Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This thread is about whether the clerk is morally or legally authorized or restrained on this issue. The comments of a cat killer obviously has no moral input on this subject.Remember...you are talking to someone who didn't threaten, they cowardly killed a cat that never did anything to them...and then cowardly hinted around to the owner.
Is he still crying in fear over two guys with sticks in 2008?Actually, dumbass, the Bush AG made the decision not to charge them criminally and to proceed civillyDemon yes, hypocrite yes. I didn't stutter. All attorneys general are charged with the duty to enforce the law. The racist former attorney general Eric Holder, fellow demon, made a race based decision to not prosecute these men because of the color of their skin.Funny how you demons didn't say a word about duty to do ones job when Eric Holder refused to uphold US law by prosecuting black panther terrorists violating civil rights laws by intimidating white voters at the poll.She won't quit. You butt fuck tyrants may get her fired but she won't quit. This is EXACTLY like using military to enforce white genocide and dumbing down the white population by FORCING school integration.I bet the feds use force in MAKING her even to the point of a gun to her head to issue these licenses
Its her job to give marriage license to people who can be married based on thousands of years of normal thinking not based on 5 tyrants in robes opinions. So yeah she is doing just fine. She has been in contempt several times before and ain't jack happened. You little butt fuck tyrants are throwing your tantrums as usual. She may be fired but she will win overall. She refuses to bend to YOUR WILL.
Odium: Her job is to comply with the law and issue marriage licenses to all qualified applicants. It doesn't matter if you disagree with the law concerning who is qualified and who is not qualified. Perhaps you can find solace in the fact that she is an ELECTED county official and cannot be fired. She can, however, be impeached by the state legislative body ... but it doesn't convene until January. If she exhausts her appeals, fails to resign, and still refuses to issue marriage licenses, then the court can hold her in contempt of a court order (which might include monetary penalties and/or jail time). Perhaps people will send her donations to ease her troubled soul.
You people are hypocrites.
I'm a demon? a hypocrite? because you don't understand the difference between an attorney general and a county clerk?
An attorney general has discretion over what cases he will pursue or not pursue based on his assessment of the facts and the law. For instance, the KY attorney general refused to appeal the state marriage case because, in his opinion, the state would lose. The governor then used his discretion, retained private counsel, and the state lost.
A county clerk does not have discretion. The statutory law of KY requires county clerks to issue marriage licenses to qualified applicants.
Your hate is blinding you ... and spewing venomous hate at me and other posters doesn't resolve your issues. Kim Davis should perform the duties of her elected office, and if she cannot do so for whatever reason, she should resign. It's that simple.
That's called racism.
And it's why you people will always be outed as the hateful racist bigots you are.
I understand the news murderer in VIrginia killed a few cats before going on his homicidal rampage......This thread is about whether the clerk is morally or legally authorized or restrained on this issue. The comments of a cat killer obviously has no moral input on this subject.Remember...you are talking to someone who didn't threaten, they cowardly killed a cat that never did anything to them...and then cowardly hinted around to the owner.
The law isn't unconstitutional because a cat killer says it is.Bullshit. If the law is unconstitutional then it isn't valid.You are a Latino cat killer. We know who you are, psycho boy. She can believe whatever she wants, but she must do her job according to the law or resign.I'm not white, asshole. Why don't you ask the one who said it?Is it warm where you are? Dank? Moist? Saturated with a foul odor?Does anyone really need to read beyond those two sentences to realize what an idiot Odium is?
Pull your head out of your ass!
Tell me more about This is EXACTLY like using military to enforce white genocide.
I really enjoy a good laugh from the Idaho nutbags.
It is interesting that she brings up Conscientious Objectors...they have to jump thru a ton of hoops to get CO status....what hoops has she jumped thru?Here is a link to Kim Davis's emergency application directed to Justice Kagan. It is 50 pages!
Kim Davis SCOTUS Stay Application
I'm not sure that I want to wade through it. Anyone else want to read it?
"She is one of 120 Kentucky County Clerks, and oversees one of approximately 137 marriage licensing locations spread throughout Kentucky. No marriage license can be issued from her office without her authorization and without her personally affixing thereto her name and endorsement."
~ Her argument:
"But such individual rights and freedoms so fundamental to liberty are neither absolutely surrendered at the entry door of public service nor waived upon taking an oath of office. To suggest otherwise creates a religious (or anti-religious) test for holding office – which the United States and Kentucky Constitutions expressly forbid."
