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

[steveh_131]

Does the same apply to gun owners who want a permit in their state or county or should they move somewhere else? Her actions were deliberate in their causing distress to the people who are now suing her. She deserves whatever she has brought upon herself for forsaking her oath and trying to impose her superstitions on others.

They don't have to move. They can drive there and do it any time.

Maybe she does deserve it. And maybe the gay activists deserve whatever "distress" they're under for taking a **** on state's rights and shoving this on the people of Kentucky

 

[RockofStrength]

.

 

[mrjarrell]

They don't have to move. They can drive there and do it any time.

Maybe she does deserve it. And maybe the gay activists deserve whatever "distress" they're under for taking a **** on state's rights and shoving this on the people of Kentucky

You, and many others of her supporters, seem to think this all about a gay thing. She also denied licenses to straight citizens, as well (hence why she is being sued by two straight couples, too). The people involved in this on the litigants side aren't shoving anything on the Commonwealth of KY. They are demanding their Rights be upheld and you would deny them that. Why should they have to go to another county to accommodate this woman and her iron age superstitions? She, and others like her need to do their damned jobs or resign. She swore an oath, (probably before her god) to do her job and she refuses to do it. Resign or rot in jail, it all falls on her shoulders. No-one else's.

 

[Libertarian01]

As to the argument that it isn't so horrible that folks need only drive 20 miles to get a license, I wonder...

What if a county bureaucrat banned any licensing of gun stores within the entire county due to gun violence, would we see the same blase indifference? "Oh big deal, you only have to drive an extra 30 minutes to go to start a new gun store. Poor you! Like your rights are really violated!"

Naturally we all know that gun owners across the land would be outraged if there were even a whiff of this, and RIGHTLY so! So it goes for the gay marriage crowd. Why some are so befuddled by this is confusing to me.

Regards,

Doug

 

[jblomenberg16]

You, and many others of her supporters, seem to think this all about a gay thing. She also denied licenses to straight citizens, as well (hence why she is being sued by two straight couples, too). The people involved in this on the litigants side aren't shoving anything on the Commonwealth of KY. They are demanding their Rights be upheld and you would deny them that. Why should they have to go to another county to accommodate this woman and her iron age superstitions? She, and others like her need to do their damned jobs or resign. She swore an oath, (probably before her god) to do her job and she refuses to do it. Resign or rot in jail, it all falls on her shoulders. No-one else's.

Good points. I think people gravitate towards the headlines, which has by in large focused on her denial of a license to a gay couple. And, I'd argue it wouldn't have gotten the media attention if it were only about the straight couple.

I will respectfully disagree with your statement calling her religious beliefs "Iron age superstitions." If people want to have a meaningful debate about respecting others rights, it has to include mutual respect on both sides. Calling a persons religious belief's an iron age superstition is just a disrespectful as someone continuously bashing the rights of homosexuals.

I think what frustrates me about this is that most reasonable people (in my opinion of course) would have recognized that it was going no where, and the path of least resistance would have just gone to another county. Let bygones be bygones as the saying goes. Did they have to, absolutely not. They did a respectable thing and stood up for their rights and once again requested that she follow the law of the land, and in the process brought a national spotlight on everyone involved. And, it more than likely permanently affected the lives of the government employees.

The other thing that frustrates me were the supporters of the gay couple chanting "LOVE WINS" after the decision. No, LOVE didn't win. Selfishness won. The individuals on both sides of this issue felt that their personal beliefs were more important than those of another fellow human being. Love includes respect for those that don't believe the same thing you do. While it isn't maybe the right time to quote the Bible, I do so based on not only my own beliefs, but also because the verse does also have a lot of universal agreement outside of the religious circles, and is often used in wedding ceremonies.

From 1st Corinthian's Chapter 13:

[SUP]4 [/SUP]Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. [SUP]5 [/SUP]It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.


In this case it appears the so called "love" was self seeking.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

As to the argument that it isn't so horrible that folks need only drive 20 miles to get a license, I wonder...

What if a county bureaucrat banned any licensing of gun stores within the entire county due to gun violence, would we see the same blase indifference? "Oh big deal, you only have to drive an extra 30 minutes to go to start a new gun store. Poor you! Like your rights are really violated!"

Naturally we all know that gun owners across the land would be outraged if there were even a whiff of this, and RIGHTLY so! So it goes for the gay marriage crowd. Why some are so befuddled by this is confusing to me.

Regards,

Doug

I cannot put a gun store anywhere I want to in most towns already.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

All the memes tied to this event have been pretty stupid... I'll admit, I chuckled at this one.

 

[steveh_131]

The people involved in this on the litigants side aren't shoving anything on the Commonwealth of KY.

Well... yeah, they did. With their supreme court nonsense crapping on the state's right to govern itself.

They are demanding their Rights be upheld and you would deny them that.

