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’s Christian Governor Wants Kim Davis to Pay Her $225,000 Bigotry Fine

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 01:40 AM
link   
Remember Kim Davis? The 3 time divorcee who denied marriage licenses to same sex couples after courts ruled in their favor to recognize their marriages? I'm sure most of us are aware. She lost her court case defending her actions, and she lost her appeal. Now Kentucky sits with a nifty fine.


In public, Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin has praised former Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis for her defiance of the law when she refused to sign marriage licenses for same-sex couples. In 2015, he said, “I absolutely support her willingness to stand on her First Amendment rights… Without any question I support her.”

That support carried a lot of weight after two of those couples sued her for violating their rights. They won the lawsuit and Davis later appealed the decision. In 2017, she lost that appeal, saddling the Kentucky government (i.e. the taxpayers) with approximately $225,000 in legal fees.


Source

The governor must be getting some heat in office for that fine floating about. How funny that we're so quick to switch our beliefs once money is involved.


But that $225,000 bill still needs to be paid.

And now Matt Bevin, the Christian governor who always had Davis’ back, says she should pay the full amount, not the government. His lawyers are arguing that Davis and Davis alone is responsible for her actions.


Maybe there outta be a GoFundMe Page for Davis to cover the fine?




posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 01:48 AM
link   
the fund sounds like a good thing to do



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 01:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Agreed . Pay the Piper Bee Itch !



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 01:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Maybe she can get a grant from this fund:
www.reuters.com...
edi t on 31-1-2019 by JinMI because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 01:58 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Maybe you could pay for her? Care to donate?



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 02:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: musicismagic
the fund sounds like a good thing to do


Do you think she'd raise enough funds?

Speaking of which, didn't she already have a considerable amount of money raised for her?

She'd been raising funds for her legal defence since 2015 although I can't get exact sources of how much she ended up raising initially?



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 02:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Go Fund Yourself .....



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 02:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: JinMI

Maybe you could pay for her? Care to donate?


Why on Earth would I do that?



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 03:07 AM
link   
Ah yes. Good old fashioned Moral Emotional Wedge Issues, one of the modern opiates for the masses. I always disdained this kind of topics being national level fervor. So I supported them getting the rights if not just so they'd shut up and we could move on to discourse about things that are screwing us all over equally. And then Obama came it got it for them. And then they started rioting over it (getting their rights finally). Meanwhile Obama cooked up a whole buffet of new Moral Emotional Wedge Issues for people to eat up like two scoops of ice cream and a steak.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 03:55 AM
link   
She's the one fined. Why should the govt. pay it. They don't pay my traffic fines.

She made her bed, she gets to lay in it.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 03:57 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss


Good old fashioned Moral Emotional Wedge Issues, one of the modern opiates for the masses. I always disdained this kind of topics being national level fervor. So I supported them getting the rights if not just so they'd shut up and we could move on to discourse about things that are screwing us all over equally. And then Obama came it got it for them. And then they started rioting over it (getting their rights finally). Meanwhile Obama cooked up a whole buffet of new Moral Emotional Wedge Issues for people to eat up like two scoops of ice cream and a steak.


So in a topic about a woman refusing the treat same sex couples equally as hetereosexual couples, in the eyes of the law, in marriage, you're complaining about Obama and how we're being screwed over equally. Yet, you express no concern or issue for the actions of this woman treating American citizens unequally?

Ok then.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Who the hell wants to get married anyways. Half of them probably only wanted it because they "werent allowed". No dou8bt, as once they had it and had nothing REALLY left to want they started rioting and beating people.

This story here, the (what couple) people got a fat settlement. So you made their hassle 'worthy of telling' because it made some Republicans look bad. Yawn. What is this ABOVE TMZ?

Now how Moral Emotional Wedge Issues have wrecked this nation society, and how Republicans and Democrats have been partners in crime in this diabolical perpetuation of polarization, thats the kinds of discussions we should be having in ABOVE TOP SECRET.




posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

The activists wanted it so they could go to the next step in remaking society in their image. A few just wanted the legalities of it.

Most of us were fine with the legalities, of course, but this gets lost in the shuffle of the acitivists' next push which is to move further into encroaching on others who disagree with them.

Acitivism, of course, is a job that can never be satisfied or it ceases to be a job.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Southern Guardian

Who the hell wants to get married anyways. Half of them probably only wanted it because they "werent allowed". No dou8bt, as once they had it and had nothing REALLY left to want they started rioting and beating people.

This story here, the (what couple) people got a fat settlement. So you made their hassle 'worthy of telling' because it made some Republicans look bad. Yawn. What is this ABOVE TMZ?

Now how Moral Emotional Wedge Issues have wrecked this nation society, and how Republicans and Democrats have been partners in crime in this diabolical perpetuation of polarization, thats the kinds of discussions we should be having in ABOVE TOP SECRET.



You're ignoring the issue at hand.

Scenario: After same sex marriage was legalized, this woman refused to sign marriage certificates for same sex couples.

Question: Was she wrong to do that?
Question 2: Should she be held liable to pay the fine levied against her?

None of this "but Obama!" crap, and Emotional Wedge issues talk. Simple question deserves a simple answer. Do you agree with her, or do you agree with the people that found her "guilty"?



posted on Feb, 1 2019 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Southern Guardian


This story here, the (what couple) people got a fat settlement.



Sorry to be rude, but that is a lie. They sued for a got a marraige license. No money. he got the boot in the next election. So, is the lie in service of an agenda? Or is it simply ignorance? By the way, I practice law in Rowan County where it all went down, so to speak.
edit on 1-2-2019 by F4guy because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-2-2019 by F4guy because: spell check run amok.




top topics



 
3

log in

join