Okla Drops National Guard Benefits For All Couples To Avoid Serving Same-Sex Couples

[Davocrat]

BTW, how much does a "Justice of the Peace" earn these days?

I mean, I know you get woken up at all hours with eloping couples, but is it really a "career" track?

 

[kwc57]

Gotta love them Baptists.
When growing up in OKC the baptist would not allow dancing at school proms, burn books and records they considered evil and protested concerts.

Hmmmm......I'm 56 years old, lived in OKC all my life and been a Baptist all my life. Even graduated from OBU with a degree in religion. I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[kwc57]

See this is why repubs try to trick people with that "states rights" bullshit. To allow legal discrimination and make it a "right"

Or because they follow the US constitution unlike the dems.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The Governors actions crap on all Guardsman/Guardswomen just to stick it to the gays. I'm sure that will be a real popular decision to the voting Guardsmen when the have to possibly take a day off work to drive hundreds of miles to a federal installation to get an ID card for their federally legal spouse.

>>>>

As I stated, the American traditional heterosexual married couples are going to have to sacrifice their benefits for the greater good of preventing married gays from fleecing the system that has been subverted by them for political correctness purposes. The governor is doing Gods will.

Marriage is an artificial construct.

Yeah.....? So is the vagina of Josephine,who was once known as Joe,and once had a dick.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

See this is why repubs try to trick people with that "states rights" bullshit. "

Nope. No tricks at all. States Rights are just that...............States Rights. And the governor has the right and Constitutional sworn duty to abide by those rights.

 

[The Rabbi]

See this is why repubs try to trick people with that "states rights" bullshit. "

Nope. No tricks at all. States Rights are just that...............States Rights. And the governor has the right and Constitutional sworn duty to abide by those rights.

The governor took an oath to uphold the law. That is what she is doing. The military wives should blame the faygolas for pushing their agenda.

 

[Againsheila]

Talk about cutting off the nose of military spouses to spite their faces.....

Fallin's fallacy fails to fix fault | MSNBC

Oklahoma will stop processing all military spouse benefit applications at state-owned National Guard facilities rather than begin accepting the applications from same-sex spouses, Gov. Mary Fallin said Wednesday.

I thought Obamacare was suppose to take care of all that?

 

[bodecea]

I think of this issue as a wonderful display of just how mean-spirited some on the Right are.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Talk about cutting off the nose of military spouses to spite their faces.....

Fallin's fallacy fails to fix fault | MSNBC

Oklahoma will stop processing all military spouse benefit applications at state-owned National Guard facilities rather than begin accepting the applications from same-sex spouses, Gov. Mary Fallin said Wednesday.

I thought Obamacare was suppose to take care of all that?

What does Obamacare have to do with MWR (Moral, Welfare and Recreation) activities, legal services offices, Commissary & Exchange access, etc.?


>>>>

 

[bodecea]

Talk about cutting off the nose of military spouses to spite their faces.....

Fallin's fallacy fails to fix fault | MSNBC

I thought Obamacare was suppose to take care of all that?

What does Obamacare have to do with MWR (Moral, Welfare and Recreation) activities, legal services offices, Commissary & Exchange access, etc.?


>>>>

Some people don't know how the military works.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think of this issue as a wonderful display of just how mean-spirited some on the Right are.

You dont even want to go there.

 

[Seawytch]

This will just hasten the overturning of the rest of DOMA.

Instead of cutting off their nose to spite their faces, the assholes are shooting themselves in the foot.

 

[bodecea]

I think of this issue as a wonderful display of just how mean-spirited some on the Right are.

You dont even want to go there.

I believe I have.

 

[Political Junky]

Talk about cutting off the nose of military spouses to spite their faces.....

Fallin's fallacy fails to fix fault | MSNBC

Oklahoma will stop processing all military spouse benefit applications at state-owned National Guard facilities rather than begin accepting the applications from same-sex spouses, Gov. Mary Fallin said Wednesday.

