RECENT  POSTS:  » Michael Brown will save his waning movement by grouping homosexuality with incest » GOP pollster Luntz to Heritage Foundation's Anderson: 'Gay marriage is harmless' » Read: Federal court judge rules against Colorado's discriminatory marriage ban » You guys, will you please pipe down so Sen. Rubio can dismantle your deserved freedoms? » 'Mask is coming off' LGBTs, says man who vowed to export and/or criminalize LGBTs » Exxon, infamous holdout on fair and decent employment protections, could be running out of options » Oregon baker who refused same-sex wedding cake bakes for 'ex-gay' org » PFOX rebrands; into group play, seemingly » Audio: Listen to this ADF spinmeister and his anti-gay spin » Report: US District judge won't deny justice to gay Coloradans; might delay it, though  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

07/09/2008

Some folks will stigmatize anything to get out of work!

by Jeremy Hooper
I will transfer. I am not going to compromise my beliefs or standards for anyone, not even the Supreme Court of California.

I do respect the rights of other citizens who are now asserting same-sex marriages but I also need to assert my right to religious freedom.

I also want to clarify that my refusal to perform this (sic) ceremonies is based only on my personal morals and beliefs, and it doesn't come from intolerance.

Above are just three quotes from 49 pages of emails obtained by the San Diego Union-Tribune, wherein various San Diego county employees have cited their religious beliefs and morals for why they don't feel comfortable performing their marriage duties for same-sex couples. To read more about the emails that have been sent since the California Supreme Court's ruling, check out the Union-Tribune article:

County releases workers' protests on gay marriages [San Diego Union-Tribune]

We say to the workers who have registered complaints:

"Boo hoo. In college, we didn't want to roll silverware after serving lasagna and endless salad bowls all day long. But guess what? We did it! Because our job duties were not only to be the middle person between breadsticks and stomach, but also to do the post-shift side work. Even though after working a double, we had a deeply held belief that we needed to be at the nearby bar commiserating with our fellow servers over a pitcher of either Bud or Sam Adams (depending on how tips were that day), we didn't let our personal convictions stop us from doing our damn job. Because it's not called "fun" or "pleasing" -- it's called work. It ain't always exactly what we want it to be."

Though it should be noted that of the twenty four county officials that complained, only six are reported to have stuck to their guns and followed through on a reassignment or transfer rather than perform their duties. We just hope those six weren't instead put in charge of driving tests, as we'd hate to see a young man failed because he fondled the stick shift too much.

**After the jump: See all 49 pages of the Union-Tribune's obtained documents:

*Read this document on Scribd: SD Union-Tribune emails

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

But did you see the report about the KERN County meeting. Unanimous rejection of 'Ordinance', of course, the county counsel told them it was against the law, so they had a
little ammo to fight with. BUT THE REAL KICKER! They also:

The five-member board also let die a motion to explore whether county employees who are willing to officiate same-sex weddings could be deputized for the duty by officials in neighboring San Bernardino County.

See there are some supporters in Kern too.

Posted by: LOrion | Jul 9, 2008 11:18:10 AM

amazing how many of them feel the need to say "I am not judging them" or "I am not prejudiced" or something like that. Yet substitute "same sex marriage" with "biracial marriage" and see how that stands up. Plus of course...they ARE making judgements and therefore being pre-judges - prejudiced.

Posted by: Laura | Jul 9, 2008 11:40:05 AM

I liked how many of the posters were asked to cite a specific belief or objection they immediately backtracked and reconsidered. That really says to me that they didn't feel strongly opposed to the decision but were probably a little squemish about the ceremony. Perhaps they were just a little uncomfortable about seeing two guys/girls kiss. I know plenty of people that are generally supportive of gay rights but haven't gotten over their personal "ick factor."

Posted by: Ed | Jul 9, 2008 1:14:05 PM

Substitute the word 'attitude' for 'beliefs' and 'religion' and re-read their statements to get an idea of how much special treatment religion is given in our country. Imagine if these people wrote letters to their bosses stating that their attitudes (which is basically what these are, given the selective literalism practiced by these 'believers') prevented them from doing their jobs.

Posted by: Larry | Jul 9, 2008 1:54:53 PM

This crap about being persecuted because of their so-called religion or faith has got to stop. Nobody is being prevented from exercising their religious liberties, prevented from worshipping whatever deity they desire, congregating in a house of worship, or adhering to the dictates of their sacred texts. What they are being prevented from doing is forcing others to worship as they do.

City Hall is not a Church, Mosque, Synagogue, Temple, or house of worship.

The Municipal Government is not a congregation or community of worship.

The Constitution of the State of California, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, or any other state in the union is not a sacred religious text.

Civil institutions exist for all citizens, not a select few or a particular religious community.

Why is this so difficult for some people to understand?

Posted by: djsaab | Jul 9, 2008 5:43:48 PM

How embarassed will these people's children and grandchildren be in 40 years when they realize how backward and bigoted and generally awful their ancestors were?

It'll be sort of like when I found out my grandfather had ransacked a bunch of temples during the Korean War, I would imagine.

Posted by: Kate | Jul 9, 2008 5:58:04 PM

I'm sure there were plenty of people who "just don't think the slaves should be free", no offense, of course. Nice, saying-good-morning-to-strangers type folks who didn't think women should vote. Sweet old ladies who thought that interracial marriage went against her deeply held beliefs.

What do these bigots think? That slavery just came about randomly? That segregation wasn't a deeply held belief? That a woman not being allowed to vote wasn't in some way considering an expression of religious civil rights? Do they think anti-semitism was some sort of new and completely original fad that cropped up in Germany?

There's nothing wrong with recognizing that the races are different, that there are differences between genders, that there are differences between homo, bi, and hetero. What's wrong is when you decide that different people should be treated negatively because of their differences. That some people should get more out of life than others.

They are lying when they say "I don't have a problem with gays". Yes you do. It's quite easy to say "live and let live" but following that means supporting gay rights, or at the VERY least not standing in our way. If you don't have a problem with gays, if you're not judging us, performing our ceremonies shouldn't be an issue.

Posted by: Jason D | Jul 10, 2008 8:11:32 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails