It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kentucky: Oath Keepers Say They Will Protect Kim Davis From The Law

page: 16
69
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic


Sounds like if they get the first order dismissed, she won't have to follow it, so she can go back to acting JUST as she was before, NOT issuing licenses and NOT allowing her deputies to do so, because the judge had no jurisdiction to expand on the original order.

You explained it better than I could have, but that was my basic understanding as well. So like I said. Legal wrangling. Lets hope the courts don't fall for it.




posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic


Sounds like if they get the first order dismissed, she won't have to follow it, so she can go back to acting JUST as she was before, NOT issuing licenses and NOT allowing her deputies to do so, because the judge had no jurisdiction to expand on the original order.

You explained it better than I could have, but that was my basic understanding as well. So like I said. Legal wrangling. Lets hope the courts don't fall for it.



Its not a case of if they fall for it or not. If there was a procedural error they have to concede and refile. The motion does not appear sound in any way from reading that side of it.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: dawnstar

That's not what the man said. What he said, plainly was:


The Oath Keepers, the anti-government “Patriot” group... is now offering anti-gay Kentucky clerk Kim Davis a “security detail” to protect her from further arrest if she continues to defy the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling.


They are showing up to prevent her from being rearrested should she choose to violate the law again.




So...what happens if Kim Davis stops issuing marriage licenses, forbids her deputies from doing so as well, and the judge once again orders her to be arrested and jailed for contempt?

Are the Oath Keepers REALLY going to put up an armed resistance to stop her arrest?

What kind of a bloody shootout and martyr making event are they planning?

The Oath Keepers are former soldiers who once vowed to give their lives to protect their country. They may just still have the mindset to do that if they feel it's what their religious beliefs demand that they do. The Theocrats and Dominionists are probably just waiting for something like this. Image the damage this could do in the upcoming election year if all the religious right voted for the candidates making all the right indignant noise.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Wonkette has a funny piece in this. ‘Oath Keepers’ Militia Will Protect Kim Davis From Jackbooted Homosexual G-Men



See, in attempting to force Kim Davis to abide by federal law, the federal courts done overstepped their goddamn bounds, and if the local sheriffs in Kentucky are such pussies they can’t march up to the feds and say “NOT ON MY WATCH, Y’HEAR?” over and over until they comply and leave poor Kim Davis alone, well by God, the Oath Keepers will do it.





posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   
these oath keepers should be in prison, for pointing loaded guns at federal employees, and threatening to shoot them, when they were at the Clive Bundy ranch.......I bet if you had 30 young black guys out there with loaded AR's pointed at the feds, they would be dead or have long prison sentences.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cheddarhead

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: dawnstar

That's not what the man said. What he said, plainly was:


The Oath Keepers, the anti-government “Patriot” group... is now offering anti-gay Kentucky clerk Kim Davis a “security detail” to protect her from further arrest if she continues to defy the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling.


They are showing up to prevent her from being rearrested should she choose to violate the law again.




So...what happens if Kim Davis stops issuing marriage licenses, forbids her deputies from doing so as well, and the judge once again orders her to be arrested and jailed for contempt?

Are the Oath Keepers REALLY going to put up an armed resistance to stop her arrest?

What kind of a bloody shootout and martyr making event are they planning?

The Oath Keepers are former soldiers who once vowed to give their lives to protect their country. They may just still have the mindset to do that if they feel it's what their religious beliefs demand that they do. The Theocrats and Dominionists are probably just waiting for something like this. Image the damage this could do in the upcoming election year if all the religious right voted for the candidates making all the right indignant noise.


Well that would be the end of their non profit i guess.

Kim has had the Gov dismiss a motion already and is ready to impeach her. Everyone is tired of the lady except the very right wing radicals. I really hope they fine her enough to cover all the expenses she is racking up for Kentucky over an issue neither her or her legal team understand at all.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx
these oath keepers should be in prison, for pointing loaded guns at federal employees, and threatening to shoot them, when they were at the Clive Bundy ranch.......I bet if you had 30 young black guys out there with loaded AR's pointed at the feds, they would be dead or have long prison sentences.


Depends if they were head by a lawyer, followed the law, and had hundreds of lawyers working with them....

Thats why i dont get this. They are educated people for the most part and were started by a lawyer. They should know the laws.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

so shouldn't anyone running for president.

lol.... I'm a member of the Holy Green of Leaf Tabernacle and we smoke weed at our services that are held everyday of the week. I believe that it's my obligation as a follower to attend these worship services
therefore, I should be exempt from you drug testing dear employer!!! It's my constitutional right!

wonder how that would go over??



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide Their true colors are red, white, and blue. While I may personally disagree with the oathkeepers doing this, their sentiment is a defiance to a legislative SCOTUS.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   
This whole thing is getting so frustrating. People don't seem to understand that siding with Kim Davis is supporting government tyranny. As a an elected County Clerk, Kim Davis is the government. She is the government enforcing her religion on the people within her county.

Government officials cannot have religious accommodations if it prevents them from performing the full duties of their office. If she needed to pray everyday at a certain time or something along those lines... that can be accommodated, discrimination on religious grounds, cannot.

In the United States, government cannot establish a religion.


Establishment Clause

The First Amendment's Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion.


