United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Kentucky clerk still won't issue same-sex marriage licenses
Source:
Associated Press
URL Source: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie ... AULT&CTIME=2015-09-01-08-52-48
Published: Sep 1, 2015
Author: Claire Valofaro
Post Date: 2015-09-01 10:04:38 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 28969
Comments: 339
A county clerk in Kentucky has again refused to issue marriage licenses to gay couples, invoking her religious beliefs and "God's authority" - this time in defiance of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling against her. On Tuesday morning, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis' office denied the licenses to at least two couples. At first, Davis was in her office with the door closed and blinds drawn. But she emerged a few minutes later, telling the couples and the activists gathered there that her office is continuing to deny the licenses "under God's authority." The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to intervene in the case, leaving Davis no legal grounds to refuse to grant the licenses. A district judge could now hold her in contempt of court, which can carry steep fines or jail time. As an elected official, Davis can't be fired. Davis asked David Moore and David Ermold to leave her office after they were denied a license Tuesday morning - the couple's fourth rejection. They refused, surrounded by reporters and cameras. "We're not leaving until we have a license," Ermold said. "Then you're going to have a long day," Davis told him. From the back of the room, Davis' supporters said: "Praise the Lord! ... Stand your ground." Other activists shouted that Davis is a bigot and told her: "Do your job." Davis has said her deeply held Christian beliefs don't let her endorse gay marriages. She stopped issuing all marriage licenses in the days after the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage across the nation. Two gay couples and two straight couples sued her, arguing that she must fulfill her duties as an elected official despite her personal religious faith. A federal judge ordered her to issue the licenses, and an appeals court upheld that decision. Her lawyers with the Liberty Counsel filed a last-ditch appeal to the Supreme Court on Friday, asking that they grant her "asylum for her conscience." Justice Elena Kagan, who oversees the 6th district, referred Davis' request to the full court, which denied the stay without comment. After Tuesday's denials, the rejected couples' supporters called the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the lawsuit on their behalf. They asked that the attorneys file that day to have Davis held in contempt. Shortly after Davis' remarks in her office, the sheriff's office cleared the room and building of those gathered to support both sides of the issue. The two groups lined up on the lawn, on either side of the courthouse entrance to chant at each other. Davis' supporters have told her to "stand firm," while gay-rights activists shouted "do your job." Randy Smith, leading the group supporting Davis, said he knows following their instruction to "stand firm" might mean Davis goes to jail. "But at the end of the day, we have to stand before God, which has higher authority than the Supreme Court," he said. Ermold hugged Moore, his partner of 17 years, and they cried and swayed as they left the clerk's office. Davis' supporters marched by, chanting. "I feel sad, I feel devastated," Ermold said. "I feel like I've been humiliated on such a national level, I can't even comprehend it." 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-197) not displayed.
.
.
.
#198. To: Vicomte13 (#188)
The issuance of licenses without the proper authority to do so is not stare decisis that I know of. A federal judge cannot "authorize" a state worker to issue state licenses.
Just where was it established that Pete is "spreading -- pedophile philisophy"?
