Apostolic Clerk Disobeys SCOTUS, Denies Gay Marriage License

[FundieFarmer]

I didn't see this being discussed here even after a search, so please forgive if it should be merged.

The clerk in Kentucky who denies a marriage license to gay couples has continued to do so today after the Supreme Court shot down her request for a stay. She is reportedly an elected official, so it remains to be seen if she will be held in contempt of court or removed from her position. When asked under whose authority she was denying the marriage license, she replied, "Under God's authority." In July, she told a court she “prayed and fasted†over the decision to issue the marriage license. She is an Apostolic Christian who counsels prison inmates and goes to church three times a week.

Conservatives are holding this up as an argument of personal rights against government position requirements.

npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/01/436557085/despite-high-court-ruling-kentucky-clerk-denies-gay-marriage-licences

[salex]

I didn't see this being discussed here even after a search, so please forgive if it should be merged.

The clerk in Kentucky who denies a marriage license to gay couples has continued to do so today after the Supreme Court shot down her request for a stay. She is reportedly an elected official, so it remains to be seen if she will be held in contempt of court or removed from her position. When asked under whose authority she was denying the marriage license, she replied, "Under God's authority." In July, she told a court she “prayed and fasted†over the decision to issue the marriage license. She is an Apostolic Christian who counsels prison inmates and goes to church three times a week.

Conservatives are holding this up as an argument of personal rights against government position requirements.

npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/01/436557085/despite-high-court-ruling-kentucky-clerk-denies-gay-marriage-licences

I suspect she is seen as the Rosa Parks of her movement and scores of Christian Right's attorneys are lined up to give her free representation. IF she wins (which I don't think she will) I am sure many fundie men in the work place will refuse to work for, with or hire women, based on deeply held religious beliefs.

As I've said before, I call bullshit on her deeply held beliefs if she gives out marriage licenses to people remarrying without proper "religious grounds" for their divorces, to people who live in sin, are not christian or the right kind of christian.

Rumor has is she has had multiple marriages, but I suspect she can prove her divorces (if they were divorces) were all biblical and blessed.

[lascuba]

She needs to be fired, fined, and whatever else for this. Republicans would not defend vegan waiters who refused to serve meet so they need to stop with the personal liberty bullshit. She's refusing to do her job and disobeying the law.

[JesusPony]

Can't stand this broad. She is clearly loving the attention:

God told her she's right. I guess He also told her it was OK that she's been married 4 times?

In addition to everything else, she dresses like damned toddler.

[Becket70]

I don't understand why the County does not force her to use a proxy to grant marriage licenses to gay couples.(apparently she is in an elected position so cannot be fired) People applying for marriage licenses are taxpayers in this county and are exercising their rights under the law. How can one person be allowed to refuse to grant these licenses? This sets a dangerous precedent where officials can pick and choose who to grant services to.

[ShepherdontheRock]

Well, I believe she petitioned the Supreme Court, and Justice Kagan basically said "Bye Felicia" to her.

So... I mean...

[JesusPony]

If she continues to refuse, she could be held in contempt of court and get jail time. Please let this happen. :fsm:

[Cartmann99]

I suspect she is seen as the Rosa Parks of her movement and scores of Christian Right's attorneys are lined up to give her free representation. IF she wins (which I don't think she will) I am sure many fundie men in the work place will refuse to work for, with or hire women, based on deeply held religious beliefs.

As I've said before, I call bullshit on her deeply held beliefs if she gives out marriage licenses to people remarrying without proper "religious grounds" for their divorces, to people who live in sin, are not christian or the right kind of christian.

Rumor has is she has had multiple marriages, but I suspect she can prove her divorces (if they were divorces) were all biblical and blessed.

I knew someone who was extremely conservative who had seven living ex-husbands. :shock:

[sawasdee]

If her religious conscience interferes with her fulfilling her elected responsibilities, then she needs to resign her position. Isn't there something about the separation of religion and state?

[quiversR4hunting]

I knew someone who was extremely conservative who had seven living ex-husbands. :shock:

:pink-shock: Holy crap! I work in child support and I don't think I have seen SEVEN (7) ex-husbands. (I have seen 7 different baby mommas or 7 different baby-daddies but not 7 divorces!!)

