Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Those anti-Christians who are thrilled to see this woman punished and jailed have no heart. Surely as a nation there's room for all of us. Other states provide a way out for the religious clerks. It works for everybody, including the gays seeking a marriage license. This woman's only "way out" is to submit to the courts, and deny her God. What kind of America is this? The judge knew in advance she wouldn't do that, that's why he didn't fine her. It's coercion. It's extortion.
In the words of Rodney King..."Can't we all just get along?"
What part of she had and still has a way out do you not get?
She can allow deputy clerks to issue the licenses, but refuses to allow anyone in the entire office issue them.
There is an out, allow deputies clerks to issue the licenses, but Kim refused to allow that out.
What she now wants is for the county clerk to no longer issue marriage licenses. She wants the administration of licensing to be removed from her office all together which just pushes the issue off to another office.
That is what the North Carolina law allows. As to who performs marriage licensing duties for the state, that is totally up to the state. Some states leave it up to the county. But, there is no conflict with federal ruling as long as whatever is done applies the same for all types of marriages. If Kentucky wants to set up a system where a county could chose between organizations or individuals that issue licenses, even based on conflicts with religious beliefs, that could be option. Again, as long as it applies to all marriages, it is not a federal matter.
ETA: I might be wrong, but I think part of her issue was that her name would still be on there - something Kentucky can change, if they choose.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
There would have to be something on the books for the attorney to say they don't need her approval.
Wrong. What you overlook is the broad power the federal district court judge has to enforce a remedy. We begin with the principle that federal law prevails over state law. The court could, in theory, use this power to issue all kinds of different orders. For example, it could issue an order that gives approval on behalf of the clerk and in her place. It could grant an injunction that prohibits the clerk from exercising any powers of her office and could than appoint one of the deputies as "acting clerk". I can imagine a number of orders that could be issued that would give legal effect to marriage licenses issued by deputy clerks. At the extreme, a judge could constitutionally even seize the office of the clerk and appoint his own staff to run it--temporarily.
The key to the whole thing is that Kentucky law cannot be used to the thwart the Supreme Court's decision about gay marriage. To the extent it stands in the way, it can be swept aside.
The simple lesson to be learned from this is that no indefinitely resists the power of the courts to enforce constitutional rights.
Apparently ALL teachings of the bible don't have the same cachet for her as some of the 'cherry picked' others.
They need a new clerk. One who will perform the defined duties and responsibilities of her office on behalf of the state without bringing disrepute to either her office or the state.
2nd she can reaffirm by quitting her j-o-b. That is her way out. Her true GOD, shown via her actions, is her $80,000 salary.
This is what I'm talking about. You can't argue this without insulting the woman's faith and Christian beliefs. That makes your objection much more personal than it should be. You want her punished not for what she did, but because she dares profess her belief in God.
At least this is how it seems.
This is what I'm talking about. You can't argue this without insulting the woman's faith and Christian beliefs. That makes your objection much more personal than it should be. You want her punished not for what she did, but because she dares profess her belief in God.
At least this is how it seems.
I think the term call "for punishment" is being confused with "just reward" due to her more than adequate display of "professing her belief in god" manifesting itself in only one very narrow and particular aspect of his edicts. Many others of his tenets she seems more than capable of ignoring if they have any restrictive impact on her personal life at all.
Apparently ALL teachings of the bible don't have the same cachet for her as some of the 'cherry picked' others.
They need a new clerk. One who will perform the defined duties and responsibilities of her office on behalf of the state without bringing disrepute to either her office or the state.
That will totally be up to the electorate. Even if the state impeached her, which is doubtful will happen because of the political backlash it woukd create, she can run again and be elected again. And, having once taught near the area, I would not be surprised at all to see that happen, for a variety of reasons.
__________________
When I post in bold red that is moderator action and, per the TOS, can only be discussed through Direct Message.
That is what the North Carolina law allows. As to who performs marriage licensing duties for the state, that is totally up to the state. Some states leave it up to the county. But, there is no conflict with federal ruling as long as whatever is done applies the same for all types of marriages. If Kentucky wants to set up a system where a county could chose between organizations or individuals that issue licenses, even based on conflicts with religious beliefs, that could be option. Again, as long as it applies to all marriages, it is not a federal matter.
ETA: I might be wrong, but I think part of her issue was that her name would still be on there - something Kentucky can change, if they choose.
There is an attempt in Michigan, to move the issuing of marriage licenses to religious institutions only. And that is nothing more than a blatant attempt to restrict SSM using the guise of religious objections as a reason to not offer the license. Yes, there are some denominations that support SSM. But overall, this is an attempt to impose religious beliefs into everyones life.
Watching an interview with the lawyer for Mrs. Davis on the Today Show. Direct quote when asked how this ends, "We don't know how this ends. It's up to the judge and appellate court. There is so much due process violated by the judge."
In other words, she's going to be in jail until her term ends. Or the legislature changes the marriage license process, which won't be earlier than 2016.
In a few days, this will die down. No news will drop it from most American's radar. And she will still be in jail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Javacoffee
Those anti-Christians who are thrilled to see this woman punished and jailed have no heart. Surely as a nation there's room for all of us. Other states provide a way out for the religious clerks. It works for everybody, including the gays seeking a marriage license. This woman's only "way out" is to submit to the courts, and deny her God. What kind of America is this? The judge knew in advance she wouldn't do that, that's why he didn't fine her. It's coercion. It's extortion.
In the words of Rodney King..."Can't we all just get along?"
Are you not following the same story we are? She was offered an out. The judge specifically asked her if she would allow her deputy clerks to issue licenses. She said "No".
Here's a great tweet from Rachel Evans:
"No one's being jailed for practicing her religion. Someone's being jailed for using the government to force others to practice her religion"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