Jesus said: 24 “Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world. 25 O righteous Father! The world has not known You, but I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me. 26 And I have declared to them Your name, and will declare it, that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.” So I ask...Is your hypothetical 'christian' who is a wicked jerk disobeying God's Love Commands have "in them" the love of God? What's God's part in all of this? Just words on stone or paper, or does He really change, transform, make us new creatures by His Grace and Mercy? The answer is, God does do the work of regeneration in our lives: 25 Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them. Jeremiah 31: 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. 34 No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” The result of 'saved by God's Grace, through faith' is a regenerated soul. Are you implying the wicked servant was a regenerated soul? I know you avoid Paul's epistles because He is not God. But I do believe his epistles and the epistles of the original apostles are inspired by the Holy Spirit. Paul, Peter, John et. al. claim such so we either believe them or reject them as false prophets. Because God is not a God of confusion. Just wanted to posit that disclaimer before I quote Paul. What would be Paul's advice for the wicked servant who would not forgive? 5 Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?— unless indeed you are disqualified. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
Equal Constitutional rights of gays to marry is stare decisis. Mickey Mouse procedural efforts to block it from happening are the same thing as racist efforts to resist desegregation. There are all sorts of little jinks and janks that people take to try to avoid the application of a law they don't like. But because the principle itself has been decided, every one of those efforts at resistance will be systematically mowed down. And if history is any guide, the efforts to use structural barriers that historically would have prevented something, merely ends up with that structure being removed or modified by court order, changing the very fabric of the political structure. We've seen it with segregation and desegregation, we've seen it with the drug war, and we've seen it with abortion. Once the court takes a stance, when the rearguard resistance happens, each element that resists the main decision then becomes the basis for a new round of decisions that essentially strip the resisting government agencies of some power they have theretofore enjoyed. The tide is too strong: the secular state WILL HAVE gay marriage, and every state official or structure that tries to resist it will be broken to force the answer. That, in turn, will leave the state institutions permanently weaker: they picked the wrong battlefield on which to fight. I've been writing about the right answer to this issue. Christians need to turn away from the idea that they need a state licensing of their wedding, and they need to turn away also from any of their Churches that will not bless their weddings without the license. Christians need to be the ones to build on the corpus of contractual law and other rights that the gays built up during the years before gay marriage. When gays could not marry, they nevertheless used the law to create structures that effectively got them everything that marriage does. Gay marriage, then, is about symbol. The symbolism for Christians is important, and NOW they need to focus on it. Neither the Church nor the State creates marriage, nor has any power to block it, nor has any control on it. Christians need to empower themselves by following their God's law. State "marriage" has become a joke. Christians need to stop doing it. Stop getting marriage licenses. Stop having judges perform weddings. Christian clergy need to perform weddings without requiring a marriage license. The Church needs to assert marriage as a sacrament that is outside of the boundaries of the state. For state matters, Christians need to use the state's basic laws of contract and other regulations that gays used for decades, to achieve roughly the same results. If Christians WANT to, they can go buy the state marriage license. The POINT, though, is that Christians need to assert the supremacy of God's law over both their churches - ending the absurd pretension that a Church's approval is required for a marriage precisely BECAUSE the Churches have been eunuched and serve now to enforce the states' marriage license requirements. Think how much political power the gays gained from the fact that they had to work to get legal norms to facilitate their lifestyles. All of those tools are there. If Christians return to the real meaning of marriage, they will eliminate the state from their calculations, and formal state marriage will become a province of seculars and gays only: Christians will shun it. It will be visible and swiftly felt. And this also gives the Christians control over their Churches and clergy: break the law and marry us, or we leave your church for a real church that will. Some creative destruction of the ossified, dying Churches is needed. Once Christians fully realize that they can marry at will, and have most of the alleged benefits of marriage, by doing so they will become more Christian - in the sense that they will slay a false tradition of the NECESSITY of the clergy in marriage. They will make the Church cleaner and truer, and they will form a great mailed fist of political force. The issue will come down to Social Security. The state will dangle Social Security survivors benefits for spouses only as the means by which to force Christians into state marriages. But Common Law marriage doctrines already supersede this. Up to now, the argument has been to not oppress gays. It's hard to argue, secularly, why gays should be oppressed. But with gay marriage and equal rights, the notion now that Christians who recuse themselves should be oppressed to take the state's license - THAT is something that Christians of all stripes (once they understand the truth about marriage) - will be able to resist, and will have a powerful financial incentive to resist.
I'm sure she never swore an oath to compromise her religious/faith convictions. But she and now every Christian in the US now know that they will be thrown in jail if they refuse an order from the federal government which compromises their conscience. "The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
You are reading Paul to cancel Jesus. Jesus said explicitly, as commandments, that to be forgiven your sins you MUST forgive the sins of other men, and that if you don't, you SHALL NOT be forgiven your sins by God either. Further, he gave a whole parable on it that explicitly and directly said that God will do the same thing to you if you do not forgive. If you do not follow Jesus, you are not forgiven your sins. If you do not forgive others their trespasses, you are not forgiven your sins. Following Jesus alone is not enough, because if you are not merciful and do not forgive other men your sins, Jesus has said your are not forgiven. I understand this desire to see a status: I've converted, and therefore. But Jesus makes it clear to converted, baptized Churches that salvation is only for those who continue to do the deeds he's required. Otherwise, spewed out of the mouth.
