Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis Jailed for Not Issuing Gay Marriage Licenses

For those that support her not giving licenses out because it goes against her religious beliefs, how would you feel about someone refusing to give a marriage license to a interracial couple, even after Loving vs Virginia, since her religious beliefs uphold the idea God does not want the races to mix.

Pammalamma said:

I think someone like that would get impeached.

Click to expand...

Ok, but would you support her going against her oath and having her "cake" while eating it to? Keeping her job but only allowing same race couples to get licenses?

Pammalamma said:

So, you think it right to treat human beings as property? Aren't God's laws higher and better than man's laws?

Click to expand...

Kindly do not attempt to put words into my mouth. I have already said that the Statute of Praemunire established a good 700 years ago that the law of the land takes precedence. Not because God is not supreme but because people are far too likely to twist the law in his name and then use his name to oppress other people. It is far too easy to claim, 'God says it, therefore we must do it.' Who on earth can argue with such statements? And they inevitably lead to the most dreadful oppression. Therefore, the law of the land is higher. 1393. Look it up.

I repeat, it is not the job of the army to judge the Government.

If people want to change the law they must do it through their vote, or else stand for election. And if anyone's conscience is troubled they must resign and find a job where their conscience is not troubled. Fwiw, where such a troubled conscience involves imposing religious views on other people I am unlikely to have much sympathy.

An oath cannot be treated lightly. Or, putting it another way; 'Let your yes be yes and your no be no.'

Pammalamma said:

So, the gays who are being denied marriage, what did they sow?

Click to expand...

the wind, and they will reap the whirlwind.

Pammalamma said:

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. If they swear to do what the President says, and to uphold the Constitution, but the President tells them to violate the Constitution, they cannot do both of those things. They contradict each other. You are acting like obeying the oath and the government is simple, but it is not always that way.

""I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." "

Does this belief of yours in blind obedience to the government apply only to our government, or to all governments?

Click to expand...

I did not say blind obedience. You are putting words in my mouth again, and that comment comes close to baiting; kindly stop it.

What I said is that Christians are not above the law. You seem to think we are.

Here it is again:

It is the job of the legislature to create the law. It is the job of the army to do what it is told to do by the Government. At the point where the army starts to try to tell the Government what to do you have an effective coup d'etat, and Martial Law.

Is that really what you are advocating? If not, then the army has to keep its oath, even if the Government tells them to wear yellow and dance round a maypole. Not blindly, not thoughtlessly but in full awareness that in so doing they are keeping their own freely given oath.

Pammalamma said:

You didn't really answer my question. How can I "find a job where my conscience is not troubled" if every person in the country is expected to return runaway slaves?

How about Daniel, in the Bible? He was a government servant. It was illegal for him to pray. Should he have quit his job? Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego? Should they have quit? Oh, wait, they were basically slaves, so they couldn't quit. So, since they can't quit, they have to stop worshiping God?

Click to expand...

Did they take an oath?

Pammalamma said:

The Jewish midwives. Should they have killed the babies, as they promised to do?

Click to expand...

Did they take an oath?

Red Fox said:

She is not a martyr for her faith. If she had any integrity whatsoever, she would have humbly resigned from the job that inflicted her conscience so much.

Click to expand...

she's following in good footsteps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

Pammalamma said:

Christians, discuss your opinion of the situation here.

Keep in mind, the forum rules say that this forum believes that homosexuality is immoral, so that is *not* up for discussion.

Is Kim Davis engaging in passive resistance, because her right to religious freedom is being violated? Because it is a lie to say that a gay relationship constitutes "a marriage," would it be a sin for her to issue gay marriage licenses, which is "approving of sin?"

Or, is Kim Davis rightfully in jail, because she did not do her job, and we cannot let government employees pick and choose which orders to follow?

I have heard Christians who oppose gay marriage say both of these things today.

What would happen if we let everyone ignore orders because of religious beliefs? Conversely, what would happen if we forced everyone to obey the government under all circumstances?

Article for your information:
I have heard Christians who oppose gay marriage say both of these things today.

Click to expand...

I don't know enough about American law to reach a conclusion but I do know that you have a law that requires employers to make reasonable accommodation for the religious beliefs & practices of employees. (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Why would this not apply in this case?

Red Fox said:

Point taken.

She is still making herself out to be a persecuted Christian because she has chosen to break the law and violate the oath that she took as an elected official.

Click to expand...

well we're making progress! now someone recognizes that Christians ARE being persecuted in the USA.

pdudgeon said:

she's following in good footsteps.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More

Click to expand...

She would be if she resigned. Thomas More resigned.

pdudgeon said:

well we're making progress! now someone recognizes that Christians ARE being persecuted in the USA.

Click to expand...

Nonsense.

Didn't the law change after she had been elected to office? That put her in an awkward position. Maybe she should have resigned, and other believers who are in such positions should resign en masse. (I wouldn't want that position since I wouldn't want to issue marriage licenses to divorced and remarried couples, but whatever.)

What I don't like seeing though, is a shrinking field of career options for people of faith.

Catherineanne said:

Christians are not above the law.

This principle was established in English law in 1393.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Praemunire

Click to expand...

The whole Chapter was repealed by section 13 of, and Part I of Schedule 4 to, the Criminal Law Act 1967 (this repeal extending to Northern Ireland).

The 16 Ric 2, of which this chapter was part, was repealed for the Republic of Ireland by section 1 of, and Part 2 of the Schedule to, the Statute Law Revision Act 1983.

Click to expand...

Catherineanne said:

At the point where any law violated my beliefs in my work I would resign.

Breaking the law is not the answer to having a troubled conscience.

Click to expand...

neither is bending to accomodate it. Christ calls that being lukewarm, and He spews people like that out of His mouth.