Kentucky Clerk Jailed for Contempt of Court

[ogibillm]

This is ridiculous.

There are two types of contempt; criminal and civil. The difference is the punishment. In a civil contempt case, the contemnor determines how long they are incarcerated. Kim Davis can leave jail at any time.

Also, the judge tried to give her an out. After imposing a sentence for contempt, Judge Bunning took a break. When Court resumed, he interviewed the Deputy Clerks for Rowan County as to whether they would comply with his Order. Five (5) of the six (6) deputies affirmed that they would comply with his Order. He then recalled Ms. Davis and asked whether she could refrain from interfering with the deputies while they issued marriage licenses. If she would do that, then he was satisfied that she was not in contempt and could go home. Ms. Davis refused even that much.

Davis seeks a confrontation, just as MLK did in Selma.

mlk wasn't an oppressor. mlk wasn't using the power of an elected office to deny rights to others.
she has nothing in common with mlk.

 

[Uncensored2008]

she has been imprisoned for defying a court order. her religious and political beliefs remain perfectly legal.

MLK was imprisoned for the same. Civil disobedience has a long tradition in America.

Rarely does it work out well for the oppressors.

 

[Seawytch]

This reminds me of the "wedding cake" controversy in a way.
People can and do break the law.
If they do it knowingly, the have the RIGHT (yes, the RIGHT) to do it if they are willing to do the TIME - take the punishment that goes along with it.

We are not puppets.

This has nothing to do with Commerce Clause jurisprudence or public accommodations laws, there is no similarity whatsoever; Davis does not have the 'right' to defy the Constitution, the courts, and the rule of law – whether she's willing to 'take the punishment' or not.

And it has nothing to do with 'being a puppet' - Davis or anyone else is at liberty to resign.

Do mayors in sanctuary cities have the right by defy immigration laws? Name one serving jail time.

That's different. The left can disobey any laws they feel are prejudice to protected classes.

Hypocritical ain't it? No liberal will answer why it's okay for mayors to defy immigration laws. Their argument that Davis defied the law falls on deaf ears.

So sue. Take the mayor of SF to court. When you do and the mayor loses, still defies the law, loses on appeal and still refuses to obey the law, you have a valid comparison. Until then you're pissing in the wind.

 

[ogibillm]

she has been imprisoned for defying a court order. her religious and political beliefs remain perfectly legal.

MLK was imprisoned for the same. Civil disobedience has a long tradition in America.

Rarely does it work out well for the oppressors.

you're right. rarely does it work out well for the oppressors - hence she'll be spending a lot of time in jail followed by a lot of time sending out resumes.

 

[Uncensored2008]

mlk wasn't an oppressor. mlk wasn't using the power of an elected office to deny rights to others.
she has nothing in common with mlk.

Nor is Davis.

You of the ruling left are in an untenable position. My advice is for you to break out the dogs and fire hoses.

 

[Asclepias]

This is ridiculous.

There are two types of contempt; criminal and civil. The difference is the punishment. In a civil contempt case, the contemnor determines how long they are incarcerated. Kim Davis can leave jail at any time.

Also, the judge tried to give her an out. After imposing a sentence for contempt, Judge Bunning took a break. When Court resumed, he interviewed the Deputy Clerks for Rowan County as to whether they would comply with his Order. Five (5) of the six (6) deputies affirmed that they would comply with his Order. He then recalled Ms. Davis and asked whether she could refrain from interfering with the deputies while they issued marriage licenses. If she would do that, then he was satisfied that she was not in contempt and could go home. Ms. Davis refused even that much.

Davis seeks a confrontation, just as MLK did in Selma.

She messed up and got put in jail instead of changing anything.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

fr

The foundation fabric of our nation is hardly 'destroyed', drama queen. People by the thousands still get married every day. If the strength of your marriage is based on your ability to deny marriage to someone else.....then your marriage already had problems.

Kim Davis does not have the authority to use her office to impose her religion on other people. Nor can she create religious tests that eligibile citizens must 'pass' in order to receive state services.

She simply lacks the authority.

Any student of history will tell you, this will not end well for you.

As any student of history will tell you, bigotry doesn't fair well. When clerks refused to abide the law and issue marriage licenses to interracial couples, they were removed.

Society kept right on truckin. Bigots are a historical speed bump. And history doesn't treat them well.

