Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff View Post
...He should have been allowed to refuse the service as long as he made sure that someone else upheld the law. Are you telling me that because he disagrees with one aspect of the law and sends the couple to another officiator, he shouldn't have the ability to judge civil case? When Gay marriage becomes legal, anyone who refuses to officiate shouldn't be allowed to be a judge? That's a sure fire way to slam an agenda though.
I would have found this acceptable.

"I cannot in good conscience perform this ceremony, but I have arranged for an official who is qualified and willing to do so to be here at the appointed time" is far more acceptable to me.

However, MRD is correct. This was not a member of the clergy ALSO acting as a justice of the peace, but a lay official charged with upholding secular statutes. It matters.

All in all, even more argument that government should be out of the marriage business entirely.