Of course they will. Consider the Fugitive Slave Act. Consider the role of the federal judge, or marshall, in the age of slavery. Consider the order to ride down and kill an Indian village. Consider the order to nuke a city full of women and children. If you obey those orders, you go to hell. If you disobey them, you go to jail. You cannot serve both God and mammon. America is mammon, and always has been.
I'm sure she never swore an oath to compromise her religious/faith convictions. By swearing an oath at all, she defied Jesus' commandment not to swear oaths.
By all means, keep digging deeper in that shit-hole you're in.... I am telling the truth.
I get the distinct impression he thinks white folks are sheep nowadays.
No. White people (and black and yellow and red) SHOULD all be sheep, following the Good Shepherd Jesus, turning neither to the left nor to the right. That would be ideal. They're not doing that. They're not sheep. What they are, is aging, and struggling to stay afloat, unable to cooperate with each other or agree on right and wrong, and relatively immoral. This is not the grounds on which revolutions are made.
The stuff from the cited page 74 is quoted at my 164. It appears a county judge/executive may issue a license in the absence of the clerk. Whether the clerk is considered absent while jailed for contempt is another question. It appears no county judge/executive has volunteered to incur all the responsibilities of the county clerk. The KY statutes appear not to have changed following Obergefell and the KY legislature is not due to come back into session until next year. www.lrc.ky.gov/lrcpubs/ib114.pdf At 20: Marriages County judges/executive may perform marriage ceremonies. They may also authorize justices of the peace and fiscal court commissioners in their respective counties to perform marriages (KRS 402.050). In the absence of the county clerk, the county judge/executive may issue a marriage license (KRS 402.240). At 54: http://law.justia.com/codes/kentucky/2009/402-00/pdf/240.pdf In the absence of the county clerk, or during a vacancy in the office, the county judge/executive may issue the license and, in so doing, he shall perform the duties and incur all the responsibilities of the clerk. The county judge/executive shall return a memorandum thereof to the clerk, and the memorandum shall be recorded as if the license had been issued by the clerk. Effective: October 1, 1942 History: Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 2113. http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/chapter.aspx?id=39205 KRS Chapter 402 - Marriage (Index) KRS Chapter 402 Includes enactments through the 2015 Regular Session The KRS database was last updated on 09/04/2015 http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=36464 .005 Definition of marriage. As used and recognized in the law of the Commonwealth, "marriage" refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent upon those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex. Effective: July 15, 1998 History: Created 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 258, sec. 4, effective July 15, 1998. http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=36466 .020 Other prohibited marriages. (1) Marriage is prohibited and void: (a) With a person who has been adjudged mentally disabled by a court of competent jurisdiction; (b) Where there is a husband or wife living, from whom the person marrying has not been divorced; (c) When not solemnized or contracted in the presence of an authorized person or society; (d) Between members of the same sex; (e) Between more than two (2) persons; and (f) 1. Except as provided in subparagraph 3. of this paragraph, when at the time of the marriage, the person is under sixteen (16) years of age; 2. Except as provided in subparagraph 3. of this paragraph, when at the time of marriage, the person is under eighteen (18) but over sixteen (16) years of age, if the marriage is without the consent of: a. The father or the mother of the person under eighteen (18) but over sixteen (16), if the parents are married, the parents are not legally separated, no legal guardian has been appointed for the person under eighteen (18) but over sixteen (16), and no court order has been issued granting custody of the person under eighteen (18) but over sixteen (16) to a party other than the father or mother; b. Both the father and the mother, if both be living and the parents are divorced or legally separated, and a court order of joint custody to the parents of the person under eighteen (18) but over sixteen (16) has been issued and is in effect; c. The surviving parent, if the parents were divorced or legally separated, and a court order of joint custody to the parents of the person under eighteen (18) but over sixteen (16) was issued prior to the death of either the father or mother, which order remains in effect; d. The custodial parent, as established by a court order which has not been superseded, where the parents are divorced or legally separated and joint custody of the person under eighteen (18) but over sixteen (16) has not been ordered; or e. Another person having lawful custodial charge of the person under eighteen (18) but over sixteen (16), but 3. In case of pregnancy the male and female, or either of them, specified in subparagraph 1. or 2. of this paragraph, may apply to a District Judge for permission to marry, which application may be granted, in the form of a written court order, in the discretion of the judge. There shall be a fee of five dollars ($5) for hearing each such application. (2) For purposes of this section "parent," "father," or "mother" means the natural parent, father, or mother of a child under eighteen (18) unless an adoption takes place pursuant to legal process, in which case the adoptive parent, father, or mother shall be considered the parent, father, or mother to the exclusion of the natural parent, father, or mother, as applicable. Effective: History: -- Amended 1988 Ky. Acts ch. 212, sec. 1, effective July 15, 1988. -- Amended 1982 Ky. Acts ch. 141, sec. 113, effective July 1, 1982. -- Amended 1978 Ky. Acts ch. 92, sec. 12, effective June 17, 1978. -- Amended 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 14, sec. 399, effective January 2, 1978. -- Amended 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 49, sec. 6; and ch. 386, sec. 90. -- Amended 1968 Ky. Acts ch. 200, sec. 10. -- Amended 1966 Ky. Acts ch. 72, sec. 1. -- Amended 1960 Ky. Acts ch. 8, sec. 1. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 2097. Legislative Research Commission Note (7/15/98). This section was amended by 1998 Ky. Acts chs. 122 and 258 which do not appear to be in conflict and have been codified together. Note: http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=36469 .045 Same-sex marriage in another jurisdiction void and unenforceable. http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=36473 .080 Marriage license required -- Who may issue. -- Who may issue. No marriage shall be solemnized without a license therefor. The license shall be issued by the clerk of the county in which the female resides at the time, unless the female is eighteen (18) years of age or over or a widow, and the license is issued on her application in person or by writing signed by her, in which case it may be issued by any county clerk. Effective: History: -- Amended -- Amended 1978 Ky. Acts ch. 384, sec. 518, effective June 17, 1978. -- Amended 1968 Ky. Acts ch. 100, sec. 14. -- Amended 1948 Ky. Acts ch. 42, sec. 1. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 2105.
You never did answer my question in # 193
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I'm not arguing that other subject. Issuing a state license of any type without state authority to issue it is not stare decisis. Obergefell did not delegate any authority to the deputies. The Federal government cannot delegate authority to the deputies to issue state licenses. The sole source of that authority is the state. Kim Davis has not violated the equal rights of anyone. She has ceased issuing licenses altogether. All were treated equally. She has failed to perform a function of her job to issue licenses. http://abcnews.go.com/US/jailed-kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-offers-remedy-sex/story?id=33532686 Sep 4, 2015, 8:01 AM ET Kim Davis thinks she has a solution to her problem. The Kentucky county clerk, jailed for failing to follow a judge’s orders to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, wants her name removed from the marriage certificates, her attorney Matthew Staver told ABC News. “She has a very strong conscience and she’s just asking for a simple remedy, and that is, remove her name from the certificate and all will be well,” Staver said. “That simple remedy has simply been ignored by the court and by the governor and that’s what should have been done. “I think it’s reprehensible that she’s in jail for this when a simple fix could have been easily handled.” Marriage licenses in Kentucky are required to include an authorization statement of the county clerk issuing the license. Some state lawmakers, as well as the Kentucky County Clerks Association, have suggesting having clerks' names removed from marriage licenses. In the meantime, five of Davis’ deputies – facing the prospect of jail time themselves – are expected to start issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples at the Rowan County Courthouse today. A sixth clerk, Kim Davis' son, remains a holdout but has not been jailed. [snip] If the documents indicate they were authorized by County Clerk Kim Davis, it would appear they are fraudulent.
It isn't. But it's a mere detail. If it becomes a means by which the will of the Supreme Court is resisted on the matter, then issuing the license will end up BECOMING stare decisis, because the Court will keep on bulldozing until they achieve compliance with their orders.
