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.
That's part of the reason Kentucky is considered one of the most corrupt states in the Union. Nepotism is rampant here.
This is the Davis family's way of ensuring that that cushy job stays in the family for a third consecutive generations. The former county clerk was Kim's mother, who hired Kim as a deputy. When the mother was ready to retire, she stepped down and Kim ran. Now Kim has hired her son, so that when she's ready to leave he can step up and take over. This is Kentucky; this is the way things are done down here.
I keep telling y'all, this is a whole different world and a whole different century down here. This is just the way everybody down here expects things to be done. You've got 50-year old men working as baggers at the grocery store because they don't know anybody, but if your mother and grandmother were the county clerk, you're on the gravy train for the rest of your life.
I get that you don't like Kentucky or the South. If you think nepotism is only a problem in the South then you have not gotten out and looked around. Yes fifty year old men may be working as baggers, but you will find that in all areas of the nation. It is one of the sad realities of how our job market works and has always worked. Who you know is everything, and it will likely determine your future. Don't blame Kentucky for something that has existed throughout our nations history and in every region. As far as the Davis family doing this to keep the Clerk job in the family I think your stretching it there. She is sitting in jail, and my bet is that she will lose everything for her stand. Yes her community supports her, but the federal authorities, homosexual lawyers and other activist will sue her, protest everything she does and make her life miserable. She is doing this because she believes it is her cross to bear. No Christian should help make a sinful lifestyle easier by handing out marriage licenses to homosexuals. I don't live up in Kentucky, but if I did I would vote for her again. In fact I wish all the southern state governors had the guts she has. They have the power to make a difference, no federal judge or authorities would be locking up a governor who has the national guard and state police at his command to prevent the arrest. This would be so much better if this were the governor of Texas, Tennessee or Alabama defying the supreme court edict on this issue. In fact I believe if one governor had the guts to do it all of them would fall in and follow suit. Then the old "solid South" would stand firm against this offense to our rights. I also believe the people would support them wholeheartedly, most folks are sick of federal overreach.
No Christian should help make a sinful lifestyle easier by handing out marriage licenses to homosexuals.
It is not the place of a government professional to use his/her position as a pulpit, no matter the religion in question. We don't want Scientologists using their position to keep people from getting psychiatric help, or Orthodox Jews withholding licenses for cheeseburger stands, either.
Quote:
This would be so much better if this were the governor of Texas, Tennessee or Alabama defying the supreme court edict on this issue. In fact I believe if one governor had the guts to do it all of them would fall in and follow suit.
Why don't you ask Gov. Wallace how well that works?
Quote:
Then the old "solid South" would stand firm against this offense to our rights. I also believe the people would support them wholeheartedly, most folks are sick of federal overreach.
Most people are already quite happy (or indifferent) about same-sex marriage, and the numbers are trending upwards. You're not going to find any career politicians willing to die on that hill any more. If your champion is a county clerk in a place 99% of Americans couldn't place on a map, that should tell you something.
Yeah, they can call it "Killing Kim Davis", since that's what so many people on this Forum, and across the US, would like to do. She's fat, she's a Christian, she disagrees with Buzzfeed. String her up.
No, most people on this forum want her to either do her job, or resign so someone else can do the job.
This whole issue is a big play just for publicity on both sides. Anyone wanting to get married could go to the next County to get their license or go on a nice vacation and get married. Most of those coming in to get in the news are not from her county.. Similar to those in riots burning down things not in their home town.
All 4 couples that started the suit are from that county. Why should citizens and taxpayers of a county have to go to another county to get government services that their tax dollars pay for?
Not every Christian interprets the bible to condemn homosexuality. Many homosexuals identify themselves as Christians (in the current atmosphere wondering why).
If I was a Christian (which I am not), I would be outraged being included in her singular interpretation of the Christianity, many who may or may not agree with every thing she thinks/believes.
That she has the audacity to not perform the job she was elected to do is incredulous. If she feels it compromises her religion, she is free to move on, resign, and find a position more to her liking.
Laws change to accommodate our changing society. We will never all agree with them. Women couldn't vote, blacks couldn't marry whites, people couldn't drink under 21, then 18, then 21. Cigarettes can't be sold to minors.
Get over it. We have so many more important problems facing our nation.
This whole issue is a big play just for publicity on both sides. Anyone wanting to get married could go to the next County to get their license or go on a nice vacation and get married. Most of those coming in to get in the news are not from her county.. Similar to those in riots burning down things not in their home town.
Those black people demanding service in segregated restaurants could have just walked right down the street to another restaurant, or even in some caes right around behind the building. Why did they have to demand to be served with the white people?
I No Christian should help make a sinful lifestyle easier by handing out marriage licenses to homosexuals. I don't live up in Kentucky, but if I did I would vote for her again. In fact I wish all the southern state governors had the guts she has. They have the power to make a difference, no federal judge or authorities would be locking up a governor who has the national guard and state police at his command to prevent the arrest. This would be so much better if this were the governor of Texas, Tennessee or Alabama defying the supreme court edict on this issue. In fact I believe if one governor had the guts to do it all of them would fall in and follow suit. Then the old "solid South" would stand firm against this offense to our rights. I also believe the people would support them wholeheartedly, most folks are sick of federal overreach.