Once again, a government slip of paper is not a 'Right' and I am not the one denying them anything. But I am asking folks to have just a bit of perspective here. A short drive for what ought to be a one-in-a-lifetime government permission slip is not making anyone's life 'miserable', as you put it.

Why should they have to go to another county to accommodate this woman and her iron age superstitions?

Good question. Why should the state of Kentucky be forced to legally recognize relationships that they, as a state, opted not to recognize? All good questions.

Why some are so befuddled by this is confusing to me.

I'm not befuddled. I just don't give a crap. I hope all these big-government loving morons fight it out until they don't have any more energy remaining to keep crapping on the real rights of the rest of us.

The right to own or sell a gun is a fundamental, natural right. The right to some piece of paper from the government that says you and your gay partner are 'married' is not. Surely any real libertarian can recognize a vast difference between these two things.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Judge Who Sent KY Clerk Kim Davis to Jail was Appointed by G.W. Bush and Disagreed with Supreme Court Decision on Marriage

 

[jamil]

I'd still like to know, does a Musilm clerk at the DMV have the same right to refuse issuing driver's licenses to women as you say this woman has to deny marriage licenses?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Judge Who Sent KY Clerk Kim Davis to Jail was Appointed by G.W. Bush and Disagreed with Supreme Court Decision on Marriage

It would be nice, for once, to have "republican" judges find penumbras and stuff to turn us back to the real constitution and not perpetuate the course of precedences that lead us to where we are now.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I'd still like to know, does a Musilm clerk at the DMV have the same right to refuse issuing driver's licenses to women as you say this woman has to deny marriage licenses?

Not really all that analogous. If the state of Kentucky voted in homosexual marriage many years ago and Mrs. Davis ran, got elected, and assumed the job last year, then yeah--more like apples to apples. The hypothetical muslim clerk knows when she takes the job she'll issue driver's licenses to women--apples and oranges.

 

[dshaf]

Nice to see Mike Huckabee and Ted Cruz come out and defend this women. This country's laws were founded years ago and based on biblical principles. This country is in trouble because we have ignored those principles.

 

[HoughMade]

Judge Who Sent KY Clerk Kim Davis to Jail was Appointed by G.W. Bush and Disagreed with Supreme Court Decision on Marriage

Look earlier in the thread and you'll see just what I thought of the decision. I too believe that if she is going to be a gvt. official, she has to follow the law even if she disagrees with it. If her conscience and beliefs will not let her do that (mine wouldn't), she needs to resign.

 

[mrjarrell]

I'd still like to know, does a Musilm clerk at the DMV have the same right to refuse issuing driver's licenses to women as you say this woman has to deny marriage licenses?

Apparently, any woman who wants a license is supposed to go to another county to get. It's the right thing to do. Same for gun owners.

 

[KLB]

I think what frustrates me about this is that most reasonable people (in my opinion of course) would have recognized that it was going no where, and the path of least resistance would have just gone to another county. Let bygones be bygones as the saying goes. Did they have to, absolutely not. They did a respectable thing and stood up for their rights and once again requested that she follow the law of the land, and in the process brought a national spotlight on everyone involved. And, it more than likely permanently affected the lives of the government employees.

You do realize that you can use that same logic for the clerk.
"most reasonable people (in my opinion of course) would have recognized that it was going no where, and the path of least resistance would have been to just issue the licenses"

 

[Denny347]

Ask President Obama. But the question should be: "what laws should be obeyed and what laws should be ignored." Oh, wait. You can ask THAT of President Obama, too.

I do not live my life by what laws this President or the ones before him choose to ignore. It seems to be something most of them have in common regardless of party. That still gives NO EXCUSE for me to violate my oath nor ANY other office holder to do so.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Kentucky clerk Kim Davis 'in good spirits', says she won't resign; will stay in jail as long as it takes - @AP


Yeah, definitely a martyr. "As long as it takes". What's "it"?

 

[Denny347]

I cannot put a gun store anywhere I want to in most towns already.

How about the clerk refusing to issue LTCH but you were able to travel to another county to do so? No harm no foul?

 

[Drail]

Where exactly does our Govt. get the authority to "require" and "issue" a license for marriage? Answer - they gave it to themselves, just like they gave the President the authority to engage in undeclared foreign wars without Congressional approval. (there was a good reason the Founders did not allow that either). Where did the Govt. get the right to tax your income? I have looked but I can't seem to find that in the Constitution either. IMO any relationship between two people is a matter for the Church - not the Govt. There was a reason the Founders were concerned about the separation of Church and State - and we're seeing why now. The Constitution was written to control and limit the Govt. - not "we the people". The role of SCOTUS is to interpret the law - not to enforce laws that are clearly unConstitutional. - they are the Judicial branch, not the Legislative branch. SCOTUS should be asking "does this law violate the U.S. Constitution?" The Govt. is completely out of control today and they should get out of the "licensing business".