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

[thanatos144]

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

You might want to read up on Current Events.

A court opinion does not make law or constitutional rights jackass .

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Really? So when SCOTUS rules against gun bans, local and state governments should just ignore those rulings?

It didn't make the law or right dipshit.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[NYcarbineer]

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

You might want to read up on Current Events.

A court opinion does not make law or constitutional rights jackass .

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Really? So when SCOTUS rules against gun bans, local and state governments should just ignore those rulings?

It didn't make the law or right dipshit.

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

The Supreme Court has struck down unconstitutional gun laws. You're claiming it can't do that.

 

[Care4all]

There is no persecution and they are not revolting, just in your imagination.

And what happens when a minister is faced with the option of performing a gay wedding or facing a lawsuit (or jail time)..

After all, the gays are already going after everybody from clerks to bakers...

And gays aren't that popular with blacks anyway.

Obiwan, a Minister/Priest/Rabbi does not work for the government or get paid to do a government job, as with Kim Davis....

And neither do bakers....

good comeback!

however the bakers were not forced to attend a Religious ceremony or perform a sacrilegious act , it was a Civil marriage if I am not mistaken? And the bakers only needed to deliver a cake to a reception, a party....they were not forced to perform or be a part of the wedding...

Why should they be forced to participate in a sin? Who made you God?

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

If you forced them to be a part or take part in the actual wedding ceremony, I would agree with you.

 

[Carla_Danger]

I believe that Catholic judge would be surprised to be called anti-christian.

I wish these rightwing, fundamentalist, so called Christians would stop all this belly aching about being oppressed. Whine, whine, whine. It's just so much BS.

I guess we need to start calling it using the Christian card.

The Christian Victim Card. lol

 

[paperview]

So, now you'd like to throw the judge in prison?

Did Davis breach her position description and the oath she took when she was instated in her position? ....Yes or No?

Is a fine harsher or more lenient than prison time?...........Yes or No?

Were Davis a Muslim and she refused to work during Ramadan, should she have been allowed to do so?............Yes or No?

First question: NO, Ky law says she MAY ISSUE marriage licenses, she chose not to, a perfectly legal decision unless the law is changed.

Questions 2 & 3 irrelevant.

She's had four marriage licenses. You would think she would let gays have one.

Totally irrelevant, to this point she has done nothing illegal.

Yes she has.

Name it.

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."

 

[OKTexas]

First question: NO, Ky law says she MAY ISSUE marriage licenses, she chose not to, a perfectly legal decision unless the law is changed.

Questions 2 & 3 irrelevant.

She's had four marriage licenses. You would think she would let gays have one.

Totally irrelevant, to this point she has done nothing illegal.

Yes she has.

Name it.

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?

 

[Arizona Willie]

More LIES from the " religious ".

The Judge offered to let her clerks issue the license ( she would not have to sign ) and she REFUSED.

She has REFUSED every option the judge gave her.

Every time she denied the homos their rights under the Constitution she committed a HATE CRIME under Federal Law and each one is a FELONY.

She signed Divorce Certificates and they are against her so-called " religion " as well but that doesn't bother her a bit.

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

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

SNIP:
The federal judge who threw Christian clerk Kim Davis in jail previously “oversaw a legal settlement that included anti-harassment sessions” for students in Boyd County, Kentucky, The New York Times
reports. In fact, the judge, David Bunning, had denied free speech rights to those students.

The so-called “anti-harassment sessions” in the Boyd County case were actually designed to instruct students “to withhold Christian viewpoints about homosexual behavior,” the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), the legal group representing the students, reported.

Bunning’s ruling against the students, a direct ban on free speech, was overturned on appeal.

The Times admitted this fact only later in the story, noting that Bunning’s ruling forcing students into the “anti-harassment sessions” was “overruled by an appellate court.”

The fact that he “was overruled by an appellate case” demonstrates how wrong his ruling was.

It is this out-of-control judge who is at the center of the Kim Davis case. Ironically, the media are reporting that Bunning is a Christian. If so, he has no fundamental understanding of how Christians helped create this nation, and are entitled to the rights and liberties guaranteed to them under the Constitution.

The Times’ handling of this case reflects how the actions of Davis have also been distorted by most of the media. The Times said Bunning sent Davis to jail for “refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses.” In fact, she had simply exercised her religious rights and liberties in refusing to sign the gay marriage licenses.

Her attorneys at Liberty Counsel noted, “Davis only asked that the Kentucky marriage license forms be changed so her name would not appear on them.” This simple request was deemed to be “contempt” and she was thrown in jail.


Pattern of discrimination against Christians
What we see in the case of Judge Bunning, under pressure from the gay lobby, is a pattern of discrimination against Christians, a pattern we also see in the coverage of the cases in which he has ruled. The media have refused to respect the rights of free speech and freedom of religion that Americans are supposed to have under the Constitution.

A rally in support of county clerk Kim Davis has been announced for Tuesday, September 8, at the Carter County Detention Center in Grayson, Kentucky at 3:00 p.m. The address is 13 Crossbar Road, Grayson, Kentucky.

Heather Clark of the Christian News Network first noted that Bunning, appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush, had, in the Boyd County case, “ordered Kentucky students to be re-educated about homosexuality despite their objections.”

In the case, she noted, a number of students objected to being forced to watch a video that asserted that it is wrong to oppose homosexuality and that a person’s sexuality cannot be changed. Clark reported, “They discovered that they could not opt-out of the training without being penalized, and contacted the legal organization Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) for assistance.”

