If you took a job/career that may potentially go against what you morally or religiously believe you probably shouldn't take that job. Instead go for something else, or start an independent company so you can deny others. In the case of the woman who wouldn't marry the 2 gay people, it probably worked for the best to just fire her since she was unable to perform her jobs as a result of her beliefs.

well white males are the only group facing real sexism/racism, its called affirmitive action.

and well he is a male, so he is a subject of sexism in another instance too, its called draft.

poor white males have it the hardest to get into a good school or university,.

There's so many moral examples of contradiction I could give you right now that it wouldn't even be fair.  

So let's say the American government/military declares martial law while we begin slaughtering other countries; We, the people of this great country decide we aren't having it. You'll have two factions in our own military - the ones who do not bat an eye while they have a gun pointed to your head because they're doing their job, and you have the defectors who morally know that they signed up to protect you, not harm you.  By your logic the latter should never have signed up. The error in this way of thinking being that without this kind of balance, the tyranny of such a scenario is brought full circle.

Equality means she is allowed to keep her job and keep her belief.  Equality also means that those two dudes can get married. Perhaps they knew she would deny them? Perhaps they wanted to stir the pot? In our current climate, if I were attracted to a man and were seeking a marriage license I'd probably do some background research on who I was going to for such a thing because not everyone is morally agreeable to such a thing.  

Oh and btw, if you can't see that America's going and has been going down the shitter then you're either ignorantly in bliss or willfully choosing to ignore reality.  And that thought is so much bigger than the pointless debates people have about gay marraige.  Way bigger than that.  I don't give a fuck who marries who, that's not a big deal to me. I think it's hypocritical that you can have feminist groups spouting hate against males, you can have gay groups spouting hate against anyone who tells them they don't like or agree with it, you can have religious groups spouting hate against religious groups, but people like me that point out flaws in these radical groups thinking get utterly SHITTED ON the moment they voice their opinion because it doesn't fit the agenda.

We are all discriminating against ourselves the moment we give ourselves certain labels.  We are intentionally being segregated and taught to think that way because a Nation that is divided cannot stand. She said no, go to someone else. That's where it started and that's where it should've ended. Now we have the fucking pope making comments on it because someone had to go and get butthurt and make a big deal over nothing.  

I believe denying people for the person's they are is a human rights violation. Ethics above Law, Law before Religion/Culture.

Rowan County covers an area approximately 524 Square Miles (Pop. 138,428).  No, she covers a pretty large area (~%22 the population of my home State) , and requiring someone to travel that far, just so she can refuse to do the job she was elected to do is absurd.  Nevermind that the Supreme Court has already ruled that States must allow for this.

And before you say it, yes, before the SCOTUS judgement, people traveled to different States, to get married.  However, now that's been decided as being discriminatory, it's no longer legal to force people to travel absurd distances to get a license for something that is universally legal across the entire country. 

/thread

Xander is clearly referring to stupid Christians, not the reasonable ones. I'm a Christian and do not support what that woman is doing. I also find not resigning from a job you can't do, stupid. There are stupid Christians just like there are stupid republicans and stupid democrats. Doesn't mean that everyone who's a republican is stupid. So, if you consider yourself a stupid Christian, then that comment refers to you. If you don't, it doesn't. I, for example, wasn't offended.

True.

That's not a fact, that's an opinion.  A fact would be that there are others who DO share her discriminary beliefs so the idea she said 'no' is not that surprising, especially given the region. How do you feel about her jail time?

i would say this is a point where ethics arent that clear, i belief this comes down to the golden rule, and well the golden rule isnt that straight forward as many would guess, it would be totaly fine with the golden rule if she is fine with gay persons not servicing christians(and i guess she is fine with that).

not discriminating against others is the normal interpretation of the golden rule, but its not the right one, there isnt right or wrong in ethics.

i would argue that the normal interpretation is better for society. but even if she doesnt understand why, her interpretations (and the one of the pope) is valid too.

find me a not stupid republican and i find you a unicorn... they have no problem with candidates that dont think evolution is a thing. thats realy stupid, like realy realy realy stupid. the only more stupid thing is trickle down economics