It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: xuenchen
But Kim Davis is a Democrat.
Elected by Democrat voters in that County.
originally posted by: wayforward
a reply to: BubbaJoe
If my employer doesn't have the right to imprison me over failure to perform a work duty, then neither does any government employer. Why should our rights not be equal? If someone has the principle that it is okay to imprison people over failing to do a job according to a certain standard, then I'm fine with that person going to prison for not doing a job according to spec. But otherwise, I consider it an extremely harmful thing to do to someone.
She is in jail without a trial. Simple as that. And as far as not upholding the law, its not a crime. Cops are told to exercise discretion. If there is a law saying "the punishment for not upholding the law is jail" then strike it down. Breaking the law is a problem, but failing your duty to support it is 100% resolved by terminating the employment contract... there is nothing sending someone to jail is going to help... that will make things worse.
originally posted by: maria_stardust
a reply to: wayforward
She is not being persecuted for her religious beliefs. She is being held in contempt for not upholding the law which is her part of her paid duty.
It really is just as simple as that.
originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: xuenchen
I don’t think I mentioned democrat or Republican I mentioned right wing “Christians”
Who can be democrat or republican
One little-known and controversial practice might be behind some of this unexpected compliance. In Utah, North Carolina, Texas and other states, local governments are shifting responsibilities so that employees who object to gay marriage do not have to be involved with wedding licenses at all. In this scenario, the objectors’ co-workers or other government officials rotate to handle the task, allowing clerks who object to fade into the background and not participate.
But a group of Columbia University law professors argue in a recent memo that these kinds of exemptions create “conscience creep,” in which government employees can refuse to provide more and more services that violate their beliefs. And what happens when no one wants to provide the service? “The exemption proposals would make the efficacy of same-sex couples’ constitutional right to marry contingent upon their being able to find a public official who has no objection to their having such a right,” they write.