Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis found in contempt, going to jail

Turn the Page · Sep 4, 2015

JaxDad said:
...,although she is a Democrat...

I discovered while living in Kentucky that in that state there is really no difference between the parties. I got so much campaign material in the mail from candidates of both parties and they all said the same thing, deacon/ leader in the church, stand up for family values, pro traditional marriage, pro life, pro 2nd amendment, etc. Republican, Democrat, didn't matter. In that state if you don't say those things you don't get elected.

Hrhpd · Sep 4, 2015

Turn the Page said:
But wouldn't flights be so much more pleasant if there was a guarantee?

Absolutely :rotfl:

But Spirit Air may object that it is against their beliefs to provide free alcohol.

Turn the Page · Sep 4, 2015

Hrhpd said:
Absolutely But Spirit Air may object that it is against their beliefs to provide free alcohol.

Well sure, and since corporations are people too it only stands to reason that they would have religious beliefs too.

airhead · Sep 4, 2015

Mizzoufan said:
/ I applaud her standing firm in her beliefs. I think it wrong for her to be arrested.

She can believe in whatever she wants,that's not the issue. Her job requires that she perform certain duties,one of them being to issue marriage licenses. If this is an issue for her,she should have resigned.

glasslipper · Sep 4, 2015

She's a public servant, if she can't separate church and state, then she should look for a new job.

robinb · Sep 4, 2015

Turn the Page said:
Well sure, and since corporations are people too it only stands to reason that they would have religious beliefs too.

Hobby Lobby does

.

Turn the Page · Sep 4, 2015

robinb said:
Hobby Lobby does .

And Chik Fil A

A_Princess'_Daddy · Sep 5, 2015

luvsJack said:
It forbids divorce yes, but not entirely. There is more to it than that.

From Jesus: “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.” Mark 10:11-12.

From the Ten Commandments: “You shall not commit adultery." Exodus 20:14

In for a penny, in for a pound...Although I cannot find where Jesus speaks about same sex marriage, so I guess it's not actually a fair comparison.

morgan98 · Sep 5, 2015

robinb said:
I, for one, am giving her a pass on hypocrisy as she converted after her divorces and children delivered out of wedlock.

I feel that her saying all of her "bad choices" were made before she was saved and now she can push her new views on others as just an excuse.

She was allowed to live whatever life she wanted, but now she doesn't have to follow the law because she has been "saved"? Give me a break. Maybe all of these people who she feels are making bad choices will be saved one day too?

sam_gordon · Sep 5, 2015

Wishing on a star said:
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.

Since you apparently have a hard time understanding my point, I'll try to simplify it for you...

1) The death threats are NOT "justification". How can they be? The threats (IF they even happened) happened AFTER she denied licenses. So how anyone can believe the threats "justify" her stance isn't thinking logically.
2) The threats don't forgive her for not doing her job.
3) I simply bring it up because I feel it's worth noting. If you think it's a piece of nonsense, then ignore it. It happens in many (most) threads... people bring up facts/reports they think others might find interesting. Just because YOU think it has no bearing on the case doesn't mean others do.

Is that simple enough?

And for someone who won't spend "days and hours" trying to argue or justify, you sure do keep trying to hammer your point home. I haven't seen anyone "name calling" either (in this thread).

Christine · Sep 5, 2015

sam_gordon said:
Since you apparently have a hard time understanding my point, I'll try to simplify it for you...

1) The death threats are NOT "justification". How can they be? The threats (IF they even happened) happened AFTER she denied licenses. So how anyone can believe the threats "justify" her stance isn't thinking logically.
2) The threats don't forgive her for not doing her job.
3) I simply bring it up because I feel it's worth noting. If you think it's a piece of nonsense, then ignore it. It happens in many (most) threads... people bring up facts/reports they think others might find interesting. Just because YOU think it has no bearing on the case doesn't mean others do.

Is that simple enough?

And for someone who won't spend "days and hours" trying to argue or justify, you sure do keep trying to hammer your point home. I haven't seen anyone "name calling" either (in this thread).

sam_gordon:

I think the issue here might be in the way/tone you posted your initial point on the death threats. Here's what you said:

Good.

According to Davis' husband, her family has received death threats in the weeks since this has been building. IF true, that is just as wrong as what Davis did.

To be honest, in reading that statement in that way, it sounds as if you are trying to make it about "two wrongs" and now we're equal. I can see that later on you said you were not trying to do that and I believe you, but the way your wrote that the first time, it kind of sounded that way.

If you had stated:

Wow, after all this, she's getting death threats from people who disagree with her.

That would have been a point/fact that was brought up as a point of interest.

The "that is just as wrong as what Davis did" seems like an attempt to exonerate or dilute her actions a bit.

Gumbo4x4 · Sep 5, 2015

Turn the Page said:
I discovered while living in Kentucky that in that state there is really no difference between the parties. I got so much campaign material in the mail from candidates of both parties and they all said the same thing, deacon/ leader in the church, stand up for family values, pro traditional marriage, pro life, pro 2nd amendment, etc. Republican, Democrat, didn't matter. In that state if you don't say those things you don't get elected.

It's really only in the past 2-3 decades that these issues were divided along party lines at the national level. And yes, both parties have major regional differences in their platforms. Side note: It's really kind of odd when you think about it that THESE are the issues that decide elections today.

SMD · Sep 5, 2015

Christine said:
sam_gordon:

I think the issue here might be in the way/tone you posted your initial point on the death threats. Here's what you said:

To be honest, in reading that statement in that way, it sounds as if you are trying to make it about "two wrongs" and now we're equal. I can see that later on you said you were not trying to do that and I believe you, but the way your wrote that the first time, it kind of sounded that way.

