Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Abbott vows a religious liberty fight, which gay couples’ lawyer warns will cost state
Update at 2:15 p.m.: AUSTIN — A lawyer for the Texas gay-marriage lawsuit plaintiffs said Friday afternoon that Gov. Greg Abbott is asking for lot of additional lawsuits that will be expensive for the state when he encourages resistance to the Supreme Court’s decision.
Hours after the ruling, Abbott sent a memo to the heads of state agencies directing them to “preserve, protect, and defend the religious liberty of every Texan.” That order “applies to any agency decision,” including granting or denying benefits, managing state employees and making decisions on or enforcing contracts, licenses and permits, the memo says.
Abbott said agency heads “should ensure that no one acting on behalf of their agency takes any adverse action against any person, as defined in Chapter 311 of the Texas Government Code, on account of the person’s act or refusal to act that is substantially motivated by sincere religious belief.”
The section of state law says “person” includes a “corporation, organization, government or governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, and any other legal entity.”
Hours after the ruling, Abbott sent a memo to the heads of state agencies directing them to “preserve, protect, and defend the religious liberty of every Texan.” That order “applies to any agency decision,” including granting or denying benefits, managing state employees and making decisions on or enforcing contracts, licenses and permits, the memo says.
Abbott said agency heads “should ensure that no one acting on behalf of their agency takes any adverse action against any person, as defined in Chapter 311 of the Texas Government Code, on account of the person’s act or refusal to act that is substantially motivated by sincere religious belief.”
The section of state law says “person” includes a “corporation, organization, government or governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, and any other legal entity.”
Read more: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/06/update-abbott-vows-a-religious-liberty-fight-which-gay-couples-lawyer-warns-will-cost-state.html/
[font color=330099]This is a long article with numerous updates made throughout the day.[/font]
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
... enforce the requirements for consistent, equal enforcement of state powers? (That is to say, what if it violates the beliefs of an agency head to follow Abbott's directive & obstruct the Supreme Court's decision?)
My guess is that if an agency head (or another "one acting on behalf of their agency" felt that, because of their religious beliefs (such as a belief in justice & equal treatment) decided that because of their religious beliefs they must per4form their duty to ensure that justice and state services were administered equally and according to the law, and consequently took an "adverse action" against an agency employee who refused to comply with the law of the land and provide equal, non-discriminatory administration of state functions, that Abbott would perhaps act to fire that agency head who conscientiously performed their duty (their duty being to ensure that the law was followed by taking action against those who refused to obey the law and provide equal justice and services to all.)
Abbott would probably tell such an agency head that if their religious beliefs prohibited them from following his illegal order obstructing the decisions of the Supreme Court, that they should either obey his (Abbott's) directive or resign.
Which suggests an alternative for those employee's who feel it infringes on their religious liberty for them to do their job and grant marriage licenses (and/or other services) to eligible parties, to re-evaluate their assertion that the equal provision of services under the law amounts to an infringement on the liberties of the state employee who disagrees with the law, or . . . . . . . if they cannot bring themselves to do their duties legally (and administer state functions without discrimination) . . . . to resign.
