Understanding What Kim Davis' Legal Argument Will Be..

[Asclepias]

Of course she already had a lawyer or a team of them before she went to jail. But there seems to be quite a rukkus and misunderstanding of religion when it comes to how her attorneys will frame their argument. Here is a spot to debate Kim Davis' flaws and how they will weigh in on her arguments at trial(s) and on appeal to the US Supreme Court, probably by about late 2016 or early 2017.

The following comment sparked this topic:

Just saw on TV that she was married FOUR FUCKING TIMES and had TWINS out of wedlock. Is that true? I can smell the hypocrisy.

Yes, she is a sinner. And that's why she is a Christian. It's a requirement to walk through the door of a church. You don't approach Christianity from a perspective of perfection, you approach it saying "I am a flawed being, I'm struggling, I need help". That's how it works.

On the topic of adultery and the famous story in the Bible of the stoning incident with Jesus, he said "let any of you who is without sin cast the first stone". His point was twofold: 1. To save the poor stoning victim and 2. To really seat in the minds of the angry mob that we are all sinners and must not judge; judgment is for God.

That being said, Jude 1 spells out that a Christian (who is also a sinner, remember) must reach out to homosexuals with compassion, "making a difference". But that to promote them as a group mentality into the fabric of any society is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. This message exists in the New Testament and in Jesus' teachings as I recall, there are very few examples of of him saying "Oh yeah, you know that Old Testament law and the shit that went down then with God casting people into Hell for eternity? Yeah, this one's like that. It's for realsies." Yet that's what we find in Jude 1.

And it makes sense if you understand sociology. When it comes to human behaviors and mimickry in youth, trends have a way of catching fire in any society. And what do we see today after 30 years of nonstop campaigning by LGBT cult to the youth in media? That's right, hordes of "bi-curious" or "gay" youth popping up like a dandelion-epidemic in a lawn that used to be relatively weed free. God's OK with his lawn having occasional dandelions but not the whole lawn being taken over with time. God remembers Ancient Greece and you don't. So he is wiser than you. God remembers Sodom and you don't. So he is wiser than you.

God teaches us to love the sinner but hate the sin. And that's what Jude 1 is all about. Jesus also extended compassion to prostitutes, thieves and lepers. Does that mean that anyone against or refusing to participate in promoting prostitution, robbery or coming down with leprosy is a "hater"? NO! Of course not! So, Kim Davis is in God's favor. The Bible's New Testament isn't all roses and hippy love fest. There are some hard rules and one of the hardest is not to tamper with God's lawn by helping to seed it with weeds. Otherwise the good grass will be choked out and wouldn't have a chance to grow in that enviroment even if it wanted to desperately. THAT is why the punishment for promoting homosexuality using God's sacred vehicle of the family (marriage) is such a pisser for God. And you will get eternity in the slammer if you fail to heed Jude 1's warning.

So, any lawyer coming forward saying "she's an adulterer! How can she object?!!" is flat out of line. Kim Davis isn't the Bible. Kim Davis is a flawed sinning Christian doing her level best to abide by the Bible in this particular instance. She has read the warnings in Jude 1, presumably. So she knows she must choose between eternal peril or jail. She has chosen wisely. But the people who put her in jail have not chosen wisely. They will be judged twice. Once here on earth in the dank and dusty courtooms. And a second time as they foolishly try to enter the Pearly Gates.

The 1st Amendment of the Constitution protects the exercise of religion. It does so not for a building or a group of people, but for an individual following a known and accepted faith (not a cult). The differences between a sublime religion and a cult are determined by society, not one judge or a small panel of them. Christians were who founded our country. And it's going to be a long day in court for an attorney trying to argue how a Johnny-Come-Lately deviant sex cult has a "right" to force a Christian to their knees to bow at a new rainbow colored altar.

The 9th Amendment of the Constitution says that no law may come along and dilute the potency of the 1st Amendment. So Ms. Davis can use the 9th to drive a big fat nail in the wall and hang her 1st Amendment hat on it. "Public Accomodation" must and will take a back seat to the 1st Amendment. Public accomodation is a brand new concept of forcing people to go along with in this case, behaviors they object to.

There was a flawed premise at the very start of all this. And it was/is "behaviors = race". A waffling group of deviant sex behaviors who don't even understand themselves completely, cannot dictate to our nation's sublime stalwart religion since day one (Christians) that they will now have to essentially tear out sections of the Bible and burn them as newly-irrelevant.