If you had stated:

That would have been a point/fact that was brought up as a point of interest.

The "that is just as wrong as what Davis did" seems like an attempt to exonerate or dilute her actions a bit.

That's not how I read it at all. I see him saying that anyone who makes a death threat because they disagree with someone else is not morally, ethically, spiritually or whatever they think superior. He stated it as a fact. He said IF it happened, which also implies that since the only evidence of death threats came from Davis' family. He did not imply a "two wrongs" argument at all. Your suggested alternative sentence is a complete non sequitur which did not flow with the conversation in this thread prior to what he added. Read what you quoted and read the post he just responded to. You don't see how interpreting what he said that way is reaching?

luvsJack · Sep 5, 2015

A_Princess'_Daddy said:
From Jesus: “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits gainst her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery.” Mark 10:11-12.

From the Ten Commandments: “You shall not commit adultery." Exodus 20:14

In for a penny, in for a pound...Although I cannot find where Jesus speaks about same sex marriage, so I guess it's not actually a fair comparison.

Adultery is indeed a sin. No doubt about it.

Do you seriously think He meant for a woman to be abused? Or to stay with a drug addict who won't try to stop?

Marriage is supposed to be between two people who are Godly. The union is supposed to be brought together be Him. We are human, we mess up. Its called free choice.

I don't take everything that is in the Bible literally. Remeber that it was translated by men in a time that was very different from now and from when it was written.

I do not think one sin is worse than another. I do know that we all sin. And there sure is a lot of stone throwing going on.

I don't know that what she believes to be wrong is wrong, Not my place to decide that.

But I do know that people change and they make their lives different. And none of us can decide what is in this woman's heart

Hrhpd · Sep 5, 2015

Listening to Davis's husband last night explain why his wife was illegally jailed reminded me of the importance of education, especially elementary education. Apparently he was on vacation during the US Government lessons, particularly the parts regarding the United States Supreme Court. Also very mature to tell the reporter to relay a message to Judge Bunning; “Tell Judge Bunning he’s a butt,” Joe Davis said.

A_Princess'_Daddy · Sep 5, 2015

luvsJack said:
Its in there. I don't know exactly where but its there in both the old and new testaments.

Adultery is indeed a sin. No doubt about it.

Do you seriously think He meant for a woman to be abused? Or to stay with a drug addict who won't try?

Marriage has a definition and being certain kind of people

No, but I think the language is quite clear. "...And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery..."

So, if an abused man or woman remarries after divorce, then yes, according to Jesus, it is adultery. That is why, in my faith tradition, divorce, while not encouraged in most cases, is technically allowed but remarriage after divorce without an annulment is absolutely not allowed. No easy ways out for those who just want what they want when they want it, while trying to deprive others of the same rights.

I did not make those rules, nor do I personally feel they are absolute. But you say that Kim Harris is not a hypocrite but she is selectively enforcing biblical rules if she is issuing marriage licenses to anybody who has previously been divorced. If enforcing a biblical view of marriage is truly a heaven or hell decision for her, then following the direct words of somebody central to her faith tradition would seem to be de rigueur. Otherwise, it's hypocritical hate.

I don't understand what your last sentence means, so I cannot reflect on that.

ETA: I did confirm that the Kentucky Marriage License application DOES ask about prior marriages and status, including "divorced" so the information is provided to her for her review and enforcement under her "biblical view of marriage." http://chfs.ky.gov/nr/rdonlyres/584f6c35-f594-4275-95cb-0bc730b1c752/0/marriageregs.pdf

Gumbo4x4 · Sep 5, 2015

A_Princess'_Daddy said:
No, but I think the language is quite clear. "...And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery..."

So, if an abused man or woman remarries after divorce, then yes, according to Jesus, it is adultery. That is why, in my faith tradition, divorce, while not encouraged in most cases, is technically allowed but remarriage after divorce without an annulment is absolutely not allowed. No easy ways out for those who just want what they want when they want it, while trying to deprive others of the same rights.

I did not make those rules, nor do I personally feel they are absolute. But you say that Kim Harris is not a hypocrite but she is selectively enforcing biblical rules if she is issuing marriage licenses to anybody who has previously been divorced. If enforcing a biblical view of marriage is truly a heaven or hell decision for her, then following the direct words of somebody central to her faith tradition would seem to be de rigueur. Otherwise, it's hypocritical hate.

I don't understand what your last sentence means, so I cannot reflect on that.

Actually, I'm not sure Jesus actually wrote any of this stuff down, so really it's according to the person who allegedly quoted Jesus

A_Princess'_Daddy · Sep 5, 2015

Gumbo4x4 said:
Actually, I'm not sure Jesus actually wrote any of this stuff down, so really it's according to the person who allegedly quoted Jesus

Yes, I absolutely agree! But not all do, and it appears Kim Harris is one of those... :duck:

luvsJack · Sep 5, 2015

Sorry, posted before I meant for it. I edited it.

I don't believe nor have I been taught in my faith that it is that absolute. I don't know about her's because I don't follow the same teachings she does.

The definition of "marriage" would first have to be determined by His standards, not ours.

LAB81018 · Sep 5, 2015

Hrhpd said:
Listening to Davis's husband last night explain why his wife was illegally jailed reminded me of the importance of education, especially elementary education. Apparently he was on vacation during the US Government lessons, particularly the parts regarding the United States Supreme Court. Also very mature to tell the reporter to relay a message to Judge Bunning; “Tell Judge Bunning he’s a butt,” Joe Davis said.

He sounds like a four year old.

Surprised he didn't call him a doody head.

Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis found in contempt, going to jail

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

Note to the ladies who forgot to

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

Note to the ladies who forgot to

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

Share this page