Clerk Kim Davis released from jail after compromise

What beliefs would those be? The ones where you can get married and divorced multiple times, get pregnant and bear children by a man other than your husband and then turn around tell other people that they're immoral?

What if some asshole clerk had refused to process her divorce papers or issue new marriage licenses because it offended their religious sensibilities? Should she have been stuck in a marriage to her first husband?

Do her "religious convictions" apply to anybody besides gay couples? Does she refuse to issue licenses from her office to divorcees and adulterers? What about people who wear clothes made from mixed fabrics and eat shellfish? That's just as immoral as sodomy according to the holy book, right? Should they be allowed to have government services bestowed upon them by pious officials whose sensibilities are offended by people who lead "immoral lifestyles"? How come American Christians only care about the parts of the bible that let them shit on groups of people that they don't like?

Oh and let's be real. The reason that she's refusing to resign is because that clerk's job pays her $80,000 a year. You know how far that goes in rural Kentucky?

 

So is God going to get around to smiting the people who've allowed queers to get married in the US before or after he fills his quota of horrific deaths of innocent children this morning?

 

She was refusing to follow a court order. A fine wouldn't have compelled her because she would have gotten donations to pay them off. Contempt of court was the only way to force her office to issue the licenses.

The only agenda that they judge had was making sure that government officials in his county uphold their oath to the US constitution.

 

Fill his quota? ??.....Come-On Frederick!...tell it straight ..God did not cause this Childs death. ....Evil Muslim terrorists drove this child and his parents into the desperation of trying to flee over this body of water. .... the over crowded boat capsized and they drowned....

 

God didn't prevent that death, either.

 

Right on.

40 years ago she'd be the same chick not issuing marriage certificates to interracial couples because it was against her religious beliefs.

People need to stop giving this woman credibility.

 

I don't agree with you often, but this is the exact reason she hasn't resigned her post.

Hell, $80K a year would go far in most areas of the country.

 

I consider myself a religious person, but these types of posts make me want to shrink into myself.

You will NOT endear anyone to a religious belief with posts such as these.

 

It is not so much even an effort to endear or persuade. ...Every tub has to sit on its own bottom. ...the effort is just to make crystal clear God's position according to what is written in his scripture. ..that said, Kim Davis SHOULD NOT resign to satisfy her many detractors....she earned her 80 thousand in her 27 years of service. ....

 

If she's not performing her job as a civil servant, then she doesn't have the right to hold that $80K a year job.

There is separation of church and state for a reason.

Someone on my Facebook feed wrote this and I think it perfectly explains the situation and how I feel about it, as well:

I really don't have a lot of sympathy for Kim Davis, nor do I think she should be getting the attention she's getting from Presidential candidates.

I just don't think the religious freedom argument holds water in this case. I'm sympathetic to the argument in the case of the bakery or the photographer refusing to be a part of a same sex marriage (well, not so much sympathetic to the argument, since I think same sex marriage is fine, but from a religious freedom perspective, I think it's perfectly appropriate to have an "opt-out right" if someone does have an objection) but this is a civil servant refusing to do her job.

Her job is to certify that under the laws of the State of Kentucky (granted, those laws have been ordered by the Supreme Court of the United States, but I don't think that's relevant), a particular event has occurred between two individuals which is recognized by the State of Kentucky as a "civil marriage" (and it HAS to be explicitly a civil marriage, and not a religious marriage as far as the State of Kentucky is concerned).

She's NOT participating in the ceremony, nor is she approving of the match, she's certifying that an event occurred under Kentucky law. It's a purely administrative function and as such she really doesn't get the choice to opt-out.

The closest I've come to hearing a cogent argument in support of her actions is where a civil servant "back when" would be required, against their beliefs, to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. But I simply don't see the situations as really the same.

 

You may have had a valid point if we lived in a theocracy, but we don't. Like it or not, we live in a nation ruled by secular laws and not religious laws. There isn't a legislature in the land that has codified the bible as law.

If she doesn't want to personally recognize gay marriage then she doesn't have to. But she does not have the right to use her personal beliefs to deny rights to others. And if she isn't actually doing her job then no, she isn't earning her massive salary no matter how long she's been clerk.

 

Darn it can't rep!!!!!

 

B. I. N. G. O.

This same sentiment applies to every religious person who feels they have the authority to push their beliefs on others. It's nauseating at this point. Enough is enough...people need to mind THEIR OWN business.

 

Done

 

The enforcement of my religous belief ends at your doorstep

 

http://news.yahoo.com/defiant-kentucky-clerks-backers-want-aides-fired-over-144618000.html

So according to the article she might fire people for issuing the licenses

MOREHEAD, Ky. (Reuters) - Supporters of Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, who refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples due to her religious beliefs, said on Wednesday that any of her deputies who provide the documents without her permission should be fired.

 

Some people don't get the concept of working for a federal agency.

 

From what I read, she said she wanted her name off the licenses. That's why her deputies would be fired. The paperwork still went out under her name.

 

Agenda's in the Judicial System do exist.

Jailing her for Contempt of Court was not the ONLY way to force the issuance of licences. A fine (regargless if you feel would not have worked) should have been the first step, followed by an emergency or special session of the General Assembly to amend the legislation, or how about what was conducted to secure her release - having her clerks issue them. That along with a fine, should have been the first step, not the last.

More on agendas...
We had an identical situation in PA, but in reverse. Not only was gay marriage unrecognized federally, but also in Pennsylvania.
A county clerk in the same position as Davis, began issuing gay marriage licenses, defiantly breaking the law. His justification was "he was doing the right thing".
Nothing happened to that clerk, the Attorney General didn't arrest him, nor the governor file suit. (despite calls to do so)
Should he have been jailed for defying federal AND State law? Yes or no?

 

When someone is violating federal law to be more inclusive, I don't think it's perceived the same way as someone violating federal law to deny American citizens their civil rights.

I don't have a problem with Kim Davis being sent to jail for contempt of court either.

When a judge asks you in open court are you still going to continue violating federal law and you say YES, your butt is usually going to end up in jail for a couple weeks.

The reason I don't sympathize with Ms. Davis is because she said she would fire her deputy clerks who issued licenses against her wishes, but were following the law.

She needs to be fired, which is what would happen if she worked for most branches of the federal government.