232
Ex-Kentucky clerk asks Supreme Court to hear case that could upend same-sex marriage
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2025
232 points (98.7% liked)
politics
25197 readers
2845 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This case should have been stamped out a very long time ago. Her first amendment rights do not give her the authority to reject a valid marriage application. Refusing to do your job is not protected by any amendment, because it isn't speech. There is no valid legal argument in defense of her actions.
The fact that we're here, still talking about it, and there's a chance she could be heard by this corrupted supreme court, that tells you where we are as a free nation.
Exactly. If you have moral or religious beliefs that will prevent you from doing your job it's on you to find another.
Especially when it's a public sector position that's financed through taxes
Yes, but have you considered that the Supreme Court doesn't care and wants instead to allow religious activists (like themselves) to disregard prior precedent and other religious beliefs in favor of enshrining their own personal beliefs as civil law? It's really rather unfair of you to not consider their personal beliefs, which says they should be able to impose theirs and ignores yours, y'know.
To the right wing authoritarian mindset, unless their unwarranted special privileges (of being xtian) are not only centered, but put up on a pedestal, they think they are being "oppressed" and that they don't have "freedom".
The Southern notion of "freedom" and "liberty" involves things like owning others and forcing your own views onto everyone else, with the blessing and the power of the government.
So we get the idiocy of these people acting like they are the keepers of "liberty", and "freedom" and say things about being for the Constitution and a "small government" with a straight face, even though all of it is a brazen lie. Forcing other peoples' kids to pray to their god, use something like the "trump bible" and be denied their right to marry who they please is the exact opposite of freedom.