tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4295584641969738415.post6740267156089929234..comments2023-03-27T06:43:23.427-07:00Comments on Reflections on Majdanek: A joyous occasion...Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4295584641969738415.post-41347915784604218232010-02-07T16:42:43.351-08:002010-02-07T16:42:43.351-08:00Neal,
It's a sticky situation indeed. The lan...Neal, <br />It's a sticky situation indeed. The language of rights leads us to some strange places, doesn't it? Additionally, some questions come up here about Christians employed by the state. Anyway, you're perspective is admirable. Keep up the good work.<br />I've begun a letter which I hope to send to you shortly. <br /><br />- G.R.S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4295584641969738415.post-75315493526450421432010-02-06T14:31:24.238-08:002010-02-06T14:31:24.238-08:00I remember blogging about this case back in August...I remember blogging about this case back in August. http://thegaywhitenorth.blogspot.com/2009/08/orville-nicholas-marriage-commisioner.html<br /><br />I am surprised that this case is still going on.<br /><br />My conclusion is the same: as an agent of the state, a marriage commissioner is not allowed to refuse marrying people based on sexual orientation. If Mr. Orville Nicholas wants to exercise that right, then he can perform marriages for the church.<br /><br />I hope you keep updated your readers about this case. I certainly am interested.Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14112741006863703910noreply@blogger.com