CA Employees told they would be reassigned if didn't perform gay weddings

[gam197]

There were a number of thread of how two clerks in California would dispense marriage licenses but no longer do weddings. One boss has changed his mind and where he originally sent out materials saying that was fine now says no.

From LifesiteNews, Canada…

At least 14 employees in the San Diego County Clerk’s Office raised religious objections to performing gay wedding ceremonies but were told by their boss they couldn’t pick and choose between marriage applicants.

Clerk Greg Smith said last month that he would allow employees with religious objections to avoid performing the ceremonies, but the response was apparently more than his office could accommodate.

“It would unfairly burden other employees and would directly compromise the services we provide to the public, particularly given that so many employees have requested the same arrangement,” Smith’s office told 14 employees by e-mail.

The office has 112 people deputized to perform wedding ceremonies, but only 30 who do so as part of their regular duties. Officials would not say whether the 14 employees who objected were part of the larger or smaller group.

signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20080619-9999-1m19clerk.htm

l

 

[neat62]

Good for them! Backbone! I love it!

 

[DaveBj]

You had me worried for a minute–I thought you were talking about Catholic Answers employees

DaveBj

 

[ghaybyers1]

It’s funny, because I quit working for one wedding planning agency (yes, that is what my degree is for!) because they would let you say “I only want to do christian weddings” and they’d understand, but if you were handed a contract for a same-sex “wedding” you “had” to do it.

Had wasn’t really a term I jived with. I told them then, that they’d just “have” to make do without me!

 

[peregrinus_WA]

You had me worried for a minute–I thought you were talking about Catholic Answers employees

DaveBj

I have a feeling that it is only a matter of time before some “couple” wants to be married in a Catholic Church. When they are rejected, I expect a lawsuit that will invariably go against the Church.

 

[Ron_Conte]

So, taking a few steps back to look at the big picture…
What’s happening here is that the separation of Church and State is failing. The State has to make decisions on questions that fall under faith (definition of marriage; roles of men and women) and morals (homosexual sins, etc.). When there is no role for the Church, above the State, as an authoritative teacher, the State will inevitably make wrong choices on important questions, causing an irreconciliable conflict between the State and citizens who are believers.

 

[redrosetea]

I have a feeling that it is only a matter of time before some “couple” wants to be married in a Catholic Church. When they are rejected, I expect a lawsuit that will invariably go against the Church.

We still have a separation between church and state thank goodness

If you are employed by the gov you don’t get to pick and choose what you want to do

I think if there was such a suit it would be thrown out of court

 

[peregrinus_WA]

We still have a separation between church and state thank goodness

If you are employed by the gov you don’t get to pick and choose what you want to do

I think if there was such a suit it would be thrown out of court

Except for one thing. The Secular Relativist has no qualms about imposing their “perversions” on religion, but religion is not allowed to do anything about it or even suggest anything moral. That is the mindset that is working here. I believe it will happen and it will happen in San Francisco or Berkley.

 

[redrosetea]

You could be right but I don’t think that it would be able to get off the ground

One thing that would unite all religions is to force one of them to do something that is sinful

They would all come out swinging if that happened…I think the days of being told to shut up and stay in your churches are over

 

[neat62]

They will win this battle. Like immorality always wins in this nation anymore. They win, because we have no backbone. Gay marriage will win acceptance in the US. It’s just a matter of time.

 

[Dale_M]

I have a feeling that it is only a matter of time before some “couple” wants to be married in a Catholic Church. When they are rejected, I expect a lawsuit that will invariably go against the Church.

Nah, the courts have already ruled in favor of the Boy Scouts excluding gays. If a voluntary organization can exclude, certainly a religion will be treated even more favorably.

As for the San Diego County Clerk’s office, it sounds as if they are doing the right thing. Rather than fire the people who can’t do the job, they are shifting them to a different position. Nobody gets hurt.

 

[neat62]

Nah, the courts have already ruled in favor of the Boy Scouts excluding gays. If a voluntary organization can exclude, certainly a religion will be treated even more favorably.

I wouldn’t be put it past them. The Church is getting favorable status from the gov in the form of tax exemption. I wouldn’t be suprised if they come after the Church and try to force them to comply because of that.

 

[BlestOne]

What I fail to understand is that polls show that most Americans are against gay marriage, abortion and gay adoption yet we allow the courts to tell us that we HAVE to allow these things… hasn’t anybody ever heard of voting idiots like that out of office? There is one premise I always go for…never retain judges… they get way too much power when we retain them and think they can write, interpret and enforce laws!

 

[neat62]

What I fail to understand is that polls show that most Americans are against gay marriage, abortion and gay adoption yet we allow the courts to tell us that we HAVE to allow these things… hasn’t anybody ever heard of voting idiots like that out of office? There is one premise I always go for…never retain judges… they get way too much power when we retain them and think they can write, interpret and enforce laws!

Unfortunately…most of the judges who are put in the positions to interpret these “laws” are appointed, not elected and in most case…they are lifetime appointments (Supreme Court Justices, state and federal levels).

The only thing we can do, is elect leaders who will appoint judges who understand the Constitution and who are not willing to hold international “law” as the law for the US!

One of the biggest reasons to vote in the upcoming presidential election…the appointment of at least three new justices will likely be given…as there are at least three who will likely “leave” the SC!

 

[Starwynd]

I get a 404 error not found when I click on the link to the story.

 

[Dale_M]

I get a 404 error not found when I click on the link to the story.

Yes, an “l” was clipped off the end of the link. Here is a working link to the story:
signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20080619-9999-1m19clerk.html

 

[friendofGODs]

calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=fab92288-8839-4b09-aad0-285f1bed9bf5

Then they need to talk to the priest, bishops and Cardinal Niederbaal and they will enlist them at the next gay pride event at the local cathedral.

Does anyone know where the former sodomite friendly Cardinal in California went…? Clue Ratzingers old job…

I think the 3rd secret of fatima was right afterall, it will all start at the top. We’re way past the ‘start’…

But really, these folks live in the most liberal state in the country and I am sure they had to write checks to abortion clinics on behalf of the state of CA or maybe worse.