Its been explained to you many times over that the issue here isn't about whether one supports gay marriage or not. The judge who locked up the clerk doesn't personally support gay marriage. The difference is that he knows he has an obligation to uphold the rule of law.
You, in effect, are saying you believe in anarchy because you have said several times over that you should get to pick the laws that you want to obey. Have you ever stopped to think what this country would like if we allowed everybody to simply do as they pleased? To begin with, you wouldn't have a "United States" much longer. You'd have fifty different countries all doing their own thing. Our Founding Fathers, realized that wasn't going to work and its why back in 1789, they ratified a Constitution that created a national government. In order for that government to work, the courts must have the final word on interpreting the laws and federal law must be supreme over state law when there is a conflict between the two. These are ancient principles of law that go back about 200 years
See Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 (1803)
McCulloch v. Maryland 17 US 316 (1819)
The notion that state governors should be able to defy Supreme Court rulings and federal law has been tested. This was specifically rejected by the US Supreme Court in Cooper v. Aaron, 358 US 1 (1958). States have no legal power to nullify federal law within their borders.
What you suggest above (governors deliberately interfering) has been tried before and its failed. Governor Faubus tried to block desegregation of schools in Little Rock, Arkansas and lost when President Eisenhower brought in the 101st Airborne Division and literally had the kids escorted to school. Governor Wallace tried to stand in the door of the University of Alabama and prevent black students from attending. President Kennedy "federalized" the Alabama National Guard and they forced Wallace to stand down. The same thing was attempted in Mississippi when James Meredith wanted to attend the University of Mississippi. Federal marshals saw to it that he did so.
What comes through to me in your posts is not only a completely ignorance of the law, but that you have virtually no understanding of American history either.
You could do yourself and all of us a favor by doing just a little bit of studying before you come here whining and complaining and acting like a know-it-all. Frankly, there comes a point when an opinion portrays such a high level of ignorance that its a downright embarrassment. Its not just that we disagree with you. Its like trying to argue with someone who insists the Earth is flat. That person is simply wrong and argument with them is a hopeless proposition until they take the trouble to get a little bit of education.
There is no groundswell of support for this clerk. Public opinion polls are solidly against her.
My father used to have a word for people who seem unable to learn anything. That word was "uneducable".
Its been explained to you many times over that the issue here isn't about whether one supports gay marriage or not. The judge who locked up the clerk doesn't personally support gay marriage. The difference is that he knows he has an obligation to uphold the rule of law.
You, in effect, are saying you believe in anarchy because you have said several times over that you should get to pick the laws that you want to obey. Have you ever stopped to think what this country would like if we allowed everybody to simply do as they pleased? To begin with, you wouldn't have a "United States" much longer. You'd have fifty different countries all doing their own thing. Our Founding Fathers, realized that wasn't going to work and its why back in 1789, they ratified a Constitution that created a national government. In order for that government to work, the courts must have the final word on interpreting the laws and federal law must be supreme over state law when there is a conflict between the two. These are ancient principles of law that go back about 200 years
See Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 (1803)
McCulloch v. Maryland 17 US 316 (1819)
The notion that state governors should be able to defy Supreme Court rulings and federal law has been tested. This was specifically rejected by the US Supreme Court in Cooper v. Aaron, 358 US 1 (1958). States have no legal power to nullify federal law within their borders.
What you suggest above (governors deliberately interfering) has been tried before and its failed. Governor Faubus tried to block desegregation of schools in Little Rock, Arkansas and lost when President Eisenhower brought in the 101st Airborne Division and literally had the kids escorted to school. Governor Wallace tried to stand in the door of the University of Alabama and prevent black students from attending. President Kennedy "federalized" the Alabama National Guard and they forced Wallace to stand down. The same thing was attempted in Mississippi when James Meredith wanted to attend the University of Mississippi. Federal marshals saw to it that he did so.
What comes through to me in your posts is not only a completely ignorance of the law, but that you have virtually no understanding of American history either.
You could do yourself and all of us a favor by doing just a little bit of studying before you come here whining and complaining and acting like a know-it-all. Frankly, there comes a point when an opinion portrays such a high level of ignorance that its a downright embarrassment. Its not just that we disagree with you. Its like trying to argue with someone who insists the Earth is flat. That person is simply wrong and argument with them is a hopeless proposition until they take the trouble to get a little bit of education.
There is no groundswell of support for this clerk. Public opinion polls are solidly against her.
Excellent post my friend, but let's be honest here; none of that makes a damn bit of difference to the people like this clerk and the poster you responded to. They have deluded themselves so far into thinking they are acting on behalf of some "higher" authority whose wishes and orders they are absolutely certain of. Every event in your post they will read as further evidence of this persecution they believe they have suffered.
Thankfully, these kind of people are dwindling in numbers.
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.
