Pope Francis sides with county clerks who refuse to issue gay marriage licenses - Polidicks

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;48786441]It was poor phrasing. Surprised I haven't been banned for it honestly. I have no problem with gay marriage, I just don't like that she was jailed because a new law was passed after the fact and she found it morally objectionable. In the future, hirees should be expected to at least be alright enough with it to do the job, but just throwing someone in jail for not doing it who was already there just seems kinda wrong to me. Feels like we sacrificed the rights of some for the rights of another.[/QUOTE] Wasn't a new law. It was an interpretation of the Constitution. That supersedes law.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;48786469]She couldn't have been fired because she's in an elected position. Like I've said, if she was really that morally conflicted, resigning is her choice.[/QUOTE] Yup. Same concept as my earlier point. The US government is her upper management, for lack of a better term...and they made changes that she finds morally wrong. She needs to quit if it's that bad. Not be a total douchebag and refuse to issue marriage licenses.

[QUOTE=Viva;48786444]Now see that's special, delegating a specific task for one group of people to do exactly the same job the former is supposed to do. Her job was to issue licenses of marriage. Plain and simple. She didn't agree with giving licenses to gay couples so she refused to. It's the exact same by very definition of her not given a license out to a hetero couple. You can't pick an choose. If you disagree and refuse to do your job you're refusing to do your job and shouldn't continue to be employed at that job.[/QUOTE] Actually, she refused to give marriage licenses to anyone, hetero couples included.

She took the job she shouldve realiEd that she migbt have to do things that go against her beliefs. Her doing this is like a chef at a restaurant refusing to make dishes with meat in them due to being a vegan.

I can't believe there are people that side with this woman.

[QUOTE=woolio1;48786478]Actually, she refused to give marriage licenses to anyone, hetero couples included.[/QUOTE] oh yeah, i forgot she later full on refused to give any license. Thereby COMPLETELY refusing to do her job yet still receiving the paycheck.

[QUOTE=OvB;48786483]I can't believe there are people that side with this woman.[/QUOTE] Yeah. Huckabee pretty much fucked his chances of ever winning presidency with his little speech beside her.

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;48786480]It sounds agreeable from that point of view. Sorry if I pissed anybody off - not trying to sound homophobic or anything. Just looking at it from a different perspective.[/QUOTE] I don't take you as a homophobe and i respect for you fighting for someones belief to disagree. But she was a public servant, and the public isn't strictly heterosexual.

[QUOTE=Viva;48786493]I don't take you as a homophobe and i respect for you fighting for someones belief to disagree. But she was a public servant, and the public isn't strictly heterosexual.[/QUOTE] Nor are the ones who are heterosexual all opposed to gay marriage.

[QUOTE=Rika-chan;48786393]Bars don't give you tax breaks, visitation rights, ect.[/QUOTE] That's completely irrelevant to the point in the article.

[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48786369]Because he's supposed to be a religious leader, not a politician.[/QUOTE] Bitch do you even fucking know what the Vatican is?! :v:

[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;48786554]Bitch do you even fucking know what the Vatican is?! :v:[/QUOTE] Yes. Who said I agree with how they run their stuff?

The history of the Vatican as a powerful entity in European politics and even still as a powerful voice in modern times is enough to fill several thick books.

[QUOTE=dannass;48786390]Well, as church and state should be seperated from all countries, I can't really see how the pope is in the right here.[/QUOTE] He has a point in the conscientious objection clause. That doesn't mean he's agreeing with her not being removed from her duty. Just that she has a right to not issue said licenses without being seen as a criminal. Nevertheless I disagree with this, as conscientious objection usually comes into play when you're dealing with a very protected life ad usually doesn't apply to your whole faith, but merely one segment of it. Life for instance. [QUOTE=agentfazexx;48786556]Yes. Who said I agree with how they run their stuff?[/QUOTE] Telling the leader of one of the most powerful religious groups in the entire world to stay out of politics is like telling water not to fill the sea. He can't stay out of politics even if he wanted to.

[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48786556]Yes. Who said I agree with how they run their stuff?[/QUOTE] religion has to deal with problems, and sometimes those problems are political the pope, being the spokesperson for a religion (and a head of state), [I]has[/I] to get political sometimes

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;48786418]Lol yeah okay because quitting and finding a new job is just a simple task that can be done overnight. [B]The portion of her job could have been delegated to somebody else instead of throwing the woman into jail. [/B]The whole thing is stupid.[/QUOTE] Right except she (until she was jailed, anyway) refused to let [I]anyone[/I] in her office issue the licences.

[QUOTE=Timebomb575;48786707]Right except she (until she was jailed, anyway) refused to let [I]anyone[/I] in her office issue the licences.[/QUOTE] She has delegated the work, though. But isn't her elected position specifically to give out marriage licenses? And she's not doing that now? So what's she doing? Sitting around collecting 80 grand a year to play Solitaire on her computer?

[QUOTE=wraithcat;48786576]He has a point in the conscientious objection clause. That doesn't mean he's agreeing with her not being removed from her duty. Just that she has a right to not issue said licenses without being seen as a criminal.[/QUOTE] She has the right to be not viewed as a criminal if she objects to to marrying gay couples. What she does NOT have a right to do is stop administering marriage licenses. She can object, but she has to resign or be in contempt of court if she wants to not sign licenses to certain people. That's how the law is. It would be like if a cashier at a store refused to accept money because they believed that their moral being would be compromised in doing so. Fine, that's ok. Nothing wrong with that. I personally think that person is fucking insane, but they're entitled to that. what they can't expect is to be able to continue working in that position. They'd have to either quit or get fired, the latter of which doesn't apply in this instance. What would be even worse is if the cashier were to just refuse to run the register at all. Lets say that the company allowed this, and just let the cashier stand around collecting pay and not doing her job. This is what Mrs. Davis is/was doing. Back to the original article, Pope can say whatever he wants. Thank god he has no actual authority over US lawmaking.