Shocking a child support work is pretty incredible! :clap:

[Kylolo]

I don't understand why the County does not force her to use a proxy to grant marriage licenses to gay couples.(apparently she is in an elected position so cannot be fired) People applying for marriage licenses are taxpayers in this county and are exercising their rights under the law. How can one person be allowed to refuse to grant these licenses? This sets a dangerous precedent where officials can pick and choose who to grant services to.

The court can't appoint a proxy. State law requires that licenses be issued by the clerk. The only exception is that if the clerk is absent from their job (like leave of absence, not just out of the office) and then the county judge executive can issue marriage licenses.

By the way, I see marriage licenses pretty frequently as part of my job. The clerk is certifying that the information provided is correct--like name, age, # of marriages/divorces, are you related, etc.--and is not endorsing the marriage in any way.

Also, I'd like to point out that if this were all about her religious convictions then she would be issuing licenses to straight couples. She is not.

[sawasdee]

An article in the Detroit Free Press compares her refusal to fulfil all her duties on religious grounds to an Amish man applying to be a bus driver - and then refusing to drive!

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/cont ... /71505026/

(Link not broken because press)

[salex]

I don't understand why the County does not force her to use a proxy to grant marriage licenses to gay couples.(apparently she is in an elected position so cannot be fired) People applying for marriage licenses are taxpayers in this county and are exercising their rights under the law. How can one person be allowed to refuse to grant these licenses? This sets a dangerous precedent where officials can pick and choose who to grant services to.

Apparently (and this is something I read on the internet, not something I can prove) her assistant is also her son. Her mother held this position before her, and she was her mother's assistant. Some people are saying this breaks her state's laws on nepotism, and that should be how she is removed from office, but again, this is what i read on the internet.... not something I researched.

[JeanieCat]

If her religious conscience interferes with her fulfilling her elected responsibilities, then she needs to resign her position. Isn't there something about the separation of religion and state?

Times are changing and she must change with them whether she wants to or not. If she can't adapt she must leave the job! :ymca:

[Kylolo]

Apparently (and this is something I read on the internet, not something I can prove) her assistant is also her son. Her mother held this position before her, and she was her mother's assistant. Some people are saying this breaks her state's laws on nepotism, and that should be how she is removed from office, but again, this is what i read on the internet.... not something I researched.

Simply put, there is no state ethics law that bars employment of family members. Some counties (like mine) have ethics codes that expressly prohibit hiring/supervising a family member but there is no state law that says elected officials can't hire a son, wife, cousin our aunt-in law as they wish.

[Crocoduck]

As much as I'm appalled by this woman, I am even more appalled about the rallying point she's created for the nutters. If she ends up in jail, she will be seen as a "persecuted Christian." Someone upthread mentioned Rosa Parks. Clerk lady need only compose a letter to put herself right up there as the teabag Martin Luther King.

[salex]

Simply put, there is no state ethics law that bars employment of family members. Some counties (like mine) have ethics codes that expressly prohibit hiring/supervising a family member but there is no state law that says elected officials can't hire a son, wife, cousin our aunt-in law as they wish.

Thanks, as I said, I hadn't researched it.

And if she was elected and her mother before her was elected, it is not likely she will lose an election, truth be told, unless the county incurs a lot of expense defending her, and I suspect she has plenty of "Christian" attorneys ready to defend her....

While it is a tempest in a teapot, I am wary of her actions being repeated in my state, where just last spring our Dear Leader Brownback crafted an executive order In Kansas, state employees can now be fired from their jobs for being gay.

Gov. Sam Brownback signed an executive order on Tuesday reversing a 2007 measure that barred employment discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender state workers.

“This Executive Order ensures that state employees enjoy the same civil rights as all Kansans without creating additional ‘protected classes’ as the previous order did,†the governor said in a statement. “Any such expansion of ‘protected classes’ should be done by the legislature and not through unilateral action.â€

He also created an order that assured religious freedom for ministers and religious organizations with deeply held religious beliefs to go ahead and discriminate against gays-- quite a handy thing when he has spent the last several years outsourcing many state services to private religious based groups.

[HerNameIsBuffy]

http://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/crc/2 ... dation.htm

Not breaking link because Department of Labor.

