That’s Cafeteria Christianity for you. Pick out the parts of the bible that agrees with their prejudices. Ignore the rest.
As Stephen Colbert observed: *The forces of darkness are hell bent on destroying traditional marriage. Already eight states in this great union allow same sex marriage as does the District of Columbia. Enough is enough! Our prideful arrogant attitude has already put us in great jeopardy. Where God allows slavery, Americans have banned it. Where God requires the virginity of all brides, we no longer even check! Where God demanded the death of adulterers, we allow them to preside over this great nation of ours. We cannot continue to shake our fists at God and say, ‘We know better!’ We already allow homosexuals to live in complete defiance of god’s law. Do we dare try His patience further? *
At the moment, yes. I am curious to see if any of these laws will now stand up to challenges in the courts. I don’t think it likely. Even though Kennedy didn’t use the “magic words” in his opinion, I would expect the lower courts would apply that standard. They did something similar after Windsor which is more or less how we go to this point so very quickly.
Every U.S. LGBT should travel to L.A. for a 30-million march on evil Hollywood that could contribute to the throngs to bring down the wrath of Yahweh with torrential rains that ends the drought and fills the reservoirs and waters the crops and makes lawns green and allows car washes to operate guilt-free.
Then the crazy Christian fuckers can turn on someone else for a change. We can only hope they turn on themselves.
In Oklahoma, and I would guess other localities as well, marriage licenses are issued by the county court clerk which is an elected official. If they refused to follow the SCOTUS, what recourse would a couple have?
Filing a request for injunctive relief in federal or even state court. You don’t get any money, but under circumstances like these your lawyer’s fees will be paid by the clerk.
What if President Bernie Sanders replaces Kennedy with someone more like Ginsburg?
What if President Ted Cruz replaces Kennedy with someone more like Steve King?
What if President Donald Trump replaces Kennedy with someone more like Gary Busey?
What if President Hillary Clinton replaces Kennedy with someone more like her husband?
What if? What if? What if?
I’m not aware of any court ruling that would allow a person working in a public accommodation to refuse to do their job because the person they have to serve or interact with may, or does in fact, engage in behavior that may conflict with the employee’s religious beliefs. If you are aware of such a ruling I would be interested in seeing it.
Conscientious Objectors fit the bill. They may refuse to do their required job because of the actions of the people they have to serve or interact with - they object to the warmaking carried on by those around them. And the CO’s citing of religious belief is considered a valid reasoning for his objection.
Indeed religious objection is recognized in the Selective Service Act so the Supreme Court did not have a case that granted that right.
The United Nations Commission on Human Rights further recognized a right to conscientious objection.
But objection doesn’t even have to be rooted in religious belief. See Welsh v United States and United States v Seeger
The court would enter an injunction; that is, order the clerk to issue the license. If the clerk ignores the injunction, then the court will find the clerk in contempt and start fining.
You seemed unconcerned that Kennedy didn’t say “the magic words”, and things would right themselves over time. All I did was point out one scenario where they wouldn’t. If you disagree, that’s fine. Tell us why you disagree. But pointing out other possible scenarios where things would be different is not a refutation of what I said, since I never claimed that particular outcome was inevitable-- just possible.
Do they agree to become a soldier, go through the training, then conscientious object when it comes time to shoot someone, at which time someone picks up their gun for them and does the shooting, after which time things go back to normal?
I don’t think you can compare someone who applied for an accepted a work position, and can resign literally at a moment’s notice with no legal repercussions, with a person who is threatened with imprisonment for not appearing at their Draft Induction.
I think practically everyone is more than happy to allow Clerks to resign their positions if they feel the work now conflicts with their religious beliefs.
Perhaps they can, though returning to normal duty after the fact is uncertain.
The United Nations Commission on Human Rights has held that soldiers may raise a conscientious objection based upon their developing beliefs. So a soldier who becomes a Quaker after he enlists might later raise an objection where he did not have such objection at the time of enlistment.
They cannot, however, raise such an objection because in one particular case they view this particular military engagement as immoral. A soldier/sailor/marine seeking CO status must object to all war, not just that they think this particular war (Iraq War?) is immoral. See Gillette v. United States