# Religious liberty of public employee vs. same-sex marriage rights. How to reconcile? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 30, 2015, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876 "2015-06-30T16:35:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 22
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/421 "2015-07-06T14:55:01Z")
Well, it certainly does not represent the period in which an appeal can be filed since SCOTUS is the court of last resort. But to answer your main question, it means what it says: a SCOTUS decision is not final for 25 days, and therefore not binding for 25 days, unless the court specifies otherwise. That is not necessarily true of interlocutory orders, but _Obergefell_ was an appeal from a final judgment. I assume you were confused because of the previous lower court rulings on the same issue, which were effective even during the pendency of an appeal unless a stay was granted. That is not true of SCOTUS’ decisions. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/422 "2015-07-06T15:10:20Z")
No I was not confused because of that. I was confused because the only people I’ve heard claiming there is a 25 day waiting period were the attorney generals of two states that oppose the ruling and a punch of media pundits who’ve been parroting their claims. I do not trust their judgement on the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/423 "2015-07-06T15:12:17Z")
Well, presumably you can trust mine (or at least my motivation) as an arch-liberal bleeding heart lawyer. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/424 "2015-07-06T15:15:24Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Well, presumably you can trust mine (or at least my motivation) as an arch-liberal bleeding heart lawyer. Is the point, then, to allow government agencies sufficient time to adjust their procedures and paperwork in order to carry out the order? Or is there some other rationale? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/425 "2015-07-06T15:19:46Z")
It’s probably not that. Most SCOTUS decisions do not affect government agencies at all, but the rule is the same for those that do and those that don’t. I think it’s because there is no higher court to appeal to for a stay pending a rehearing. ---
**Author:** ![Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e47c2d/32.png) [@Hershele\_Ostropoler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hershele_Ostropoler)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/426 "2015-07-06T17:51:26Z")
A hypothetical. The state of Jefferson commissions an automated system for marriage licenses. The betrothed fill out the form electronically at a kiosk or by typing into the blanks of a PDF and printing it out and taking it to a kiosk to be scanned in, and pay by credit card or EFT. If the computer determines that the answers on the form are the correct ones and, as best as it can tell, are accurate, and the payment goes through, it prints out a license. This allows the couple to get married between seven and 60 calendar days later. During that seven-day waiting period, human beings look for irregularities. If they find any the license is invalidated. Can those humans be required not to invalidate an automatically issued license if there are no irregularities, legally speaking, but they regard the issuees as the wrong sort of couple, e.g. for religious reasons? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/427 "2015-07-06T18:06:56Z")
Your question is a bit oddly worded. Do you mean “are the reviewing humans allowed to assert their religious freedom rights to invalidate the license?” Doubtful. The courts generally treat a requirement to perform some affirmative act rather differently from one that requires no active participation. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/428 "2015-07-06T18:16:56Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Yes, that was already covered. You’d know this if you read the entire thread. What was the point of this post? Are you chastising me for repeating something that somebody already said? For fuck’s sake, I reply to a dozen different posts and one of them is repetitive? That’s your contribution to the conversation? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2015, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/429 "2015-07-06T19:22:10Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > I know neither of them is wearing their Mod hats but watching **Miller** and **tomndebb** slug it out here feels a bit like watching Mommy and Daddy fighting. 😃 Daddy and Daddy. Get with the spirit of this thread!! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/430 "2015-07-07T03:20:59Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > What was the point of this post? Are you chastising me for repeating something that somebody already said? It was actually more than one other person and I have already conceded the example that it would not apply to union jobs. > [@](#): > > That’s your contribution to the conversation? No, I’ve contributed more than that - which, again, makes me doubt you’ve read much of this thread. ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 10:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/431 "2015-07-07T10:24:32Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Shut them up until they die, huh? Good point. We can’t allow people to be exposed to wrong-thinking. What else do you do with ideas that have been discarded by history? This is not a friendly difference of opinion. These views have cause harm, direct harm, to people I love. It’s not about “not allowing people to be exposed” to them. It’s about consigning them to the margins, just like we are with racism, sexism and other forms of bigotry. It’s an approach that seems to work. I know that you really believe these ideas are okay, that they really shouldn’t be considered abhorrent. But your side lost this fight. We are moving away from being a society that judges people based on what sex they are attracted to. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/432 "2015-07-07T11:02:56Z")