I know she's an elected official and I don't know what in involved in getting rid of one (impeachment at that level?) But the way I read the regulations it this doesn't even fall under what would be considered a religious belief, making it outside the realm of protection if other criteria were met:

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) defines "religious beliefs" to include theistic beliefs (i.e. those that include a belief in God) as well as non-theistic moral or ethical beliefs about right and wrong that are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views. In most cases, whether or not a practice or belief is religious is not an issue. However, generally, religion typically concerns "ultimate ideas" about "life, purpose and death," while social, political and/or economic philosophies and mere personal preferences are not "religious" beliefs.

Emphasis mine. IMO this is clearly social and political and not a higher level idea. Men who hold religious beliefs that women shouldn't be allowed in the work place don't have that aspect of their "faith" protected, this is the same deal.

Title VII requires federal agencies, upon notice of a request, to reasonably accommodate employees whose sincerely held religious beliefs, practices or observances conflict with work requirements, unless the accommodation would create an undue hardship.

And even if this were a protected belief under the accommodation umbrella (which IMO it's not) it clearly isn't something that can be accommodated without undue hardship unless someone else could easily issue the license in her stead.

That's just employment law, though. How can an elected official legally refuse to uphold the law and maintain their position? At the very least she should be put on unpaid administrative leave immediately while they sort it out so the constituents aren't denied access to the services to which they are legally entitled.

I know government employment makes everything a colossal pita when it comes to getting rid of someone, but refusal to do your job as the law requires should be pretty cut and dried, right? Don't they take an oath saying they'll uphold it? (Maybe not, just assuming anyone who was elected would have some kind of legally binding thing to not circumvent the law even if they are personally a bigoted fuckwit.)

Still though, there are always contingencies to replace an elected official in case of emergency (death, crime, gross misconduct, etc.)

Her first statement refusing to issue should have been met with acknowledgement that she has the right to her beliefs as a citizen but as she is, of her own volition, refusing to carry out the full duties of her job they will then walk her through the exit process. Done.

[nausicaa]

I knew someone who was extremely conservative who had seven living ex-husbands. :shock:

Damn, chick was even beating out Elizabeth Taylor!

[HerNameIsBuffy]

Apparently (and this is something I read on the internet, not something I can prove) her assistant is also her son. Her mother held this position before her, and she was her mother's assistant. Some people are saying this breaks her state's laws on nepotism, and that should be how she is removed from office, but again, this is what i read on the internet.... not something I researched.

I'm sure they were each fairly vetted against other qualified candidates and got the position on merit alone.

[doggie]

our next persecuted christian/martyr

[greycat]

This is in my news coverage area. Close enough that I think that she has even placed print orders where I work. Its huge around here. In the beginning there were 3 or 4 clerks in the area that refused for the first couple days then caved, but she still is refusing.

Also in the beginning she was refusing to be on camera and now she is in fact loving it. Im trying to find the video of her telling a couple that they will be judged on judgement day or something along those lines. They showed it on the noon news today. wsaz.com

[Cartmann99]

:pink-shock: Holy crap! I work in child support and I don't think I have seen SEVEN (7) ex-husbands. (I have seen 7 different baby mommas or 7 different baby-daddies but not 7 divorces!!)

Shocking a child support work is pretty incredible! :clap:

It's a long, long story about a woman who desperately clung to her beliefs even when they failed her. She was the first woman I ever met who had a career, and yet believed that God designed women to be intellectually inferior to men. :evil-eye:

The short version: Believing that premarital sex is a sin can lead lusting people to marry someone incompatible. :|

[socalrules]

Isn't she getting paid to do a job she refuses to do? So isn't she actually stealing from her employer by taking money and refusing to do her job? I was under the impression that there is still a commandment about stealing.

What happens when someone who works at the DMV refuses to issue licenses to women because it is against their religion? Should we just look the other way. I am disturbed by the fact that she has basically brought her county to a standstill by refusing to do her job.

I do believe she is now enjoying the attention and probably hoping that she will become a Christian Celeb or even that she is starting a non-civil rights movement.

[greycat]

She has a court date in Ashland KY Thursday to motion to hold her in contempt. Just heard it on the news.