Calm Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 (edited) Since the other thread is locked starting new one.Apparently Kim Davis took a few more days of leave than announced before, but she was back in her office today.She made no effort to even show her face when a license was issued this morning, but managed to leave her office for a press conference to protest...thus avoiding more jail time, but still getting the benefit of media attention. She is still claiming it is a choice between her conscience and her liberty, ignoring the fact she could quit and thus remove herself from being in the position of choosing to follow her sworn oath of office or her religious beliefs.http://abcnews.go.com/US/kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-licenses-issued-authority/story?id=33737136This goes back to halc's great post in being willing to accept the concequences of civil disobedience, instead of trying to bend the law etc."Despite her assertion that her deputies don't have her authority to issue marriage licenses, Rowan County Deputy Clerk Brian Mason issued a license this morning to the first same-sex couple to apply after Davis' return to the office. Davis never left her office during the process.Davis also told reporters this morning that she wants the licenses to indicate that they are being issued under federal authority." Edited September 15, 2015 by Calm 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 (edited) Apparently Kim Davis took a few more days of leave than announced before, but she was back in her office today. No politics please, it is clearly political. It is not a religious issue, most American Christians support SSM right according to Pew Forum, so it means it is a political issue. The LDS church no longer gets involved in the politics of gay marriage, just like it doesn't get involved in the politics of the abortion issue. Edited September 16, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
ttribe Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 No politics please, it is clearly political. It is not a religious issue, most American Christians support SSM right according to Pew Forum, so it means it is a political issue. The LDS church no longer gets involved in the politics of gay marriage, just like it doesn't get involved in the politics of the abortion issue. Well, Kim Davis keeps stating it is a "religious issue." I think that's kind of what matters in terms of it being a topic of discussion here. 2
rongo Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 Isn't it interesting that the people who are outraged that she is refusing to do something connected with her elected office because of deliberate civil disobedience were somehow silent when politicians around the country were deliberately breaking the law at the time (e.g., Gavin Newsome, et. al.)? Where was the outrage then that elected officials would deliberately act against current law because of conscience?
The Nehor Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 Isn't it interesting that the people who are outraged that she is refusing to do something connected with her elected office because of deliberate civil disobedience were somehow silent when politicians around the country were deliberately breaking the law at the time (e.g., Gavin Newsome, et. al.)? Where was the outrage then that elected officials would deliberately act against current law because of conscience? There was some but there is a key difference too. Newsome was a lieutenant governor who is elected to take action, make decisions, etc. Deciding to challenge a law through executive action is much more reasonable in that position. A clerk does not have that kind of power and the people she reports to in the state government told her to issue the licenses. I think what Newsome did was premature but he is more in his rights then Davis is.
Popular Post Calm Posted September 16, 2015 Author Popular Post Posted September 16, 2015 " It is not a religious issue, most American Christians support SSM right according to Pew Forum, so it means it is a political issue."That makes no sense.If you do not like a thread, then report it and don't post in it. Please do not attempt to dictate to others what they can and cannot post in threads I start. 7
Yirgacheffe Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 Isn't it interesting that the people who are outraged that she is refusing to do something connected with her elected office because of deliberate civil disobedience were somehow silent when politicians around the country were deliberately breaking the law at the time (e.g., Gavin Newsome, et. al.)? Where was the outrage then that elected officials would deliberately act against current law because of conscience?Well who really cares if someone makes a pointless gesture? And just how does one Gavin Newsome equal "politicians around the country"?
halconero Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 Comparisons to Rosa Parks are overrated. As I mentioned in my previous post, civil disobedience should ideally accept the reality and inevitability of consequences with peaceable demeanor in order to be effective. Kim Davis was put in jail, was released to become a temporary celebrity, and has promptly caved (on preventing her subordinates from signing licences) on her previous position in the face of jail time. Either her willpower was simply not that strong, or she's a bit more self-serving than previously thought. I lean towards the latter, the reason being that her concession allows her to possibly retain her $80k/year salary, while her personal refusal allows her to remain in the limelight. 2
Calm Posted September 16, 2015 Author Posted September 16, 2015 "she's a bit more self-serving than previously thought."The sitting in her office intentionally ignoring the issuing of a license, doing nothing to stop it...not even going out there and informing participants she is not authorizing the license while telling reporters her position hasn't changed does seem self serving.Her geographical position might not have changed (she is still sitting in her office avoiding confrontation), but the implications of her resolution to sit and do nothing is pretty much the opposite. The first prevented the issuing of licenses because her clerks had to go through her; now by doing nothing she is facilitating the issuing of licenses.
rockpond Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 Isn't it interesting that the people who are outraged that she is refusing to do something connected with her elected office because of deliberate civil disobedience were somehow silent when politicians around the country were deliberately breaking the law at the time (e.g., Gavin Newsome, et. al.)? Where was the outrage then that elected officials would deliberately act against current law because of conscience? There was plenty of outrage at Gavin Newsome.
Calm Posted September 16, 2015 Author Posted September 16, 2015 (edited) "The head of an organization of African-American pastors told Newsmax Saturday that Christians must oppose the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling through civil disobedience because "you do something to get arrested to call attention to the injustice.""I was in the civil rights movement, so I know how to do it" the Rev. Bill Owens, president of the Coalition of African-American Pastors (CAAP), said in an interview. "When we sat at the counters at restaurants, we knew we were going to be arrested. You do things to get arrested, to call attention to it."http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/bill-owens-caps-gay-marriage/2015/06/27/id/652541/Also:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/15/black-pastors-gay-marriage-michigan_n_5332496.htmlBlacks have always been opposed to same sex marriage at the highest rate of any ethnic group:http://hotair.com/archives/2015/06/08/holdouts-blacks-oppose-gay-marriage-4151-in-new-pew-poll/ Edited September 16, 2015 by Calm
rockpond Posted September 16, 2015 Posted September 16, 2015 "The head of an organization of African-American pastors told Newsmax Saturday that Christians must oppose the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling through civil disobedience because "you do something to get arrested to call attention to the injustice.""I was in the civil rights movement, so I know how to do it" the Rev. Bill Owens, president of the Coalition of African-American Pastors (CAAP), said in an interview. "When we sat at the counters at restaurants, we knew we were going to be arrested. You do things to get arrested, to call attention to it."http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/bill-owens-caps-gay-marriage/2015/06/27/id/652541/Also:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/15/black-pastors-gay-marriage-michigan_n_5332496.html Interesting. I'm all in favor of a little civil disobedience. But, I'm curious what "injustice" they believe Davis is "calling attention to".
Recommended Posts