That began the process of filing suit, and eventually the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Bunning’s ruling in October 2007.

Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has sided with Davis, saying she not only has the right to object on religious grounds to signing gay marriage licenses, but that the Supreme Court did not in any sense make gay marriage the “law of the land.”

Numerous experts have pointed out that, under the U.S. Constitution, the Supreme Court cannot make law. The Supreme Court’s “power to offer opinion does not equal the power to make law,” notes the Tenth Amendment Center. Generally speaking, experts say, the Supreme Court can overturn laws and executive actions but it cannot enforce its rulings. The power to make law is given to the representatives of the people in the national and state legislatures.

‘Under what law am I authorized to issue homosexual couples a marriage license?’



Huckabee says Davis, a county official elected as a Democrat, should be immediately released from federal custody. “Exercising religious liberty should never be a crime in America,” he says. “This is a direct attack on our God-given, constitutional rights.”

all of it here:
Anti-Christian Bigotry on the Bench and in the Media

 

[OKTexas]

First question: NO, Ky law says she MAY ISSUE marriage licenses, she chose not to, a perfectly legal decision unless the law is changed.

Questions 2 & 3 irrelevant.

She's had four marriage licenses. You would think she would let gays have one.

Totally irrelevant, to this point she has done nothing illegal.

Yes she has.

Name it.

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.

 

[Care4all]

Yet the Government just forced Christians who work in Government to accept a practice that is condemned in Christian, Jewish and Muslim religions.
That interferes with the fist amendment that says government shall make no law prohibiting the freedom of exercising their religion.
This whole thing has been handed badly where the rights of both sides should be exercised.
It is not right that one side of a small minority should over ride the rights of the majority.
Reasonable compromises can be done but it seems that gays are not willing to do so.

Actually, was it not Kim Davis, that was not willing to compromise, by forcing her religious stance on to her other employees by not allowing them to issue marriage licenses or she would fire them? Is that NOT true????

 

[Valerie]

looks like she's finally willing to let go of her title...



Davis' legal team has filed several appeals to the U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. It is asking that the state take her name off the licenses -- a move that her lawyers say would accommodate Davis while allowing same-sex couples to receive licenses.

"If (Davis' deputies) can issue licenses under someone else's authority ... Kim Davis would not stand in the way of that," one of her attorneys, Roger Gannam, told CNN's "New Day" on Tuesday.

Kim Davis to get jail visit from Mike Huckabee - CNNPolitics.com

 

[Carla_Danger]

Yet the Government just forced Christians who work in Government to accept a practice that is condemned in Christian, Jewish and Muslim religions.
That interferes with the fist amendment that says government shall make no law prohibiting the freedom of exercising their religion.
This whole thing has been handed badly where the rights of both sides should be exercised.
It is not right that one side of a small minority should over ride the rights of the majority.
Reasonable compromises can be done but it seems that gays are not willing to do so.

Actually, was it not Kim Davis, that was not willing to compromise, by forcing her religious stance on to her other employees by not allowing them to issue marriage licenses or she would fire them? Is that NOT true????

That's the way I "red" it.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Each time she denied a homo a license, she committed a HATE CRIME under Federal Law and each instance is a FELONY.

It is a hate crime because she originally denied gays / lesbos and only gays / lesbos. It wasn't until her lawyer told her she was going to be charged with discrimination that she began refusing everyone but that won't get her out of what she did originally.

She's lucky that so far ( as far as I know ) none of the homos have gotten a lawyer and filed hate crime charges against her because she would certainly lose.

And she could face the penalties listed below FOR EACH CASE, which would amount to YEARS in prison and she deserves every bit of it.

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

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."

 

[PaintMyHouse]

She's had four marriage licenses. You would think she would let gays have one.

Totally irrelevant, to this point she has done nothing illegal.

Yes she has.

Name it.

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.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

She's had four marriage licenses. You would think she would let gays have one.

Totally irrelevant, to this point she has done nothing illegal.

Yes she has.

Name it.

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.

 

[bendog]

Her views of not allowing subordinates to issue licenses needs stretching

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Theresiana-Leiter.jpg

 

[Arizona Willie]

Nah we live on welfare and spend our days at the casino when we are home from going on our latest around the world cruise on that welfare money, and in between times we amuse ourselves annoying the right wingers who are giving us their money.

=========

Guess its nice to be working at the government desk and browsing the internet from 8 am on.

 

[paperview]

She's had four marriage licenses. You would think she would let gays have one.

Totally irrelevant, to this point she has done nothing illegal.

Yes she has.

Name it.

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?

It says she SHALL issue.

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

Yes, he does. That's not in dispute.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Nah we live on welfare and spend our days at the casino when we are home from going on our latest around the world cruise on that welfare money, and in between times we amuse ourselves annoying the right wingers who are giving us their money.

=========

Guess its nice to be working at the government desk and browsing the internet from 8 am on.

JimBob has already admitted to receiving Government assistance. He admitted it on this very forum.

 

[Arizona Willie]

No they can't.

I think that the problem for the clerk is that she is a clerk------she is not a professional anything ------she is not entitled to a professional "opinion" -------sorry----I am not disparaging her-------simply stating fact. I do believe that a judge ----or someone allowed to DO A MARRIAGE can refuse----legally

 

[peach174]

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

You might want to read up on Current Events.

A court opinion does not make law or constitutional rights jackass .

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

You can repeat that a hundred times a day if you like, but it won't change anything for you. Gays have the right to marry. End of story. And there is nothing the Christian Taliban can do about it.

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.