It appears a county judge/executive may issue a license in the absence of the clerk. Whether the clerk is considered absent while jailed for contempt is another question. It appears no county judge/executive has volunteered to incur all the responsibilities of the county clerk. The KY statutes appear not to have changed following Obergefell and the KY legislature is not due to come back into session until next year. For all of this and what you cite, who do you think will prevail, Davis or the Fed? Do you think any gay marriage under a license issued by a Deputy will be overturned or declared invaild? What gets Davis out of jail? When? потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
I suppose she swore an oath (or affirmed) to faithfully execute the duties of her office, but at a time when said duties did not include condoning same-sex marriage, something her moral standards will not permit her to do.
The Fed can bulldoze all it wants and not acquire the authority to issue state licenses. The Fed can punish and sanction until the state complies, but the Fed authorizing state officials to issue state licenses without state issued authorization will not enter into it. Defiance will eventually bring a rain of pain. That will be stare decisis.
She can always resign and even seek another office. She, and anyone else, including local and state governments are on the losing side of the issue. I guess it is possible the states can defy the Fed and refuse to issue marriage licenses to gays while they continue to issue such licenses to straights - welcome to the next potential civil war (which Christians will lose). потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
You do not know as a matter of fact. Why would the Judge accept the issuance of the license under the ausices of a Deputy if the Judge know or had serious reason to believe that he was condoning a fraudulent act? потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
That depends on how you define the word "authority". To me, authority is the power to force people against their will to accomplish an objective defined by the one with the authority.
The Fed, of course.
I didn't see it. Flurry of questions from many. I'll go look now, and answer it next.
Fed. Going up against the Fed, the only consideration is raw power. Yes. I fail to see how these fraudulent documents can be legally defended. Bending to the will of the court or resigning, or being impeached and removed from office. Dunno. If she is still in jail next year, the state might choose to impeach her when the legislature comes back into session. It may also be a matter of how long the Fed wants to keep the deputies churning out fraudulent documents, knowing they can be invalidated by a state court, returning to square one and maing the Fed court look silly. The documents will purport to have her authorization while she can be documented as being in jail for refusing to give her authorization. It is not clear how the Fed forces the state to issue gay marriage licenses where it chooses to issue no marriage licenses to anyone. If all but gay marriage licenses were issued, there could be drastic sanctions against the state for violation of the constitutional rights of gays. I suspect this is not a lone lady resisting, but an organized resistance effort. It appears to have been too carefully tailored to evade any federal charges for that to be accidental. I suspect many folks saying she must comply with the Constitution or the law or the court, probably would argue that the Fugitive Slave Clause deserved to be violated, or do not condemn the states or individuals who violated it. How many would say that Dred Scott (7-2) did not deserve compliance? For consideration, contains several suggestions: Roger Severino / September 04, 2015
Because he can. He wants licenses issued. He cannot issue them or grant anyone authorization to issue them. The Fed does not tolerate defiance. If Kim Davis can do it (or not do it) so can other clerks.
Why would the Judge accept the issuance of the license under the ausices of a Deputy if the Judge know or had serious reason to believe that he was condoning a fraudulent act? Because he can. Then he is knowingly committing a fraudlent act from his bench. IMO he would be in serious legal trouble for doing that. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Or the clerks can issue fraudulent licenses at Federal direction, and the state can invalidate them later. This is only one county, not the whole state. It cannot issue licenses selectively without invoking a whole bunch of Federal anti-discrimination sanctions. But it can just stop issuing licenses at all, and not discriminate against any group. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Texas Same Sex Marriage in Texas
He is a federal judge doing what is wanted. He will face nothing.
