Somebody please explain why...

[JustOneWay]

What does matter is that it has nothing to do with the issue we're supposed to be discussing.

So far I have seen you try to get people back to the topic, yet not once in any of your posts in this thread have have you addressed the topic!

Here is a question in the OP. Maybe you have an answer?

The authors leave out the following: Morehead is home to Morehead State University. Enrollment: 10,654. Why do they leave that out?

 

[iluvatar5150]

So $79,000 outrages you, but $62,000 does not.

I didn't say that it outraged me; I said that it amazed me. I'm not outraged, because I'm perfectly ok with people making comfortable salaries. I'm surprised by it, because you don't often see people getting paid $80k for administrative work in sparsely-populated rural areas. If she were the clerk in one of the state's urban counties, I wouldn't have batted an eye.

And you have compared her county with no other Kentucky counties.

Did you read the document I linked to? The salary schedules applied statewide. Any county clerk (or judge or jailer or sheriff) in an equivalently-sized county would make exactly the same as her.

I still think you're just trying to find something to pin on her and you'd look anywhere that might turn up something that could be make into an issue. I don't find that admirable, but maybe it doesn't matter so much. What does matter is that it has nothing to do with the issue we're supposed to be discussing.

I'm not looking to pin anything on her aside from her inability to make a distinction between religious beliefs and her duty as a public official.

The county clerk's office seems to be a family business for her: her mother was clerk for decades, while she worked in the office, including as a deputy clerk. Now that she's the county clerk, her son is working in the office. She's not a "public servant" in the truest sense of the word; she's a participant in a long-running system of nepotism that doles out cushy government jobs that pay well above average.

 

[Korah]

She clearly has a legal obligation, but she has made it into a "moral" topic which she then fails to live up to in her own life.

FALSE:
I'm Going to start my own thread on how FALSE the whole "FREE PRESS" is in this country, but for THIS particular matter the legal issue at hand has been addressed by NO NEWS AGENCIES except the most notorious otherwise for their abominable slant to the right with their reporting. (Yes, what I used to call "Faux News" I will henceforth admit is really "Fox News", and for this particular matter I get the FACTS from OAN Network, home of that execrable farther-Right-than-TrumpCruzWalkerCarsonRand combined, Graham Ledger)
THE BIG ISSUE IS THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE JUDICIAL TYRANNY BY scotus. There is not a shred of law-abidingness in the five of them who perpetrated this FRAUD on the the American people. (By the way, the five on the right who gave us CITIZENS UNITED should also be impeached for malfeasance of duty, but I'll save that for MY thread.)
Edited to Add:
Here I am parading as such a "smarty" (to avoid being profane), but I can't even find the "New Thread" button? Am I an idiot or what?

THERE IS NO LAW THAT MAKES OR ENTITLES ANY KENTUCKY CLERK TO ISSUE MARRIAGE LICENSES TO "GAYS" TO GET "MARRIED"!! It's just judicial tyranny. What U. S. law says that homosexual marriage is the law of the land? I can't even name ANY state that has a law making such an abomination "legal"--yes, there is one or two, maybe such Liberal Establishment enclaves as Massachusetts. But for darn sure, there is NO LAW IN KENTUCKY that allows such an abortion.
Edited to add:
Here I promised to start a new thread on the wider topic of Judicial Tyranny in the U. S., but I can't even find the "New Thread" button? Is it me or something wrong with CF?
Meanwhile, look's like I stomped on a nerve here--no replies yet.

 

[stamperben]

You may want to call it something else, but it's a personal attack on the character of the woman, when the issue is not a matter of personality but simply whether any county clerk should defy the court in this matter.


...according to you, that is. From all that I know, a marriage between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman who are not close relatives is a traditional marriage.

You keep ignoring the "Why" of the reason she's being defiant. Why is that?

 

[Korah]

That's quite an 'if'. The only counties that are in defiance of the Supreme Court are in Texas, Alabama, and Kentucky.

