Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
They really need to set up a new "Go Fund Me" catagory for these people called..."GoFundMyMartyrdom" or GoFundMyBigotry". Call it what it is...separate it from those who have real problems and need help....like that cop's family in Texas."I'm willing to face my consequences and you all will face your consequences when it comes time for judgment."
You are going for early retirement through a "Go Fund me wind fall...."
She cannot be fired as she is an elected official...she has to be Impeached.....I'm sure this will get all worked out and I'm sure she will either be fired, or capitulate. And possibly jailed.
Hell of a 2" branch I climbed out on.
Sure, you are demanding that another gives up their own personal rights of religious freedom in favor of your own perception immorality and perversions. When all of the voters of Kentucky agree with you maybe then you will have something to boast about. For now she is an elected official whom the people of that county placed into that office.Sure and I bet you'll go right on down their into Kentucky and tell all those Rednecks your position on the matter.You're at liberty to disagree, provided you understand and acknowledge that as a fact of law you are wrong, as is the clerk.I do not agree with you. I do think though that this hatred being exhibited towards the faithful and believers will come back a hundred fold to haunt those that are trying to scramble what God created. I am willing put my heart with hers for standing on her new found faith. If by chance she does go to jail she won't be the first to do so based on lies and deceit from those who desire to dispel another's faith.Do you understand that her position is without merit, do you understand that her personal religious beliefs have no bearing on the issue, and do you understand that her 'argument' has no legal basis whatsoever.Both of you failed to read the link or her testimony;
Moreover, no 'hatred' is being directed at the faithful or believers in any official or legal capacity; that there might be a tiny minority of private persons who do so is not representative of the majority, nor are their actions condoned by the majority.
Last, your attempt to propagate the lie that this is some sort of 'attack' on religion will only serve to further undermine your already untenable position.
Not a problem. I have done just that. I argued about it in a small diner in Sandy Hook KY (pop.678). That town is full of rednecks. But then, I am a redneck too (by many standards). I am just not ignorant. I am just not demanding that the gov't cater to my faith and ignore the US Constitution.
Ok, damn that was funny!Kim would have been perfect in Misery, I can see her hobbling applicants now.
Fair question, How did this woman snatch four husbands?
Sure, you are demanding that another gives up their own personal rights of religious freedom in favor of your own perception immorality and perversions. When all of the voters of Kentucky agree with you maybe then you will have something to boast about. For now she is an elected official whom the people of that county placed into that office.Sure and I bet you'll go right on down their into Kentucky and tell all those Rednecks your position on the matter.You're at liberty to disagree, provided you understand and acknowledge that as a fact of law you are wrong, as is the clerk.I do not agree with you. I do think though that this hatred being exhibited towards the faithful and believers will come back a hundred fold to haunt those that are trying to scramble what God created. I am willing put my heart with hers for standing on her new found faith. If by chance she does go to jail she won't be the first to do so based on lies and deceit from those who desire to dispel another's faith.Do you understand that her position is without merit, do you understand that her personal religious beliefs have no bearing on the issue, and do you understand that her 'argument' has no legal basis whatsoever.
Moreover, no 'hatred' is being directed at the faithful or believers in any official or legal capacity; that there might be a tiny minority of private persons who do so is not representative of the majority, nor are their actions condoned by the majority.
Last, your attempt to propagate the lie that this is some sort of 'attack' on religion will only serve to further undermine your already untenable position.
Not a problem. I have done just that. I argued about it in a small diner in Sandy Hook KY (pop.678). That town is full of rednecks. But then, I am a redneck too (by many standards). I am just not ignorant. I am just not demanding that the gov't cater to my faith and ignore the US Constitution.
A portion of Kentucky's bill of rights;
BILL OF RIGHTS That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare that: Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 1. Rights of life, liberty, worship, pursuit of safety and happiness, free speech, acquiring and protecting property, peaceable assembly, redress of grievances, bearing arms. All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned: First: The right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties. Second: The right of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences. Third: The right of seeking and pursuing their safety and happiness. Fourth: The right of freely communicating their thoughts and opinions. Fifth: The right of acquiring and protecting property. Sixth: The right of assembling together in a peaceable manner for their common good, and of applying to those invested with the power of government for redress of grievances or other proper purposes, by petition, address or remonstrance. Seventh: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the State, subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Free speech, right of, Const. 8; Religious freedom, right of, Const. 5.
