forest-spirit said:
|
No way. That would take conviction. Her tax payer funded job is way to sweet to give up. But as the court illustrated, you can't have both. Especially when the construct of one's job is bound by the rule of law.
Her defense is completely invalid in fact. She is collecting tax payer money as an elected official in a system where the separation of church and state is clearly defined.
But she already knows that. She knows that she cannot use her position to endorse a religious belief and enforce it on the public.
These tenants of government weren't created yesterday and the don't disappear now that gays make her uncomfortable. Her freedom of religion as expressed through apparent bigotry doesn't entitle her to ignore the law and block legal marriages.
Her defense of discrimination is completely invalid. Not being able to discriminate doesn't make her a victim.