I don't think so. Issing of licenses by the Office Clerk is what the state authorizes and requires that office to do. The Clerk cannot willy nilly based on personal preferences stop issuing licenses to anyone which she knew before she took the job was a function of that office. What would be the basis for her to stop issuing licenses to straight couples or anyone that is entitled to a license by state law? HOw can she willy nilly decide to punish or inconvenience others that are entitled to the license? потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Why is that? Demographics. War is a young man's game. The median age of the US Hispanic population is 27.5 - prime military age. The median age of the US White population is 42. Every year the median age of whites gets older. Every year the median age of Hispanics gets younger. In 1990, 70% of the young people in America were white. In 2010, 53% were. In ten years, between 2000 and 2010, the total number of white children declined by 4.3 million. With a median age of 42, and rising, the white population is mostly already past the age of fertility. Some 42 year olds have a child, but very few. The older the population, the more white. 73% of the population over age 50 is white. 79% of the population over 65. But when one looks at the under 20 population, half of it is non-white. White numbers are plunging, and the white fertility rate is far below replacement. Given economic conditions, and the median age of the white population, there is no possibility that white fertility will pick up either. The white population is spiralling downward. The black population is slowly declining. The Asian population is growing rapidly. And the Hispanic population is young, fertile and surging. There is nothing on the horizon that suggests that white demographic decline is slowing. Rather, it is accelerating. Whites are aging, dwindling in numbers, and have a declining fertility rate. The median age of whites is 42, but only 5.6% of the military is over 42. In 1995, 10% of the military officer corps was minorities. Today, 22% is minority, and 32% of the enlisted. The whites are aging out, and the military forces are being replaced by minorities, mostly Hispanic, just like the rest of the population at large. The same thing is true of the police forces. In 1987, they were 15% minority. In 2013, that was up to 29%, and the trend is accelerating as whites age out and retire. So, you have an aging population of whites, having few children, moving towards retirement age or already in retirement. Social Security and Medicare are locked-in programs. Taxes will be increased on the rich as necessary to pay for that. Old people don't rebel in arms anyway, and old people who have basic security in retirement certainly don't. So, who is going to do the rebelling? An aging white middle class of the age that has families, obligations, mortgages and jobs? Rebellions come from the youth (see Ferguson), and white youth are already matched by minority youth, with that balance steadily shifting in the direction of minorities. And the military and police forces that would respond to a white rebellion are more and more and more Hispanic and young. So, who is going to rebel? Old people? No. That's never happened anywhere, and it's not going to happen here either. Who, then? Middle class whites with families and obligations? No. That doesn't happen either. People with families emigrate from problems. The young rebel. War is a young man's game. Where is the "white youth movement"? Young whites are the most tolerant and egalitarian. There is never going to be a substantial rebellion of white America. If there were, it would be middle aged crackpots, and the young, professional, large, well-armed, heavily minority police and military forces will crush the rebellion, and that will be that. That's why that is. And that's a good thing anyway. Christians should not be contemplating shedding blood. They should, rather, focus on having God's law memorized, conforming to it, and cooperating economically with others who follow God's law, following God's economic template. That's the only way to actually reverse the birth rate decline.
Or the clerks can issue putatively valid licenses at federal direction, which the state will ratify or lose federal funds and suffer other retaliatory measures. Nobody is going to fight this the way that the racists fought desegregation. The racists were numerous - even majoritarian in their areas - and they still lost. The only proper response is for Christians to turn back to the Law of God, refresh their understanding of it so that they cease to take foolish and suicidal political stances, and instead live as a growing and prosperous community apart, one that will have many advantages over the secular community.
IMO he would be in serious legal trouble for doing that. He is a federal judge doing what is wanted. He will face nothing. So we are back to where I always been, i.e. - a law is not enforced is de facto not a law. Also, the only rights that anyone de facto have are the ones that one can defend. We will soon be living in a live in a lawless land under the boot of the Emperor and his thugs in DC. A scoiety in whcih might makes right. Which of the bullies will be the first to physically wipe his ass with the U.S. Constitution? потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
We always have. Since first settlement. It's just that in the past, that lawlessness and brutality favored the white WASP majority that made up the power base back then. The whites are no longer a majority of young people, and Christianity has faded because of its own internal evils, hypocrisies and moral compromises. So the people who were always accustomed to winning before are starting to lose as the wheel turns. But the ways they are losing are the ways that others were already losing before.
