In Kentucky, we have reached the point where force is required.
So that hateful bigot of a county clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky, Kim Davis, has been denying the issuance of marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples since the Supreme Court’s decision in late June 2015 allowing for them. State and Federal appeallate courts have ordered her to follow the Constitution and the Supreme Court’s ruling, which is the supreme law of the land. She refused, and appealed to the Supreme Court. Last night, they denied her.
That was the Supreme Court’s way of saying “Do you job and issue the license.”
Thus, the bigot in Kentucky is out of appeals. She must now do her job. But this morning, she is refusing, citing to God’s authority.
Davis comes out to speak to another couple denied license
Posted by Hillary Thornton WKYT on Tuesday, September 1, 2015
We have now reached the point where force is required. She must be placed under arrest and removed from that office, either voluntarily or involuntarily, by any and all means necessary. If she physically resists, she must meet physical force. If the local authorities are unwillingly to do it, then that office must be occupied by those who are being denied their constitutional rights until such time as either the state or federal authorities forcibly remove her from office.
This person has a bright future in wingnut welfare.
Shouldn’t she just be sacked this morning and replaced by someone with the mental capacity to separate their personal religious beliefs from their legal professional obligations? I would have expected that this plan would have been in place to address this very expected turn of events.
Puck makes a good point. I see in her future a speaking engagement at the Republican National Convention. Maybe a role in a direct-to-DVD documentary produced by Saddleback Church, something like that.
Apparently the local authorities have deferred to the State AG, who is running for Governor. Pull up a chair and get a bowl of popcorn.
If they are going to evict her, they better do it before armed “defenders” start showing up.
I predict several calls from GOP presidential candidates seeking an endorsement or at least a photo op.
“by any and all means”
A bit dramatic, little queen, dontcha think?
Might want to narrow it down to a warrant, followed by a simple arrest and escort from the building, then employment termination proceedings.
Any and all means…….angry internet liberals are so scary!
I fight fire with fire.
I understand the sentiment, but it does sound a bit Trumpish. How about we just have her removed and replaced with a clerk who will fulfill the legal obligations of the position. I think that’s the sane course of action.
Fine with me. The problem is she won’t go willingly.
I’ve heard that God’s docket is pretty jammed right now. His ruling on her appeal could take months, and could take the form of a typhoon or earthquake.
ok so bigot? or Rascist? Because she denied gay people their right to get married, I think it’s racism…not bigotry…
It’s so hard to keep up with which is which.
I wonder if she is union? How come she hasn’t been fired yet
Apparently she is an elected official, so we have to go through some major hurdles here. And she is a bigot since she is discriminating against those who are homosexual. Homosexuality is not its own race of people. It is simply a sexual preference. Thus, she is not a racist (though she probably is).
I suppose some of you know this little tidbit. I didn’t, as I have only followed this story casually, but I’m not surprised. I just read that this clerk has been married four times.
Normally I’d say her personal business is her personal business, but since she doesn’t seem to abide by that I don’t feel as if I need to in this instance either.
Does anyone know this as fact?
One small correction DelDem, saying sexual orientation is a “preference” is not really correct modern terminology. It implies a choice, whether conscious or not. Most of us will tell you it’s nothing we consciously or unconsciously chose, it’s innate. Just like everyone else, we are attracted to and become romantically involved with where our heart leads us, which has its reasons. It just is. Similar, but not the same, as race or eye color, or right/left handedness. They just are what they are. Some because of genetics, and some because of a likely confluence of genetics and womb environment.
This contrasts with something that is clearly a choice: one’s religion. That is something that history shows people can change at the drop of a hat. I usually like to say religion is a lifestyle choice.
I know what you’re getting at, i.e. why some people prefer chocolate over vanilla ice cream (don’t get me started on why vanilla rules) but in this case preference is a descriptor with unnecessary implications. Other than that spot on.
Dorian, it has been confirmed by the scofflaw clerk’s religious advisors, I mean lawyers (all apologies to lawyers for the slur). See below link. Four marriages, three divorces. If a public official sworn to uphold the constitution conflates personal beliefs with execution of their office, personal behavior becomes fair game as far as I’m concerned.
http://www.lex18.com/story/29933844/kim-davis-releases-statement
“This year we are on track to generate a surplus for the county of $1.5 million”
At a minimum, the fine should eliminate her surplus.
Well, US News dug into HER record and found… (remember, it’s Kentucky) that while married to husband number one, she had husband number three’s children,which created her first divorce and husband number two raised her children for her until his divorce, and husband number three took on parental duties until, husband number 4 showed up…
God is laughing at every hypocritical Conservative right now… 🙂
Four marriages??? So much for the sanctity of traditional marriage…
Easy solution… Contempt of court and thrown in jail for a week.
Just keep that up until she capitulates, or that becomes her new permanent address.
She’s a Democrat
@Anonymous: Her calling herself a “Democrat” is like me calling myself “Skinny”… Personal perception don’t make it reality.
She’s an elected Democrat for last 20 years.
I love that idiots think “she is a Democrat” is meaningful
It is meaningful to them, J, because they never call out their own members. They’re very tribal. Meanwhile, we call out Ds all the time – Coons, Carper and Carney spring immediately to mind.
Keep in mind this charge is also coming from a group that coined the term RINO.
I’ll call them out on both sides. I spoke to a Republican Rep recently, who was talking about Bloom Energy. I asked; how could you vote for such a hidden tax on all of us. His words were; “If I read all the documentation, I would not have voted for it.”
I told him he lost my vote!
On both sides, we have our wingnuts.
Trump/Davis 2016!
In the culture wars, Kim Davis is like one of those Japanese soldiers living in a cave long after the war is over.
We got our perp walk. Now feed her to the lions.
I think Obergefell v. Hodges (state-level bans on same-sex marriage) is wrong. The Supreme Court has been wrong before, and it’s wrong this time. Homosexuality is a perversion of procreation, nothing more. And, it’s wrong to pervert marriage in this manner.
I’m probably wasting my time here, but maybe some of you will eventually mature, and unsaddle yourselves of the stereotype ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ lemming mentality.
Regards
So… no marriage for infertile couples, or couples who decided not to have children, or for women who have gone through menopause? Should married people be allowed access to birth control (maybe, only after they have a certain number of children)? Seriously, flesh this out for me, Simon.
Nice diversion there, Pandora; you can nuance all you want. But what I said is true, isn’t it? Will check back later- have to go. Have a nice Labor-day weekend!
Simon
Simon needs to find a country that doesn’t have a constitutional wall of separation between church and state. Kenya perhaps?
@Simon “But what I said is true, isn’t it?”
Actually No. Not even close. Let’s look at your two seminal sentences (pardon the pun):
“Homosexuality is a perversion of procreation, nothing more.”
Nothing more? According to whom? This represents a true ignorance of actual history and the role that homosexuality has played throughout the development of the human race and human culture. Go read the “Seven Pillars of Wisdom”.
“And, it’s wrong to pervert marriage in this manner.”
Again… According to whom? Why is it wrong? Wrong based on exactly what?
Is a prospective couple wrong to like each other? — It seems to me that trying to prevent that would be that actual a perversion of nature. Homosexuality is completely natural. Denying such and trying to prevent such based on a “natural” argument shows your ignorance.
Or maybe you are more against the civil aspects of marriage? …equal protection under the law?…. blatant discrimination? — Is that really OK with you?
This is where conservatives fall off the moral cliff… your views are truly evil.