~ I find her points a bit interesting, because yeah they kind of already do all of this...
"For if that were true, a person who religiously objects to wartime combat would be forced to shoulder a rifle regardless of their conscience or be refused citizenship; a person who religiously objects to work on the Sabbath day of their faith would be forced to accept such work regardless of their conscience or lose access to state unemployment benefits; a person who religiously objects to state-mandated schooling for their children would be forced to send their children to school regardless of their conscience or face criminal penalties; a person who religiously objects to state-approved messages would be forced to carry that message on their vehicles regardless of their conscience or face criminal penalties; a person who religiously objects to capital punishment would be forced to participate in an execution regardless of their conscience or lose their job; a person who religiously objects to providing abortion-related and contraceptive insurance coverage to their employees would be forced to pay for such coverage regardless of their conscience or face staggering fines."
~ In order: The draft, getting fired, child neglect/abuse, huh? That's a dumb one if your employer says you can't have x bumper sticker you can be fired (see the shooter guy who couldn't wear his Obama pin), getting fired, if I'm not mistaken ACA does that?
~ So she's basically trying to say that the State Constitution should "outweigh" the SOCTUS ruling, that's not happening:
"The district court has acknowledged that “this civil action” presents a constitutional “debate,” “tension,” and “conflict” between “two individual liberties held sacrosanct in American jurisprudence.” Davis’ individual liberties are enumerated in the United States and Kentucky Constitutions and a state Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which predate and survive this Court’s ruling in Obergefell. Such rights deserve protection before the “demands of the State” irrevocably crush the “conscience of the individual.”
In the district court’s view, Plaintiffs’ rights trump Davis’ religious rights. But Davis’ individual liberties are enumerated in the United States and Kentucky Constitutions and a
state Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which predate and survive this Court’s ruling in Obergefell. Such rights deserve protection before the “demands of the State” irrevocably crush the “conscience of the individual.”
~ I can't imagine that's going to fly frankly, Alaska constitution has considered marijuana for private use legal since it's inception as a state. The Feds overruled that and /forced/ Alaska to make it illegal during the war on drugs; I can't recall if we went to the SCOTUS or not, but the Feds said basically "You will comply or you will have zero federal funding." Same shit, different layer cake.
~ She's kind of breaking the oath she took in taking office, regardless of her attempt to put religious spin on the oath:
"Before taking office as Rowan County clerk, Davis swore an oath to support the Constitutions and laws of the United States and Kentucky “so help me God.” KY. CONST. § 228."
And here's the rub, she's not only denying SSM's but /all/ marriages in her area:
"Expressly to avoid disparate treatment of any couple and ensure that all individuals and couples were treated the same, Davis suspended the issuance of all marriage licenses in Rowan County. VC, ¶ 29. She instructed all deputy clerks to stop issuing marriage licenses because licenses are issued on her authority, and because every license requires her name to appear on the license as the authorizing person."
~ Ouch
"The district court also rejected Davis’ claims under the Kentucky Religious Freedom Restoration Act (“Kentucky RFRA”), KY. REV. STAT. § 446.350, the Free Exercise Clause, the Free Speech Clause, and the Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution, and similar Kentucky Constitution provisions. See App. A-16 to A-28. In rejecting Davis’ religious liberty, conscience, and speech claims, the district court incorrectly concluded that the Kentucky marriage license form “does not require the county clerk to condone or endorse same-sex marriage” and instead merely “asks the county clerk to certify that the information provided is accurate and that
the couple is qualified to marry under Kentucky law.”9 According to the district court, the burden on Davis’ religious freedom is “more slight,” and she “remains free to practice her Apostolic Christian beliefs” since she “may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible Study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County jail,” and “believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman.” Id. at 27. But, according to the district court, “her religious convictions cannot excuse her” from authorizing SSM licenses.
[...]
"On August 26, 2015, the Sixth Circuit denied Davis’ emergency motion to stay the Injunction pending appeal. See App. D. In denying the stay request, the Sixth Circuit stated that [t]he injunction operates not against Davis personally, but against the holder of her office of Rowan County Clerk,” and further stated that “In light of the binding holding of Obergefell, it cannot be defensibly argued that the holder of the Rowan County Clerk’s office, apart from who personally occupies that office, may decline to act in conformity with the United States Constitution as interpreted by a dispositive holding of the United States Supreme Court.”
