Discussion in 'In The News' started by Joshuastone7, Sep 1, 2015.
It's beginning... News Article, and watch the video!
ARTICLE So now she's gone to jail, and will not be released until she agrees to issue marriage licenses to gay couples.
don't have a problem with it , since she is employed voluntarily
by city , state or federal gov't , she should comply ..unlike
Daniel and his companions who were pressed into service , she
swore her oaths to the world branch's and should comply .this
is different from owning your own business also (even here I
see no reason to discriminate when providing "public"services
..we are not the worlds police ..but teachers to set an example..
I don't recall Jesus singling out any "sinners" when he feed the
crowds and said I will not feed you cause You a sinner man ..
I'm not sure how This works over there....issuing a licence....is that ..and I think it is...different to actually marrying them....then it wouldn't bother my conscience if I worked in that office..
yet I wouldn't marry them....and I think this is what you are pointing to..
soon we will have a homosexual couple approaching an elder and wishing them to marry them.
I can see this happening with some one who was gay and had been in the truth ....or another gay couple even wanting to make a point with JWs over this issue..
That brother..hence the Society would have to deny that request..and either pay the fines or go to jail..
I can definitely see this happening...over here ( Aust ) gay marriage is not legalised as of yet...but they are pushing for it.
This case is the start of this scenario playing out...
She is a civil servant and registering your marriage is a civil ceremony. The Supreme court has said that it is "civilly" her duty to do so. She is not registering their marriage before God, just before Caesar. We are also commanded to love our enemies. I think it would show love to place their desires before yours. If it was a matter of "before God" that would be a different story. But this is clearly a matter in the hands of Caesar.
I don't have an opinion on whether she is right or wrong, I just notice as Thinking says that this is the start to much more coming...
I don't think it's a question of right or wrong, she can refuse to issue the license, but if she does she has to be prepared to accept Caesar's wrath. I just think she's looking at the civil authority for the marriage somehow as it's God's approval if she gives then the paperwork or approves it. It has absolutely nothing to do with God. Jesus told us to pay Caesar's things to Caesar. Well this is civil, so it's Caesar's, not God's.
Agreed - I would say she is actually wrong, but you're right on target, this is a window into what is coming.
Comply with Caesar or lose your 'life'.
From another perspective, her actions will cause any LEGITIMATE persecution by the state to be overlooked.
The reason I say I don't have an opinion is she could quote Acts 5:29 "You must obey God rather then man". So in reality we obey the superior authorities up until they contradict our spiritual conscience.
Now, she is an elected government official, so should she obey the supreme court ruling? I'm not so sure, what if since she wouldn't do it they looked over at you and told you to do it, would you?
Regardless of if we think she's right or wrong this subject will come into the churches, those establishments who actually hold the procedures, this will happen.
What if since she wouldn't do it they looked over at you and told you to do it,would you?
im not sure but wouldn't It come under sinning against your conscience ....
That the example of a Jew eating meat that had been offered to a idol...but sold at the market place afterward.
One Israelite conscience would allow him to eat it....
another Israelite conscience wouldn't allow him to eat it....
Yet neither of them was wrong .....BUT...if either of them had gone against their conscience then it would have been a sin....
sorry i I can't find this scripture......all very interesting isn't it......
I guess it is up to the individual.
Personally I would have no more a problem giving a govt. certificate to a "gay marriage" than giving another form of govt. certificate to a corrupt corporation.
Basically, it's the job to hand out Caesars paperwork, regardless of what the paperwork contains. I admire her stand though.
Well see, then the next argument could be that there are other instances that would restrict marriage license, such as blood relatives. So what if a brother and sister wants to marry, the state won't allow it, but would she, we others? Then at that point you have inanimate objects, and other forms of life, and on and on...
The problem comes in when marriage in this country was set up as a constitution by God. Then later marriage becomes a set of laws and tax breaks. So church and state never really separated in this subject.
To be honest all marriage license should probably be called union certificates, or law providers, then the marriage or civil unions can be named at the ceremony. So that would make the word marriage for those who want it to be a religious matter, and civil unions who don't. This would allow her to allow the legal benefits such as taxes to people, but would leave out the word marriage.
This would never happen in this screwed up world though, it makes too much sense. Instead we'll just go down in flames trying to be politically correct.
That about sums it up
Here is the oath she took when she excepted the office:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof, and that I will faithfully execute, to the best of my ability, the office of â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€”â€” according to law; and I do further solemnly swear (or affirm) that since the adoption of the present Constitution, I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending, so help me God."
So they still have God in the oath...
Apparently each certificate has her name on them, and she has asked that it be removed. Also 6 deputies refused to sign in place of her while she is in jail until the judge brought them in and threatened jail time for them as well, after which 5 of the 6 excepted to sign in her place.
There have been other states where they have passed laws allowing others to sign and transferred that responsibility to someone else when someones religious objection prevented them from doing so, however this state so far has refused to do so.
The judge in the case will refuse to release her until she either resigns or decides to sign the certificates.
Separate names with a comma.