LOL! Scared you are going to start wearing dresses in public? BTW,Religious doctrine is NOT law. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
The shortage of tv cameras and lawsuits. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I didn't realize Illustrious Leader was deleting my posts with prejudice. I wonder if they were making him start wearing a bow in his hair? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I think the "office" not only has the authority,but has the obligation. If you work there,you can do the deed. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Me,too. She seems to be determined to be a martyr. It should be interesting to watch this shake out. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Probably when he started playing dress-up and listening to Cher records. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I'm sure it was never her intention to do so,but when it became apparent that was what was going to be happening,she should have either just resigned or stood aside and let someone else do it who wasn't bothered by it. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It should be interesting to watch this shake out. Yeah, I'll bet Las Vegas probably has an over/under betting line by now on how long she'll be in the pokey. Between her and Trump who needs real news any more. Entertainment!
Comments (239 - 339) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThe issue of gay marriage is stare decisis.
#199. To: A K A Stone, sneakypete, y'all (#171)
Now stay the fuck off these threads. We don't need you spreading your pedophile philisophy
#200. To: Vicomte13, liberator, GarySpFc (#190)
The ONLY WAY to be forgiven your sins is by being forgiving and merciful to other men. The Christian who is baptized, loves God and is "saved" and forgiven, but who then is harsh and unforgiving, is judged by the unforgiving standard that he himself has set, and is thrown into the flames at the end. Jesus promised this.
John 17:
Ezekiel 36:
2 Corinthians 13:
#201. To: nolu chan (#198)
The issuance of licenses without the proper authority to do so is not stare decisis that I know of. A federal judge cannot "authorize" a state worker to issue state licenses.
#202. To: nolu chan (#197)
"Oaths mean things."
#203. To: redleghunter (#200)
(Edited)
#204. To: redleghunter (#202)
But she and now every Christian in the US now know that they will be thrown in jail if they refuse an order from the federal government which compromises their conscience.
#205. To: redleghunter, nolu chan (#202)
(Edited)
"Oaths mean things."
#206. To: tpaine (#194)
-- there is nothing exceptional about American soldiers getting killed in a bunch of imperial wars for American expansion and power, and no, those wars were not about American freedom. The Revolution and World War II were about American freedom, ----
#207. To: Stoner (#193)
“Let me see which pig "DON'T" I want to vote for, the one with or without lipstick??" Hmmmmm...
#208. To: CZ82, Stoner (#207)
I get the distinct impression he thinks white folks are sheep nowadays.
#209. To: SOSO, redleghunter, Vicomte13 (#191)
Go to this link http://www.lrc.ky.gov/lrcpubs/ib114.pdf for more info on the delegation of powers to County Offices in KY. Page 74 has info on Deputies of the Office of Clerk.
Miscellaneous Executive Duties
The county clerk issues marriage licenses (KRS 402.080) and files and records all marriage certificates (KRS 402.220 and 402.230). Military discharges may also be recorded in the county clerk’s office (KRS 422.090). On or before the 10th day of each month, the county clerk reports to the state registrar of vital statistics all marriage licenses issued and all marriage certificates returned (KRS 213.116). Each county clerk must furnish each applicant for a marriage license with a copy of a marriage manual to be prepared and printed by the Human Resources Coordinating Commission of Kentucky (KRS 402.270).
402.240 County judge/executive to issue license in absence of clerk.
Kentucky Revised Statutes
402.005 Definition of marriage.
402.020 Other prohibited marriages.
July 15, 1998
Amended 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 122, sec. 1, effective March 26, 1998 and ch. 258, sec. 2, effective July 15, 1998.
1980 Ky. Acts ch. 396, sec. 124 would have amended this section effective July 1, 1982. However, 1980 Ky. Acts ch. 396 was repealed by 1982 Ky. Acts ch. 141, sec. 146, also effective July 1, 1982. 402.080 Marriage license required
July 13, 1984
Amended 1984 Ky. Acts ch. 279, sec. 1, effective July 13, 1984.
1980 Ky. Acts ch. 74, sec. 1, effective July 15, 1980.
#210. To: Vicomte13 (#208)
#211. To: Vicomte13, SOSO, redleghunter (#201)
Equal Constitutional rights of gays to marry is stare decisis.