Section 2. Absolute and arbitrary power denied. Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 3. Men are equal – No exclusive grant except for public services – Property not to be exempted from taxation – Grants revocable. All men, when they form a social compact, are equal; and no grant of exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges shall be made to any man or set of men, except in consideration of public services; but no property shall be exempt from taxation except as provided in this Constitution, and every grant of a franchise, privilege or exemption, shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amendment. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Private and local legislation prohibited, Const. 59; Property exempt from taxation, Const. 170. Section 4. Power inherent in the people – Right to alter, reform, or abolish government. All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 5. Right of religious freedom. No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed; and the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching. No human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Freedom of worship, Const. 1; School money not to be used for sectarian schools, Const. 189.
Sure, you are demanding that another gives up their own personal rights of religious freedom in favor of your own perception immorality and perversions. When all of the voters of Kentucky agree with you maybe then you will have something to boast about. For now she is an elected official whom the people of that county placed into that office.Sure and I bet you'll go right on down their into Kentucky and tell all those Rednecks your position on the matter.You're at liberty to disagree, provided you understand and acknowledge that as a fact of law you are wrong, as is the clerk.I do not agree with you. I do think though that this hatred being exhibited towards the faithful and believers will come back a hundred fold to haunt those that are trying to scramble what God created. I am willing put my heart with hers for standing on her new found faith. If by chance she does go to jail she won't be the first to do so based on lies and deceit from those who desire to dispel another's faith.
Moreover, no 'hatred' is being directed at the faithful or believers in any official or legal capacity; that there might be a tiny minority of private persons who do so is not representative of the majority, nor are their actions condoned by the majority.
Last, your attempt to propagate the lie that this is some sort of 'attack' on religion will only serve to further undermine your already untenable position.
Not a problem. I have done just that. I argued about it in a small diner in Sandy Hook KY (pop.678). That town is full of rednecks. But then, I am a redneck too (by many standards). I am just not ignorant. I am just not demanding that the gov't cater to my faith and ignore the US Constitution.
A portion of Kentucky's bill of rights;
BILL OF RIGHTS That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare that: Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 1. Rights of life, liberty, worship, pursuit of safety and happiness, free speech, acquiring and protecting property, peaceable assembly, redress of grievances, bearing arms. All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned: First: The right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties. Second: The right of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences. Third: The right of seeking and pursuing their safety and happiness. Fourth: The right of freely communicating their thoughts and opinions. Fifth: The right of acquiring and protecting property. Sixth: The right of assembling together in a peaceable manner for their common good, and of applying to those invested with the power of government for redress of grievances or other proper purposes, by petition, address or remonstrance. Seventh: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the State, subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Free speech, right of, Const. 8; Religious freedom, right of, Const. 5.
Section 2. Absolute and arbitrary power denied. Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 3. Men are equal – No exclusive grant except for public services – Property not to be exempted from taxation – Grants revocable. All men, when they form a social compact, are equal; and no grant of exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges shall be made to any man or set of men, except in consideration of public services; but no property shall be exempt from taxation except as provided in this Constitution, and every grant of a franchise, privilege or exemption, shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amendment. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Private and local legislation prohibited, Const. 59; Property exempt from taxation, Const. 170. Section 4. Power inherent in the people – Right to alter, reform, or abolish government. All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 5. Right of religious freedom. No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed; and the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching. No human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Freedom of worship, Const. 1; School money not to be used for sectarian schools, Const. 189.
Absolutely not. I am not demanding anyone give up their personal rights of religious freedoms.
But Kim Davis swore an oath, and she has violated that oath. She is subject to the US Constitution, just like every other citizen of this nation. And the US Constitution gives the SCOTUS the authority and power to rule as they did.
