Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-07-2016, 04:27 AM
Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
here we go again





we need outrage here
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Ace's post
17-07-2016, 05:37 AM
RE: Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
Some people are NOT taking the GOP/Trump's attempt to turn back the clock seriously enough. While there have always been attempts at blurring the line by right wingers, this is yet another uptick considering the recent victories progressives have had over the past 8 years. The GOP is shitting it's pants that time has passed them by. This is all the more reason to stop Trump, because these are the GOP supporters, not just as judges but as voters too, and a Trump controlled SCOTUS could severely open the flood gates for sickos like this. Trump has also recently made comments that Churches should be allowed to endorse candidates from the pulpit.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Brian37's post
17-07-2016, 05:58 AM
RE: Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
More American BS.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Banjo's post
17-07-2016, 06:44 AM
RE: Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
Awful. And, yes, outrageous. Sadly, not unexpected, since the right-wing Christian narrative in the US right now seems to be to call people who are assholes to others heroes, as long as they are being assholes in the name of Jeebus.

We were very clear with the Justice of the Peace who married us that we didn't want any mention of god in our ceremony, and she complied. (She also left out any language requiring me to promise to "obey" my husband, at my request)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like julep's post
17-07-2016, 07:02 AM
RE: Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
Wow. Just wow.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dom's post
17-07-2016, 07:53 AM
RE: Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
(17-07-2016 05:58 AM)Banjo Wrote:  More American BS.

NO, just right wing Christian/GOP bullshit.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Brian37's post
17-07-2016, 07:53 AM
RE: Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
Another Kim Davis. Fuck you Kentucky.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like The Organic Chemist's post
17-07-2016, 08:32 AM
RE: Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
Andrew Seidel, attorney for the Freedom From Religion Foundation, sent Judge Hollis Alexander a letter warning him about his egregious and unconstitutional actions. The following is an excerpt...

"This refusal violates the US Constitution. As a government official, you have an obligation to remain neutral on religious matters.

As a government employee, you have a constitutional obligation to remain neutral on religious matters while acting in your official capacity. You have no right to impose your personal religious beliefs on people seeking to be married.

Governments in this nation, including the Commonwealth of Kentucky, are secular. They do not have the power to impose religion on citizens. The bottom line is that by law, there must be a secular option for people seeking to get married. In Trigg County, you are that secular option.

The default ceremony offered by your office should be secular and people wishing to add in religion should be able to do so upon request. Not the other way around and certainly not to the exclusion of a secular option."

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like SYZ's post
17-07-2016, 08:47 AM
RE: Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
... okay, having done a minimal amount of research on this...

This isn't quite a Kim Davis case. It's still bad, but not that bad.

1) Unlike with Kim Davis, marrying people is not part of the judge's job. He is empowered to perform marriages, but it's optional for him. If he decided to never perform a marriage, that would be legit. If he decided to perform marriages only for his daughter and cousin, that would be legit. Nor is this a power tied to the office -- he would retain it even after he retires and leaves public service.

2) Unlike Kim Davis, who had a lock on the county clerk's office, he is not the only provider of this service in the area.

3) Unlike Kim Davis with same-sex couples, he is not imposing a blanket refusal to marry atheist couples. He is quite willing to perform this marriage. He is simply refusing to modify the language he uses in the ceremony to remove all mention of God.

So the legality of this is a lot more questionable than a clear-cut case like Kim Davis. In particular, the fact that it's not a requirement of his job and that this is something the judge has been empowered to do selectively, in his private persona rather than his public office, makes me think it likely IS legal... at least for him.

That said, there is still a significant issue of access. Only three parties are empowered to solemnize marriages under Kentucky law: Judges/justices (including those who have retired), ministers of the gospel (which does, as a legal category, ironically include secular humanist celebrants), and religious societies without ministers. Judges are the only obvious secular option. Furthermore, your average Christian couple could throw a rock and hit someone who could solemnize their marriage, but for atheists they would have to look pretty hard. While it would be hard to make a case against the judge for denying them marriage, it would be easy to make a case against Kentucky for the unequal access.

Stepping away from what the law says and looking out how the world should be? This is a definite problem. There needs to be a reliably secular way to DO BASIC LIFE without needing to go to a priest or having religion shoved down your throat. Not that it needs to be the ONLY way to do life, but it has to be a clear and easy option. Otherwise religious liberty is a lie.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Reltzik's post
17-07-2016, 09:17 AM
RE: Kentucky Official Refuses To Marry Atheist Couple
(17-07-2016 08:47 AM)Reltzik Wrote:  [...] In particular, the fact that it's not a requirement of his job and that this is something the judge has been empowered to do selectively, in his private persona rather than his public office, makes me think it likely IS legal... at least for him. [...]

So if Judge Alexander refused—on solely personal grounds—to marry a white man and a black woman, or two gays or two lesbians, that would be okay with you? It'd be "legal"?

Do you not think those other scenarios would engender an understandable mass outcry? Of course they would, and it's nothing to do with Alexander's repugnant moral beliefs—it's to do solely with discrimination because they're atheists. And if anybody—be it a shopkeeper or a dentist or a judge—discriminates based on religion (or a lack thereof) alone, then that individual is breaking the law (in Australia at least). It's neither here nor there if he or she is a state employee, or private citizen or celebrant.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like SYZ's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: