Breaking: Per SCOTUS, Same-Sex Marriage is now law of the land.

[jamil]

Great. They decided to go ahead and martyr her.

 

[MisterChester]

Notice how all sorts of depravity, marital betrayal, etc. are forgiven by the left, no matter how unrepentant the actor is when that actor is marching to the correct tune but when it serves a purpose, to further an agenda, their outrage of those same sorts of acts is relentless and deafening.

I'm sorry but I don't exactly see the right running anyone of their own out of town for having hypocritical beliefs either.

 

[historian]

Great. They decided to go ahead and martyr her.

I'm actually ok with this. I thought it was funny that the left tried so hard to make sure she didn't get jail time because they understand imagery so well.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I'm sorry but I don't exactly see the right running anyone of their own out of town for having hypocritical beliefs either.

Then you've got selective memory. There are a number of instances where some righty commits some crime or some PC foible, they kick them to the crib.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

She's in custody.

Kim Davis, Kentucky Clerk Blocking Gay Marriages, Held in Contempt - NBC News

I gotta admire her resolve. You don't have to agree with her position to be able to appreciate what she's willing to do for her principles. I probably would have caved, I gotta admit.

 

[MisterChester]

She's in custody.

Kim Davis, Kentucky Clerk Blocking Gay Marriages, Held in Contempt - NBC News

I don't know what everyone was expecting. If you defy the court, you're going to pay for it. The legal battle is over and done with. Her actions would have had much more meaning if it hadn't been settled in SCOTUS.

 

[MisterChester]

Then you've got selective memory. There are a number of instances where some righty commits some crime or some PC foible, they kick them to the crib.

I remember now. David Vitter was publicly shamed and humiliated out of office and the GOP offered no forgiveness. Oh wait...

 

[indiucky]

Then you've got selective memory. There are a number of instances where some righty commits some crime or some PC foible, they kick them to the crib.

I have had liberal friends tell me they do admire that about the right...We will eat our own......There is a term "Yellow dog Democrat" which by definition is someone will vote for a yellow dog as long as the dog is a Democrat...There is no term like that for Republicans....As I said...We eat our own....

 

[PistolBob]

What jail is she in, maybe some of us can contribute to her commissary account. She's gonna be there a bit.

 

[miguel]

Nothing to see here, go back to the classifieds...

 

[Libertarian01]

What I believe is interesting in this is that the Judge has told the rest of the office, "The judge also told all five of the clerk's deputies, including her son, Nathan Davis, that they are free to issue licenses to all applicants while Davis is held in contempt, but would also face fines or jail if they refuse to comply. He told them to meet with lawyers and consider their fates before returning to his courtroom later Thursday to reveal their decisions."

So it seems that we shall see if her office staff has the same convictions as she does. Of course, if they defy her wishes and she gets out of jail what kind of retribution will they face, legal or not? It has become abundantly clear that she has no compunction about obeying the law.

I also like this from the Judge, "I myself have genuinely held religious beliefs," the judge said, but "I took an oath." "Mrs. Davis took an oath," he added. "Oaths mean things."

I think it is interesting politically how he didn't allow himself to be outflanked by her supporters. Had he fined her this may have meant nothing as the people backing her could just send in money so she wasn't pressured. By jailing her this cuts off any amelioration she could receive from supporters. Judges can be pretty smart at times.

Regards,

Doug

PS - The link, duh: News from The Associated Press

 

[miguel]

Oaths were made to be broken.

[video=youtube;aNi5256dhvM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNi5256dhvM&bpctr=1441310020[/video]

 

[indiucky]

I remember now. David Vitter was publicly shamed and humiliated out of office and the GOP offered no forgiveness. Oh wait...

You are right they did...(Louisiana had a sitting Democrat Governor and she would have appointed a Democrat in his place which would have tipped the balance of power in the Senate.) Yes he hired hookers from a DC Madam and he was vilified (rightly so) by the left for doing so, he was a little vilified by his state party for doing so and forgiven by the national party.....

Remember how vilified Ted "Grab the wheel sweetie...I need a drink"Kennedy , Bill "Put this cigar right there honey...Did I hurt you Mrs. Wiley?...Hey boys can you get me that Flowers gal up to me?" Clinton, and John "Hey sweetie,Why don't you swim over to that man there and give him a...." Kennedy were vilified and totally disowned by the left???? Oh wait.....