I am not saying she has to issue licenses. She is welcome to resign, based on her religious beliefs. I have voluntarily resigned from 2 jobs in my life. Both times because the company expected me to do something that goes against my personal ethics. Her job now includes issuing marriage licenses to both gays and straights. She can either do that or quit.
But let me ask you this. Suppose a muslim was elected to a comparable position, say in Dearborn Michigan. Would you support that person's religious beliefs that a christian couple cannot marry since they have not done the things muslims do in order to stay clean? Muslims have a tax on non-muslims. It is called Jizya. The fact that christian couples in Dearborn have not been paying that tax means it would be a violation of that muslim's religious beliefs to issue them a marriage license. Would you support that as well?
Sure, you are demanding that another gives up their own personal rights of religious freedom in favor of your own perception immorality and perversions. When all of the voters of Kentucky agree with you maybe then you will have something to boast about. For now she is an elected official whom the people of that county placed into that office.Sure and I bet you'll go right on down their into Kentucky and tell all those Rednecks your position on the matter.You're at liberty to disagree, provided you understand and acknowledge that as a fact of law you are wrong, as is the clerk.
Moreover, no 'hatred' is being directed at the faithful or believers in any official or legal capacity; that there might be a tiny minority of private persons who do so is not representative of the majority, nor are their actions condoned by the majority.
Last, your attempt to propagate the lie that this is some sort of 'attack' on religion will only serve to further undermine your already untenable position.
Not a problem. I have done just that. I argued about it in a small diner in Sandy Hook KY (pop.678). That town is full of rednecks. But then, I am a redneck too (by many standards). I am just not ignorant. I am just not demanding that the gov't cater to my faith and ignore the US Constitution.
A portion of Kentucky's bill of rights;
BILL OF RIGHTS That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare that: Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 1. Rights of life, liberty, worship, pursuit of safety and happiness, free speech, acquiring and protecting property, peaceable assembly, redress of grievances, bearing arms. All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned: First: The right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties. Second: The right of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences. Third: The right of seeking and pursuing their safety and happiness. Fourth: The right of freely communicating their thoughts and opinions. Fifth: The right of acquiring and protecting property. Sixth: The right of assembling together in a peaceable manner for their common good, and of applying to those invested with the power of government for redress of grievances or other proper purposes, by petition, address or remonstrance. Seventh: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the State, subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Free speech, right of, Const. 8; Religious freedom, right of, Const. 5.
Section 2. Absolute and arbitrary power denied. Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 3. Men are equal – No exclusive grant except for public services – Property not to be exempted from taxation – Grants revocable. All men, when they form a social compact, are equal; and no grant of exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges shall be made to any man or set of men, except in consideration of public services; but no property shall be exempt from taxation except as provided in this Constitution, and every grant of a franchise, privilege or exemption, shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amendment. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Private and local legislation prohibited, Const. 59; Property exempt from taxation, Const. 170. Section 4. Power inherent in the people – Right to alter, reform, or abolish government. All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 5. Right of religious freedom. No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed; and the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching. No human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Freedom of worship, Const. 1; School money not to be used for sectarian schools, Const. 189.
Absolutely not. I am not demanding anyone give up their personal rights of religious freedoms.
But Kim Davis swore an oath, and she has violated that oath. She is subject to the US Constitution, just like every other citizen of this nation. And the US Constitution gives the SCOTUS the authority and power to rule as they did.
I am not saying she has to issue licenses. She is welcome to resign, based on her religious beliefs. I have voluntarily resigned from 2 jobs in my life. Both times because the company expected me to do something that goes against my personal ethics. Her job now includes issuing marriage licenses to both gays and straights. She can either do that or quit.
But let me ask you this. Suppose a muslim was elected to a comparable position, say in Dearborn Michigan. Would you support that person's religious beliefs that a christian couple cannot marry since they have not done the things muslims do in order to stay clean? Muslims have a tax on non-muslims. It is called Jizya. The fact that christian couples in Dearborn have not been paying that tax means it would be a violation of that muslim's religious beliefs to issue them a marriage license. Would you support that as well?
If the people of Dearborn voted this pretend person you pose into such a position that will be an issue the people there in Dearborn can take up. Your imagination has it has nothing to do with this real live case now in Kentucky.
It is her name, therefore her right to refuse to attach her name to something that she believes is in her right to refuse based on her faith and the Kentucky Bill Of Rights. If the people of Rowan County Kentucky disagree with her verses you they can rise up and vote her out.
The founders of country did not specify that abnormal behavior or deviant behavior is protected in the Bill Of Rights or the Constitution. They did however specifically protect each individuals right to their own Religious beliefs and convictions. In this case her name is attached to that document and she refuses to issue a document that is going against her religious belief and convictions. She does not have to resign as the people voted her into that position.the Gays as far as I can tell simply want their marriage license. They have a Constitutional Right to that document and the people of Kentucky do not get to vote on whether or not gays accrue those Rights...
The Clerk is saying her personally held beliefs are stronger than the US Constitution...OK then resign.....do not do a George Wallace in the doorway....
I see so now you are claiming to know what is in her heart and what her thought processes are. I again quote my favorite vice president, "Go fuck yourself".Sure, you are demanding that another gives up their own personal rights of religious freedom in favor of your own perception immorality and perversions. When all of the voters of Kentucky agree with you maybe then you will have something to boast about. For now she is an elected official whom the people of that county placed into that office.Sure and I bet you'll go right on down their into Kentucky and tell all those Rednecks your position on the matter.
Not a problem. I have done just that. I argued about it in a small diner in Sandy Hook KY (pop.678). That town is full of rednecks. But then, I am a redneck too (by many standards). I am just not ignorant. I am just not demanding that the gov't cater to my faith and ignore the US Constitution.
A portion of Kentucky's bill of rights;
BILL OF RIGHTS That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare that: Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 1. Rights of life, liberty, worship, pursuit of safety and happiness, free speech, acquiring and protecting property, peaceable assembly, redress of grievances, bearing arms. All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned: First: The right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties. Second: The right of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences. Third: The right of seeking and pursuing their safety and happiness. Fourth: The right of freely communicating their thoughts and opinions. Fifth: The right of acquiring and protecting property. Sixth: The right of assembling together in a peaceable manner for their common good, and of applying to those invested with the power of government for redress of grievances or other proper purposes, by petition, address or remonstrance. Seventh: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the State, subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Free speech, right of, Const. 8; Religious freedom, right of, Const. 5.
Section 2. Absolute and arbitrary power denied. Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 3. Men are equal – No exclusive grant except for public services – Property not to be exempted from taxation – Grants revocable. All men, when they form a social compact, are equal; and no grant of exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges shall be made to any man or set of men, except in consideration of public services; but no property shall be exempt from taxation except as provided in this Constitution, and every grant of a franchise, privilege or exemption, shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amendment. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Private and local legislation prohibited, Const. 59; Property exempt from taxation, Const. 170. Section 4. Power inherent in the people – Right to alter, reform, or abolish government. All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 5. Right of religious freedom. No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed; and the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching. No human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Freedom of worship, Const. 1; School money not to be used for sectarian schools, Const. 189.
Absolutely not. I am not demanding anyone give up their personal rights of religious freedoms.
But Kim Davis swore an oath, and she has violated that oath. She is subject to the US Constitution, just like every other citizen of this nation. And the US Constitution gives the SCOTUS the authority and power to rule as they did.
I am not saying she has to issue licenses. She is welcome to resign, based on her religious beliefs. I have voluntarily resigned from 2 jobs in my life. Both times because the company expected me to do something that goes against my personal ethics. Her job now includes issuing marriage licenses to both gays and straights. She can either do that or quit.
But let me ask you this. Suppose a muslim was elected to a comparable position, say in Dearborn Michigan. Would you support that person's religious beliefs that a christian couple cannot marry since they have not done the things muslims do in order to stay clean? Muslims have a tax on non-muslims. It is called Jizya. The fact that christian couples in Dearborn have not been paying that tax means it would be a violation of that muslim's religious beliefs to issue them a marriage license. Would you support that as well?
If the people of Dearborn voted this pretend person you pose into such a position that will be an issue the people there in Dearborn can take up. Your imagination has it has nothing to do with this real live case now in Kentucky.