Cornell

ETA: This is where separation of Church and State exists in the US Constitution.


edit on 9/11/2015 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: marg6043



Its this what America has become now, a fight between religious zealots against the rest of the population?


And people are told be afraid of Islam. The war on the separation of church and state is ramping up.


I've been watching them going down kicking and screaming since Madeline Murray O'Hare.

Its been interesting watching Christianity lose its totalitarian grip on this country. Still got a ways to go, though.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnFisher
a reply to: Hefficide Their true colors are red, white, and blue. While I may personally disagree with the oathkeepers doing this, their sentiment is a defiance to a legislative SCOTUS.



Really wasnt aware they legislated anything hmmm.

They ruled on an unconstitutional practice in some states. Thats it.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnFisher
Their true colors are red, white, and blue. While I may personally disagree with the oathkeepers doing this, their sentiment is a defiance to a legislative SCOTUS.


Then they're in defiance of something that didn't happen. SCOTUS didn't legislate anything. The Constitution did. Kenutcky, among other states, violated the 14th amendment, and the SCOTUS ruled that they can't do that...



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:22 PM
link   
I've read very few responses here, because frankly, I've been talking to the uninformed on FB and am sort of tired of this topic now. So if any of the following has already been shared, I apologize for the repeat. Kim IS making it about religious beliefs, but that should NOT be the issue. The Constitution specifically states that any powers not enumerated to the federal government therein, goes to the states. Marriage is not enumerated in the Constitution, so it's a states' power. Kim IS following the law. Her state specifies that marriage is between a man and woman. Also, even if marriage were enumerated in the Constitution as being a federal power, it would be up to Congress to make a law concerning same. The Supreme Court does NOT get to make law like they just did!!! Congress, according to the Constitution, makes law, Supreme Court interprets law, and the Executive enforces law. Some of us would like the government to completely get out of the marriage business altogether -- all this bickering would cease. People could go back to getting married through their church, or having contracts... I think I'll put this out on FB in it's own thread, then hopefully things will soon start settling down!
edit on 11-9-2015 by Habit4ming because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Habit4ming
The Constitution specifically states that any powers not enumerated to the federal government therein, goes to the states.


But restrictions on states making laws IS enumerated in the Constitution. States laws must apply equally to all citizens of that state. So, marriage (a state law) must protect ALL citizens, gay and straight.


The Supreme Court does NOT get to make law like they just did!!!


The Supreme Court did not make a law.



I've been talking to the uninformed on FB


You ARE one of the uninformed.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:28 PM
link   
But they wouldn't do this for an atheist a Muslim or a Scientologist...so why only for a Christian?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Habit4ming

The Supreme Court does NOT get to make law...


No. They don't. You are correct.


...like they just did!!!


No. They (the SCOTUS) did not "make law". They ruled on the question.


Kim IS making it about religious beliefs,


Yes, she "IS" making it about religious beliefs.

but that should NOT be the issue.

Correct.


Kim IS following the law.

No. She is not.

edit on 9/11/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Rough sequence of events in Kim Davis case.

1. 1868 - 14th amendment is written, saying that states cannot make laws that deny equal protection under the law. In other words, states can't make laws that don't apply equally to all citizens.

2. Kentucky, among other states, make laws banning same-sex marriages, while permitting opposite-sex marriage. This is a law that doesn't apply equally to all citizens. It violates the 14th amendment.

3. The People take several states with "gay marriage bans" to the Supreme Court, charging that their state marriage laws only apply to straight people.

4. The Supreme Court finds that they are right and rules that the state "gay marriage" bans are unconstitutional, violating the 14th amendment. States marriage laws now apply to everyone equally. And state laws that ban gay marriage are void.

5. All state governors order their county clerks to issue marriage licenses to ALL citizens who qualify for marriage, including gay people.

6. Kim Davis refuses. And prohibits anyone in her office from issuing marriage licenses to ANYONE.

7. Two gay couples and two straight couples, who were denied marriage licenses in Rowan County, take her to court and win.

8. The governor orders Kim Davis to issue licenses from her office. She refuses.

9. Judge Bunning calls for a hearing and finds Ms. Davis in Contempt of Court and sends her to jail for refusing to follow a court order.

10. At the direction of Judge Bunning, court clerk deputies begin issuing licenses and the people who sued (in #7 above) get their licenses.

11. Judge Bunning releases Ms. Davis with the orders to NOT interfere with her deputies from issuing licenses.

12. Ms Davis goes back to work Monday and we'll see what happens.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 06:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: JohnFisher
Their true colors are red, white, and blue. While I may personally disagree with the oathkeepers doing this, their sentiment is a defiance to a legislative SCOTUS.


Then they're in defiance of something that didn't happen. SCOTUS didn't legislate anything. The Constitution did. Kenutcky, among other states, violated the 14th amendment, and the SCOTUS ruled that they can't do that...
TThat's how it was played off anyway. Everybody had the same right to marry. It just wasn't who they wanted to marry. People want to marry robots and children and animals and objects too. That's why marriage had to be defined. They redefined marriage on their own accord. Now everybody still has the same right to marry, same as before, and it still isn't to whomever they want. That's legislation.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 06:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Habit4ming

and, I have a feeling that if the state had passed a law legalizing gay marriage, she would still be rufusing to based on religous principles. so well, don't think it makes a difference here.




top topics



 
69
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join