There is something ironic about Sil creaming her panties over this woman, all in contempt for gay people.

I was not aware Sil was a woman.

 

[Silhouette]

There is something ironic about Sil creaming her panties over this woman, all in contempt for gay people.

Yes, one of the symptoms of "being gay" is sexualizing everything and then projecting that sexualizing fixation onto other people, assigning the whole world your illness so you don't have to suffer alone. I know, I know. All this would've been addressed in your persona except y'all had yourselves taken off the DSM by force and artifice so now what you do "is normal and everybody else better agree or they go to jail!!"..

And hence why this lawsuit is so important. Go Kim Davis. Go. Humanity itself depends on your lawsuit.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

There is something ironic about Sil creaming her panties over this woman, all in contempt for gay people.

Yes, one of the symptoms of "being gay" is sexualizing everything and then projecting that sexualizing fixation onto other people, assigning the whole world your illness so you don't have to suffer alone. I know, I know. All this would've been addressed in your persona except y'all had yourselves taken off the DSM by force and artifice so now what you do "is normal and everybody else better agree or they go to jail!!"..

And hence why this lawsuit is so important. Go Kim Davis. Go. Humanity itself depends on your lawsuit.

What "lawsuit"? The one that exists only in your head?

 

[mdk]

And hence why this lawsuit is so important. Go Kim Davis. Go. Humanity itself depends on your lawsuit.

At least you are not being dramatic or anything. Get a grip! lol.

 

[Montrovant]

There is something ironic about Sil creaming her panties over this woman, all in contempt for gay people.

Yes, one of the symptoms of "being gay" is sexualizing everything and then projecting that sexualizing fixation onto other people, assigning the whole world your illness so you don't have to suffer alone. I know, I know. All this would've been addressed in your persona except y'all had yourselves taken off the DSM by force and artifice so now what you do "is normal and everybody else better agree or they go to jail!!"..

And hence why this lawsuit is so important. Go Kim Davis. Go. Humanity itself depends on your lawsuit.

Humanity depends on it!

 

[SwimExpert]

There is something ironic about Sil creaming her panties over this woman, all in contempt for gay people.

Yes, one of the symptoms of "being gay" is sexualizing everything and then projecting that sexualizing fixation onto other people, assigning the whole world your illness so you don't have to suffer alone. I know, I know. All this would've been addressed in your persona except y'all had yourselves taken off the DSM by force and artifice so now what you do "is normal and everybody else better agree or they go to jail!!"..

And hence why this lawsuit is so important. Go Kim Davis. Go. Humanity itself depends on your lawsuit.

Are you Kim Davis? You were gone for a while there, and then suddenly she's release from jail and you're back again. I'm feeling a Clark Kent/Superman thing going on here. Your delusions of grandeur certainly would explain alot.

 

[Silhouette]

There is something ironic about Sil creaming her panties over this woman, all in contempt for gay people.

Yes, one of the symptoms of "being gay" is sexualizing everything and then projecting that sexualizing fixation onto other people, assigning the whole world your illness so you don't have to suffer alone. I know, I know. All this would've been addressed in your persona except y'all had yourselves taken off the DSM by force and artifice so now what you do "is normal and everybody else better agree or they go to jail!!"..

And hence why this lawsuit is so important. Go Kim Davis. Go. Humanity itself depends on your lawsuit.

What "lawsuit"? The one that exists only in your head?

You think that she was stuck in jail for refusing to participate in a gay marriage (Jude 1) for fear for of the warning therein for her immortal soul... and she isn't going to sue for violation of her 1st Amendment civil rights?

You think teams of drooling lawyers are sitting out there saying at conference tables, "nah, there's no merit to this case.."

Goodness you ARE optimistic, aren't you?.

 

[SwimExpert]

There is something ironic about Sil creaming her panties over this woman, all in contempt for gay people.

Yes, one of the symptoms of "being gay" is sexualizing everything and then projecting that sexualizing fixation onto other people, assigning the whole world your illness so you don't have to suffer alone. I know, I know. All this would've been addressed in your persona except y'all had yourselves taken off the DSM by force and artifice so now what you do "is normal and everybody else better agree or they go to jail!!"..

And hence why this lawsuit is so important. Go Kim Davis. Go. Humanity itself depends on your lawsuit.

What "lawsuit"? The one that exists only in your head?

