County Clerk Defies Federal, Appeals, And Scotus Court Orders Against Her, Invoking Her Faith And Religious Freedom

[jkwilliams]

No, Ahab.  Some things are just wrong and we shouldn't "respect" people for standing up to wrong things.

 

We shouldn't "respect" the KKK for "standing up for their beliefs."

 

We shouldn't "respect" ISIS for "standing up for their beliefs."

 

We shouldn't "respect" NAMBLA for "standing up for their beliefs."

The Laffertys did what they thought was right, so should we respect them for that?

 

Further demonstrations of Godwin's Law will result in thread bans.

[Russell C McGregor]

Fine.  

 

But let the rubber met the road here.  What is your solution?  She should be able to be in office and have her entire office not issue licenses to people because that's her right?

 

I know you weren't asking me, but I think she ought to be able to remain in office and not personally endorse inauthentic marriages, but not compel her staff to do the same.

 

The Juggernaut, of course, disagree.  Not only do they demand that everyone actively support same sex "marriage," but they even expect everyone to like it.

 

And anyone who doesn't is unfit for office.

[jkwilliams]

I fail to see that they had the slightest interest in authentic marriage.

Like Pius IX, who exercised Infallibility before it was conferred upon him by Vatican I, SCOTUS found in Obergefell a convenient case to claim for themselves the power to legislate.

The precedent was already there since Loving in 1967 and reaffirmed in Windsor. It's bizarre to insist that the court's citation of precedent is equivalent to claiming the power to legislate.

[ttribe]

I know you weren't asking me, but I think she ought to be able to remain in office and not personally endorse inauthentic marriages, but not compel her staff to do the same.

 

The Juggernaut, of course, disagree.  Not only do they demand that everyone actively support same sex "marriage," but they even expect everyone to like it.

 

And anyone who doesn't is unfit for office.

 

Nonsense.  She's not unfit for not "liking" same-sex marriage.  She's unfit for failing to fulfill her oath as a publicly elected official.

Edited September 8, 2015 by ttribe

[Brian 2.0]

I know you weren't asking me, but I think she ought to be able to remain in office and not personally endorse inauthentic marriages, but not compel her staff to do the same.

 

The Juggernaut, of course, disagree.  Not only do they demand that everyone actively support same sex "marriage," but they even expect everyone to like it.

 

And anyone who doesn't is unfit for office.

 

What happens if the entire staff of a county don't want to do it.  Tough luck, gays.

 

I'm not opposed to Civil Disobedience... just remember that people go to jail for it.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Brian 2.0

[jkwilliams]

Nonsense.  She's not unfit for not "liking" same-sex marriage.  She's unfit for failing to fulfill her oath as a publicley elected official.

Not only that, but as an elected official, she was forbidding other government officials to do their job. Her actions are unacceptable for any reason. We don't elect people to apply the law only when they feel like it.

[Zakuska]

Not only that, but as an elected official, she was forbidding other government officials to do their job. Her actions are unacceptable for any reason. We don't elect people to apply the law only when they feel like it.

 

Plenty of current officials already doing this (or as the case is... upholding only laws they feel like upholding) All the way to the top.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Zakuska

[ttribe]

Plenty of current officials already doing it. (or as the case is not upholding the law) All the way to the top.

 

Back to the "If we can't fix all elected official dereliction of duty, we shouldn't fix any of it" argument.

[Zakuska]

Back to the "If we can't fix all elected official dereliction of duty, we shouldn't fix any of it" argument.

No.  fix ALL of it.  Boot them All out.

[ttribe]

No.  fix ALL of it.  Boot them All out.

 

While I don't necessarily disagree in principle, the practical reality is something else altogether.

[CA Steve]

Didn't Henny Penny play for the Juggernauts?

Edited September 8, 2015 by CA Steve

[Thinking]

God's approval should be our benchmark.

 

So which religion should the government consult in order to find out which things have God's approval?

[jkwilliams]

Plenty of current officials already doing this (or as the case is... upholding only laws they feel like upholding) All the way to the top.

So, you're saying it's OK for her because other people are doing it? Really? Selective enforcement of the law is unacceptable, no matter who does it.

[Ahab]

Fine.

But let the rubber met the road here. What is your solution? She should be able to be in office and have her entire office not issue licenses to people because that's her right?

Not my problem but to be fair I think there should be a way for everybody in that county to settle or resettle this issue. For everyone voted into office there should be a way to vote them out of office too. Whether at the next regular election or some special election before then doesn't matter at all to me.

