Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis Found in Contempt of Court - Jail

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: woogleuk
Fantastic news, all hail the USA, land of free speech and religion, how dare she uphold her religious beliefs the silly mare....

So someone who has a "religious belief" that blacks are just animals and should not be served, or has a religious belief that women are 4th class citizens and should not speak unless spoken to, following those beliefs is fine by you?

I was told to take my full moon virgin sacrifice to the supreme court earlier, I might be able to get away with it

originally posted by: woogleuk
a reply to: hellobruce

No, I'm agreeing, what right does she have to express herself and uphold the values she has known all her life, it's just not politically correct in this modern day society.

This is a woman that has divorced three times, delivered babies out of wedlock, and based on the time line of the children, committed adultery, not exactly a candidate to become St. Kim of Homophobia.

a reply to: BubbaJoe

I want to state for the record, that as far as I know, she refused to acknowledge gay marriage, that's it....and whilst I'm not against that (gay marriage), I am against forcing people to do things that they are brought up to believe (unless that includes raping, stoning and hurting innocent people).

People cry free speech all the time, unless they don't want to hear it.

Could they have not quietly replaced the woman without making such a scene?

originally posted by: BubbaJoe
a reply to: retiredTxn

I have had some pretty bad experiences with fundi congregations, and realize I should not take it out on everyone that proclaims to be christian. I have known some good christian folks, and that I will not deny. But the fundis drove me away from anything to do with it.

Dude, I was raised Assembly of God, in Texas no less. Nowadays I am much more humble, and I don't take these twisted religions at face value. They pervert the Word, and spew hate and intolerance. The other strike against me is I'm conservative. When others rant about 'right wing Christians", that is not who I am. But sometimes I am lumped in there with them.

I am my own kind of conservative, not what the RNC tells me to be. Now back to the thread. Sorry to the OP for de-railing.

originally posted by: woogleuk

Could they have not quietly replaced the woman without making such a scene?

No. She made the scene. She was denying others their rights. She has to be impeached by the legislature of Kentucky, which does not convene until January. Simple.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
Again...she deserved to be fired. I couldn't agree more. She did not deserve to be given a choice of breaking her beliefs or being jailed. That was wrong.

What you're missing is that she can't be fired. It is illegal to fire an elected official. Just as a federal judge can't fire Obama, a county judge can't fire this woman. Removing her from office requires the state legislature to be in session and the governor isn't going to call a special session over this. That leaves one option, giving her a court order to hand our marriage licenses and putting her in jail on contempt of court charges if she refuses.

originally posted by: woogleuk
Could they have not quietly replaced the woman without making such a scene?

No. She's an elected official. Filling an elected position comes with a certain level of job security, provided you can continue winning elections. That's the whole point of such a position.

originally posted by: woogleuk
I am against forcing people to do things that they are brought up to believe (unless that includes raping, stoning and hurting innocent people).

So you believe people should be allowed to discriminate against blacks, women, left handed people etc. as long as they were bought up that way!

a reply to: retiredTxn

I've said a few times that if Steve Beshear had called a special session, like many people wanted him to do, this all could have been handled without the federal court and without all the attention this has gotten. There was one or two other county clerks in Kentucky who also had reservations about issuing the licenses to same-sex couples. Beshear didn't call the special session because he wanted a precedence to be set and an example to be made of Kim Davis.

This is as much about Kentucky politics as it is about equal rights. Beshear wanted the scene to be made.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Well, I think he has done a great job then. He is leaving her out there to dry, and very soon may get that precedent he desires. Hope it goes the right way.

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: retiredTxn

I've said a few times that if Steve Beshear had called a special session, like many people wanted him to do, this all could have been handled without the federal court and without all the attention this has gotten. There was one or two other county clerks in Kentucky who also had reservations about issuing the licenses to same-sex couples. Beshear didn't call the special session because he wanted a precedence to be set and an example to be made of Kim Davis.

This is as much about Kentucky politics as it is about equal rights. Beshear wanted the scene to be made.

This is interesting info...sorry if I missed it, but could you provide more research on this?

But it still doesn't change the facts of her actions.

originally posted by: woogleuk
a reply to: BubbaJoe

I want to state for the record, that as far as I know, she refused to acknowledge gay marriage, that's it....and whilst I'm not against that (gay marriage), I am against forcing people to do things that they are brought up to believe (unless that includes raping, stoning and hurting innocent people).

People cry free speech all the time, unless they don't want to hear it.

Could they have not quietly replaced the woman without making such a scene?

She is a county clerk responsible for issuing marriage licenses. She decided in June of this year, that she wouldn't issue licenses to anyone gay or straight. She was ordered to issue them by the governor of her state and a federal judge. She refused, and appealed it to the federal appeals court, her state supreme court, and the US Supreme Court. They all refused to hear the case and sent it back to the lower court, the judge at the lower court upheld his original ruling, and jailed her for contempt of court.

