• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which of the following hypothetical public employees should be fired?

Select all that apply

  • A clerk that refuses to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple because they are a Christian.

    Votes: 50 92.6%

  • A clerk that refuses to issue a permit to a slaughterhouse because they are a Buddhist.

    Votes: 50 92.6%

  • A clerk that refuses to issue a liquor license because they are a Muslim.

    Votes: 52 96.3%

  • A clerk that refuses to issue a drilling permit because they are a wiccan.

    Votes: 49 90.7%
  • Total voters
    54
Cephus said:
No, you keep responding. Don't want me to say it again, stop. Easy.
Click to expand...

Okay, you get the last word. Go! (Be sure to say one more time that you'd fire a good employee because he's a whiny religious person).
 
tres borrachos said:
So if it's grounds for termination, then what is the point of your silly hypotheticals if the "vast, vast majority" of employers would terminate the employees? Do you think there may be an epidemic of wiccans being in a position of being the sole permit providers for drillers? Do you think we have Christians all over the country just waiting for a chance to deny a couple a marriage certificate so they can see their name all over the news and internet and get death threats from strangers and have the righteous on DP call them bigots?
Click to expand...

It was to make a point. Most of the same people that would be hollering about discrimination against Christians when a clerk is fired for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples would see no problem at all for firing a Muslim that refused to issue Liquor Licenses.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Ummm... where is the "all the above" option?

A government employee is not a business owner; he/she is hired to provide the services and preform the duties of the job. If the job is to issue a license, and the applicant has paid the fees and met all requirements of the law, then either the license must be issued, or the employee can resign and let someone else do the job.
Click to expand...

true enough. Good to see you back CA-its been over a year IIRC
 
TurtleDude said:
true enough. Good to see you back CA-its been over a year IIRC
Click to expand...

Hey Turtledude!

Good to be back. I happen to be on a vacation so I can actually spend some quality time adding my particular brand of B/S on here again. ;)
 
tres borrachos said:
None of the above if there is someone else who can cover for him/her. If he/she is the ultimate decision maker than I think he/she should be removed or transferred.

I have 10 people who work for me and there have been times and different reasons that they can't/won't work with a customer. I get someone else to cover. It isn't a big deal.
Click to expand...

Have you ever thought that maybe it is a big deal to that other person who has to take up the slack for someone who might be refusing to work with a customer, for whatever reason, but particularly if it is certain types of customers.
 
tres borrachos said:
How is it different? I'm the manager, the customer expects x service, and it's my right to decide which employee fulfills the customer needs. I didn't say anything about a difficult customer.

Unless "being the only person in the division to give out slaughterhouse licenses" is clearly stated in the job description, any smart and reasonable manager will get someone else to do it. Why would you force a good employee to do something that you know will upset him?
Click to expand...

He/she isn't really a "good employee" if they aren't willing to do their job without regard to their religious feelings about a certain group of people or their legal activity.
 
soot said:
I think that's a pretty good rule of thumb, and maybe if you're employed in a capacity where you're easily replaced you feel that it's a necessity you'd toe any line, but I wouldn't consider it to be universal.

I've refused to work with clients, and I've had clients refuse to work with me.

In both cases we're talking about rare instances but when they pop up it all comes down to pretty basic value judgements.

If I'm an above average contributor who has received glowing reviews from clients, in a job that requires specialized industry and corporate knowledge, and I tend to get along well within the corporate culture, is it REALLY worth it to go through the time, effort, and expense to fire and replace me?

Over something like this?

Maybe it is, and if you're looking for a reason to let someone go this could certainly present a manager with a lucky opportunity to do so.

But if you're talking about a strong member of a team with just this one "weakness" it seems to me that finding a work-around would be the best course of action.
Click to expand...

How hard do you think issuing a marriage license, keeping track of them and other county paperwork, being county clerk might be? It isn't rocket science or nuclear engineering or even computer programming. While I don't doubt that this isn't a job just anyone should be in, it also isn't really something that requires a whole helluva lot of effort to accomplish.
 
tres borrachos said:
It's their job, says who? The department is set up to give out licenses. It isn't up to you to decide which employee provides you with your license. It's up to his/her manager.
Click to expand...

Actually, no. Federal and state laws actually do have some say in whether or not certain employees can refuse to give you certain licenses or government paperwork based on your race, religion, sex, etc.