It is her name, therefore her right to refuse to attach her name to something that she believes is in her right to refuse based on her faith and the Kentucky Bill Of Rights. If the people of Rowan County Kentucky disagree with her verses you they can rise up and vote her out.
So she should be allowed to violate the orders from the Gov of Kentucky and the ruling of the US Supreme Court until election time? That is absolute nonsense. County Clerks are not allowed to defy the governor of their state and the SCOTUS because of their religious beliefs. She can resign or she can be prosecuted. She knows she will not win. She is looking at the money to be made afterwards.
Yep, all her whoring around will guarantee Hell for her.She belongs in jail, until Hell has a place for her...
Ky. clerk in gay marriage fracas married 4 times: records
The Kentucky county clerk who is stopping gay couples from being marriedbecause of her literal interpretation of the Bible has herself been married four times and conceived twins by having sex outside her marriage, according to court records.
Kim Davis, 49, who has defied the U.S. Supreme Court and continues to refuse to issue marriage licenses to same sex-couples, was married and divorced three times — in 1994, 2006 and 2008, according to U.S. News & World Report.
She gave birth to twins five months after she divorced her first husband. The father of those twins was her third husband, according to the records.
<more>
The founders of country did not specify that abnormal behavior or deviant behavior is protected in the Bill Of Rights or the Constitution. They did however specifically protect each individuals right to their own Religious beliefs and convictions. In this case her name is attached to that document and she refuses to issue a document that is going against her religious belief and convictions. She does not have to resign as the people voted her into that position.the Gays as far as I can tell simply want their marriage license. They have a Constitutional Right to that document and the people of Kentucky do not get to vote on whether or not gays accrue those Rights...
The Clerk is saying her personally held beliefs are stronger than the US Constitution...OK then resign.....do not do a George Wallace in the doorway....
I see so now you are claiming to know what is in her heart and what her thought processes are. I again quote my favorite vice president, "Go fuck yourself".Sure, you are demanding that another gives up their own personal rights of religious freedom in favor of your own perception immorality and perversions. When all of the voters of Kentucky agree with you maybe then you will have something to boast about. For now she is an elected official whom the people of that county placed into that office.Not a problem. I have done just that. I argued about it in a small diner in Sandy Hook KY (pop.678). That town is full of rednecks. But then, I am a redneck too (by many standards). I am just not ignorant. I am just not demanding that the gov't cater to my faith and ignore the US Constitution.
A portion of Kentucky's bill of rights;
BILL OF RIGHTS That the great and essential principles of liberty and free government may be recognized and established, we declare that: Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 1. Rights of life, liberty, worship, pursuit of safety and happiness, free speech, acquiring and protecting property, peaceable assembly, redress of grievances, bearing arms. All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned: First: The right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties. Second: The right of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences. Third: The right of seeking and pursuing their safety and happiness. Fourth: The right of freely communicating their thoughts and opinions. Fifth: The right of acquiring and protecting property. Sixth: The right of assembling together in a peaceable manner for their common good, and of applying to those invested with the power of government for redress of grievances or other proper purposes, by petition, address or remonstrance. Seventh: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the State, subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Free speech, right of, Const. 8; Religious freedom, right of, Const. 5.
Section 2. Absolute and arbitrary power denied. Absolute and arbitrary power over the lives, liberty and property of freemen exists nowhere in a republic, not even in the largest majority. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 3. Men are equal – No exclusive grant except for public services – Property not to be exempted from taxation – Grants revocable. All men, when they form a social compact, are equal; and no grant of exclusive, separate public emoluments or privileges shall be made to any man or set of men, except in consideration of public services; but no property shall be exempt from taxation except as provided in this Constitution, and every grant of a franchise, privilege or exemption, shall remain subject to revocation, alteration or amendment. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Private and local legislation prohibited, Const. 59; Property exempt from taxation, Const. 170. Section 4. Power inherent in the people – Right to alter, reform, or abolish government. All power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their peace, safety, happiness and the protection of property. For the advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may deem proper. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Section 5. Right of religious freedom. No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed; and the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching. No human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience. Text as ratified on: August 3, 1891, and revised September 28, 1891. History: Not yet amended. Freedom of worship, Const. 1; School money not to be used for sectarian schools, Const. 189.