~SCOTUS will follow the same lines of thought I'm sure.
~ I have to wonder if she ensures that every marriage license she signs is for a Christian couple, or a couple who is of "good moral standing"... Does this mean we can we then hold her morally and/or legally responsible for every marriage she allowed which ended in divorce over the past 30 years? How about where there was domestic abuse?
Thing is, it is not for a state worker to determine an applicants "moral status" when providing services of any kind. I suspect this office will be looked upon no differently than the folks who authorize welfare, or unemployment, or social security applications. If one were to argue that the applicant wasn't Christian therefore couldn't receive a marriage license it would fail, thus too will the argument that because they're the same sex will fail as well.
Later on she argues for "religious accommodations," presumably that she will only sign "traditional" marriage papers. Problem is she has to sign /all/ of them, thus the only "accommodation" would be hiring a second clerk to do her job... That's not reasonable. I'm not sure if they can like fax the paper's to the next county for a signature or not, because it's gotta be notarized and shit, can't do that over a fax heh. I just don't think there /is/ an accommodation that would work for her position. Clearly it needs to be specified from now on that part of that job is signing off on SSM's, in the mean time I guess give her early retirement and move forward.
I'm sure she's already set up a "FundmyBigotry" account.Here is a link to Kim Davis's emergency application directed to Justice Kagan. It is 50 pages!
Kim Davis SCOTUS Stay Application
I'm not sure that I want to wade through it. Anyone else want to read it?
"She is one of 120 Kentucky County Clerks, and oversees one of approximately 137 marriage licensing locations spread throughout Kentucky. No marriage license can be issued from her office without her authorization and without her personally affixing thereto her name and endorsement."
~ Her argument:
"But such individual rights and freedoms so fundamental to liberty are neither absolutely surrendered at the entry door of public service nor waived upon taking an oath of office. To suggest otherwise creates a religious (or anti-religious) test for holding office – which the United States and Kentucky Constitutions expressly forbid."
~ I find her points a bit interesting, because yeah they kind of already do all of this...
"For if that were true, a person who religiously objects to wartime combat would be forced to shoulder a rifle regardless of their conscience or be refused citizenship; a person who religiously objects to work on the Sabbath day of their faith would be forced to accept such work regardless of their conscience or lose access to state unemployment benefits; a person who religiously objects to state-mandated schooling for their children would be forced to send their children to school regardless of their conscience or face criminal penalties; a person who religiously objects to state-approved messages would be forced to carry that message on their vehicles regardless of their conscience or face criminal penalties; a person who religiously objects to capital punishment would be forced to participate in an execution regardless of their conscience or lose their job; a person who religiously objects to providing abortion-related and contraceptive insurance coverage to their employees would be forced to pay for such coverage regardless of their conscience or face staggering fines."
~ In order: The draft, getting fired, child neglect/abuse, huh? That's a dumb one if your employer says you can't have x bumper sticker you can be fired (see the shooter guy who couldn't wear his Obama pin), getting fired, if I'm not mistaken ACA does that?
~ So she's basically trying to say that the State Constitution should "outweigh" the SOCTUS ruling, that's not happening:
"The district court has acknowledged that “this civil action” presents a constitutional “debate,” “tension,” and “conflict” between “two individual liberties held sacrosanct in American jurisprudence.” Davis’ individual liberties are enumerated in the United States and Kentucky Constitutions and a state Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which predate and survive this Court’s ruling in Obergefell. Such rights deserve protection before the “demands of the State” irrevocably crush the “conscience of the individual.”
In the district court’s view, Plaintiffs’ rights trump Davis’ religious rights. But Davis’ individual liberties are enumerated in the United States and Kentucky Constitutions and a
state Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which predate and survive this Court’s ruling in Obergefell. Such rights deserve protection before the “demands of the State” irrevocably crush the “conscience of the individual.”
~ I can't imagine that's going to fly frankly, Alaska constitution has considered marijuana for private use legal since it's inception as a state. The Feds overruled that and /forced/ Alaska to make it illegal during the war on drugs; I can't recall if we went to the SCOTUS or not, but the Feds said basically "You will comply or you will have zero federal funding." Same shit, different layer cake.