What is to prevent a state employee from refusing to issue a birth certificate to a same sex couple for their child?
 
tres borrachos said:
So if it's grounds for termination, then what is the point of your silly hypotheticals if the "vast, vast majority" of employers would terminate the employees? Do you think there may be an epidemic of wiccans being in a position of being the sole permit providers for drillers? Do you think we have Christians all over the country just waiting for a chance to deny a couple a marriage certificate so they can see their name all over the news and internet and get death threats from strangers and have the righteous on DP call them bigots?
Click to expand...

Have you ever even visited a small rural county office before? There might be one, MAYBE two, clerks, and if they're both christians I guess all the gays in the county should just gtfo, right? State workers are not allowed to use their positions of power to hurt minority groups they find icky.

Just 50 short years ago those christian county clerks in the south were denying voter registration to african americans. Have we not already settled this issue?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Have you ever even visited a small rural county office before? There might be one, MAYBE two, clerks, and if they're both christians I guess all the gays in the county should just gtfo, right? State workers are not allowed to use their positions of power to hurt minority groups they find icky.

Just 50 short years ago those christian county clerks in the south were denying voter registration to african americans. Have we not already settled this issue?
Click to expand...

There was one at the office my husband and I got our marriage license from.
 
tres borrachos said:
That isn't the same thing as "for any reason".

I don't make blanket statements like that about my employees. I also don't relish the idea of firing a good employee for any reason.

I also know the odds of anyone's employees refusing to serve a class or color or sex of people is less likely than the odds of me waking up naked with Orlando Bloom.
Click to expand...

Really? Because that is exactly what this issue is, people who are willing to refuse to issue marriage licenses to a certain group of people, class of people. Refusing to serve a certain group of people.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
OK, this is a multiple choice, so select all that you feel applies. Which of the hypothetical public employees should be fire or moved to a different position for not doing their job?
Click to expand...

I'm curious...

Why did you choose these examples? Have there been cases in which a public employee has refused to issue a license or permit because of their religion?

In any case, the employee's religious beliefs shouldn't enter into the picture at all. The employee should only follow the law.
 
roguenuke said:
How hard do you think issuing a marriage license, keeping track of them and other county paperwork, being county clerk might be?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what all is actually involved in being the town/county clerk.

I don't imagine that it's a position where you could easily fire the current clerk today and replace him or her with someone fresh off the street tomorrow.

I expect that while much of the actual "work" is pro forma (eg. pull form, fill form, stamp form, file) the institutional knowledge of how to do the job is fairly extensive and requires more than a little OJT as well as the development of relationships both within the town or county "capitol" building as well as across the various departments of government.

If we're talking about a town where there's only the clerk then I expect a government would be setting itself up for an absolute nightmare by just up and firing that person.

In a larger municipality where there's the clerk and one or more subordinate(s) it would probably be a lot easier to do but still not without its share of friction.

In either case, it's also possible that there are contracts and union representation (AFSCME) involved in the mix as well as an informal "good ol' boy" network of Christian employees who all disagree with this law on religious grounds and don't like the idea of one of their own having his or her faith compromised in this manner.

If you decide you want to fire the clerk it's possible that you'll have every other unionized and/or Christian employee in the government employ striking or slowing down or otherwise throwing wrenches in to the works.

As I also mentioned we may be talking about people who are politically connected or who may have knowledge of...indiscretions (to choose a tactful term) that have been committed by various public servants. Such relationships and knowledge could be brought to bear in order to pressure superiors.

It's also possible that we're talking about little old ladies in tennis shoes who have been serving the municipality for multiple decades and enjoy a very warm place in the hearts of local people both within and outside of government.

And all of this may be taking place in municipality where 99% of the population is deeply fundamentalist Christian, disagrees with this ruling, feels that the SCOTUS is legislating from the bench, and has had enough with what they see as a decline in good old fashioned values.

Look, I support SSM and this recent SCOTUS ruling as much as anyone.

It is not my intention to support what (if any - and I doubt there'll be much) "rebellion" might come as a result on the municipal level.

But, again, we're not talking about firing a McDonald's fry chef because he or she refused to clean a bathroom.

These are skilled professional positions and potential volatile situations.

There's a lot more to consider than just firing someone.
 
It's kind of weird that given the divorce and remarriage statistics here we don't hear more about all those sinners adulterers having issues getting a marriage license since you typically have to put your current status or number of previous marriages. Anyways if you are hired to issue marriage licenses that's what you should do no questions asked.
 
soot said:
I have no idea what all is actually involved in being the town/county clerk.

I don't imagine that it's a position where you could easily fire the current clerk today and replace him or her with someone fresh off the street tomorrow.