Hell, we ban people from posting here just for being jerks, and all they’re doing is posting words that we could easily ignore. And we do it because to allow them to continue unchecked is to diminish and spoil what makes this little electronic society worth maintaining and participating in. How then should we react when those people are not just words on a messageboard but are representatives of our government who are only willing to treat you like a full human being under duress? It is no punishment to stop them from attempting to inflict further harms, even trivial ones. We may be magnanimous in victory but we will not concede one inch of hard-won territory. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/433 "2015-07-07T14:05:43Z")
Heck, in most public workplaces you can be privately as much of a jerk as you want, as long as you’re not one to the customers or your coworkers and you perform your duties properly. It’s really easy. If you still have sn objection, keep it outside the workday. If we can move you elsewhere with minimal disruption, we will. But you will not do or say anything to impede the public from accessing this service. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/434 "2015-07-07T15:05:38Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > No, I get it. If someone expresses bigoted views, that’s intolerant, but if someone calls them a bigot for expressing their views, that’s intolerant AND hypocritical. Because it’s bigoted to call someone a bigot for being a bigot. No, you don’t. It’s treating as exactly the same: a) “Burn them fags, they’ll continue burning in hell!!!” b) I’d rather no issue a licence if another person can do it. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/435 "2015-07-07T15:30:26Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > No, you don’t. It’s treating as exactly the same: > a) “Burn them fags, they’ll continue burning in hell!!!” > b) I’d rather no issue a licence if another person can do it. Difference of degree, not of kind. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/436 "2015-07-07T15:33:12Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > No, you don’t. It’s treating as exactly the same: > a) “Burn them fags, they’ll continue burning in hell!!!” > b) I’d rather no issue a licence if another person can do it. You’re right - a) is namecalling; b) is denial of a Constitutional right. The latter is worse. And the people fighting for option b) are not including the “if…” clause - it’s strictly “I’d rather not issue a licence”. Period. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/437 "2015-07-07T22:18:10Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > Difference of degree, not of kind. Maybe, but so are “stealing” a kiss and rape; both are unwanted sexual contact. > [@Gyrate](#): > > You’re right - a) is namecalling; b) is denial of a Constitutional right. The latter is worse. > > And the people fighting for option b) are not including the “if…” clause - it’s strictly “I’d rather not issue a licence”. Period. “a” is namecalling by a clerk. “b” is my hypothetical, deal with it. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/438 "2015-07-07T22:42:51Z")
Some employees will also just walk off the job and avoid the issue altogether: > **[Entire County Clerk Office Resigns Over Same-Sex Marriage](https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2015/07/03/entire-county-clerk-office-resigns-over-same-sex-marriage/)** > > No same-sex marriage licenses are being issued in Decatur County, Tennessee, because the entire county clerk’s office has resigned following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. | ---
**Author:** ![Crane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crane/32/3495_2.png) [@Crane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crane)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/439 "2015-07-07T23:11:43Z")
“Some employees will also just walk off the job and avoid the issue altogether” (V438) That is the appropriate action for them to take. Is there any reason why US citizens, conducting normal business, should be subjected to the arbitrary whims of various believers? I cannot imagine a case where that would be justified. Crane ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2015, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876/440 "2015-07-07T23:31:36Z")
> [@Crane](#): > > “Some employees will also just walk off the job and avoid the issue altogether” (V438) > > That is the appropriate action for them to take. Only if following a resignation letter. Simply not showing up anymore is not appropriate. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-liberty-of-public-employee-vs-same-sex-marriage-rights-how-to-reconcile/723876.md?page=23)