~ She's kind of breaking the oath she took in taking office, regardless of her attempt to put religious spin on the oath:
"Before taking office as Rowan County clerk, Davis swore an oath to support the Constitutions and laws of the United States and Kentucky “so help me God.” KY. CONST. § 228."
And here's the rub, she's not only denying SSM's but /all/ marriages in her area:
"Expressly to avoid disparate treatment of any couple and ensure that all individuals and couples were treated the same, Davis suspended the issuance of all marriage licenses in Rowan County. VC, ¶ 29. She instructed all deputy clerks to stop issuing marriage licenses because licenses are issued on her authority, and because every license requires her name to appear on the license as the authorizing person."
~ Ouch
"The district court also rejected Davis’ claims under the Kentucky Religious Freedom Restoration Act (“Kentucky RFRA”), KY. REV. STAT. § 446.350, the Free Exercise Clause, the Free Speech Clause, and the Religious Test Clause of the United States Constitution, and similar Kentucky Constitution provisions. See App. A-16 to A-28. In rejecting Davis’ religious liberty, conscience, and speech claims, the district court incorrectly concluded that the Kentucky marriage license form “does not require the county clerk to condone or endorse same-sex marriage” and instead merely “asks the county clerk to certify that the information provided is accurate and that
the couple is qualified to marry under Kentucky law.”9 According to the district court, the burden on Davis’ religious freedom is “more slight,” and she “remains free to practice her Apostolic Christian beliefs” since she “may continue to attend church twice a week, participate in Bible Study and minister to female inmates at the Rowan County jail,” and “believe that marriage is a union between one man and one woman.” Id. at 27. But, according to the district court, “her religious convictions cannot excuse her” from authorizing SSM licenses.
[...]
"On August 26, 2015, the Sixth Circuit denied Davis’ emergency motion to stay the Injunction pending appeal. See App. D. In denying the stay request, the Sixth Circuit stated that [t]he injunction operates not against Davis personally, but against the holder of her office of Rowan County Clerk,” and further stated that “In light of the binding holding of Obergefell, it cannot be defensibly argued that the holder of the Rowan County Clerk’s office, apart from who personally occupies that office, may decline to act in conformity with the United States Constitution as interpreted by a dispositive holding of the United States Supreme Court.”
~SCOTUS will follow the same lines of thought I'm sure.
~ I have to wonder if she ensures that every marriage license she signs is for a Christian couple, or a couple who is of "good moral standing"... Does this mean we can we then hold her morally and/or legally responsible for every marriage she allowed which ended in divorce over the past 30 years? How about where there was domestic abuse?
Thing is, it is not for a state worker to determine an applicants "moral status" when providing services of any kind. I suspect this office will be looked upon no differently than the folks who authorize welfare, or unemployment, or social security applications. If one were to argue that the applicant wasn't Christian therefore couldn't receive a marriage license it would fail, thus too will the argument that because they're the same sex will fail as well.
Later on she argues for "religious accommodations," presumably that she will only sign "traditional" marriage papers. Problem is she has to sign /all/ of them, thus the only "accommodation" would be hiring a second clerk to do her job... That's not reasonable. I'm not sure if they can like fax the paper's to the next county for a signature or not, because it's gotta be notarized and shit, can't do that over a fax heh. I just don't think there /is/ an accommodation that would work for her position. Clearly it needs to be specified from now on that part of that job is signing off on SSM's, in the mean time I guess give her early retirement and move forward.
I read her previously filings with the district court and the court of appeals. I skimmed through the emergency petition and I didn't notice any new arguments. All of her arguments are spurious, frivolous, or fallacious. I think she just wants the media attention so the gay-haters will be frothing at the mouth and eager to send her donations.
Unequal enforcement? The law requires that gays be provided with marriage licenses. This three time failure at marriage refuses to issue licenses that the law requires her to issue.The issue at hand is the governor's unequal enforcement of the law....Spoon, your lack of cognitive aility is either congenital or you were dropped on your head. All criminals are targeted, bub. She can believe whatever she wants, but in her government job, she must follow the law.The operative being "targeted"....Which is how these libs operate. They carefully pick their battles. Most likely due to the eagerness of a complicit main stream media to report with an extreme left wing bias.
THAT is the subject on which we focus. Not your whiny ass liberal talking points.
