I’m glad Jack Phillips had been vindicated and I agree with your basic point, but I think Kim Davis should have resigned. Nobody has a right to a government job (or any job). I believe in at-will employment. Also, people need to accept the consequences of their beliefs and sometimes you have to do something hard (like resign on principle).
Maybe. But I still believe that the basic principles of religious liberty, so central to our Republic, put the onus on the state to make accommodation for people who believe basic Christian beliefs—-let alone what even a majority of Californians believed in 2007.
Add to that that Kim Davis’s belief was in line with the basic Natural Law, Tao, common law tradition, and American constitutional history while Obergefell was and is the historical anomaly.
I agree with that, but again I think the case of the government in the role of employer is different from the case of government infringing on private citizens. In theory, I have zero problem with private employers firing employees who bring their personal beliefs to work in a way that interferes with the workplace. If the conduct is on the job, not off the clock, the employer has every right to demand employees comport themselves in certain ways and fulfill certain duties. Davis was refusing to carry out duties in her job description. I don’t think it’s the state’s responsibility to accommodate her. I think it’s her responsibility to get a different job. It’s hard enough as it is to fire government employees. No government employee should have a right to his or her job.
I’m glad Jack Phillips had been vindicated and I agree with your basic point, but I think Kim Davis should have resigned. Nobody has a right to a government job (or any job). I believe in at-will employment. Also, people need to accept the consequences of their beliefs and sometimes you have to do something hard (like resign on principle).
Maybe. But I still believe that the basic principles of religious liberty, so central to our Republic, put the onus on the state to make accommodation for people who believe basic Christian beliefs—-let alone what even a majority of Californians believed in 2007.
Add to that that Kim Davis’s belief was in line with the basic Natural Law, Tao, common law tradition, and American constitutional history while Obergefell was and is the historical anomaly.
I agree with that, but again I think the case of the government in the role of employer is different from the case of government infringing on private citizens. In theory, I have zero problem with private employers firing employees who bring their personal beliefs to work in a way that interferes with the workplace. If the conduct is on the job, not off the clock, the employer has every right to demand employees comport themselves in certain ways and fulfill certain duties. Davis was refusing to carry out duties in her job description. I don’t think it’s the state’s responsibility to accommodate her. I think it’s her responsibility to get a different job. It’s hard enough as it is to fire government employees. No government employee should have a right to his or her job.