may seem like a sensible option at first; but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. She didn't know when she became county clerk that it would eventually require her to violate the dictate of her conscience. I really wish, rather, that there were more widespread legal protections for those who cannot in good faith enable same-sex marriage; but in such a way that gay couples that want to be married can do so. Same-sex marriage post-Obergefell does not have to be zero-sum, winner-takes-all; everyone could walk away happy if we let them.

Also, and this is probably just me, but zealot and bigot seem like awfully heavy terms for Kim Davis. Her beliefs are mainstream within a faithful Christian context, and she's going/gone to court to protect her perceived liberties instead of harassing gay couples on streetcorners. That having been said, some of the people at her rallies are... unsettling...

But she /is/ a bigot and is using her public office as a way to promote her particular version of Christianity when it says in the first amendment that the government shall not give any one religion (or sect) favor over the other. As a government employee, she should not let her religion get in the way of performing her duties.

I am pretty sure that her version of god is not the same as the god of Christians who are completely okay with same sex marriage. Why should we favor her particular brand of Christianity over that of others?

[Daecon]

She didn't know when she became county clerk that it would eventually require her to violate the dictate of her conscience.

On the contrary:  This controversy was completely predictable before she ran for office.  Perhaps she could have made the claim when she first started working there since even Massachusetts had yet to allow the practice, but by the time she ran for the top spot in 2014, there had already been numerous lower court rulings in favor of marriage equality and it was widely predicted that SCOTUS would follow suit.  It's not credible to suppose that she would have such strong feelings about gay marriage but be unaware that it was legal in 38 states.

[MadZealot]

On the contrary:  This controversy was completely predictable before she ran for office.

 
And even if it were 100% unforeseeable, that'd still be no excuse.  Job descriptions and duties change.  Either learn, adapt, and grow within your position, or find another job.