Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis found in contempt, going to jail

[LAB81018]

Apparently she now wants her name to be removed from an "authorization statement" which is required to be included with all marriage licences.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/jailed-kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-offers-remedy-sex/story?id=33532686

I'm not sure what exactly the "authorization statement" is. My guess it's a preprinted form that has the head clerk's name on it that attests that all the paperwork is in order.

Once again, there is one guaranteed way to get her name off of the document and she refuses to take that step.

 

[sam_gordon]

And, SOOOOOOO???????

That has anything to do with what?

Are you actually suggesting that what some other individuals might have done actually justifies her actions?
Seriously.... Seriously???????

We all know that gay and lesbian couples have been subject to discrimination, violence, and death threats, since... well... the beginning of time.
Does that justify anything for them?
Does that justify the gay black man who gunned down two innocent local TV reporters?

You can't argue one way, and not the other.
That would be total hypocrisy.

There is no argument that any action of discrimination or violence is ever 'just as bad' or is 'worse' or is 'justified'.

(NOTE: my disclaimer, again, one more time: This is coming from a poster who is more conservative christian than not.... I am not here to argue my own feelings or champion anyones rights (gay, christian, whatever...) This is about every human beings civil rights in this country. Period)

You might want to go back and read again...

1) I NEVER said or implied the death threats justified her actions.
2) I've REPEATEDLY said Davis is wrong and should have resigned if she couldn't fulfill the job.

HOWEVER, *IF* anyone did issue death threats against Davis or her family, they are equally as wrong, and should also be punished. I hope you're not saying that she DESERVED the death threats because of her actions.

I'm sorry if my posting of things I'm hearing about the case is disturbing to you or not matching what YOU feel should be discussed online. However, you don't really have a say in what someone is allowed to post.

 

[Teresa Pitman]

The "sit next to Kim Davis" twitter account is hilarious. Lots of swear words but hilarious. https://twitter.com/nexttokimdavis?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

 

[pryncess527]

The NC law only allows recusal by magistrates and assistant or deputy register of deeds staff, all of whom are appointed, not elected. The elected Register of deeds (who issue marriage licenses in NC) is not subject to the NC law allowing recusal. The NC law would not help Kim Davis.

Thank you for clarifying

 

[Deb in IA]

I agree that she should have quit her job. She does not have the right to impose her beliefs on others and deny something to them that is now lawful.

 

[sam_gordon]

Here's my guess... she'll sit in jail through the end of the year. In January, she tells the judge she'll resign. He lets her out, she resigns, and then collects her pension. Meanwhile, while she's in jail, she still receives her paycheck. What do you think? Would you spend 3 months in jail to collect an $80K pension?

 

[ChrisFL]

I'm waiting for her to be offered a hosting job at Fox News next

 

[Goofy_Disney_Dad]

I hear Arby's might have some openings for intolerant people soon. Maybe she could apply there.

 

[LAB81018]

Here's my guess... she'll sit in jail through the end of the year. In January, she tells the judge she'll resign. He lets her out, she resigns, and then collects her pension. Meanwhile, while she's in jail, she still receives her paycheck. What do you think? Would you spend 3 months in jail to collect an $80K pension?

Ding, Ding, Ding

If she felt this strongly about her beliefs, wouldn't she forgo her pension.

 

[Christine]

HOWEVER, *IF* anyone did issue death threats against Davis or her family, they are equally as wrong, and should also be punished. I hope you're not saying that she DESERVED the death threats because of her actions.

I believe most people on this thread would agree that death threats are equally as wrong. I saw where you posted that upthread and I didn't comment because, of course, they were equally as wrong.

 

[Hrhpd]

From what I know about the case, that's exactly what happened - they assured her that they could make accommodations, but a coworker complained that she was refusing to do her job. If the company did actually suspend or punish her after promising her accommodations, then I believe she does have a case.

Unless she refused to do any work or ensured that nobody on the plane was served alcohol, any comparison between her and Kim Davis is tenuous.

There is also that little sticking point that refusing to serve alcohol on a plane is not against the law nor is it violating somebody's civil rights. At least I have not heard of any recent amendments that say "Thou shall be guaranteed alcohol while on the large tube in the air."

 

[Hrhpd]

The founding fathers must be spinning in their graves with a speed enough to give Walt a run for his money.

Best sentence on this thread.

I nearly choked on my coffee from it. Classic.

Thank you, thank you very much.

 

[gwynne]

Here's my guess... she'll sit in jail through the end of the year. In January, she tells the judge she'll resign. He lets her out, she resigns, and then collects her pension. Meanwhile, while she's in jail, she still receives her paycheck. What do you think? Would you spend 3 months in jail to collect an $80K pension?

Me? I would do my job. I wouldn't steal money from taxpayers by attempting to manipulate a situation in my favor. So....I wouldn't have to decide your question.

 

[JaxDad]

I'm waiting for her to be offered a hosting job at Fox News next

...,although she is a Democrat...

 

[sam_gordon]

Me? I would do my job. I wouldn't steal money from taxpayers by attempting to manipulate a situation in my favor. So....I wouldn't have to decide your question.

I agree 100%. I just wonder if she's thinking she doesn't have to go against her principles and can still collect her money.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Okay everyone,
Of course death threats are wrong.
But, bringing that up, as if it is relevant to this case in KY is dangerously close to either of two things.
Either Justification or Two Wrongs Make a Right.

We live in a world, an internet world, where anyone who purposefully takes controversial actions in order to make the National News will see some haters and death threats. I simply don't find that to be relevant here. I have seen the "But, (gasp!!!!) I am receiving death threats!!!" often enough to see right thru that.

Trying to justify one's wrongs by pointing fingers, saying "But somebody else is even more wrong..." just doesn't cut it with me.

This lady has taken actions to insure that the duties of her office are not being fulfilled, and she has violated peoples civil rights.

To me, it really is that simple.

I don't care if she has been married 50 times... is christian or muslim or athiest or straight or gay or black, yellow, brown, black or white... or pink and purple polka dotted. It really is that simple to me. I am just one of those people who can see things that way, and not spend days and hours, until kingdom come, to try to argue, justify, point fingers, name-call, etc.

 

[gwynne]

I agree 100%. I just wonder if she's thinking she doesn't have to go against her principles and can still collect her money.

Theft (collecting a paycheck while refusing to do her job), harassing customers, harassing co-workers, wasting time on the job.. ...gosh...all of those might be against some people's principles.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Back on the most current topic...

ALWAYS, ALWAYS, FOLLOW THE MONEY!

 

[gwynne]

And I addressed the "threats" upthread. The should be reporting each and every one to the police.
If her hubby has said anything threatening about "votes" (and his ability to manipulate them) that should be noted and address by the police with him.

I can't tell if they are potential victims or if their true status is "it's complicated."

 

[Turn the Page]

There is also that little sticking point that refusing to serve alcohol on a plane is not against the law nor is it violating somebody's civil rights. At least I have not heard of any recent amendments that say "Thou shall be guaranteed alcohol while on the large tube in the air."

But wouldn't flights be so much more pleasant if there was a guarantee?