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

[Catherineanne]

then be surprised, because there is allowance for conscience still.

Did I say otherwise?

By all means follow conscience, but then expect to answer to the law. That is how it worked for Sir Thomas More, and that is how it works for the rest of us.

 

[Catherineanne]

and look what they wound up with; a queen in name only, a governmont run amok, a kingdom sabotaged by foreigners, and lost colonies.

Off topic and verging on racist.

Your awareness of history leaves much to be desired.

 

[ken777]

What a crazy situation! Who issues marriage licenses when the county clerk is on vacation, in hospital, or dies? Surely some accommodation for religious belief must be possible.

Justice Antonin Scalia's statement is becoming more relevant every day: "A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.”

 

[Stellar Vision]

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?

I think that's sort of a moot point, because she might actually be assassinated for something like that. It would not be tolerated.

No, I don't think that's a moot point at all. Rather your supposition that this person might be assassinated as a byproduct of public vitriol is indeed a moot point.

I'd still like to hear your view as to whether or not you would support the person refusing marriage licenses to interracial couples.

 

[ken777]

I'd still like to hear your view as to whether or not you would support the person refusing marriage licenses to interracial couples.

Would you have supported a county clerk issuing a marriage licence to an interracial couple before it was legal?

This case turns on the fact that ssm was banned in Kentucky until 26 June 2015. For that reason some accommodation for religious objection should be implemented. Jailing a woman in this situation is an abuse of power.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

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.

Davis and her supporters have confused religious privilege for religious liberty.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Not only has Kim Davis reneged on the oath she took when she was sworn into the office by failing to perform the full duties of the job she's been fully paid for, she prevented others under her authority from completing their jobs. She was graciously relieved of having to issue same-sex marriage licenses herself. All she had to do was agree to not interfere with five deputy clerks who had told the federal judge they'd issue them in her stead. Judge Bunning had asked Davis' six deputy clerks whether they would issue the licenses, and despite some of them holding the same religious beliefs as Davis, five told him they would. The only one who didn't agree to was Davis' son. Despite the willingness of the clerks and the reprieve it would offer Davis, she still refused to allow them to issue the licenses, citing her religious beliefs.

Judge Bunning said that he is also religious, but explained that when he took his oath to become a judge, that oath trumped his personal beliefs. I know a few people who are in elected positions, and they also took into consideration their willingness and ability to set aside personal and religious beliefs if necessary to fairly and impartially honor their oath before they took it. Most people who feel like their deeply held convictions interfere with their ability to do their job properly resign from it and find another one. It's audacious to feel entitled to receive your full salary when you're not earning it.

 

[trunks2k]

What a crazy situation! Who issues marriage licenses when the county clerk is on vacation, in hospital, or dies?

A certain judge does. The judge in question has said he doesn't mind doing so, but the law is that he can only do it when the county clerk is absent, and she hasn't been absent, so he can't legally do it. Now that she's in jail, that changes things some, though the fact that her staff is still present mean she (i.e. the clerks office) is not absent.

 

[Dave Ellis]

What a crazy situation! Who issues marriage licenses when the county clerk is on vacation, in hospital, or dies? Surely some accommodation for religious belief must be possible.

Justice Antonin Scalia's statement is becoming more relevant every day: "A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.”

The licence still goes out with Kim Davis's signature on it, the forms are likely printed with her signature already in place.

As for Scalia, that's just a stupid comment. The people are not subordinate to the supreme court justices any more than they are subordinate to the rest of the legal system. It's the court's job to figure out what is constitutional or not, and rule on important cases nationwide. It's a necessary check on the power of the executive and legislative branches of government, which is a huge benefit to the people.

 

[HonestTruth]

"Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." [Matthew 5:10]

When Christians opposed American wars they were persecuted and thrown in jail - often for years. Not so strangely, the right wingers defended the government's actions and called these true Christians commies and traitors.

Double standards, much?

 

[HonestTruth]

Justice Antonin Scalia's statement is becoming more relevant every day: "A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.”



Right wingers had no problem when that same court was engaging in judicial activism by reversing decades of progressive rulings by its predecessors in the court.

 

[AirPo]

What a crazy situation! Who issues marriage licenses when the county clerk is on vacation, in hospital, or dies? Surely some accommodation for religious belief must be possible.

Justice Antonin Scalia's statement is becoming more relevant every day: "A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.”

Frightening to think that one of those unelected lawyers doesn't know that the US is not a democracy.

 

[HonestTruth]

citing her religious beliefs

 

[brinny]

But an official who doesn't follow immigration law would get a wink.

