Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis Found in Contempt of Court - Jail

a reply to: Annee

Yall do realize he can be made to resign in one day for family reasons or relgious reasons. Thats th eloophole to firing you make it so they want to quit. Tell her as long as you do not resign you will stay in jail.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: MrWendal
They can take the money from the millions and millions of unreported dollars the Police departments have taken from across the entire State under Asset Forfeiture Laws.

You have a GREAT argument! One many of us have been stating since early in the thread. I don't think she should be in jail, either! She should have been booted! But your argument isn't with us, it's with the Kentucky legislature, who I suspect WANTS the spectacle of the poor, abused, religious woman in jail "for her beliefs".

I would agree completely. 100%.

And it has been my argument that this women is being put into jail and dropped on the Courts so that elected Officials do not have to uphold the law and actually piss off a large portion of potential voters by doing so.

And you are right, my argument is not with ATS. It is with the Kentucky Legislature who has failed to do their jobs in this case. For some reason, many of the posters here have taken issue with what I have said.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: yuppa

So the ten commandments don't apply to Christians?

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

Already explained it. Jesus came and fulfilled the old law. HE was said to had said this. The OT is a history of where we came from to get to that point. You can look this up as well but its easier to call all christians hypocrites right? Jesus gave the gentiles 3 things to do not ten. gentiles were are christians. And once again th eOT plainly says who th e10 commandments were for.

If I were handing out licenses I'd allow lesbians or gays to marry. I can't stop them anymore than I can stop them from having sexual attraction to each other or loving each other enough to be spouses. And yet somehow I want to support the idea of people NOT marrying same sex. I know that'd never work because people want to be treated equally wherever they're and sometimes it's not easy to do something somewhere else if you can't do it where you're. And people would claim it's discrimination if one county will marry them and another won't.

Many people on this forum seem to have a black/white perspective. Either they're completely for something or completely against it. I'm different. I accept lesbians/gays and same-sex marriage, but I'm still skeptical about it and question it. Most other people on this forum are alien to the statement "skeptical about it and question it."

Since when do I have to accept the sovereignty of others and also never question them or be skeptical about their position on things? I have a gay friend ok. Close friend. We talk. Sometimes deeply. I'm not a gay hater. Far from it. And yet many on this forum would want to cast me as one. Twist the truth. They cannot have gray thoughts, it's all black/white.

And yes I understand to be skeptical when the evidence supports it. Thing is, we don't have hte evidence to be certain about these things. We don't understand everything about our evolution. Not all of the how's are figured out. A lot of happy lesbian/gay couples does not make certainty. It seems to me most of the people who support lesbians/gays are doing so solely on the notion of supporting freedom and individual expression. Why would we stop two people who love each other from being officially recognized as loving each other? Or why would we stop them at all? Gays/lesbians used to keep their relationships secret because people commonly ridiculed it. Now it's in the open and it's not ridiculed as much.

I support freedom too. I told my friend to be himself. I would be happy if he married. And yet I will always be skeptical. I cannot accept things blindly. I've never really known certainty anyway. I think some people are more certain than others. Maybe it's psychological? Maybe the part of my brain which creates certainty is small or impaired.

a reply to: MrWendal

Going back and reading your first post, I see what you're saying. I disagree that she not hurting anyone, but I understand what you mean by that, too.

Unfortunately, I suspect a lot of voters in Kentucky support her and that's why the legislature doesn't act. They want to be elected next term and calling a special session to take her out of office wouldn't sit well with the voters. They're having rallies in support of her. It's this whole big thing! LOL!

I found this opinion piece that hits on some really good points, IMO. It's written by a Kentuckian and touches on the human side of this mess. Definitely worth the read.

How the Kim Davis culture war illustrates Kentucky's state of paradox:

You meet a lot of women like Kim Davis down home. In Eastern Kentucky, the born-again Christian—with her denim skirts and disdain for the federal government—is as ubiquitous as the hills themselves. They go to church on Sundays to pray their sons won’t do meth on Mondays. They vote Republican, then go spend their food stamps at the Save-a-Lot. They oppose LGBT rights while embracing their own queer kin (because “you do for family”).
...
Davis and her ilk keep appealing to the First Amendment and their “deeply held religious beliefs,” insisting they are on the side of righteousness. But their actions breed a culture of fear, ignorance, and marginalization—which, in ways both tangible and visceral, injure fellow Kentuckians.
...
These debates aren’t exclusive to Kentucky. Conflicts over “religious liberty” and LGBT rights are raging throughout the country, with more county officials around the country beginning to emulate Kim Davis as legislatures carve out exemptions for homophobic public servants to refuse to serve gay folks. Kentucky is a state still trying to figure out its place in a rapidly changing world. It has to reconcile its past with its future, its religion with its civil rights, if it ever hopes to prosper in the 21st century.

a reply to: jonnywhite

Skeptical about what exactly??? Why even concern yourself with something that doesn't effect you at all???