The point is I thought Democrats had no problem with sexual shenanigans....Is it only bad when Republicans do it??? I know Rosie O'Donnell says that the reason that is is that Republicans preach family values so they should be held to a different standard...Is that a viable reason???? Do you agree with Ms O'Donnell or can we both agree that the men, both Republican and Democrat, should be treated the same when they screw up like this?????

One difference? Vitter paid for his kink and shenanigans by giving young women money for their services..It's sleazy but it is capitalism and he did not abuse his power to lure them into the sack....

Bill Clinton- Unpaid intern young enough to be his daughter...
Ted Kennedy-Unpaid campaign worker, too young to be left to drown in a vehicle by a sitting Senator...
John Kennedy (and this just came out in her biography)-Unpaid 18 year old intern "asked" by the President to perform oral sex on demand to him and his buddies while they were sitting around the White House pool...


I guess Democrats figure why pay for it when you got some guys 18 year old daughter willing to do it for free?

 

[PaulF]

For me, it a matter of personal integrity and consistency.

I have a problem with sexual shenanigans when the person committing them has a history of shaming others (or using the government to stop others) from engaging in the same shenanigans.

I don't care what party you are, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

[MisterChester]

You are right they did...(Louisiana had a sitting Democrat Governor and she would have appointed a Democrat in his place which would have tipped the balance of power in the Senate.) Yes he hired hookers from a DC Madam and he was vilified (rightly so) by the left for doing so, he was a little vilified by his state party for doing so and forgiven by the national party.....

Remember how vilified Ted "Grab the wheel sweetie...I need a drink"Kennedy , Bill "Put this cigar right there honey...Did I hurt you Mrs. Wiley?...Hey boys can you get me that Flowers gal up to me?" Clinton, and John "Hey sweetie,Why don't you swim over to that man there and give him a...." Kennedy were vilified and totally disowned by the left???? Oh wait.....

The point is I thought Democrats had no problem with sexual shenanigans....Is it only bad when Republicans do it??? I know Rosie O'Donnell says that the reason that is is that Republicans preach family values so they should be held to a different standard...Is that a viable reason???? Do you agree with Ms O'Donnell or can we both agree that the men, both Republican and Democrat, should be treated the same when they screw up like this?????

One difference? Vitter paid for his kink and shenanigans by giving young women money for their services..It's sleazy but it is capitalism and he did not abuse his power to lure them into the sack....

Bill Clinton- Unpaid intern young enough to be his daughter...
Ted Kennedy-Unpaid campaign worker, too young to be left to drown in a vehicle by a sitting Senator...
John Kennedy (and this just came out in her biography)-Unpaid 18 year old intern "asked" by the President to perform oral sex on demand to him and his buddies while they were sitting around the White House pool...


I guess Democrats figure why pay for it when you got some guys 18 year old daughter willing to do it for free?

I mean, you are proving my point how either party doesn't care about the conduct of its members.

 

[MisterChester]

https://mobile.twitter.com/GovMikeHuckabee/status/639488249958805504

Hey Einstein, how much you want to bet the judge is a Christian as well?

 

[jamil]

I remember now. David Vitter was publicly shamed and humiliated out of office and the GOP offered no forgiveness. Oh wait...

Dude, he's got a point. If you think of any examples, you're either not paying attention, you're too young to remember, or you just want to believe what you believe.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

We'll see how this flies:

UPDATE: Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis ordered to jail after she a - WDRB 41 Louisville News

 

[RockofStrength]

.

 

[jamil]

Oh oaths do indeed mean things. So does the chain of command or the supremacy of a higher court. Her Christian faith and the Law of God supersede the laws of the United States, and the rulings of God's court outweigh that of the Supreme Court. Whatever can be said about her, she is not morally wrong to disobey the requirement.

To put it another way,

"Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you, rather than to God, you judge."

It's fine to believe that God supersedes the laws of the United States. That's just belief. As county clerk she does not have the right to use her personal beliefs as criteria for determining who should or should not receive licenses. The law defines that. No one is denying her right to believe what she wants. They are denying that she, as an elected official, has a right to impose her beliefs on the public.

People are conflating freedom of religion with duties of elected office. So one question I have: Why is it okay for her to use her personal beliefs as criteria when the law defines the criteria differently? Do all religious people have that right, regardless of religion? Or is it only your religion that has that right.

In KY the clerk also has her name on driver's licenses. When a fundamentalist Muslim clerk starts denying women driver's licenses because he believes Allah doesn't approve, would you support that? If not why is what she's doing any different other than it's your religion?