You think that she was stuck in jail for refusing to participate in a gay marriage (Jude 1) for fear for of the warning therein for her immortal soul... and she isn't going to sue for violation of her 1st Amendment civil rights?

You think teams of drooling lawyers are sitting out there saying at conference tables, "nah, there's no merit to this case.."

Goodness you ARE optimistic, aren't you?.

So....yes, the lawsuit in your head.

 

[Montrovant]

There is something ironic about Sil creaming her panties over this woman, all in contempt for gay people.

Yes, one of the symptoms of "being gay" is sexualizing everything and then projecting that sexualizing fixation onto other people, assigning the whole world your illness so you don't have to suffer alone. I know, I know. All this would've been addressed in your persona except y'all had yourselves taken off the DSM by force and artifice so now what you do "is normal and everybody else better agree or they go to jail!!"..

And hence why this lawsuit is so important. Go Kim Davis. Go. Humanity itself depends on your lawsuit.

What "lawsuit"? The one that exists only in your head?

You think that she was stuck in jail for refusing to participate in a gay marriage (Jude 1) for fear for of the warning therein for her immortal soul... and she isn't going to sue for violation of her 1st Amendment civil rights?

You think teams of drooling lawyers are sitting out there saying at conference tables, "nah, there's no merit to this case.."

Goodness you ARE optimistic, aren't you?.

After your many failures in predicting legal arguments and decisions, I think you are the optimistic one to imagine you have any clue about what is going to happen in any sort of legal discussion.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

There is something ironic about Sil creaming her panties over this woman, all in contempt for gay people.

Yes, one of the symptoms of "being gay" is sexualizing everything and then projecting that sexualizing fixation onto other people, assigning the whole world your illness so you don't have to suffer alone. I know, I know. All this would've been addressed in your persona except y'all had yourselves taken off the DSM by force and artifice so now what you do "is normal and everybody else better agree or they go to jail!!"..

And hence why this lawsuit is so important. Go Kim Davis. Go. Humanity itself depends on your lawsuit.

What "lawsuit"? The one that exists only in your head?

You think that she was stuck in jail for refusing to participate in a gay marriage (Jude 1) for fear for of the warning therein for her immortal soul... and she isn't going to sue for violation of her 1st Amendment civil rights?

You think teams of drooling lawyers are sitting out there saying at conference tables, "nah, there's no merit to this case.."

Goodness you ARE optimistic, aren't you?.

I can almost guarantee that she's not going to sue.

In this case, I'm going to guess that she's actually more in touch with reality than you are - or at least her Liberty Institute handlers are.

 

[Silhouette]

After your many failures in predicting legal arguments and decisions, I think you are the optimistic one to imagine you have any clue about what is going to happen in any sort of legal discussion.

You've heard she has civil lawyers right? What do you suppose they're for?

Kim Davis' legal representation:

Mat Staver is one of the nation’s leading constitutional attorneys defending life, liberty and family. Mat has argued numerous cases before the highest courts in America, including arguing two cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 1989, Mat Staver became the Founder, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel and currently serves as Chairman of the Board. Liberty Counsel was one of the first religious liberty litigation organizations in the country. In the early 1990s, Dean Staver was one of the first to pioneer a new legal strategy and theory in litigating religious liberty cases, using the First Amendment Free Speech Clause. MAT STAVER, FOUNDER AND CHAIRMAN | Liberty Counsel Action

Kim Davis: More To This Story Than Being Reported (Liberty Counsel) | Liberty Counsel Action

We are very pleased that Kim Davis was released from jail yesterday. But the battle in Kentucky is far from over for Kim and other county clerks — and for many other states’ public officials who are facing similar threats of fines, incarceration, or removal from their positions over their conscience-based opposition to same-sex “marriage.”...While the Supreme Court struck down federal and state laws defining marriage as being between one man and one woman, the Court cannot create a new law. The five lawyers on the Supreme Court who created a “right” to same-sex “marriage” did so without constitutional authority and have thus created legal chaos. The Constitution states that the creation of laws must always come from the Legislative Branch.

And

Kim Davis is adhered to Kentucky law while standing for her First Amendment right to religious liberty and freedom of conscience.
As I have said before, this case has national implications and is predictive of just how protected our religious liberties are in America following the Supreme Court’s misguided ruling

 

[Silhouette]

*crickets*

Yep, that's what I thought. You know this is going to SCOTUS.

 

[Silhouette]

C'mon guys. How many posts did you make saying there was no civil case arising from this? And I just set you straight. Suddenly your relentless horde has "other things to do" eh?

Next post from the LGBT blogging choir "I just can't be bothered with this topic, it's ridiculous"...lol..

 

[Montrovant]

After your many failures in predicting legal arguments and decisions, I think you are the optimistic one to imagine you have any clue about what is going to happen in any sort of legal discussion.

You've heard she has civil lawyers right? What do you suppose they're for?

Kim Davis' legal representation:

Mat Staver is one of the nation’s leading constitutional attorneys defending life, liberty and family. Mat has argued numerous cases before the highest courts in America, including arguing two cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 1989, Mat Staver became the Founder, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel and currently serves as Chairman of the Board. Liberty Counsel was one of the first religious liberty litigation organizations in the country. In the early 1990s, Dean Staver was one of the first to pioneer a new legal strategy and theory in litigating religious liberty cases, using the First Amendment Free Speech Clause. MAT STAVER, FOUNDER AND CHAIRMAN | Liberty Counsel Action

Kim Davis: More To This Story Than Being Reported (Liberty Counsel) | Liberty Counsel Action

We are very pleased that Kim Davis was released from jail yesterday. But the battle in Kentucky is far from over for Kim and other county clerks — and for many other states’ public officials who are facing similar threats of fines, incarceration, or removal from their positions over their conscience-based opposition to same-sex “marriage.”...While the Supreme Court struck down federal and state laws defining marriage as being between one man and one woman, the Court cannot create a new law. The five lawyers on the Supreme Court who created a “right” to same-sex “marriage” did so without constitutional authority and have thus created legal chaos. The Constitution states that the creation of laws must always come from the Legislative Branch.

And

Kim Davis is adhered to Kentucky law while standing for her First Amendment right to religious liberty and freedom of conscience.
As I have said before, this case has national implications and is predictive of just how protected our religious liberties are in America following the Supreme Court’s misguided ruling

So she has lawyers.....and? Does that mean any potential lawsuit will win? Do you think the state and federal governments do not have lawyers as well?

Davis has every right to sue if she decides to do so. With your history I certainly would not expect your take on the outcome of any such suit to be correct. That you would be confident in your legal predictions despite the many times you've been wrong in past predictions shows that you are quite optimistic.

 

[Montrovant]

*crickets*

Yep, that's what I thought. You know this is going to SCOTUS.

Didn't it do so already, and they declined to hear it?

 

[sidneyworld]

How are her religious views a defense to breaking the law?

A couple of observations here:

Original story: Kentucky clerks to license marriages as their boss is jailed

1. "A federal judge ordered a defiant county clerk to jail for contempt Thursday after she insisted that it would violate her conscience to follow court orders to issue marriage licenses to gay couples." ...

2. "Kim Davis testified about 20 minutes and was very emotional. She described how she became a Christian and said she is unable to believe anything else." ... "Davis, an Apostolic Christian, said earlier this week she never imagined this day would come."

3. "Davis stopped issuing licenses to all couples in June after the U.S. Supreme Court effectively legalized gay marriage. Despite rulings against her, she's turned away couples again and again."

4. "I have no animosity toward anyone and harbor no ill will. To me this has never been a gay or lesbian issue. It is about marriage and God's word," her statement said. ... Her critics mock this moral stand, noting that Davis is on her fourth husband after being divorced three times."

The main issue here in terms of the set of circumstances is not unlike the issue of certain pharmacists who, while working for a corporation, refused to dispense the morning after pill once it became available well after their initial employment, which could potentially abort a fetus, thus assisting in abortion being clearly against their religious beliefs. Pharmacy Refusals 101

Right or wrong? Well to begin with, at the time Ms. Davis took office it's not clear if she was a Christian. It only suggests that she became a Christian before Gay Marriage became legal. Her statement that she "never imagined this day would come." suggests that it was before the gay legislation but not before she took office. This creates a huge moral and ethical dilemma in terms of exercising duty of office or like the Christian pharmacists, practicing within the acceptable employment parameters of a corporate contract. Both Davis and those pharmacists did not initially accept their position knowing they would have to compromise their religious practices at any time during their tenure. It's not enough to prosecute these people with the assumption that they should have anticipated such religiously adverse legislation in their capacity to potentially accommodate it, because like all controversial issues, especially in terms of abortion and same sex marriage, it's unimaginable. In fact much of the legislative evolution these two issues have been unimaginable for decades for many people. Including myself.

