DescentBB

A lot of talk has been around the first part of the First Amendment, where it says the government cannot unduly punish you for exercising your religion. That's fine and dandy, but let's have a look at what it really is about.

The Establishment Clause.

In it, it states the government can't push one religion over another, non-religion over religion, and vice-versa.

Kim Davis went completely wrong by assuming her beliefs should be honored by the place who she works for, the county clerks office. That office, as part of the federal government, cannot under any circumstances allow anyone with religious beliefs to do what she did.

The most appropriate action would have been removal from office immediately and disqualification from ever holding another elected position. By jailing her as they have, the federal government were inline with their responsibilities. The county clerks office, however, is culpable.

In short; she put her own beliefs over the constitution, and got punished for it.

First off…the county clerk’s office is not part of the federal government, second the pertinent law here is not the establishment clause.

I believe if you look Lothar posted links to the proper laws.

Spidey wrote:First off…the county clerk’s office is not part of the federal government, second the pertinent law here is not the establishment clause.

when it involves issuing marriage licenses (federal jurisdiction) and an office allows a government employee to put their religion above a federal ruling, it applies.

sorry.

Marriage licenses are issued by the state, not the federal government.

The establishment clause has little or no bearing on freedom of an individual to practice a religion.

I think I see what Ferno is attempting in imply: by issue of State licenses, the resulting licensure impacts Federal Laws(taxation, etc), thus the tie in. That said, stretching it to fall under that clause seems dubious. I'm sure some lawyers would have sorted that out by now....

that's the tricky part about understanding, tolerance and forgiveness........you have to extend them to those you disagree with.

Lothar wrote:http://theweek.com/articles/580405/why- ... pe-francis

Makes me wonder if the Pope even knew that meeting with Davis was set up in secret and would be very controversial. It's also no secret that there are many members and leaders within the Church who think he's going too far with his revolutionary changes and ideas.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/not-e ... 8C11398435