Ten years after the Supreme Court extended marriage rights to same-sex couples nationwide, the justices this fall will consider for the first time whether to take up a case that explicitly asks them to overturn that decision.

Kim Davis, the former Kentucky county clerk who was jailed for six days in 2015 after refusing to issue marriage licenses to a gay couple on religious grounds, is appealing a $100,000 jury verdict for emotional damages plus $260,000 for attorneys fees.

In a petition for writ of certiorari filed last month, Davis argues First Amendment protection for free exercise of religion immunizes her from personal liability for the denial of marriage licenses.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    107
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I once asked my mother if it would be ok for a Muslim or Jewish deli employee to refuse to sell her pork. She said they shouldn’t be in that job if it conflicted with their religious beliefs. I tried to tie that to this and she sort of shut down rather than argue against it or accept it.

    We don’t have a relationship anymore. She voted for the shithead every time.

    • 0li0li@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      The deli owner can actually deny service to however they want since it’s a private business. They don’t have to serve anyone, but it does look fucking bad if/when they discrininate, but technically they can.

      Here, that government employee HAS the obligation to follow the law and act regardless of her own beliefs. Maybe she should instead run a deli…

      Your example is very good, in fact, it prouves your mother wrong in 2 different ways.

      • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        There’s a big difference between a deli owner and a deli employee. An owner wouldn’t choose to even have pork available to sell if they didn’t want to sell it. If is it available to sell, and an employee chooses not to sell it because of their religious beliefs, that’s definitely a problem, but (as you said) not discrimination, just bad business and the owner should fire them immediately.

    • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I used to shop at a butcher’s where a Muslim employee worked. Once, chitchatting I asked him if he didn’t have a problem with cutting pork, and he answered that he didn’t, he just didn’t eat it.

      I guess there are degrees of strictness.

      • Kyrgizion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        14 hours ago

        This guy actually knows and adheres to the rules. All those others who refuse to touch it/sell it/… ? Posers hiding behind their convictions. But there is nothing in the Quran about not being allowed to touch pork or sell it.

    • rhymeswithduck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      14 hours ago

      We literally made a law that says bartenders and restaurants can’t refuse to serve alcohol to pregnant women if they order it. While not based on religion, I feel like this sets a pretty strong precedent.

    • lowleekun@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      That might be due to our morals feeling like a rational thing while they are mostly learned emotional reactions (that we rationalize afterwards). We do not need a society that self-reflects on a level a level where they would understand and thus we do not educate on this self-awareness. And by ‘we’ i mean the Owner-Class.

    • oxjox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      15 hours ago

      That’s not a comparable situation though. There’s no reasonable expectation that those places would sell you pork. The employee who works there isn’t (not) doing anything that conflicts with the business’ offerings.

      Even if a muslim employee at a barbecue restaurant were to deny a customer a rack of ribs, the restaurant is under no obligation to serve you.

      This issue is about a representative of the county rejecting the county’s obligations.

      • Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        If the place carries pork and a specific employee refused to give it to you …

        That’s directly applicable. It’s an exact equivalent situation. You’re just replacing nouns