Kim Davis...and the Judge's "mistake"

[PaintMyHouse]

Contempt of Court, plus --

She is currently facing a charge of official misconduct - which has been sent to the Kentucky Attorney General's Office, from the Rowan County Attorney General's Office.

"KRS 522.020 and KRS 522.030 deal with official misconduct in the first and second degree, respectively. “A public servant is guilty of official misconduct in the first degree when, with intent to obtain or confer a benefit or to injure another person or to deprive another person of a benefit, knowingly commits an act relating to his office which constitutes an unauthorized exercise of his official functions or refrains from performing a duty imposed upon him by law or clearly inherent in the nature of his office or violates any statute or lawfully adopted rule or regulation relating to his office,” according to KRS 522.020.

Official misconduct in the first degree is a Class A misdemeanor and is punishable with imprisonment not to exceed 12 months and fines of $500.

Official misconduct in the second degree is a Class B misdemeanor and carries a potential punishment of up to 90 days imprisonment and fines of $250."

Once again, the law says she MAY ISSUE marriage licenses, it does NOT say she SHALL ISSUE marriage licenses. How is she engaging in misconduct when the law gives her an option on issuing marriage licenses?

Regardless as to how the State choses to deal with an elected official the federal court has no authority in it.

Civil rights are a Federal issue. And your but you don't have to issue licenses dog won't hunt. Give it up.

Oh right, you're one of those folks that think only the laws you agree with should be followed.

Oh, so you're saying Davis should not have broken the law.

I agree.

She didn't dumbass.

Actually she did break the law in this case, the law against Contempt of Court.

 

[Arizona Willie]

A priest ( or minister ) does have a right to refuse but a judge or clerk DOES NOT.

The priest is acting within his religion as part of his religion.

The judge / clerk is a civil servant and their job is in no way related to their religion. Just signing a marriage certificate as an agent of the state ONLY declares that it is a valid marriage certificate in that state. It only means that the people have a legal right under the Constitution to get married.

A judge / clerk does not have the authority to overthrow the rulings of the Supreme Court which has ruled that homos have a Constitutional right to get married.

A judge / clerk does not have the authority to abrogate the rights of homos under the Constitution as determined by the Supreme Court.

Their personal religious beliefs are totally irrelevant.

============

If a priest refuses to do a marriage ceremony for "same sex" IMHO----he has a right to REFUSE

 

[peach174]

Advocating means trying to persuade the authorities to make changes that you want.

Other people advocate for their point of view.

That's why we have elections.

If the religious people who want to force Christaria Law on the U.S. can PERSUADE the majority of voters to change the Constitution or replace it with their Bible ( which is what they really want ), then it might happen.

But a minority of a relatively few religious nut jobs cannot just declare that their beliefs overrule the Constitution and the Supreme Court.

Well they < can > declare that, but it would be worth just as much as me declaring my poop is made of gold.

If they don't stop trying to force their religion down everyone's throat they may wind up eating some lead.

===========

Yet the court said this-
And it is ignored.
Finally, it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered. The same is true of those who oppose same-sex marriage for other reasons. In turn, those who believe allowing same sex marriage is proper or indeed essential, whether as a matter of religious conviction or secular belief, may engage those who disagree with their view in an open and searching debate.

There needs to be a compromise where those who oppose have their rights also.

So in the same Supreme Court ruling they say Davis has the right to advocate as well as the Judge in Oregon.

The right to ADVOCATE is NOT the right to DENY or force others to submit to your religious views.

Yet that is exactly what happened by gays who advocated for their rights. It is now being forced on those that oppose it.
The few that are saying that gay marriage should not done is not the majority of the nation. The majority say they do have their right to marry.
At the same time it should not be forced on those who work in government or otherwise to be forced to marry them and they have the right to advocate for their 1st amendment right just like gays with the 14th amendment.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Contempt of court for starters.

Denying constitutional rights by using an unconstitutional law.

Not complying with an illegal order from a judge is not a violation of law. It's being appealed.

When was the KY law on who MAY ISSUE marriage licenses overturned?

There was nothing illegal about her order. Face it, she's sitting in jail because of her own actions.

Perfectly legal actions under KY law.

Not according to the judge, who she should have obeyed while she was making her case. The fix was easy, let others in her office do it. She's her own jailer, let it go. Soon enough she will...

So what will you say if she wins her appeal?

She won't because the judge has been very smart and very patient about her. She's dead wrong, and nearly everyone knows it. She had three outs, and didn't use any of them. That is not the fault of the judge.

 

[OKTexas]

Tell us, OKT, do agree with Jesus on this?