Says a lot about the Right and logic.

 

[Jughead]

I know this will sound cold, but the reality of the working world is that the employer defines the duties and responsibilities for the position in which you are employed. If you are unwilling to perform those duties then start polishing your resume.

Think about how you want to handle the situation in advance though. If you know the duties and can't perform them and come up to me and say "I can't do this work, so I'd like to give my two weeks notice". That's cool and you'd probably get a good reference (assuming good work habits). On the other hand if you know you can't perform the required duties and wait until you can make a political statement by refusing a customer, then don't expect a good job reference.


>>>>

I absolutely agree. I would get fired for refusing to do the job. Same would apply for countless other jobs like an IRS official who refuses to process a joint tax return from a gay couple. What is unfair though is that when many of us starting working these jobs, these issues were not present. My faith has not changed, but I could still get fired because my faith "now" interferes with my work.

I guess if someone had signed paperwork that outlined their job description when accepting the job, they could always go to court to keep their job as the job description has since changed. They could argue their constitutional right to not have to renounce their faith in order to keep their job.

Nope, I work in HR. We change Job Descriptions all the time. Just because the duties of your job change, if you refuse, that is cause for termination (unless of course you want to voluntarily resign).

Now, if you are working under a contract (much different then a Job Description) which specifies your duties and does not include a general clause such as "and other duties as assigned" you might have a case for the period of that contract only which will normally be renewed annually. Once that contract period is over, then you are offered a new contract which you can accept or decline. If the contract contains the "other duties as assigned provision" or adds "perform all legal Civil Marriages as required", then there would not be legal protections for that.

Now if your contract specifically said, "The performance of a Civil Marriage is not considered an essential function of the job." Then you could refuse to perform all marriages or choose to not perform any marriages, however Public Accommodation laws would prohibit you from doing some but not others.

Finally for public sector jobs, there are no guarantees that the legislature will not change the nature of the job and that is perfectly legal. If in good conscience you can't perform the duties, find a new job. I was in the military for 20 years, my enlistment contracts contained a provision putting me on notice that Congress could change the conditions of my contract after the fact and there wasn't a thing I could do about it. Just the way the cookie crumbles.


>>>>

I'm not sure. Looks like this is a gray area here.

Generally, employers would have to document a series of transgressions in order to fire someone. A person’s religious beliefs are not on the list of items that may be considered as transgressions. In addition, the First Amendment prohibits the federal government from enacting any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This provision was later expanded to state and local governments, with the Incorporation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

I guess anyone who is fired because of their faith can simply claim the 1st amendment in court in order to get their job back.

 

[bodecea]

I absolutely agree. I would get fired for refusing to do the job. Same would apply for countless other jobs like an IRS official who refuses to process a joint tax return from a gay couple. What is unfair though is that when many of us starting working these jobs, these issues were not present. My faith has not changed, but I could still get fired because my faith "now" interferes with my work.

I guess if someone had signed paperwork that outlined their job description when accepting the job, they could always go to court to keep their job as the job description has since changed. They could argue their constitutional right to not have to renounce their faith in order to keep their job.

Nope, I work in HR. We change Job Descriptions all the time. Just because the duties of your job change, if you refuse, that is cause for termination (unless of course you want to voluntarily resign).

Now, if you are working under a contract (much different then a Job Description) which specifies your duties and does not include a general clause such as "and other duties as assigned" you might have a case for the period of that contract only which will normally be renewed annually. Once that contract period is over, then you are offered a new contract which you can accept or decline. If the contract contains the "other duties as assigned provision" or adds "perform all legal Civil Marriages as required", then there would not be legal protections for that.

Now if your contract specifically said, "The performance of a Civil Marriage is not considered an essential function of the job." Then you could refuse to perform all marriages or choose to not perform any marriages, however Public Accommodation laws would prohibit you from doing some but not others.