I expect that while much of the actual "work" is pro forma (eg. pull form, fill form, stamp form, file) the institutional knowledge of how to do the job is fairly extensive and requires more than a little OJT as well as the development of relationships both within the town or county "capitol" building as well as across the various departments of government.

If we're talking about a town where there's only the clerk then I expect a government would be setting itself up for an absolute nightmare by just up and firing that person.

In a larger municipality where there's the clerk and one or more subordinate(s) it would probably be a lot easier to do but still not without its share of friction.

In either case, it's also possible that there are contracts and union representation (AFSCME) involved in the mix as well as an informal "good ol' boy" network of Christian employees who all disagree with this law on religious grounds and don't like the idea of one of their own having his or her faith compromised in this manner.

If you decide you want to fire the clerk it's possible that you'll have every other unionized and/or Christian employee in the government employ striking or slowing down or otherwise throwing wrenches in to the works.

As I also mentioned we may be talking about people who are politically connected or who may have knowledge of...indiscretions (to choose a tactful term) that have been committed by various public servants. Such relationships and knowledge could be brought to bear in order to pressure superiors.

It's also possible that we're talking about little old ladies in tennis shoes who have been serving the municipality for multiple decades and enjoy a very warm place in the hearts of local people both within and outside of government.

And all of this may be taking place in municipality where 99% of the population is deeply fundamentalist Christian, disagrees with this ruling, feels that the SCOTUS is legislating from the bench, and has had enough with what they see as a decline in good old fashioned values.

Look, I support SSM and this recent SCOTUS ruling as much as anyone.

It is not my intention to support what (if any - and I doubt there'll be much) "rebellion" might come as a result on the municipal level.

But, again, we're not talking about firing a McDonald's fry chef because he or she refused to clean a bathroom.

These are skilled professional positions and potential volatile situations.

There's a lot more to consider than just firing someone.
Click to expand...

There are still plenty of people looking for jobs. I'm willing to bet that that particular job would not be too hard to quickly fill.
 
"Skilled professionals"

Lol my mom works for the county straight across from the county clerks office and I know exactly how skilled and professional they are not. You'll be lucky to break them out of their office gossip for two seconds to answer a question let alone trying to get them to actually do something. Of course I can't speak for all county clerks or offices but that one, actually most in the county, isn't exactly known for their good service. They are mostly rude and act like you are making a huge inconvenience when you ask them to do their job.
 
Mycroft said:
I'm curious...

Why did you choose these examples? Have there been cases in which a public employee has refused to issue a license or permit because of their religion?

In any case, the employee's religious beliefs shouldn't enter into the picture at all. The employee should only follow the law.
Click to expand...

They are all just purely hypotheticals.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
It was to make a point. Most of the same people that would be hollering about discrimination against Christians when a clerk is fired for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples would see no problem at all for firing a Muslim that refused to issue Liquor Licenses.
Click to expand...

These silly hypotheticals were to make a point that Christians are mean to Muslims?
 
americanwoman said:
It's kind of weird that given the divorce and remarriage statistics here we don't hear more about all those sinners adulterers having issues getting a marriage license since you typically have to put your current status or number of previous marriages. Anyways if you are hired to issue marriage licenses that's what you should do no questions asked.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can get a marriage license if your current status is "married", at least not in NH.
 
tres borrachos said:
These silly hypotheticals were to make a point that Christians are mean to Muslims?
Click to expand...

No, its to make the point that its not religious discrimination to require a public employee to do their job and follow the law.
 
roguenuke said:
Have you ever thought that maybe it is a big deal to that other person who has to take up the slack for someone who might be refusing to work with a customer, for whatever reason, but particularly if it is certain types of customers.
Click to expand...

No, but you can worry about it.
 
tres borrachos said:
I don't think you can get a marriage license if your current status is "married", at least not in NH.
Click to expand...

There are religions that do not view a civil divorce as valid in the eyes of God. To those people, getting married after a divorce is adultery.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
No, its to make the point that its not religious discrimination to require a public employee to do their job and follow the law.
Click to expand...

And we all know the law, don't we? You asked some hypotheticals and you got some answers. Don't be surprised when not everyone is as anxious to fire an employee as you are. Some people actually value their employees and don't want them to unnecessarily do something that will upset them or make them uncomfortable.
 
tres borrachos said:
And we all know the law, don't we? You asked some hypotheticals and you got some answers. Don't be surprised when not everyone is as anxious to fire an employee as you are. Some people actually value their employees and don't want them to unnecessarily do something that will upset them or make them uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

You just proved you don't really value your employees though. You are willing to give special exceptions to some employees, forcing others to make up that work because of their feelings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom