KY clerk of courts - Kim Davis
 

How do you feel about her refusing to perform gay marriages. And what do you think of the subsequent punishment?

She can have her religious convictions, but she also has a duty under the law which she vowed to uphold. She should have resigned. As for the punishment, there really wasn't any other course they could take.

Exactly my views. It is my understanding that they can't do anything but find her in contempt until the legislature is back in session.

If she was fined, someone would take care of it and she'd still not budge in following the law.

Religious beliefs are not equal. She will do what she is told or be fired. On the other hand, Muslims are allowed to wear their burkas for their drivers license photos. Employers are also being required to allow certain attire for religious practices. Airlines are providing special meals for the religious. I believe the only religion that has practices that are banned are the Christian faiths. Hey, even traffic is stopped in NYC for Muslims to pray in public.

If she can't perform her job due to religious belief, then they should transfer her to a different department. Do I empathize with her? Yes, but she still has a legal obligation to perform her job or get terminated.

I have an ounce of empathy, but issuing licenses are her job and she took an oath to follow the law.

She should have done the right thing from the beginning and stepped down.

She was wrong in what and how she did it.
Religious prefernce is fine, but if it interferes with the performance of her job then she has an obligation to step down/quit.

There is the issue of the job being an appointment hence not able to be fired. However there was an obilgation on the part of who ever appointed her to demand she perform the job assigned or relinquish the position.

There is no doubt she knew how this was going to end up. Where was the supervision/responsible management?

To allow it to become a media circus is in keeping with the sensationalism allure of the day.

There is more to the story not known.

Actually she was elected, and could not be fired.

I stand corrected...thanx.

I think she's an idiot...first because her job description has her signing wedding applications, and doesn't give her the right to refuse...second because she quotes God as a reason, but then ignores the interesting bit about not judging others as that's in His job description...not hers....she doesn't like gay marriage...since one person says she was elected then just impeach her stupid @ss...

It's about religious rights all around. If a religion allows for a same-sex ceremony and welcome gays into their congregation, that also is a religious right.

To me this is the legal part of marriage and God has little to do with it. Your beliefs and devotion to one another is not something you can buy with a license.

This situation is just the beginning of an assault on religious freedom. the standard defense is going to be its your job follow the rules follow my orders...that's what many of the Nazi said when they were tried.

The Supreme court activist have opened a pandora's box unnecessarily

I support the county clerk

So if I robbed you and said that it was within my religious rights and to heck with the law, you wouldn't prosecute?

We cannot live in a lawless society, even if you do not accept the authority.

A marriage license is a non religious issue. A religion or church has every right not to married a same-sex couple. That is their freedom, and it is not challenged here.

The county clerk was totally wrong. She was breaking the law by not giving marriage licenses. Same sex marriage is the law of the land. Keep her in jail.

Keep it simple. She refused to perform the job she was elected to do and agreed to do when she ran for the job.

Religion, sexual preference and anything else is political canon fodder.

She knowingly failed to perform her job!

...and you are legally WRONG. Would you support the county clerk if it meant YOU had to go to jail? Be honest with your answer.

She had legal options. Once this became law, she could have protested. She could have resigned. She could not refuse to issue a marriage certificate to a gay couple. Once upon a time, miscegenation was illegal and court clerks refused to issue licenses to mixed-race couples even when miscegenation was declared illegal. The clerks got away with it. This time around, the Feds have more power and can do something to enforce the law. Ms. Davis and her ilk need to either do their job or resign. If they refuse to follow the law, they should be prosecuted and treated as the lawbreakers they are.

There is an old country song goes something like this (you have to stand for something or you fall for anything) If its that big a of deal they should just fire her and fight the discharge later. No jail time.

Ah now the real truth of the matter is beginning to surface. The state legislature is proposing changing the laws that would make them more in step with the supreme courts decision.

And all the super smart politicians and lawyers and judges did not know the supreme court ruling was in fact counter to many KY laws on the books??