Jailed Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis Offers 'Remedy' in Same-Sex Marriage License Battle
By ABC NEWS via GOOD MORNING AMERICA
#212. To: nolu chan (#211)
Issuing a state license of any type without state authority to issue it is not stare decisis.
#213. To: nolu chan, redleghunter, Vicomte13 (#209)
The stuff from the cited page 74 is quoted at my 164.
#214. To: redleghunter (#202)
I'm sure she never swore an oath to compromise her religious/faith convictions.
#215. To: Vicomte13 (#212)
If it becomes a means by which the will of the Supreme Court is resisted on the matter, then issuing the license will end up BECOMING stare decisis, because the Court will keep on bulldozing until they achieve compliance with their orders.
#216. To: nolu chan, redleghunter (#214)
I suppose she swore an oath (or affirmed) to faithfully execute the duties of her office, but at a time when said duties did not include condoning same-sex marriage, something her moral standards will not permit her to do.
#217. To: nolu chan, Vicomte13, SOSO, redleghunter (#211)
If the documents indicate they were authorized by County Clerk Kim Davis, it would appear they are fraudulent.
#218. To: nolu chan (#215)
The Fed can bulldoze all it wants and not acquire the authority to issue state licenses.
#219. To: SOSO (#213)
For all of this and what you cite, who do you think will prevail, Davis or the Fed?
#220. To: Stoner (#210)
You never did answer my question in # 193
#221. To: SOSO, redleghunter, Vicomte13 (#213)
For all of this and what you cite, who do you think will prevail, Davis or the Fed?
Do you think any gay marriage under a license issued by a Deputy will be overturned or declared invaild?
What gets Davis out of jail?
When?
How Kim Davis Can Be Released From Jail Without Agreeing to Violate Her Conscience
#222. To: SOSO (#217)
Why would the Judge accept the issuance of the license under the ausices of a Deputy if the Judge know or had serious reason to believe that he was condoning a fraudulent act?
#223. To: nolu chan (#222)
#224. To: SOSO, redleghunter (#216)
I guess it is possible the states can defy the Fed and refuse to issue marriage licenses to gays while they continue to issue such licenses to straights
After the Obergefell ruling, nearly all counties started issuing marriage licenses for same-sex couples. As of 1 August 2015, Irion County is the sole remaining county in the country that overtly refuses to issue licenses to same-sex couples while continuing to license to opposite-sex couples. However, two other counties (Loving, with 82 residents, as of August 7 and Mills as of August 21) also refuse to license same-sex couples, claiming to have delayed implementation while they update paperwork or software. As with similar cases in Kentucky, it is suspected that this may be a tactic to refuse to issue licenses while avoiding lawsuits.
#225. To: SOSO (#223)
IMO he would be in serious legal trouble for doing that.
#226. To: nolu chan (#224)
But it can just stop issuing licenses at all, and not discriminate against any group.
#227. To: Stoner (#193)
" It's never going to happen in white America. "
#228. To: nolu chan (#224)
Or the clerks can issue fraudulent licenses at Federal direction, and the state can invalidate them later.
#229. To: nolu chan, vicomte13, redleghunter, A K A Stone, liberator, GarySpFc, sneakypete, TooConservative, All (#225)
#230. To: SOSO (#229)
We will soon be living in a live in a lawless land under the boot of the Emperor and his thugs in DC. A scoiety in whcih might makes right.
#231. To: A K A Stone (#171)
Now stay the fuck off these threads. We don't need you spreading your pedophile philisophy.
#232. To: Stoner (#173)
What prevents these gays from simply going to the next county and getting a license. Or, having a lawyer draw up an agreement where they will have inheritance rights, etc?
#233. To: CZ82 (#187)
I managed to read your reply before it got "ZOTTED"
#234. To: redleghunter (#189)
Is it a possibility another state or county official with the same authority delegated said authority?
#235. To: Stoner (#192)
I suspect this situation is far from over.
#236. To: tpaine (#199)
Just where was it established that Pete is "spreading -- pedophile philisophy"?
#237. To: redleghunter (#202)
I'm sure she never swore an oath to compromise her religious/faith convictions.
#238. To: sneakypete (#235)
Me,too. She seems to be determined to be a martyr.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]