"No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money." - Matthew 6:24

I'm not addressing the religious issue, legally it has no bearing on the case. KY law gives her the option to issue marriage licenses or not, her reasons are irrelevant. Until that is changed she has done nothing legally wrong.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Advocating means trying to persuade the authorities to make changes that you want.

Other people advocate for their point of view.

That's why we have elections.

If the religious people who want to force Christaria Law on the U.S. can PERSUADE the majority of voters to change the Constitution or replace it with their Bible ( which is what they really want ), then it might happen.

But a minority of a relatively few religious nut jobs cannot just declare that their beliefs overrule the Constitution and the Supreme Court.

Well they < can > declare that, but it would be worth just as much as me declaring my poop is made of gold.

If they don't stop trying to force their religion down everyone's throat they may wind up eating some lead.

===========

Yet the court said this-
And it is ignored.
Finally, it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered. The same is true of those who oppose same-sex marriage for other reasons. In turn, those who believe allowing same sex marriage is proper or indeed essential, whether as a matter of religious conviction or secular belief, may engage those who disagree with their view in an open and searching debate.

There needs to be a compromise where those who oppose have their rights also.

So in the same Supreme Court ruling they say Davis has the right to advocate as well as the Judge in Oregon.

The right to ADVOCATE is NOT the right to DENY or force others to submit to your religious views.

Yet that is exactly what happened by gays who advocated for their rights. It is now being forced on those that oppose it.
The few that are saying that gay marriage should not done is not the majority of the nation. The majority say they do have their right to marry.
At the same time it should not be forced on those who work in government or otherwise to be forced to marry them and they have the right to advocate for their 1st amendment right just like gays with the 14th amendment.

Bigots don't like others have the rights that they do. You'll just have to suck it up, like ****** did when the ******* were no longer property. They felt just the way that you do...

 

[Arizona Willie]

She has already issued MANY Divorce Certificates AND SIGNED THEM even though they are against her " religion " as well.

Every time she denied a homo a license it was a Hate Crime under Federal Law and each instance is a separate FELONY.

================

Is Kim Davis going to sign Petitions for Divorce hearings as County Clerk knowing full and well that God says that Divorce sucks............

 

[OKTexas]

Once again, the law says she MAY ISSUE marriage licenses, it does NOT say she SHALL ISSUE marriage licenses. How is she engaging in misconduct when the law gives her an option on issuing marriage licenses?

Regardless as to how the State choses to deal with an elected official the federal court has no authority in it.

Civil rights are a Federal issue. And your but you don't have to issue licenses dog won't hunt. Give it up.

Oh right, you're one of those folks that think only the laws you agree with should be followed.

Oh, so you're saying Davis should not have broken the law.

I agree.

She didn't dumbass.

Actually she did break the law in this case, the law against Contempt of Court.

Right, she pissed off an unelected lawyer in a robe.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Tell us, OKT, do agree with Jesus on this?

"No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money." - Matthew 6:24

I'm not addressing the religious issue, legally it has no bearing on the case. KY law gives her the option to issue marriage licenses or not, her reasons are irrelevant. Until that is changed she has done nothing legally wrong.

The law needs to be updated, obviously, but the law that she broke is Contempt. You cannot ignore a court order and get away with it.

And answer the question, do you agree with Jesus or not?

 

[Carla_Danger]

People better start waking up to what is going on. They came for Kim Davis and you said Nothing. well you know the rest of that saying

What a load of horse shit. Kim Davis was the one persecuting people by denying them their civil right to marriage. PERIOD.

If you want to live in a theocracy go join ISIS. The Christian Taliban has a lot in common with them.

There is no right to a license.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Civil rights are a Federal issue. And your but you don't have to issue licenses dog won't hunt. Give it up.

Oh right, you're one of those folks that think only the laws you agree with should be followed.

Oh, so you're saying Davis should not have broken the law.

I agree.

She didn't dumbass.

Actually she did break the law in this case, the law against Contempt of Court.

Right, she pissed off an unelected lawyer in a robe.

That's correct, a judge appointed by a Bush. Don't do that, it's a very bad idea since the court doesn't take kindly to being told to **** off.

 

[OKTexas]

Not complying with an illegal order from a judge is not a violation of law. It's being appealed.

When was the KY law on who MAY ISSUE marriage licenses overturned?

There was nothing illegal about her order. Face it, she's sitting in jail because of her own actions.

Perfectly legal actions under KY law.

Not according to the judge, who she should have obeyed while she was making her case. The fix was easy, let others in her office do it. She's her own jailer, let it go. Soon enough she will...

So what will you say if she wins her appeal?

She won't because the judge has been very smart and very patient about her. She's dead wrong, and nearly everyone knows it. She had three outs, and didn't use any of them. That is not the fault of the judge.

Right, he's taken everything into account except the KY law that gives her an option.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

There was nothing illegal about her order. Face it, she's sitting in jail because of her own actions.