Finally for public sector jobs, there are no guarantees that the legislature will not change the nature of the job and that is perfectly legal. If in good conscience you can't perform the duties, find a new job. I was in the military for 20 years, my enlistment contracts contained a provision putting me on notice that Congress could change the conditions of my contract after the fact and there wasn't a thing I could do about it. Just the way the cookie crumbles.


>>>>

I'm not sure. Looks like this is a gray area here.

Generally, employers would have to document a series of transgressions in order to fire someone. A person’s religious beliefs are not on the list of items that may be considered as transgressions. In addition, the First Amendment prohibits the federal government from enacting any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This provision was later expanded to state and local governments, with the Incorporation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

I guess anyone who is fired because of their faith can simply claim the 1st amendment in court in order to get their job back.

As long as they can prove that the GOVERNMENT prevented them from practicing their religion.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Forcing someone of faith to provide benefits to a gay couple would be equivalent to asking them to renounce their faith. This would be unconstitutional.

What a loon. Forcing a GOVERNMENT official to observe the tenets of YOUR faith is what is unconstitutional.

As my faith does not accept gay marriage, I don't acknowledge it. I do have a right under the constitution to practice my faith.

And not force its precepts on the majority of Americans who disagree with you.

The feds will issue the cards. Watch.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I absolutely agree. I would get fired for refusing to do the job. Same would apply for countless other jobs like an IRS official who refuses to process a joint tax return from a gay couple. What is unfair though is that when many of us starting working these jobs, these issues were not present. My faith has not changed, but I could still get fired because my faith "now" interferes with my work.

I guess if someone had signed paperwork that outlined their job description when accepting the job, they could always go to court to keep their job as the job description has since changed. They could argue their constitutional right to not have to renounce their faith in order to keep their job.

Nope, I work in HR. We change Job Descriptions all the time. Just because the duties of your job change, if you refuse, that is cause for termination (unless of course you want to voluntarily resign).

Now, if you are working under a contract (much different then a Job Description) which specifies your duties and does not include a general clause such as "and other duties as assigned" you might have a case for the period of that contract only which will normally be renewed annually. Once that contract period is over, then you are offered a new contract which you can accept or decline. If the contract contains the "other duties as assigned provision" or adds "perform all legal Civil Marriages as required", then there would not be legal protections for that.

Now if your contract specifically said, "The performance of a Civil Marriage is not considered an essential function of the job." Then you could refuse to perform all marriages or choose to not perform any marriages, however Public Accommodation laws would prohibit you from doing some but not others.

Finally for public sector jobs, there are no guarantees that the legislature will not change the nature of the job and that is perfectly legal. If in good conscience you can't perform the duties, find a new job. I was in the military for 20 years, my enlistment contracts contained a provision putting me on notice that Congress could change the conditions of my contract after the fact and there wasn't a thing I could do about it. Just the way the cookie crumbles.


>>>>

I'm not sure. Looks like this is a gray area here.

With all do respect it's not as gray as you believe.

Generally, employers would have to document a series of transgressions in order to fire someone.

You mean like refusing to perform the duties of the job?

A person’s religious beliefs are not on the list of items that may be considered as transgressions.

Yes they are.

For example, if a strict Jewish person is hired by a meat processing plant that processes beef. They switch to processing pork and the individual refuses to perform such work, they can be terminated.

For another a Muslim cab is employed by a company to take fars between locations. They refuse to carry passengers that have alcohol in their possession, appear to be under the influence of alcohol, have a dog with them (pet or service animal) - they can be terminated for failure to perform the essential functions of the job.

For another, a pharmacy hires a Christian to dispense all legal prescriptions, the pharmacist refuses to fill routine contraceptives, emergency contraceptives (morning after pill), or abortion pills. They can be terminated for failure to fill the essential functions of the position.

