Posted on 08/12/2015 10:35:18 PM PDT by Coronal
A federal judge in Kentucky ordered a county clerk on Wednesday to resume issuing marriage licenses despite her religious objections to same-sex marriage, a ruling that was quickly appealed.
U.S. District Judge David Bunning granted a preliminary injunction against Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis that had been requested by eight people, including two same-sex couples, who sued Davis last month for violating their rights.
Bunning said Davis had to live up to her responsibilities as county clerk.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
The duty of the County Clerk is to follow the statutory law with regard to the issuance of marriage licenses.
Right now the only statute on the books prohibits the clerk from issuing licenses to same-sex couples.
The clerk would be violating the statutory law if she were to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple.
If and when Kentucky passes a statutory law allowing for the issuance of a marriage license to a same-sex couple, then the clerk would either have to abide by the law or resign. As it stands right now, the clerk is completely within her rights to refuse to issue any marriage license which is not In accordance with the Kentucky statutes which are on the books currently.
The order from the court is invalid. The court may be able to order Kentucky to change their statute, but they can't force a clerk to violate the statute until it is changed.
Come to think of it, my purposes in resigning at the very moment of the first sodomite application would be better accomplished by your option: refuse and fight. Thanks for clearing up my thinking on this. It may come in handy in some similar situation. Again, thanks.
Nausea would be very believable in this kind of situation
Lord Jesus please hurry and take us away from this madness! Amen
That's a very strange analogy. Islam is to religion what Planned Parenthood is to healthcare.
“The American population is entirely Christian, and with us Christianity and Religion are identified. It would be strange indeed, if with such a people, our institutions did not presuppose Christianity, and did not often refer to it, and exhibit relations with it.”
Chief Justice Marshall - May 9, 1833,
Very strange, indeed.
Cordially,
If the County Clerk is a Quaker, can she refuse to issue any gun licenses?
If she's a Buddhist, can she refuse to issue hunting and fishing licenses?
If she's an Orthodox Jew, can she refuse to issue a business license to a store that sells pork?
There is no statute which authorizes this clerk to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple.
Until there is a new statute, the clerk has no authority to issue the licence. Even if she wanted to, she has no statutory authority to do so.
The law just changed to violate five thousand years of human religious history.
This specific issue is not like any other.
Planned parenthood?!! Whiplash as you completely change what we were talking about. And....DRINK!
Cordially,
Cordially,
Apparently you believe muslims can refuse to do their jobs because of religious objections, but Christians can’t.
Why is that?
Do you follow the so-called prophet, or are you a liberal?
My understanding is that she’s not just refusing to issue the licenses personally. She’s stopped everyone in the Clerk’s office from issuing licenses as well.
That’s a great point! Too bad it will go completely over the heads of many!
That would be different, I think. At that level, a person has decided to simply make a stand and go down swinging.
Huh?
Let me see if I have this straight; in responding a post that defined anarchy as "let[ing] every employee decide what parts of a job they will do and what they won’t do", and to another one absurdly comparing mohammedan practices regarding dogs and bacon to Christianity, I cited Christian principles and precepts regarding the PROPER FUNCTION AND LIMITED AUTHORITY OF HUMAN GOVERNMENT as found in Declaration of Independence, John Calvin ("the virtual founder of America"), John Marshall and the motto Benjamin Franklin suggested for the reverse side of the U.S. Seal, "Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God", and all you derive from it is that I am a liberal or a follower mohammedanism?
Wow. I give up.
Cordially,
Or you can ignore the unconstitutional "orders" of the supreme court and stay with current law...
So your definition of religious freedom is that you can decide which laws you want to obey, but no one else gets that choice.
Yep.
Or is there another meaning of the word "freedom"?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.