You have a political prisoner sitting in a cell. Pretend all you like that you are the ones oppressed - while a political prisoner rots on your jails for failing to bow to you.

The worst oppressors in history present themselves as the underdog while running a reign of terror. The Gaysteppo haven't proven any different.

Sounds like the Tea Party

Really? Who has the Tea Party oppressed? Spit it out.

 

[Uncensored2008]

you're right. rarely does it work out well for the oppressors - hence she'll be spending a lot of time in jail followed by a lot of time sending out resumes.

Are those the words of Bull Conner?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Bullshit! She's another ignorant Christian.

Perhaps the regime will execute her? In public.

This is ridiculous.

There are two types of contempt; criminal and civil. The difference is the punishment. In a civil contempt case, the contemnor determines how long they are incarcerated. Kim Davis can leave jail at any time.

Also, the judge tried to give her an out. After imposing a sentence for contempt, Judge Bunning took a break. When Court resumed, he interviewed the Deputy Clerks for Rowan County as to whether they would comply with his Order. Five (5) of the six (6) deputies affirmed that they would comply with his Order. He then recalled Ms. Davis and asked whether she could refrain from interfering with the deputies while they issued marriage licenses. If she would do that, then he was satisfied that she was not in contempt and could go home. Ms. Davis refused even that much.

We need more just like her, a tradition of righteous defiance.

And by 'righteous defiance', you mean using the government to try and force people to obey your religious beliefs?

Better than obeying your religious beliefs. Government is always a reflection of somebody's religiously held values. And your sucks.

 

[Flopper]

And they refused to BAKE A FUCKING CAKE! The "homo's" weren't telling them to bend over! They were trying to pay them money to bake a cake! And you can't see the ridiculousness of this situation?

They weren't telling the bakers "you have to be gay to bake my cake!" I do think that the State of Oregon has gone totally batshit crazy in the punishment they have handed out, that is the very definition of "cruel and unusual punishment". But how in the hell a person can think that baking a cake is somehow violating their religious principles is beyond me.

That is a level of batshit crazy that I will never understand.

And you do not see how ridiculous it is for a private business enterprise to be put out of business when they refuse to be a part of sanctifying such an arrangement; with something they totally disagree with according to their religious faith? Hell they could bake their own fucking cake.

I already said I thought the punishment to be ridiculous. Are you blind? However you still haven't been able to tell me how baking a cake for a gay wedding, affects the baker.

Yes I did.

But I will go even a lil further for you westwall. A small privately held Christian business owner providing personal services has the right to not go along. The same sex couple can bake their own cake or hit a corporation to get their cake or go start their own little cake business. If one of these same sex couples asked me to paint a painting or provide a sculpture for them and I said no I'm not interested in doing such for you should they have the right to sue me?

No, they shouldn't. I don't believe that government should be able to compel anyone to do anything. However, the clerk is a government official which means she is OBLIGATED to follow the laws of the land. To do otherwise, IS tyranny.

The supreme court made up their rulings after she was already elected to that position by the people of that county. It is not like she took the job prior to the latest decisions. Her objection is that it is her name on that document that she is unwilling to issue. If it were my name I may very well do the same.

Employers are always making changes that go against beliefs of employees. In this case both the courts and the governor ordered the issue of marriage licenses to gay couples. This clerk should either do the job or find another job more in keeping with her personal beliefs.

 

[ogibillm]

mlk wasn't an oppressor. mlk wasn't using the power of an elected office to deny rights to others.
she has nothing in common with mlk.

Nor is Davis.

You of the ruling left are in an untenable position. My advice is for you to break out the dogs and fire hoses.

davis was using the power of her office to deny the rights of the people of her county. this is not something that is up for debate, it is a fact. you should really learn the facts of the situation before you begin to try to discuss it.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Yeah, because Mandela was imprisoned because he interfered with marriage licenses.

You want to be the victims *so badly*, don't you.

What you should do, is get some firetrucks and turn high pressure hoses on protesters. :thup;

And if we did that to OWS?

 

[Uncensored2008]

If she were a Muslim, she would most certainly be villified.

If she were Muslim you would demand her release and would condemn the hated Americans for persecuting her.

