I'm collecting false "exclusions" that government workers might claim as excuses for not doing their duty based on their religious beliefs -- like Kim Davis refusing to issue marriage licenses.
On Sept. 5th I suggested that a Buddhist might refuse to issue gun permits because his faith forbids killing. Another one floated by on the internet today:
A Muslim clerk in the drivers license bureau might refuse a license to women because some Islamist laws forbid women to drive.
Mike Huckabee says, yes, one should follow the law . . . but only if it is right. Right according to whom, Huck? Isn't that the duty of the U. S. Supreme Court, which has already brushed off Kim Davis' claim? So then Huck cites the Dred Scott decision (that said no one of African descent may be a U. S. citizen) to show that SCOTUS makes mistakes and later overturns them.
Yes, Dred Scott was a terrible decision. But that does not justify 300 million people each, willy nilly, on her own, choosing which laws to obey. So, maybe, Huck, you would say . . . it's OK if you give a Bible verse to back you up. No, better not go there. Too many forbidden things that Christian conservatives do every day (eating shellfish, being greedy, coveting neighbors wives, etc.)
So what's the answer, Huck, huh? Only those with the right pipeline to God have the right answers to what is a right law? Is that it? And you, Huck, get to say if it is the right pipeline? And which God? Oh, I see. And who appointed you the Protestant Pope?