Praises be to Texas, Alabama, and Kentucky then!
Some people in these illustrious states have the honor and commitment to integrity to stand by the laws of their states until (at least, leaving God Yahweh or Whomever you call Him or Her out of the picture until it comes to the point that any but a few sold-out "Gay" states pass laws to make the word "marriage" violate the whole meaning of the word) their legislatures pass and if required their governors sign any such law. As for the U. S. A. itself, Congress long ago passed and POTUS signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). That's the latest law, regardless of what Judicial Tyranny has falsely ruled on the matter.
AND IT'S WORSE THAN THAT!
Many U. S. states have held VOTES OF THE PEOPLE by initiative or referendum specifically to state that marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman. EVEN MY OWN LIBERAL ENCLAVE OF CALIFORNIA! Yes, our famous Proposition Eight passed and was ruled against by the illegal action of a covertly homosexual lower court Judge Walker. He could make no legally-standing rule on something where he had refused to recuse himself as so very biased on the matter.
It's time to stand up against JUDICIAL TYRANNY! Impeach (and convict) the whole SCOTUS and let's find true constitutional scholars that a right-(and left-) minded POTUS and Congress can install in place of such incompetents. (At a stretch, I might consent to re-instating Chief Justice Roberts, I haven't studied him well enough to be sure we have to get rid of him as so clearly we must impeach and convict the other eight.)

 

[JGG]

I agree! Impeach Supreme Court Justices who disagree with me!

 

[Korah]

That's a start. Which ones are those--I'm sure I'll support you?

 

[JGG]

Scalia said this: “The choice for the judge who believes the death penalty to be immoral is resignation, rather than simply ignoring duly enacted, constitutional laws. … He has, after all, taken an oath to apply the laws and has been given no power to supplant them with rules of his own. . … Rewrite the laws he cannot do.”

The idea that an officer of the court should have to uphold laws he disagrees with is unconscionable. Impeach Scalia!

And Thomas doesn't even talk! Impeach Clarence Thomas!

 

[trunks2k]

Looks like she was found in contempt and ordered to jail. Seems to be breaking news, am awaiting a useful link to the story.

ETA:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...e50f08-51af-11e5-9812-92d5948a40f8_story.html

 

[Jan Volkes]

Looks like she was found in contempt and ordered to jail. Seems to be breaking news, am awaiting a useful link to the story.

ETA:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...e50f08-51af-11e5-9812-92d5948a40f8_story.html

Now the crazies are going to raise her up as a martyr.

 

[trunks2k]

Now the crazies are going to raise her up as a martyr.

Fined or in jail, that was going to happen either way. She really already was one.

 

[AirPo]

Fined or in jail, that was going to happen either way. She really already was one.

I have not seen for how long yet? Does she just stay in jail until she's ready to comply?

 

[trunks2k]

I have not seen for how long yet? Does she just stay in jail until she's ready to comply?

I'm pretty sure how this sort of thing usually works. The point is to get the person to comply with the order so the punishment only goes on as long as they refuse to comply.

 

[AirPo]

I'm pretty sure how this sort of thing usually works. The point is to get the person to comply with the order so the punishment only goes on as long as they refuse to comply.

Like that episode of Big Bang Theory!

 

[stamperben]

Hey! Where'd he get my suit? It's the only one I own.

 

[amanuensis63]

FALSE:
I'm Going to start my own thread on how FALSE the whole "FREE PRESS" is in this country, but for THIS particular matter the legal issue at hand has been addressed by NO NEWS AGENCIES except the most notorious otherwise for their abominable slant to the right with their reporting. (Yes, what I used to call "Faux News" I will henceforth admit is really "Fox News", and for this particular matter I get the FACTS from OAN Network, home of that execrable farther-Right-than-TrumpCruzWalkerCarsonRand combined, Graham Ledger)
THE BIG ISSUE IS THE UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE JUDICIAL TYRANNY BY scotus.

Might want to take a quick class on American Government. Madison v Marbury.