If a gay couple is walking down the street does it even make a difference to anyone else if they're married or not??? Would you even know if they were???

If you did know would it change anything???

Does their marriage impact your life in any way???

Then who cares???

originally posted by: jonnywhite
I support freedom to. I told my friend to be himself. I would be happy if he married. And yet I will always be skeptical. I cannot accept things blindly. I've never really known certainty anyway. I think some people are more certain than others. Maybe it's psychological? Maybe the part of my brain which creates certainty is small or impaired.

I think you bring up some interesting points and I actually support the "gray area". Too many people jump to one side or the other the instant a situation comes up. I have to spend some time analyzing all sides of an issue before I take a position.

As far as I'm concerned, you don't have to be accepting of any marriage.

So, what are you uncertain about? The stability of gay marriage? The morality of it?

Do you feel differently about the certainty of straight marriage? Why is it acceptable (if it is)?

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: jonnywhite

Skeptical about what exactly??? Why even concern yourself with something that doesn't effect you at all???

If a gay couple is walking down the street does it even make a difference to anyone else if they're married or not??? Would you even know if they were???

If you did know would it change anything???

Does their marriage impact your life in any way???

Then who cares???

Skepticism doesn't mean I forbid same-sex marriage. I support it. Skeptical doesn't mean I cast a wary eye to every person or couple who states they're gay. It doesn't mean I wonder if the couple I passed is a gay couple. I really don't care. But when questioned on a deep level about what it all means, I will openly admit skepticism.

What scares you so much about me? Are you afraid I'll turn over night to become a bigoted homo hater? Maybe one day I will say I'm friendly and then the next I will be aggressive and hostile? Well no need to have those fears because it won't happen. I love all people of all kinds. Just because I'm nebulous on things should not mean you have to fear me.

a reply to: jonnywhite

I admit I'm skeptical when I see a straight married couple where the woman is young and pretty and the man is much older and seems to have a lot of money. Could I be wrong in my suspicions? Maybe. Maybe there really is love there and it's not just about the money. I'd like to support the idea of people NOT marrying for money, but basically it's none of my business, so I don't spend too much time thinking about it.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: jonnywhite

I admit I'm skeptical when I see a straight married couple where the woman is young and pretty and the man is much older and seems to have a lot of money.

Yeah that raises my eyebrows too - along with older white men who have younger Asian or Russian brides. My first thought is "How much did he pay for her"?

a reply to: jonnywhite

No I'm not afraid of you becoming a gay hater. It doesn't matter to me either way. But what do you mean on a deeper level what it all means?? What deeper level and "all what" means???

It means the same thing as any other couple. Anything beyond that delving into what it means to be gay, I don't think it's different than hetero attraction except the obvious. I mean what else do you expect???

As a hetero male myself I just don't get why everyone makes a big deal out of it. I don't care if two guys or two girls are married or dating any more than I care about any other couple. Why would I unless I'm personally involved??

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: Annee

Yall do realize he can be made to resign in one day for family reasons or relgious reasons. Thats th eloophole to firing you make it so they want to quit. Tell her as long as you do not resign you will stay in jail.

I really don't know what can or will legally be done.

But, I am a major supporter of separation of church and state.

originally posted by: jonnywhite

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: jonnywhite

Skeptical about what exactly??? Why even concern yourself with something that doesn't effect you at all???

If a gay couple is walking down the street does it even make a difference to anyone else if they're married or not??? Would you even know if they were???

If you did know would it change anything???

Does their marriage impact your life in any way???

Then who cares???

Skepticism doesn't mean I forbid same-sex marriage. I support it. Skeptical doesn't mean I cast a wary eye to every person or couple who states they're gay. It doesn't mean I wonder if the couple I passed is a gay couple. I really don't care. But when questioned on a deep level about what it all means, I will openly admit skepticism.

So..I have a scientific mind..Apart from my political views..apart from my moral world view...a scientific..and yes, Skeptical, mind.