Interesting.

 

[trunks2k]

Interesting.

Law enforcement is generally given some leeway to enforce laws as they see fit. Similar to prosecutorial discretion. Given limited resources, it's not possible to do everything. If the law is "do X and Y", it can often be considered acceptable to just do X if there isn't enough resources to do both and focusing on X is the most effective way to work. So it's not so simple.

 

[Red Fox]

Are we forgetting that she's been married 4 times and cheated on several of her husbands? Jesus explicitly condemned divorce and adultery, He never said anything directly about homosexuality or gay marriage. It seems to me that she doesn't care much about Christian principles or the sanctity of marriage, but is rather just motivated by homophobia.

Yes, she has shown herself to be nothing more than a self-righteous hypocrite, more concerned for the log in a homosexual's eye than the obvious plank in her own. And it is completely irrelevant in the eyes of society that she committed adultery (how many times?) before she became a Christian. This does not change the fact that she was pregnant with twins by her THIRD husband five months after she divorced her FIRST husband and these twins were then adopted by her SECOND husband. She is still seen as a self-righteous hypocrite who has no moral authority to lecture anyone on the sanctity of marriage. And as I have repeatedly said, it also doesn't matter that she is a Christian and her job requirement violate her Christian convictions. She is not above the law and she is now being held accountable for breaking the law. She is not being persecuted for being a Christian but rather being punished for defying court orders, one such court order being a Supreme Court order. If someone goes before a judge for a crime that they have committed, the judge is not going to take into account that they are now saved and God has forgiven them of their sins. If they were to say something like, "Yes, Your Honor, I did commit this crime, but you see I'm a Christian now, and I asked God to forgive me of my crime, so I can't be held accountable for that crime now by any of your petty man-made laws." Well, the judge is not going to give a rip if that person is a Christian or not or whether God forgave them of that crime or not. They will still be held accountable and still face justice for committing that crime. No one is above the laws of this country, not even Christians, no matter what many may believe.

 

[brinny]

brinny said:
Interesting.

Law enforcement is generally given some leeway to enforce laws as they see fit. Similar to prosecutorial discretion. Given limited resources, it's not possible to do everything. If the law is "do X and Y", it can often be considered acceptable to just do X if there isn't enough resources to do both and focusing on X is the most effective way to work. So it's not so simple.

Even more interesting.

Thank you.

 

[SnowyMacie]

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.

She is rightfully in jail because she disobeyed the direct orders of a federal judge.

 

[Red Fox]

A very sanctimonious screed. If someone believes that taking an action will send them to Hell, it's a violation of their religious freedom for the government to coerce them to do it. That's not making people follow your religion. It is following your own religion, because to approve of sin is one of the worst sins a Christian can commit (Romans 1).

Again, if her job requirements afflict her conscience so much, she is more than capable of resigning rather than drag this out for the attention and publicity. She does not have the legal right to infringe on the equal rights of other people. The courts, as well the highest court in this country, have decided that she does not have the legal right to use her Christian beliefs as an excuse to religiously discriminate against homosexuals and be a religious homophobic bigot. And regardless of whether she or other Christians agree with these courts, the rulings are still legally binding and she is being punished because of her lack of compliance to them. I thought a friend of mine was spot on when he said, "What kind of attorney advises you to defy multiple court orders, anyway? Oh, right...the one that's making millions of dollars in donations selling her as a martyr."

The government makes accommodations for conscientious objectors in the military, so they can make accommodations for conscientious objectors in the county clerk's office. It's really not that hard to figure out. There are also other county clerks.

I doubt that any conscientious objector in the military was violating the civil rights and equal rights of the people whose lifestyle they didn't approve of. They were objecting to going to war and having to kill people and that isn't the same as refusing to sign a marriage license to a homosexual couple because it makes you feel bad in your religion.

Have you noticed nobody seems to talk about tolerance anymore? I think it's because of situations like this. To force someone to violate their beliefs is religious intolerance, just like banning the hijab in France and banning circumcision in Germany.

What is intolerant in this situation is her religious discrimination and religious bigotry against homosexuals, which is clearly in violation of their equal rights in this country. Neither she or other Christians have the legal right in this country to tell homosexuals that they cannot be married or try to stop them from getting married.

 

[Marius27]

What a crazy situation! Who issues marriage licenses when the county clerk is on vacation, in hospital, or dies? Surely some accommodation for religious belief must be possible.

The other staff members in the office who were denied the ability to do so due to threats and bullying from Davis.