There is not a shred of law-abidingness in the five of them who perpetrated this FRAUD on the the American people. (By the way, the five on the right who gave us CITIZENS UNITED should also be impeached for malfeasance of duty, but I'll save that for MY thread.)
Edited to Add:
Here I am parading as such a "smarty"

I fear you may have overestimated.

 

[amanuensis63]

EVEN MY OWN LIBERAL ENCLAVE OF CALIFORNIA! Yes, our famous Proposition Eight passed and was ruled against by the illegal action of a covertly homosexual lower court Judge Walker.

Let us also note that many out of state religious organizations poured lots of money into California politics in order to influence that vote.

It's time to stand up against JUDICIAL TYRANNY! Impeach (and convict) the whole SCOTUS and let's find true constitutional scholars that a right-(and left-) minded POTUS and Congress can install in place of such incompetents.

Well, to be fair, most "true constitutional scholars" would probably be aware of Madison v Marbury which was decided something like 212 years ago.

 

[amanuensis63]

Looks like she was found in contempt and ordered to jail. Seems to be breaking news, am awaiting a useful link to the story.

I think it sad that she is facing jail time on this. But perhaps this is the wage of disingenuous use of the Bible? If she becomes some sort of "political martyr" for the Right it will be sad. It will certainly make a mockery of real martyrs for the faith. You know, people who could accidentally live according to their convictions. It seems she lived actively against her convictions. It almost looks like the only Biblical rule she didn't break in regards to marriage was getting gay married! Who knew that was the ONLY ONE that counted?

 

[Maren]

Praises be to Texas, Alabama, and Kentucky then!
Some people in these illustrious states have the honor and commitment to integrity to stand by the laws of their states until (at least, leaving God Yahweh or Whomever you call Him or Her out of the picture until it comes to the point that any but a few sold-out "Gay" states pass laws to make the word "marriage" violate the whole meaning of the word) their legislatures pass and if required their governors sign any such law. As for the U. S. A. itself, Congress long ago passed and POTUS signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). That's the latest law, regardless of what Judicial Tyranny has falsely ruled on the matter.
AND IT'S WORSE THAN THAT!
Many U. S. states have held VOTES OF THE PEOPLE by initiative or referendum specifically to state that marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman. EVEN MY OWN LIBERAL ENCLAVE OF CALIFORNIA! Yes, our famous Proposition Eight passed and was ruled against by the illegal action of a covertly homosexual lower court Judge Walker. He could make no legally-standing rule on something where he had refused to recuse himself as so very biased on the matter.
It's time to stand up against JUDICIAL TYRANNY! Impeach (and convict) the whole SCOTUS and let's find true constitutional scholars that a right-(and left-) minded POTUS and Congress can install in place of such incompetents. (At a stretch, I might consent to re-instating Chief Justice Roberts, I haven't studied him well enough to be sure we have to get rid of him as so clearly we must impeach and convict the other eight.)

Perhaps you could tell me what makes the decisions to allow gay marriage unconstitutional. And before you yell "states rights" and the 10th amendment, does that mean if Kentucky voted to legalize slavery that it would be wrong for a court to overturn that law -- after all, a majority wanted it. In particular, I'd like to hear you explain how the 9th and 14th amendments were wrongly applied.

Beyond that, even if you are correct and the decision was wrong, it still have the force of law currently -- until the Supreme Court overturns the ruling as being unconstitutional or a Constitutional Amendment is passed. As such, those governors and others like Kim Davis are breaking the law.

Hopefully she will now resign her position and a new Clerk can be put into office.

 

[Maren]

Apparently five of the deputy clerks are now saying they will issue marriage licenses, only Kim Davis' son appears to be the only holdout. The plaintiffs appear to be considering petitioning the judge to let Kim Davis out of jail, once marriage licenses are issued. Interestingly, I'm wondering what Kim Davis may end up doing or saying about this, since part of the complaint in court was her signature (as County Clerk) being on the licenses.