Absolutely not. I am not demanding anyone give up their personal rights of religious freedoms.
But Kim Davis swore an oath, and she has violated that oath. She is subject to the US Constitution, just like every other citizen of this nation. And the US Constitution gives the SCOTUS the authority and power to rule as they did.
I am not saying she has to issue licenses. She is welcome to resign, based on her religious beliefs. I have voluntarily resigned from 2 jobs in my life. Both times because the company expected me to do something that goes against my personal ethics. Her job now includes issuing marriage licenses to both gays and straights. She can either do that or quit.
But let me ask you this. Suppose a muslim was elected to a comparable position, say in Dearborn Michigan. Would you support that person's religious beliefs that a christian couple cannot marry since they have not done the things muslims do in order to stay clean? Muslims have a tax on non-muslims. It is called Jizya. The fact that christian couples in Dearborn have not been paying that tax means it would be a violation of that muslim's religious beliefs to issue them a marriage license. Would you support that as well?
If the people of Dearborn voted this pretend person you pose into such a position that will be an issue the people there in Dearborn can take up. Your imagination has it has nothing to do with this real live case now in Kentucky.
It is her name, therefore her right to refuse to attach her name to something that she believes is in her right to refuse based on her faith and the Kentucky Bill Of Rights. If the people of Rowan County Kentucky disagree with her verses you they can rise up and vote her out.
So she should be allowed to violate the orders from the Gov of Kentucky and the ruling of the US Supreme Court until election time? That is absolute nonsense. County Clerks are not allowed to defy the governor of their state and the SCOTUS because of their religious beliefs. She can resign or she can be prosecuted. She knows she will not win. She is looking at the money to be made afterwards.
The system set up by those founders using Documents such as The US Constitution is saying the gays have equal Rights to marry...that has been litigated to the Highest Court...the Bible does not , pardon the pun, Trump the Constitution...you are not in authority of any kind to declare what is abnormal or deviant........The founders of country did not specify that abnormal behavior or deviant behavior is protected in the Bill Of Rights or the Constitution. They did however specifically protect each individuals right to their own Religious beliefs and convictions. In this case her name is attached to that document and she refuses to issue a document that is going against her religious belief and convictions. She does not have to resign as the people voted her into that position.
I will repeat again, no where the Bill Rights or the United States Constitution is sodomy or protection thereof mention. It does however protect her belief in Religious Rights.The system set up by those founders using Documents such as The US Constitution is saying the gays have equal Rights to marry...that has been litigated to the Highest Court...the Bible does not , pardon the pun, Trump the Constitution...you are not in authority of any kind to declare what is abnormal or deviant........The founders of country did not specify that abnormal behavior or deviant behavior is protected in the Bill Of Rights or the Constitution. They did however specifically protect each individuals right to their own Religious beliefs and convictions. In this case her name is attached to that document and she refuses to issue a document that is going against her religious belief and convictions. She does not have to resign as the people voted her into that position.
She does not have to resign.The founders of country did not specify that abnormal behavior or deviant behavior is protected in the Bill Of Rights or the Constitution. They did however specifically protect each individuals right to their own Religious beliefs and convictions. In this case her name is attached to that document and she refuses to issue a document that is going against her religious belief and convictions. She does not have to resign as the people voted her into that position.the Gays as far as I can tell simply want their marriage license. They have a Constitutional Right to that document and the people of Kentucky do not get to vote on whether or not gays accrue those Rights...
The Clerk is saying her personally held beliefs are stronger than the US Constitution...OK then resign.....do not do a George Wallace in the doorway....
She is being paid, in part, to issue marriage licenses. Either do it or resign. She does not have the authority to change the ruling of the US Supreme Court. She can either deal with it or resign.
BTW, do you know the name of the person who signed your marriage license? I have been married twice and have no clue who signed my marriage licenses. I know the state of Alabama issued it. But the signature is in the official capacity as clerk, not her personal approval.