Nonetheless, the question here is how enforceable is a breach of contract, whether on a government level or within the private sector, when it involves a requirement of an employee/elected official to suddenly and in this case critically compromise their religious beliefs?

I don't care as much that she was jailed as ridiculous as that was. However, and in this case, church and state should remain separate provided that there is a clause, whatever that may be, which accommodates some reasonable compensation for such events that would otherwise cause the incarceration of an individual being forced to go against core religious beliefs.
I have to add one more note here involving her multiple marriages. While again we also don't know if she became a Christian after her last marriage, (lol) I too would question her conviction in qualifying her defense of Christianity. If you're going to court with a bloody cross, it better be your own blood that's bleeding.

Good to be back, folks! Hope you all had a great summer..

Anne Marie

 

[Silhouette]

So she has lawyers.....and? Does that mean any potential lawsuit will win? Do you think the state and federal governments do not have lawyers as well?

Her attorney just happens to be one of the most respected constitutional attorneys around; specializing in 1st Amendment issues. So, yes, that means her lawsuit will win. Because if it doesn't win, then the 1st Amendment is defunct and should be repealed. I suppose the five tyrants of SCOTUS will also handle that little secretarial glitch...now that the Legislature no longer has the sole power of amending the Constitution..

 

[Montrovant]

So she has lawyers.....and? Does that mean any potential lawsuit will win? Do you think the state and federal governments do not have lawyers as well?

Her attorney just happens to be one of the most respected constitutional attorneys around; specializing in 1st Amendment issues. So, yes, that means her lawsuit will win. Because if it doesn't win, then the 1st Amendment is defunct and should be repealed. I suppose the five tyrants of SCOTUS will also handle that little secretarial glitch...now that the Legislature no longer has the sole power of amending the Constitution..

One of the most respected constitutional attorneys around, huh? Respected by who? His own non-profit?

Having a well-respected constitutional attorney means a person must win their lawsuit? I wonder why they even bother with the trials, then. Just decide who has the 'best' attorney and that person wins the case!

Your take on the 1st amendment, as with so much else you say, must be taken with a huge grain of salt.

So if the USSC makes a ruling you disagree with, those who ruled against what you believe are tyrants? That's a common theme on this board it seems.

The USSC didn't amend the Constitution. This is obvious. They struck down what the majority considered unconstitutional laws.

 

[bendog]

After your many failures in predicting legal arguments and decisions, I think you are the optimistic one to imagine you have any clue about what is going to happen in any sort of legal discussion.

You've heard she has civil lawyers right? What do you suppose they're for?

Kim Davis' legal representation:

Mat Staver is one of the nation’s leading constitutional attorneys defending life, liberty and family. Mat has argued numerous cases before the highest courts in America, including arguing two cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 1989, Mat Staver became the Founder, President and General Counsel of Liberty Counsel and currently serves as Chairman of the Board. Liberty Counsel was one of the first religious liberty litigation organizations in the country. In the early 1990s, Dean Staver was one of the first to pioneer a new legal strategy and theory in litigating religious liberty cases, using the First Amendment Free Speech Clause. MAT STAVER, FOUNDER AND CHAIRMAN | Liberty Counsel Action

Kim Davis: More To This Story Than Being Reported (Liberty Counsel) | Liberty Counsel Action

We are very pleased that Kim Davis was released from jail yesterday. But the battle in Kentucky is far from over for Kim and other county clerks — and for many other states’ public officials who are facing similar threats of fines, incarceration, or removal from their positions over their conscience-based opposition to same-sex “marriage.”...While the Supreme Court struck down federal and state laws defining marriage as being between one man and one woman, the Court cannot create a new law. The five lawyers on the Supreme Court who created a “right” to same-sex “marriage” did so without constitutional authority and have thus created legal chaos. The Constitution states that the creation of laws must always come from the Legislative Branch.

And

Kim Davis is adhered to Kentucky law while standing for her First Amendment right to religious liberty and freedom of conscience.
As I have said before, this case has national implications and is predictive of just how protected our religious liberties are in America following the Supreme Court’s misguided ruling

OMG, Davis's attorney is asking for money! LOL Guess that go fund me thing hurt.

 

[Silhouette]

*crickets*

Yep, that's what I thought. You know this is going to SCOTUS.

Didn't it do so already, and they declined to hear it?

I think the rule of four will allow Kim Davis' case to be Heard. I feel confident that Scalia, Roberts, Alito and Thomas will vote to Hear her case.