She is an elected official, and the governor of the state refused to call a special session in order to have her impeached.

originally posted by: retiredTxn

originally posted by: BubbaJoe
a reply to: retiredTxn

I have had some pretty bad experiences with fundi congregations, and realize I should not take it out on everyone that proclaims to be christian. I have known some good christian folks, and that I will not deny. But the fundis drove me away from anything to do with it.

Dude, I was raised Assembly of God, in Texas no less. Nowadays I am much more humble, and I don't take these twisted religions at face value. They pervert the Word, and spew hate and intolerance. The other strike against me is I'm conservative. When others rant about 'right wing Christians", that is not who I am. But sometimes I am lumped in there with them.

I am my own kind of conservative, not what the RNC tells me to be. Now back to the thread. Sorry to the OP for de-railing.

I have my conservative moments as well, and probably not left of center enough to be considered a true democrat. You and I probably have much more in common than what the right/left wing want us to believe, hell over a beer and bar b que, we could probably solve most of the problems in this country.

originally posted by: DelMarvel
a reply to: yuppa

The whole New Covenant/Old Covenent thing becomes a gimmick for "salad bar" style Christians.

Whatever they don't want to follow in the old Testament is "old Covenent."

Whatever they want to cite is still the Word of God.

You see all the usual Old Testament quotes on the posters carried by the anti-gay contingent.

If you read the Bible correctly it SPECIFICALLY STATES WHO THE OT APPLIES TO. Its not pick what you want. The ones posting old testament need to stop and actually understand what they are reading. They are being hypocrites.

originally posted by: retiredTxn

originally posted by: woogleuk

Could they have not quietly replaced the woman without making such a scene?

No. She made the scene. She was denying others their rights. She has to be impeached by the legislature of Kentucky, which does not convene until January. Simple.

cough unpaid leave and resigning cough.

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Two observations:

1) It apparently is okay for elected officials to ignore the laws when they have the liberal ideology and social lemming media behind them. No one went to jail for refusing to enforce DOMA, DADT, Immigration Laws, etc.

2) SCOTUS rulings do not rewrite state laws. Judges are neither legislators nor executives. They can strike down state marriage laws, as was done with recent rulings (erroneously and via pure judicial activism, but there is no easy recourse against that.) Has Kentucky passed new marriage or civil union laws yet? What law is this country clerk being told to enforce?

She wasn't told to enforce anything, she was told to do her job and issue marriage licenses to any two people that were entitled to be married. This included same sex couples as the one man - one woman kentucky law had been ruled unconstitutional.

I'm not disputing that she is supposed to fulfill the law. I'm asking what law didn't she fulfill? Did the Kentucky legislature pass, and the Kentucky governor sign a law that allowed same sex union licenses?

a reply to: yuppa

So the ten commandments don't apply to Christians?

The OT is part of the bible, plain and simple.

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
Two observations:

1) It apparently is okay for elected officials to ignore the laws when they have the liberal ideology and social lemming media behind them. No one went to jail for refusing to enforce DOMA, DADT, Immigration Laws, etc.

2) SCOTUS rulings do not rewrite state laws. Judges are neither legislators nor executives. They can strike down state marriage laws, as was done with recent rulings (erroneously and via pure judicial activism, but there is no easy recourse against that.) Has Kentucky passed new marriage or civil union laws yet? What law is this country clerk being told to enforce?

She wasn't told to enforce anything, she was told to do her job and issue marriage licenses to any two people that were entitled to be married. This included same sex couples as the one man - one woman kentucky law had been ruled unconstitutional.

I'm not disputing that she is supposed to fulfill the law. I'm asking what law didn't she fulfill? Did the Kentucky legislature pass, and the Kentucky governor sign a law that allowed same sex union licenses?

The Supreme Court ruled that any state laws banning same sex marriage were unconstitutional. It doesn't matter if there isn't a law specifically allowing same sex marriage. All that has to happen is someone to sue her, and any court in the land is going to rule against her based on the Supreme Court ruling. She didn't go to jail for not following some law. She went to jail for refusing to follow the judge's court order.

Same thing happened with interracial marriage. Supreme Court struck down any state laws banning it. Some states didn't remove those laws for years and years, but they weren't enforceable. If any state tried to refuse an interracial marriage license, any lawsuit would end up in favor of the plaintiffs. The rulings aren't based on a specific law - they are based on precedent of Supreme Court ruling.

You do know the difference between a law and a ruling, don't you?

originally posted by: woogleuk


Could they have not quietly replaced the woman without making such a scene?

Because she is an elected official, they can't just quietly replace her. She has to go through impeachment proceedings and then a trial to actually remove her. It takes a lot of time. In the meantime, she would make sure and stop all same sex marriage licenses in her county.

It involves more than just her personal belief. It involves her turning her county into a theocracy with her being the "ruler from God".

a reply to: EternalSolace

She also could have just quietly resigned, or quietly allowed her employees to issue the marriage licenses without her participation, and that would have eliminated all the fuss and attention. She wanted to set an example as much as anybody.