• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Kim Davis - Kentucky's theocratic ruler

credoconsolans

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Messages
2,900
Location
Texas
Basic Beliefs
neopagan leaning toward moral relativism
Kentucky Rowan county clerk Kim Davis' refusal to issue marriage licenses to gays in her country continues.

She is head clerk and has ordered her staff to not give out marriage licenses to gays either.

To stop from being charged with discrimination, she had her office stop issuing marriage licenses at all

The Supreme Court refused to hear her final appeal. Today she was to begin issuing licenses.

Instead, today she declared she recognizes no authority but god.

Her supporters call her a modern St. Paul, a Christian martyr to morals, despite the fact she hasn't suffered a single thing - typical of people with armchair Christian martyr complexes - and is 4 times married, and has broken her oath to serve the public (when questioned in an interview of her moral failings, she said they were 'irrelevant' to the situation and 'between her and god').

She has defied court orders and any authority other than her own, telling the gay couples they will suffer for their sins in the afterlife before shutting her door in their faces.

She is earning $80K a year in an elected position. She cannot be fired, she can only be impeached or resign.

She has refused to resign. Impeachment proceedings cannot begin until next year when the legislature convenes unless an emergency session is called. ACLU and a civil suit has been filed, and the latest suit wants her fined heavily, but not jailed, since being hauled away in cuffs would add to her 'aura' of persecution.

So unless an emergency session is called for to impeach her, or the governor takes other action, she is free to continue doing what she's doing. Sitting fat and happy in her own little theocracy.

http://news.yahoo.com/clerk-issue-gay-marriage-licenses-court-ruling-083217111.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/kentucky-clerk-kim-davis_b_8071594.html
 
Well, now she is disobeying a court order. I would think that would make her in contempt of court which I believe opens her to fines and/or jail time.
 
Kentucky Rowan county clerk Kim Davis' refusal to issue marriage licenses to gays in her country continues.

...

She is earning $80K a year in an elected position. She cannot be fired, she can only be impeached or resign.


I'm in the wrong line of work.
 
Kentucky Rowan county clerk Kim Davis' refusal to issue marriage licenses to gays in her country continues.

...

She is earning $80K a year in an elected position. She cannot be fired, she can only be impeached or resign.


I'm in the wrong line of work.
She's no doubt a supporter of the tea Party. You know, those folks who have public jobs and bennies and want smaller gubmint for everyone else.
 
Don't worry about her. One day she'll be rich.

She'll stand firm in her religious beliefs (well, some of them, anyway.)

Eventually she'll be fined or jailed for dereliction of duty.

She'll announce that she's being persecuted for her faith.

Once she launches a GoFundMe campaign, she'll rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars.

She'll collect speaking fees from churches.

If she cleans up her hair and teeth, FoxNews just might make her a guest commentator.
 
Don't worry about her. One day she'll be rich.

She'll stand firm in her religious beliefs (well, some of them, anyway.)

Eventually she'll be fined or jailed for dereliction of duty.

She'll announce that she's being persecuted for her faith.

Once she launches a GoFundMe campaign, she'll rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars.

She'll collect speaking fees from churches.

If she cleans up her hair and teeth, FoxNews just might make her a guest commentator.
Don't forget about the book deals.
 
That's why I hope they don't haul her off in handcuffs. It'll only add to her image of being "persecuted".

Yes, they should just put someone else in there who will hand out the marriage licenses. She can stand by and watch or go home.
 
I'm more curious about the people who work for her. The judge gave a ruling, so she's giving them orders which are contrary to the law. Are they not free to ignore her? If she takes action against them for not obeying her illegeal orders, do they not then have a suit against her?
 
I'm more curious about the people who work for her. The judge gave a ruling, so she's giving them orders which are contrary to the law. Are they not free to ignore her? If she takes action against them for not obeying her illegeal orders, do they not then have a suit against her?

They're not used to dealing with gay people, so her "orders" may just seem right to them. That is the problem with long standing discrimination against a sector of society. Discrimination is the norm. The new law, no matter who completely legal, seems foreign to them and they probably are hanging with their sister in the faith. Despite what you may think about civil service, supervisors have a way of getting people they want hired, so this may be a situation that will take some time for the court to deal with. I think firing her is possible...even if she is elected. But who knows the thinking of her boss. Let her shut the operation down and put her in jail for contempt of court. That ought to fix things just fine even if there is a slight delay in implementing the law.:thinking:
 
I'm more curious about the people who work for her. The judge gave a ruling, so she's giving them orders which are contrary to the law. Are they not free to ignore her? If she takes action against them for not obeying her illegeal orders, do they not then have a suit against her?

"We were just following orders."
 
I'm more curious about the people who work for her. The judge gave a ruling, so she's giving them orders which are contrary to the law. Are they not free to ignore her? If she takes action against them for not obeying her illegeal orders, do they not then have a suit against her?

"We were just following orders."

Fair point. I withdraw the argument.
 
It's so weird that she thinks Jesus said anything about government issued marriage licenses.
 
I'd issue the licenses. If I got into trouble, I'd sue and become a very rich man. Whoo Hoo!! :joy:
 
She works for God? Then why is Kentucky paying her?!?!

One of the criticisms aimed at her.

"Let Jesus sign your paycheck!"

- - - Updated - - -

I'm more curious about the people who work for her. The judge gave a ruling, so she's giving them orders which are contrary to the law. Are they not free to ignore her? If she takes action against them for not obeying her illegeal orders, do they not then have a suit against her?

They're not used to dealing with gay people, so her "orders" may just seem right to them. That is the problem with long standing discrimination against a sector of society. Discrimination is the norm. The new law, no matter who completely legal, seems foreign to them and they probably are hanging with their sister in the faith. Despite what you may think about civil service, supervisors have a way of getting people they want hired, so this may be a situation that will take some time for the court to deal with...

Exactly. Her son works in the office and one of the employees there, a man, has already said he'd "die rather than issue marriage licenses to gays".

Birds of a feather.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm in the wrong line of work.
She's no doubt a supporter of the tea Party. You know, those folks who have public jobs and bennies and want smaller gubmint for everyone else.

Surprisingly, no. She's a Democrat.
 
Back
Top Bottom