New Sport?

[ToraToraTora]

Why has the Gay community turned into bullies?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34121411
Ironically they have been delivered from this sort of thing themselves, now they make a "sport" of picking on people that don't embrace their lifestyle as enthusiastically as they think they should. It's going to take time for all the officials to come to terms with new rules etc, why go around trying to find people to bully?

[-Talbot-]

Are you on the Carleberg export, Sven?

[andy-hughes]

AOG - "I do not know if this still happens, but a vicar can refuse to marry a person if they do not live within their parish?

What is the difference?"

Because a vicar is employed by the church, not the city council.

Decisions based on religious beliefs are a fundamental part of his occupation, and the right to refuse on various grounds is enshrined by custom and practice.

A city clerk is employed to issue licences, not make religious decisions based on her own beliefs.

[Ellipsis]

jno, if she can resign then she should. Society has changed around her, meaning that the job is not the same. If she refuses to resign and refuses to do the job as it now is, then all legal avenues must be pursued to remove her from the job.

[Svejk]

-Talbot- /// How can you not agree?///

That's how things work. Or rather used to, before wrong opinions were verboten.

[andy-hughes]

Svejk - "Bullies. Imagine going about the place deliberately making people's lives a misery, just because the law is on your side. Why would anyone want to force a clergyman/official to, grudgingly, marry you? Doesn't sound like a very joyous occasion to me.

Or imagine refusing to do your job because of your own personal predjudices which break the law. How about that for making people's lives a misery.

The woman has to issue the licence - that is her job, and the law.

She doesn't have to like it - I don't imagine the couple care one way or the other - it does not appear that she will be conducting the ceremony for them.

[ToraToraTora]

Andy, do you not accept that there is a an element that deliberately seeks out those that don't agree with many aspects of the gay lifestyle? eg the guest house, the cake shop, and this? Can you not look beyond the actual function required here and see the mischief?

[-Talbot-]

ToraToraTora
you cannot have employees picking and choosing what they sell. I find the Daily mirror offensive but how long would I last in a newsagents?

13:15 Sun 22nd Dec 2013

[Svejk]

Lol, I'd better check what I said 2 years ago,,,,,before tablet does.

[-Talbot-]

AOG is at too, Sven.... the lack of consistency is quite funny.

[Ric.ror]

I get a little confused with this (and other) issues of conscience. It seems to be me that it is not ok to offend some people (in this case the homosexual community) yet it seems to be ok to offend a billion muslims (cartoons etc)
I have to state quite clearly that I am in favour of gay marriage - yet I also believe that if one person can act on their free will so can another.
Another example is if its ok to print offensive cartoons is it also ok to use the 'N' word? I am not trying to be confrontational - I am just genuinely confused

[jno]

I was wondering how TTT squared all this with his thoughts on workshy scum. A woman picking up her pay (which comes, as the would-be customer says, from him) while refusing to perform it?

[joggerjayne]

She think's she's acting "under God's authority"?

Who else refuses to follow the Law, claiming they have God's authority?

Thinks, thinks, oh yes, Islamic terrorists.

[anotheoldgit]

One particular Christian official in faraway Kentucky, refuses to issue a marriage licence, and it becomes World Wide news courtesy of the BBC??????

And some don't think that there is some kind of agenda issue here?

[joggerjayne]

(ignore surplus apostrophe)

[naomi24]

Anyone who, due to religious conviction, feels unable to perform the tasks expected of them by an employer should change jobs, but the law does create confusion. People of religion are often afforded special dispensation - until another minority group is inconvenienced.

[Ellipsis]

> Can you not look beyond the actual function required here and see the mischief?

TTT, I can't I'm afraid.

Imagine you turned up at your local registry office for a wedding for yourself or a close friend or relative - that was all booked and legal - and the registrar announced that they weren't going to perform the wedding, not because there was anything technically wrong, but because it conflicted with their own personal belief system.

That belief system conflict could be anything. Could be an "ism", could be that the bride and groom were dressed as goths, could be that they had matching tattoos, could be that the groom was 75 and the bride was 25, could be anything. The registrar doesn't like it, so they're not going to perform the ceremony ...

Wouldn't you feel aggrieved at the registrar's behaviour?

[anotheoldgit]

/// Wouldn't you feel aggrieved at the registrar's behaviour? ///

He most likely would, but I doubt very much if it would become World Wide News.

[jno]

it becomes World Wide news courtesy of the BBC

it's this internet thing, aog, it's everywhere. Why, no less a publication than the Mail tells us that the officer in question has been married four times and had twins "out of wedlock" - World Wide news courtesty of the Daily Mail!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3219147/Kentucky-clerk-Kim-Davis-married-FOUR-times-gave-birth-wedlock.html

[andy-hughes]

TTT - "Andy, do you not accept that there is a an element that deliberately seeks out those that don't agree with many aspects of the gay lifestyle? eg the guest house, the cake shop, and this? Can you not look beyond the actual function required here and see the mischief?"

I accept that there is an element that seeks out those that don't agree with every lifestyle under the sun - of which the gay lifestyle is merely one example.

Except that - in the instance of the cake shop, the guest house, and here - the gay couples involved reacted to blatant and illegal discrimination.

That's not 'making mischief', that is standing up for your rights under the law.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - "One particular Christian official in faraway Kentucky, refuses to issue a marriage licence, and it becomes World Wide news courtesy of the BBC??????

And some don't think that there is some kind of agenda issue here?"

Absolutely there is an agenda here - it's called the news agenda, the website name rather gives it away.

As has been proved by the length of this thread - people regard this as an interesting topic for discussion and analysis - if you think it is not valid and shouldn't be debated as a news topic, what are you doing here?