My main point is that she has been doing what everybody should do, standing up for her own values and principles whatever they are, regardless of any peer pressure. And I especially appreciate that she values doing whatever she believes God would want her to do.

[Brian 2.0]

I'd mainly just like to see her stick to her idea that she should do only what she believes God approves of. There are still plenty of places where all kinds of people can legally marry.

 

Below there are 3 options that all have her sticking to her values.  One of them should NOT be a option we are championing (I'll let you decide)

 

1)  She sticks to her values... so she steps down as County Clerk because she can no longer fully execute her duties in accordance with law

2)  She sticks to her values... and refuses to have her office issue licenses, so she goes to jail or is removed for her marriage licenses duties for her civil disobedience

3)  She sticks to her values... and refuses to have her office issue licenses, so gays and lesbians have to go to a different county to get one because she should be allowed to not issue the licenses.  

[Ahab]

So which religion should the government consult in order to find out which things have God's approval?

Everybody should ask God, personally, whether or not they are government officials.

There is no person known as "the government". The closest any of us can come to being in any government is to be a government official. And Kim Davis is one of them.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Ahab

[Thinking]

There's a scripture that I think applies to this situation even though it was about paying taxes.

Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Cæsar, or no? But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me? Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Cæsar’s. And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Cæsar the things which be Cæsar’s, and unto God the things which be God’s. Luke 20:22-25

[ttribe]

Everybody should ask God, personally, whether or not they are government officials.

There is no person known as "the government". The closest any of us can come to being in any government is to be a government official.

 

Pretty sure the folks in ISIS will claim they did just that...doesn't seem to be working out so well for the rest of us.

[Ahab]

Pretty sure the folks in ISIS will claim they did just that...doesn't seem to be working out so well for the rest of us.

Every government official has some opposition. Fortunately our Father will settle and sort everything out in the end.

[Brian 2.0]

Everybody should ask God, personally, whether or not they are government officials.

There is no person known as "the government". The closest any of us can come to being in any government is to be a government official. And Kim Davis is one of them.

 

I don't know where you exactly stand on Kim Davis, Ahab, and I'm starting to get the feeling you are engaging in debate with people you might be agreeing with to make a side point.

 

Do you believe that Kim Davis as County Clerk should be allowed to prohibit the giving out of marriage licenses to gay marriages in Rowan County and remain in office for her term? 

 

Please answer that question.  I'm not asking what she should be able to stand up for, or believe in, I'm asking a specific question.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Brian 2.0

[Ahab]

There's a scripture that I think applies to this situation even though it was about paying taxes.

And fortunately we can figure out for ourselves what is ours and what belongs to Caesar/any other government official.

... with or without the help of (other) accountants and lawyers.

[Brian 2.0]

And fortunately we can figure out for ourselves what is ours and what belongs to Caesar/any other government official.

... with or without the help of (other) accountants and lawyers.

 

Really?  You realize you will get fines and possibly go to jail if what you've "figured out" to pay Uncle Sam is different from the tax code, don't you?

Edited September 8, 2015 by Brian 2.0

[Ahab]

I don't know where you exactly stand on Kim Davis, Ahab, and I'm starting to get the feeling you are engaging in debate with people you might be agreeing with to make a side point.

Do you believe that Kim Davis as County Clerk should be allowed to prohibit the giving out of marriage licenses to gay marriages in Rowan County and remain in office for her term?

Please answer that question. I'm not asking what she should be able to stand up for, or believe in, I'm asking a specific question.

Yes, and I also believe the recent USSC opinion and interpretation of the Constitution didn't mandate same sex marriage even though it allows it. Meaning that it can be allowed but is not required. So Kim Davis should not be required to approve of same sex marriage or anything else she believes God doesn't approve of. Edited September 8, 2015 by Ahab

[Brian 2.0]

Yes, and I also believe the recent USSC opinion and interpretation of the Constitution didn't mandate same sex marriage even though it allows it. Meaning that it can be allowed but is not required. So Kim Davis should not be required to approve of same sex marriage or anything else she believes God doesn't approve of.

 

How did you get that reading from the decision?  Because it seems fairly clear to me that it states are REQUIRED now to issue same-sex couples marriage licenses.  

[Brian 2.0]

Yes, and I also believe the recent USSC opinion and interpretation of the Constitution didn't mandate same sex marriage even though it allows it. Meaning that it can be allowed but is not required. So Kim Davis should not be required to approve of same sex marriage or anything else she believes God doesn't approve of.

 

The very first page of the SCOTUS decision for reference.

 

Held: The Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage

between two people of the same sex and to recognize a marriage

between two people of the same sex when their marriage was lawfully

licensed and performed out-of-State