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;48786365]rofl and why not? Gays can get married but if people want the right to have nothing to do with gay marriage but like their otherwise acceptable job they're horrible and stupid, right?[/QUOTE] She wasn't a conscientious objector though, she actively blocked gays from getting married, then stopped everyone from getting married and then started changing forms without court order. A conscientious objector refuses to work but doesn't stop everybody else, its a big distinction. The courts even found that her actions were not that of an objector because she stood in the way of everything instead of letting her other clerks do the job

What did people expect, he's still the damn pope. The most likable in a while perhaps, but still the pope. Furthermore that doesn't necessary have to be his personal opinion. I recall reading about Paul II and how despite how against homosexuals he seemed to be, he still said that they had all the rights of any other human.

I don't think it would be a huge deal if she objected on a basis of her beliefs, and had someone else sign the papers. Outright blocking gay marriages is just hate. She's no role model of religious liberty. She's a role model of hate and discrimination. Rather than delegating a couples legal right to someone else, she took the law into her own hands and threw a hissy fit. I think she should be in jail for contempt.

[QUOTE=OvB;48786827]I don't think it would be a huge deal if she objected on a basis of her beliefs, and had someone else sign the papers. Outright blocking gay marriages is just hate. She's no role model of religious liberty. She's a role model of hate and discrimination. Rather than delegating a couples legal right to someone else, she took the law into her own hands and threw a hissy fit. I think she should be in jail for contempt.[/QUOTE] 100% agree. I'm a Christian (don't follow any denomination) I don't agree with what she's doing at all. Gives normal reasonable Christians a bad name. I have tons of family that are [B]way [/B]more conservative than I am. They don't agree with this hateful bigot either.

[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;48786554]Bitch do you even fucking know what the Vatican is?! :v:[/QUOTE] Rember who you're dealing with. Agentfazexx knows literally nothing about catholicism as evidenced by sich asinine statements as "catholics dont pray to jesus they pray to mary"

[QUOTE=Kyle902;48786985]Rember who you're dealing with. Agentfazexx knows literally nothing about catholicism as evidenced by sich asinine statements as "catholics dont pray to jesus they pray to mary"[/QUOTE] [url]http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/mary_do_catholics_pray_to_her.php[/url] Read this, it's a Catholic site.

[QUOTE=agentfazexx;48786998][url]http://catholicbridge.com/catholic/mary_do_catholics_pray_to_her.php[/url] Read this, it's a Catholic site.[/QUOTE] Nice source. Not only that but I've literally never heard anyone say this. I've also never heard any of this the few times I've been to mass. Also pardon me if I dont take someone who says shit like [quote]You don't understand non-denom churches then dude. Nothing there matters aside from the obvious. You only have exposure to mainstream churches full of political headaches. Stop following shit like Baptists and Epicsopalians and whatnot. Listening to Priests and reading a script every Sunday does nothing. Try a church without a liturgy. [/quote] [quote]I'm a man of faith, but the pope is nothing more than another political figure that people bandwagon after. I read something recently where he basically said: "If you fuck up come to me and I'll forgive you and absolve you of your sins" or something to that effect. Yup, you're not Jesus dude. [/quote] as an authority on the catholic church. [editline]29th September 2015[/editline] Or someone who didn't realize the pope was a head of state for that matter.

Pope Francis did a ton of really cool things which makes me think he is one of the better popes for the younger generation but this decision is a ugly smudge on his otherwise clean slate..

This will absolutely change many American Catholics' minds about Kim Davis (not that it'll affect anything).

I think people are taking this the wrong way, but even still its not the best thing to come out of the popes mouth. Hes saying this because its for religious freedom which should exist obviously, at the same time hes saying it in a country where that specific circumstance is now illegal since gay marriage is legal federally. It would also be fucking up peoples basic rights pretty hard, I dont think getting into that ladys field is the one you get into if you dislike homosexuals and gay marriage. Popes message probably would have come across better if it was something like those bakery owners refusing to make a cake for a homosexual couple. Also for people that arent aware for the Popes stance, he doesnt like homosexuality, but he doesnt condemn people for it and he tolerates it.

Why is it always "One step forward, two steps back" with this guy. Everytime I'm like "wow, what a progressive thing to say" he comes along and says some backwards ass shit.

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;48787145]I think people are taking this the wrong way, but even still its not the best thing to come out of the popes mouth. Hes saying this because its for religious freedom which should exist obviously, at the same time hes saying it in a country where that specific circumstance is now illegal since gay marriage is legal federally. It would also be fucking up peoples basic rights pretty hard, I dont think getting into that ladys field is the one you get into if you dislike homosexuals and gay marriage. Popes message probably would have come across better if it was something like those bakery owners refusing to make a cake for a homosexual couple.[/QUOTE] Bakery Owners was cut and dry discrimination, though. It'd be like not making a cake for a black person's wedding. All these gay marriage arguments really sound completely absurd if you replace gay with interracial. We can look back at what we saw happening in this country fifty years ago, and yet we still don't get it.