The issue at hand is the governor's unequal enforcement of the law....Spoon, your lack of cognitive aility is either congenital or you were dropped on your head. All criminals are targeted, bub. She can believe whatever she wants, but in her government job, she must follow the law.The operative being "targeted"....Which is how these libs operate. They carefully pick their battles. Most likely due to the eagerness of a complicit main stream media to report with an extreme left wing bias.
THAT is the subject on which we focus. Not your whiny ass liberal talking points.
Her "blessing" is of no consequence at all. The fulfilling of her duties is of consquence in the law.The county clerks already have the right to delegate duties to their deputy clerks. Kim Davis employs 6 deputy clerks in her office and one of them expressed willingness to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Kim Davis's complaint is that her name as the county clerk is still printed on the state form even if one of her deputy clerks signs it instead of her. She says this makes her give her "blessing" to marriages that she doesn't approve based on her religious beliefs.She already commenced that action through a third party complaint against the governor. She claims the governor's mandate (that clerks obey the Obergefell opinion or resign) substantially burdens her religious freedom and that there were less restrictive means through which gays could get marriage licenses rather than seeking them from her office. For instance, she claims the governor could have called a special session of the legislature to consider amending the law to give her a religious accommodation. But doing that would be very expensive for the state and the governor refused to call a special session. The regular legislative session isn't schedule to convene until January. During the last session, Kim Davis and other county clerks and deputy clerks lobbied their representatives in the legislature to enact legislation giving county clerks the right to "opt out" of issuing marriage licenses, and the legislature ignored their requests.
I find it that the only "accommodation" is to allow the clerks to "opt out" meaning citizens of her county would be denied equal access to government services in the county in which they live.
Why couldn't the county clerks have asked for an option whereby a member of their staff could be authorized to sign the certificate in stead of the elected clerk. Under her "accommodation" she wins by denying service to the citizens she was elected to serve. Under the deleted signature option both party wins, she doesn't have to sign it and the citizens get equal access to government service.
>>>>
Bullshit. If the law is unconstitutional then it isn't valid.You are a Latino cat killer. We know who you are, psycho boy. She can believe whatever she wants, but she must do her job according to the law or resign.I'm not white, asshole. Why don't you ask the one who said it?Is it warm where you are? Dank? Moist? Saturated with a foul odor?Does anyone really need to read beyond those two sentences to realize what an idiot Odium is?
Pull your head out of your ass!
Tell me more about This is EXACTLY like using military to enforce white genocide.
I really enjoy a good laugh from the Idaho nutbags.
He can't tell you which law is unconstitutional, because he does not or will not understand the Constitution and its narrative in American history.Bullshit. If the law is unconstitutional then it isn't valid.You are a Latino cat killer. We know who you are, psycho boy. She can believe whatever she wants, but she must do her job according to the law or resign.I'm not white, asshole. Why don't you ask the one who said it?Is it warm where you are? Dank? Moist? Saturated with a foul odor?
Pull your head out of your ass!
Tell me more about This is EXACTLY like using military to enforce white genocide.
I really enjoy a good laugh from the Idaho nutbags.
What law is it that you believe is unconstitutional?
And? You expect her to listen to thugs in robes? I don't. The last thing the system wants is a martyr for the religious freedom movement and any fines these thugs put on her will be paid by supporters and supporters of religious freedom. Good luck!
I am going to do my part in fighting tyranny and those that rule like dictators and against religious freedom. I am not a christian not even close but I support this fight 100%.And? You expect her to listen to thugs in robes? I don't. The last thing the system wants is a martyr for the religious freedom movement and any fines these thugs put on her will be paid by supporters and supporters of religious freedom. Good luck!
You are going to financially support her and her family, right?
The only thug is this walking, talking example of what marriage should not be (Four Husbands?). She has decided that she, and she alone, will determine who gets married in Rowan county. That is the epitome of thuggery and government tyranny.And? You expect her to listen to thugs in robes? I don't. The last thing the system wants is a martyr for the religious freedom movement and any fines these thugs put on her will be paid by supporters and supporters of religious freedom. Good luck!
And? You expect her to listen to thugs in robes? I don't. The last thing the system wants is a martyr for the religious freedom movement and any fines these thugs put on her will be paid by supporters and supporters of religious freedom. Good luck!