I have no problem with her "following her convictions" - but she wasn't content to stop there. She refused to allow her deputies to issue licenses as well. They were willing to step in when there was a same sex wedding license needed. That would have been a win-win for both her and the state, but that wasn't good enough for her. She had to force her religion on everyone and refuse permission for anyone to issue those licenses.

You of the left are at war to crush the 1st Amendment rights of Christians. This has oddly enough become a battle ground.

Oh, and who did she "force her religion" on? She refused to alter the process that has been in place for over 50 years to suit the demands of an unelected judiciary creating extaconstitutional law by fiat. That is far from forcing her religion. It is an act of civil disobedience.

 

[ogibillm]

you're right. rarely does it work out well for the oppressors - hence she'll be spending a lot of time in jail followed by a lot of time sending out resumes.

Are those the words of Bull Conner?

you lack integrity. davis is analogous to bull connor - using her office to deny the rights of the citizens.

 

[Seawytch]

Where in the constitution does it give gays the right to marry?

This should be fun.

Did you miss June of this year? Were you in cryro freeze?

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf

 

[ogibillm]

And you do not see how ridiculous it is for a private business enterprise to be put out of business when they refuse to be a part of sanctifying such an arrangement; with something they totally disagree with according to their religious faith? Hell they could bake their own fucking cake.

I already said I thought the punishment to be ridiculous. Are you blind? However you still haven't been able to tell me how baking a cake for a gay wedding, affects the baker.

Yes I did.

But I will go even a lil further for you westwall. A small privately held Christian business owner providing personal services has the right to not go along. The same sex couple can bake their own cake or hit a corporation to get their cake or go start their own little cake business. If one of these same sex couples asked me to paint a painting or provide a sculpture for them and I said no I'm not interested in doing such for you should they have the right to sue me?

No, they shouldn't. I don't believe that government should be able to compel anyone to do anything. However, the clerk is a government official which means she is OBLIGATED to follow the laws of the land. To do otherwise, IS tyranny.

The supreme court made up their rulings after she was already elected to that position by the people of that county. It is not like she took the job prior to the latest decisions. Her objection is that it is her name on that document that she is unwilling to issue. If it were my name I may very well do the same.

Employers are always making changes that go against beliefs of employees. In this case both the courts and the governor ordered the issue of marriage licenses to gay couples. This clerk should either do the job or find another job more in keeping with her personal beliefs.

i guess we both missed where her oath said that she promises to uphold the constitution, unless she disagrees with it.

 

[Coyote]

did you forget to add "is bullshit" to your comment?
she has not been imprisoned for her political beliefs.

She has been imprisoned for religious and political beliefs.

No.

She's being imprisoned for contempt of court because she's trying to force her religious beliefs on her deputies.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And if we did that to OWS?

I encourage the left to show their true colors.

I'm sure America will embrace them as they sic attack dogs on blue hairs holding signs. Skylar needs to let her inner Kim Jong Un free!

 

[ogibillm]

If she were a Muslim, she would most certainly be villified.

If she were Muslim you would demand her release and would condemn the hated Americans for persecuting her.

I have no problem with her "following her convictions" - but she wasn't content to stop there. She refused to allow her deputies to issue licenses as well. They were willing to step in when there was a same sex wedding license needed. That would have been a win-win for both her and the state, but that wasn't good enough for her. She had to force her religion on everyone and refuse permission for anyone to issue those licenses.

You of the left are at war to crush the 1st Amendment rights of Christians. This has oddly enough become a battle ground.

Oh, and who did she "force her religion" on? She refused to alter the process that has been in place for over 50 years to suit the demands of an unelected judiciary creating extaconstitutional law by fiat. That is far from forcing her religion. It is an act of civil disobedience.

she refused to uphold the constitution. she forced her religious beliefs on her subordinates by not allowing them to perform their duties and provide marriage licenses to homosexual couples. she forced her religious beliefs on the people of her county by using her office to deny marriage licenses to those she did not find religiously acceptable.

 

[Uncensored2008]

i guess we both missed where her oath said that she promises to uphold the constitution, unless she disagrees with it.

Well do post the article or amendment of the Constitution that dictates issuing marriage licenses to homosexuals?

The SCOTUS created law, but it certainly is not the Constitution. Further, I doubt a county clerk takes any such oath.

Oh, and I'll bet she gets reelected.

But you're winning - America is behind you, which is why you need to stage a public execution!