Perfectly legal actions under KY law.

Not according to the judge, who she should have obeyed while she was making her case. The fix was easy, let others in her office do it. She's her own jailer, let it go. Soon enough she will...

So what will you say if she wins her appeal?

She won't because the judge has been very smart and very patient about her. She's dead wrong, and nearly everyone knows it. She had three outs, and didn't use any of them. That is not the fault of the judge.

Right, he's taken everything into account except the KY law that gives her an option.

He took that into account as well. You read the law, you know that it requires her to issue a marriage license in one particular case, otherwise she'd be in violation of the civil rights of a very young woman. Your dog won't hunt, let it go. Only she and one other bozo are having issues with this, and for all I know he's already caved...

 

[OKTexas]

Tell us, OKT, do agree with Jesus on this?

"No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money." - Matthew 6:24

I'm not addressing the religious issue, legally it has no bearing on the case. KY law gives her the option to issue marriage licenses or not, her reasons are irrelevant. Until that is changed she has done nothing legally wrong.

The law needs to be updated, obviously, but the law that she broke is Contempt. You cannot ignore a court order and get away with it.

And answer the question, do you agree with Jesus or not?

The court can not order to do something she is not compelled to do under KY law.

And NO.

 

[OKTexas]

Perfectly legal actions under KY law.

Not according to the judge, who she should have obeyed while she was making her case. The fix was easy, let others in her office do it. She's her own jailer, let it go. Soon enough she will...

So what will you say if she wins her appeal?

She won't because the judge has been very smart and very patient about her. She's dead wrong, and nearly everyone knows it. She had three outs, and didn't use any of them. That is not the fault of the judge.

Right, he's taken everything into account except the KY law that gives her an option.

He took that into account as well. You read the law, you know that it requires her to issue a marriage license in one particular case, otherwise she'd be in violation of the civil rights of a very young woman. Your dog won't hunt, let it go. Only she and one other bozo are having issues with this, and for all I know he's already caved...

Really, name that female.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Not quite right, amigo.

She ONLY has a right to deny a marriage license if the people requesting it are not eligible under the laws of the state --- such as if she knows that one of them is already married or is not eligible for some other reason ==== but not a reason under her wacko religious thinking ... only if they are not eligible under the law.

She cannot discriminate, which she WAS doing because she started out denying licenses to homos / lesbos ONLY. And her motivation is hate ... which makes each instance a hate crime under Federal Law and each instance is a Felony.

She also is violating the laws of her State.

She has committed multiple crimes and multiple felonies and should serve YEARS in prison.

==============

KY law gives her the option to issue marriage licenses or not, her reasons are irrelevant. Until that is changed she has done nothing legally wrong.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Contempt of court for starters.

Denying constitutional rights by using an unconstitutional law.

Not complying with an illegal order from a judge is not a violation of law. It's being appealed.

When was the KY law on who MAY ISSUE marriage licenses overturned?

There was nothing illegal about her order. Face it, she's sitting in jail because of her own actions.

Perfectly legal actions under KY law.

And KY law trumps SCOTUS?

Sheesh.

Has SCOTUS addressed the KY law on who MAY ISSUE marriage licenses? NO, so until it does the law stands.

The KY law is as unconsitutional as the laws against interracial marriage.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Not according to the judge, who she should have obeyed while she was making her case. The fix was easy, let others in her office do it. She's her own jailer, let it go. Soon enough she will...

So what will you say if she wins her appeal?

She won't because the judge has been very smart and very patient about her. She's dead wrong, and nearly everyone knows it. She had three outs, and didn't use any of them. That is not the fault of the judge.

Right, he's taken everything into account except the KY law that gives her an option.

He took that into account as well. You read the law, you know that it requires her to issue a marriage license in one particular case, otherwise she'd be in violation of the civil rights of a very young woman. Your dog won't hunt, let it go. Only she and one other bozo are having issues with this, and for all I know he's already caved...

Really, name that female.

Any girl under 18 with permission to marry. That's the law eh?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Contempt of court for starters.

Denying constitutional rights by using an unconstitutional law.

Not complying with an illegal order from a judge is not a violation of law. It's being appealed.

When was the KY law on who MAY ISSUE marriage licenses overturned?

There was nothing illegal about her order. Face it, she's sitting in jail because of her own actions.

Perfectly legal actions under KY law.

Not according to the judge, who she should have obeyed while she was making her case. The fix was easy, let others in her office do it. She's her own jailer, let it go. Soon enough she will...

So what will you say if she wins her appeal?

Maybe we will just say what you people say.

...the court got it wrong...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The KY law is as unconsitutional as the laws against interracial marriage.

Which are probably still on the books there...