Non-religious woman who refused judge's order to meet with Christian counselor loses her sons

Technically I suppose the court which issued the order would count as a “higher power.”

16 Likes

It does sound dubious, but if you’re given a court order to do something, you don’t just stop going, you take your own legal action.

I also am curious if this was the only counselor the person had to choose from. I’m not defending the government mandating anything religion-based, but the lack of information in this article makes me extremely skeptic.

2 Likes

I know this is going to get a lot of jeers, but in the wake of everyone I know on FB yelling “do your damn job!” at some woman because she refused to do something she was morally against, is this that much different? This person had some domestic issues, the state had to intervene, and it resolved the issue by ordering her to get counseling and she refused to follow the law. Why does she get to ignore the law based on her own, individual beliefs, but not Kim Davis?

I mean, yes, I disagree with Davis’ assessment of homosexuality, and I totally agree with this woman’s analysis of the crackpot counselor, but obviously that’s my subjective point of view. Either we allow folks to think for themselves, or we don’t. “Do your damn job” is the stupidest phrase I’ve heard being yelled in years, and the fact that it’s being yelled by mostly liberal intellectuals does not speak well of liberal intellectuals as a whole.

Watch the video. It shows the actual court order that names Mary Pepper specifically as the person she had to contact for her counseling.

6 Likes

Embedded flash player? C’mon BB, I thought you were more modern than that.

5 Likes

Are the cases really comparable? The story here is about a woman forced by a judge to get Christian counseling, while Davis enforced her religion as an official state actor.

25 Likes

What about separation of Church and State? An official appointed by the State should not be allowed to bring religion into it.

12 Likes

I watched the video, it said that court ordered counseling was required, it never said with whom specifically. Even the part where the “ACLU does not have all the facts in the case” makes this sound a bit sensationalist.

If I’m mistaken and there’s a point where it specifically says “she was ordered to specifically take counseling from Mary Pepper” I’d like to know where.

Couldn’t she have played along, for her kids you know?

Admittedly, it’s under a ‘Recommended’ heading.

4 Likes

Has anyone ever tried to fight the courts on that one? It seems like something they do largely out of inertia.

2 Likes

I’m not sure what your point about Davis is, since the brouhaha isn’t about her beliefs but her assertion that she did not, in fact, have to do her damn job and initially refused to let anyone else do it for her, while still smugly drawing a paycheck. If she was actually morally against it–“it” being upholding the Constitution as she swore to, and “it” also being verifying that couples who came before her were legally entitled to marry (which they were)–she had every opportunity to resign her post.

I mean, I realize you’re attempting to draw some connection regarding beliefs, but…c’mon. Best you could do?

12 Likes

She tried to take legal action. It was ignored.

7 Likes

Her kids were the reason that she didn’t “play along”.

12 Likes

I once did a relatively deep dive on a specific courts history of 3rd party contractors for this purpose - though mainly I was reviewing those paid to provide “expert” testimony. Absolute horror show. Judges get a LOT of leeway- what’s that old saying about power? At any rate, I haven’t read the article but it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if she and the judge both see eye to eye on the necessity of converting heathens.

7 Likes

Yup, they try, and mostly seem to win, but only after incurring extra costs, extra sentence time, etc.

8 Likes

The cases are comparable, but not in the way greenberger tries to compare them.

In both cases, a person acting on behalf of the government imposed their religion on someone else.

36 Likes

There needs to be an AAA (Atheist Alcoholics Anonymous)…but that might get confusing with American Automotive Association already claiming that name.

1 Like

There tends to be a fair amount of handwaving about that Commandment such that it doesn’t apply to whatever such folks don’t want it to apply to.

Very few self-proclaimed Bible literalists actually take it literally when it’s personally inconvenient to do so.

(Some do, but they seem pretty damn rare.)

2 Likes

But should she have had to?

Change up the situation and see if the logic still works.

A (bigoted) judge might think a gay parent would be a better parent if they were straight, so should a gay parent have to play along with pray-the-gay-away therapy if such a judge ordered them to?

Of course not.

11 Likes