Can a Government Official Claim Religious Exemption from Performing Official Duties?

I believe that in the gay marriage Supreme Court case, justice Scalia's dissenting opinion said that the decision had nothing to do with the Constitution.

Brandon9000 wrote:

I believe that in the gay marriage Supreme Court case, justice Scalia's dissenting opinion said that the decision had nothing to do with the Constitution.

Now there's irony for you, considering how often this court has legislated from the bench, without reference to the constitution. A good example is Scalia's majority opinion in The District of Columbia versus Heller, in which it was asserted that there is a natural right of self-defense. Although this may be an eminently defensible claim to make, there's nothing about it in the constitution.

Kim Davis released from jail, ordered not to interfere with same-sex marriage licenses
(By David Weigel, Abby Phillip and Sarah Larimer, The Washington Post, September 8, 2015)

GRAYSON, Ky. — “Eye of the Tiger” poured out of the loudspeakers. The crowd cheered. And Kim Davis sobbed, then exulted.

The defiant clerk from Rowan County was free at last, ready to thank a crowd of thousands gathered outside the jailhouse where Davis was held for five days for refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/09/08/judge-orders-kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-released-from-jail/

Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The Constitution states -

Quote:

Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Because the Constitution doesn't mention marriage in no way means marriage isn't a right.

But it does mean that the Constitution doesn't say that gay marriage is a right, and these cases are being decided on the basis of what the Constitution says.

Does the Constitution explicitly allow for marriage between natural-born citizens and immigrants?

The US Constitution also doesn't say anything about regular marriage or divorce or corporations being people. As Set already pointed out the Constitution doesn't say anything about self defense. It seems you want to disparage or deny a right not mentioned in the Constitution.

You know, you should actually read and study the constitution before you shoot off your mouth. This is the first section of the fourteenth amendment, in its entirety:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

That means that all people have the same civil rights, and that includes people whose sexual predilections you do not approve of.

The Constitution states -

Quote:

Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Because the Constitution doesn't mention marriage in no way means marriage isn't a right.

The fact that a right isn't mentioned specifically in the Constitution doesn't mean it isn't a right nor does it mean it isn't protected under the Constitution. The Constitution specifically says there are rights not mentioned in it. It also states that if the right isn't mentioned it is still a right.

parados wrote:

The Constitution states -

Quote:

Amendment 9
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Because the Constitution doesn't mention marriage in no way means marriage isn't a right.

Right you are.

The Constitution does not mention oatmeal in any way...but I should be allowed to eat it for breakfast without fear of being arrested.