Here are some interesting factors...About 1 in 4500 babies is born with "indeterminate genatalia"...2% of the population.

Stange, but true. Sexual orientation is a spectrum. Not Binaray...Either/Or.

in those cases the doctors often make a judgment call and operate accordingly giving the baby either female genatalia or male.

This is done unaware of genetic/psychological/physical future. So a male or female might hit puberty and realize they are a woman or a man despite whatever the doctors decision was when they were a child.

Also...seeing as sexual orientation is a spectrum, it is possible for people to have male or female genitalia but for their desires and general biology to cross over from the line where there physicality is.

Natural born homosexuals.

Lastly I must acknowledge knowing women who suffered abuse by men as children that skew homosexual/lesbian. they simply will never feel sexual attraction toward men after the horrors of their youth.

Whatever the cause...it is not my own and thus I have no issue accepting anyone's else's world view, physical destiny, DNA, experience etc.

Nature vs. Nurture? Interesting, but not my place to assign any moral value whatever the answer. To each their own and God bless.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: Grimpachi
I find that it is sad and somewhat amazing that so many people do not understand how state and federal government works especially pertaining to laws.

Most people only get half a year of classes on US government in school. It's really not that surprising. I think US government was a semester long class, maybe it's a year at the most...but that's about it.

Unless you seek out additional education, they really only cover the bare bones. Pretty sad.

This is true. I went to HS in the mid 70's, and even then, I only had one teacher who encouraged his students to read the constitution and the Bill of Rights, and to understand how the branches our our government work. Our education system needs an overhaul, and has for a long time.

originally posted by: neformore
Just read a very valid point on this on Facebook.

Imagine she'd refused to sell/license someone a handgun on religious grounds.

I wonder what kind of arguments would be put forward by those who are defending her and saying she is being persecuted to justify that?

Brought up several pages ago, but still a good point to bring up. As well as this same thing happening when the courts ruled on interracial marriage.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

So hypocritical, and typical.

Its what we've come to expect from Christianity, and America.

I for one am glad, in a way, that the forces that are using Kim Davis chose this moment to make their ham-handed "stand."

The matter will be resolved clearly and completely that religious freedom does not mean that you can dictate your religion to others, particularly, in a government office:

Here, I'll let a Christian make the point:

What this means is that anyone who functions as an agent of the state must remain religiously neutral, providing equal service, treatment, and rights to all people of all religious, ethical, social, and cultural backgrounds.

This separation is one of the fundamental pillars of American society. The Church will never overtake the government and the government will never overtake the Church. This is what our founding fathers fought for. This is what it means to be an American. And Kim Davis posed a great threat to the religious liberties of our nation by refusing to carry out her duties as an agent of the state, issuing marriage licenses to all couples, regardless of their sexuality or gender identity. Davis forced her Christian faith on the people of Rowan County, and violated their right to be able to receive equal treatment from the government, regardless of their sexuality, race, religion, or values. If Davis was able to continue serving as the county clerk, she could, in theory, continue to refuse to grant marriages licenses or provide services to everyone she disagrees with, which would, in effect, completely dissolve the religious freedoms of the people in her county.

How Kim Davis' Imprisonment is a Win for Religious Liberty

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

The only reason this idiot is doing this is because she has been divorced 3 times and could not stand for other people to be happy, probably. I hope she does a hunger strike next in protest, she could stand to lose some weight, unfortunately, the only way for her to really lose weight would be to get the rocks out of her head, that would require a more drastic measure.

Wow, such an enlightened comment. Lets not address the issue at hand, lets insult her physical appearance! Typical Liberal, you are hypocrite just like she is.

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

The only reason this idiot is doing this is because she has been divorced 3 times and could not stand for other people to be happy, probably. I hope she does a hunger strike next in protest, she could stand to lose some weight, unfortunately, the only way for her to really lose weight would be to get the rocks out of her head, that would require a more drastic measure.

Wow, such an enlightened comment. Lets not address the issue at hand, lets insult her physical appearance! Typical Liberal, you are hypocrite just like she is.

You'll have to point that "hypocritical" finger right back at yourself, as you just categorized millions of people unfairly because of your own political beliefs.

The "issue at hand" has been addressed, re addressed, addressed again, and again and again.

Ms. Davis is not obeying the Bible, she is not following the laws of Kentucky or the United States, she chose to disobey a court order, was charged with contempt, and ended up where people who are in contempt of court end up.

Religious freedom does not mean you can inflict your religion onto other Americans. Period.