In practical application the KY laws on the books do not allow for same gender situations.
So this whole episode could have been an issue of "ENFORCING THE EXISTING LAWS" and not another race/gender/political-media circus.

Special interest/minority groups in conjunction with the 24/7 media are the ruination of our beloved country.

Kim Davis cannot be fired as she is an elected official. Jail time for contempt of court is the solution. People have to learn consequences if they openly break the law.

Instead of creating another gender media circus she could have cited the laws of KY did not support issuing the certificates. But then that would have not had the sensationalism, agenda promoting media frenzy, would it?

However, when the Supreme Court decision was handed down, the Kentucky state laws against same sex marriage all became invalid. There were no "existing" laws to enorce.

Since the Feds don't believe in enforcing the immigration laws, we can pick and chose the laws that fit us, right? Az found that out, didn't they?

Then why is the KY legislature claiming that is the issue, and requesting getting the laws changed?
To the question posed earlier why did not the lawers, judges and law makers address the issue.

It is nothing more than a contrived special interest, media exploitation.

Married husband #1
Fathered twins with husband #3
Divorced husband #1
Married husband #2
Husband #2 adopts her kids
Divorced husband #2
Married husband #3
Divorced husband #3
Remarried husband #2

And she is a defender of the traditional Biblical marriage?

Sounds like a perfect example of a Kentucky hillbilly.

You can always count on certain posters to go for the personal attack instead of the issue being discussed.

WHAT does any of this have to do with the issue of discussion ?

If it is pertinent, then please present your personal resume for us to judge your ability to have an opinion.

Judging others is easy, isnt it ? Especially if it fits your political feelings.

You don't have to get racist about it. That is just like calling a black the N-word

Are not all relions frought with hypocritic members. Who like the current administration use the selective fit rules of law and enforcement or not.

And if the message is on agenda point it does not matter one bit what the person did or did not do....kinda Clinton-like measurement.

Your post is an excellent example of what liberals always do ... trash any woman who violates liberal precepts of any type. You would have made a good candidate for Hillary's Bimbo Eruption Unit ... the real war on women.

btw, Kim converted to Christianity after having made a hash of her life ...that's the basic idea of forgiveness. Hmm, maybe there's hope for Hillary after all ... especially after she's indicted?

Excellent example of trashing a woman. Bimbo says it all.

I'm starting to come around to that point of view ... conservatives always get suckered by the libs regarding sanctity of rule of law .... but it's selective. Obama ignores laws he does not like and his acolytes pontificate on things like gay marriage (an oxymoron), enforcing the "law' handed down by Anthony Kennedy personal beliefes etc.

Thus, since liberals have trashed the rule of law, when Trump is elected I look forward to selective law enforcement but from the other side of the spectrum.

That works for me. Like some liberal said, "elections have consequences". When liberals controlled congress and started passing bills without a Republican vote, they screamed that Republicans didn't know how to compromise. Now that they are the minority, they are still whining that Republicans don't know how to compromise, yet they won't add their vote to anything. I guess compromise is overrated.

:thumbup:

Didn't you know that it's only racist if you are saying it against a black, Latin, or gay:D

I would think that any couple in Rowan County, KY, who could not obtain a marriage license in that county could just drive over to another county to get their marriage license. As far as I have heard, Rowan County is the only one whose County Clerk refuses to issue marriage licenses.

The marriage license from any county is valid for the entire state.

Now how would such a make sense low profile, no problem solution satisfy the special interest and minority groups and the media that fan their flames.

So, a low level clerk refuses to enforce the law (as determined by Antony Kennedy) and the liberals want her to go to jail ...

Yet Obie trashes the Constitution in more ways than most of us can keep up with, and on huge issues, yet no one calls for him to go to jail??

Does anyone else see a slight discrepancy here in the scales of justice in USA 2015??

It all depends on which side of the political spectrum you reside on.

You must have forgotten that we employ selective enforcement!!