If your job is marriage licensing, and you think you know what marriage is, issuing marriage licenses is no longer the job for you.
Corrected that for you. You see, you and the clerks involved are getting confused. Marriage to you is a religious thing. Marriage to the government is a contract involving a license. It's a lawyer type thing, or where a scientific 'theory' is a very different thing than a personal theory.
As a progressive you want to make sure that government employees tow the line and enforce secular egalitarianism, the religion of the left.
Now you're just getting insulting. After years in the military, I expect employees to do their job. Government employees to do their job as dictated by the laws of the state. IE If it says to hand out marriage licenses, you hand out the marriage licenses per the applicable rules and regulations.
So in the government workplace only the moral code of progressives like you and KD5NRH are allowed. Basically telling all other groups, in particular Christians who hold traditional morality, that they are no longer welcome as government employees unless they pay fealty to the new moral code.
Did you miss the part where I was fine with them getting a pass so long as the work got done by somebody? You also set up a strawman with the whole 'no longer welcome as government employees'. I doubt the road department particularly cares about your views on marriage. They could transfer into an office where they don't have to issue marriage licenses.
At least you are honest enough to admit you are allied with the forces that are tearing apart the fabric of the western world.
Well, I am on this board.
Actually, I've known a few Mormons who have worked in or even owned businesses that sell alcohol, tobacco and may have Penthouse behind the counter.
Go back to the Muslim thing about handling pork. I've known plenty of Muslims willing to handle the packaging and sell the stuff, even if they won't eat it themselves. It's when they start wanting to be a special snowflake and not even touch it or impose their beliefs on others to the point that it interferes with the performance of their job that it becomes an issue.
I was just using the Mormans as a second example. I know full well that many are willing to sell that stuff, and a few that aren't. Just like there are Muslims who will happily ring up pork products and use alcohol based hand sanitizer, even as there's a few who won't.
Avoiding something and not approving of others' use of it isn't the same as saying they shouldn't be allowed to have it, or refusing to profit from them obtaining it.
I agree. I consider myself a libertarian. I might not be a good one, but it's the closest fitting party. I do not smoke or drink, but I believe that people should be allowed to. I think California raising the smoking age to 21 is a mistake.
Now, I don't think I've ever heard of one owning a business where any of those is a primary product, but in general, people do expect to find those items in certain business types (convenience stores, grocery stores, newsstands, video rental, etc.) that aren't primarily geared toward them.
Well yes. I'm just of the thinking that if a store sells smokes, they're generally a small but important byline - they're higher profit than most of the rest of the stuff in the store. The owner isn't going to want customers trying to guess when Employee X is on the counter because he won't sell them.
How bout if as an elected official you take an oath to uphold your states laws? And your state has a constitutional amendment that specifically says marriage is one man one woman?
In that case they shouldn't be issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Where it gets complicated is when the courts, the designated interpreters of that constitution, say it isn't valid.