In addition, the First Amendment prohibits the federal government from enacting any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This provision was later expanded to state and local governments, with the Incorporation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Such restriction don't apply to employees that refuse to perform the essential functions of the job. Individual are free to practice their religion, there is not a requirement for employers to maintain employees on the payroll who will not do their job.

Now with that said, organizations can be required to make reasonable accommodations of religious beliefs, that usually tough does not extend to unique or required duties. Lets say a country clerk office is staffed by 3 assistants, if one objects and the other don't have an issue with treating same-sex couple they can make a reasonable accommodation. However if there is only a single country clerk, the failure to perform essential duties is a termination cause.

I guess anyone who is fired because of their faith can simply claim the 1st amendment in court in order to get their job back.

They can claim anything they want, that doesn't mean the job is protected.


>>>>

 

[Jughead]

Nope, I work in HR. We change Job Descriptions all the time. Just because the duties of your job change, if you refuse, that is cause for termination (unless of course you want to voluntarily resign).

Now, if you are working under a contract (much different then a Job Description) which specifies your duties and does not include a general clause such as "and other duties as assigned" you might have a case for the period of that contract only which will normally be renewed annually. Once that contract period is over, then you are offered a new contract which you can accept or decline. If the contract contains the "other duties as assigned provision" or adds "perform all legal Civil Marriages as required", then there would not be legal protections for that.

Now if your contract specifically said, "The performance of a Civil Marriage is not considered an essential function of the job." Then you could refuse to perform all marriages or choose to not perform any marriages, however Public Accommodation laws would prohibit you from doing some but not others.

Finally for public sector jobs, there are no guarantees that the legislature will not change the nature of the job and that is perfectly legal. If in good conscience you can't perform the duties, find a new job. I was in the military for 20 years, my enlistment contracts contained a provision putting me on notice that Congress could change the conditions of my contract after the fact and there wasn't a thing I could do about it. Just the way the cookie crumbles.


>>>>

I'm not sure. Looks like this is a gray area here.

Generally, employers would have to document a series of transgressions in order to fire someone. A person’s religious beliefs are not on the list of items that may be considered as transgressions. In addition, the First Amendment prohibits the federal government from enacting any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This provision was later expanded to state and local governments, with the Incorporation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

I guess anyone who is fired because of their faith can simply claim the 1st amendment in court in order to get their job back.

As long as they can prove that the GOVERNMENT prevented them from practicing their religion.

That shouldn't be too hard. For instance, if an IRS official refuses to process joint tax returns filed by gay couples, he can argue that in doing so he would be in conflict with his faith, and he should not be required to renounce his faith. Of course his lawyer would provide supporting documentation to support his claim.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I'm not sure. Looks like this is a gray area here.

Generally, employers would have to document a series of transgressions in order to fire someone. A person’s religious beliefs are not on the list of items that may be considered as transgressions. In addition, the First Amendment prohibits the federal government from enacting any law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This provision was later expanded to state and local governments, with the Incorporation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

I guess anyone who is fired because of their faith can simply claim the 1st amendment in court in order to get their job back.

As long as they can prove that the GOVERNMENT prevented them from practicing their religion.

That shouldn't be too hard. For instance, if an IRS official refuses to process joint tax returns filed by gay couples, he can argue that in doing so he would be in conflict with his faith, and he should not be required to renounce his faith. Of course his lawyer would provide supporting documentation to support his claim.

US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Religious Discrimination & Reasonable Accommodation

The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee’s religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion.

Examples of some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, and modifications to workplace policies or practices.

Religious Discrimination​

For an IRS Auditor, the answer is not absolute, it depends on if the employer can make a "reasonable accommodation". If the case of an IRS office with multiple auditors, a reasonable accommodation can include a case swap with another auditor.

In the case of a Justice of the Peace or a County Clerk in a small office where there are no other personnel to provide the same services, then there is no reasonable accommodation without impacting the operations of the office, in such a case an accommodation would not be required.


>>>>