Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis denies marriage license for gay couple for third time
kentucky.com ^ | 08/27/2015 | John Cheves

Posted on 08/27/2015 7:24:08 AM PDT by GIdget2004

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: GIdget2004

:: James Yates and William Smith Jr. were turned away by a deputy clerk in Davis’ office ::

So the clerk in the next county over can issue said license. Go there, get an ML and then get hitched wherever you damn well please. The license is “good” thru-out the State.

Drama queens are the worst...male drama queens just contemplate on their wurst!


21 posted on 08/27/2015 8:17:09 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (BREAKING: Boy Scouts of America Changes Corporate Identity to "Scouting for Boys in America")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

These guys could go to any of the surrounding counties and get the license if they wanted.

They are just in it for the show and to be snub-nosed ‘we will get our way...and our 15 minutes of fame’.


22 posted on 08/27/2015 8:17:51 AM PDT by the_boy_who_got_lost (Need a laugh? ThingsITrustMoreThanHillary.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

What part of “NO!” do these homos not understand?


23 posted on 08/27/2015 8:22:06 AM PDT by lakecumberlandvet (APPEASEMENT NEVER WORKS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tanknetter
They can go to the next county, provided "the female" is over 18 years old. Kentucky Statute 402.080
24 posted on 08/27/2015 8:25:42 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Patton@Bastogne

She has that right under The First Amendment: The Supreme Court decision was created out of nothing.


25 posted on 08/27/2015 8:30:25 AM PDT by upcountryhorseman (An old fashioned conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

And, by the way, the last time I checked the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is still on the books. A supreme court ruling does remove a law or render it moot. Only the legislative branch can amend or remove or replace a law that has been duly enacted.


26 posted on 08/27/2015 8:30:41 AM PDT by lakecumberlandvet (APPEASEMENT NEVER WORKS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004
She better watch it...They Gays are on the hunt.


27 posted on 08/27/2015 8:32:40 AM PDT by MuttTheHoople (Yes, Liberals, I question your patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CPONav

The supreme court cannot change a law duly enacted by congress. The supremes can only offer their (in this case, misguided) opinion regarding constitutionality.


28 posted on 08/27/2015 8:34:01 AM PDT by lakecumberlandvet (APPEASEMENT NEVER WORKS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hoosierham

The supreme court cannot make or change a law duly enacted by congress. The supremes can only offer their (in this case, misguided) opinion regarding constitutionality.


29 posted on 08/27/2015 8:35:18 AM PDT by lakecumberlandvet (APPEASEMENT NEVER WORKS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CPONav
Whether or not one agrees with the law, one must abide by it.

Nope. Try telling that to the colonists that stood on Lexington Green when the British came to confiscate their weapons. If this County Clerk is in need of armed guard services who will fend off any and all that would suggest they have some right to deprive her of her religious liberty, I'm happy to volunteer. Stand your ground, Davis!

30 posted on 08/27/2015 8:40:21 AM PDT by dware (Trump/Cruz 2016, or get ready for 8 more dummycrat years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004

nuthin new
Thomas More
He was executed for refusing to recognise Henry VIII’s divorce

It`s called religious persecution.


31 posted on 08/27/2015 8:46:12 AM PDT by bunkerhill7 (new)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: usconservative

All examples of laws thaat were changed.
Escaped slaves were hunted down and punished within the law.

When women were not allowed to vote, did they vote illegally? Bad example.

In regard to civil rights, people who defied the law were arrested and prosecuted.

If you think a law is wrong, immoral, unfair, etc, etc, then we have the right to protest the law, petition the court, write our gov’t etc. We do not have the right to violate the law, whether or not we believe in the law or the process in which it became law.
This is similar to reports of Muslim grocery clerks refusing to handle pork at their checkouts. Do it or work elswhere.
My vehicle, with me driving, can safely travel our nation’s highways at speeds over 100 mph, conditions permitting. I cannot legally exceed the speed limit no matter what I think about environmental conditions. If I do and get caught, I can lose my privilege to drive.
This clerk is operating in defiance of the law (possibly, depending on this stay that may or may not be in effect). She can lose her privilege of working in her office.


32 posted on 08/27/2015 8:49:44 AM PDT by CPONav
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: CPONav
We do not have the right to violate the law, whether or not we believe in the law or the process in which it became law.

When that law is immoral, violates our Constitutional rights, and is an affront to our God given rights we ABSOLUTELY have the right to refuse to comply with the law.

You've missed the point, and I'll restate my position on Civil Rights as an example. Laws that segregated blacks ("separate but equal") and required actions that white people didn't have to follow (surrendering their seats on a bus/sitting in the back of the bus, white only restaurants as just a few examples) were of course violated as part of the Civil Rights movement because those laws were IMMORAL.

When there is no civil recourse to address an immoral law, protests and active violation of that law by the masses is absolutely called for.

We have that exact scenario with "gay marriage." In every state that voted against legalizing and recognizing homosexual marriages, the US Supreme Court violated its solemn oath and God's law at the same time creating a new "right" for a tiny minority of people at the expense of the masses and majority's rights.

In your view, homosexual marriage is "settled" and we have the right to petition the courts to overturn the law.

That's patently ridiculous. The US Supreme Court has taken away that right by their ruling. There is NO OTHER OPTION than to refuse to comply with the law.

There are none so blind, as those who choose not to see.

33 posted on 08/27/2015 9:05:16 AM PDT by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: knarf
I just can't sleep or enjoy myself ... not even being alive

Yup. Total drama queens.

Wait until after Aug 31st. Or, go to a different location that will issue the license. But, sensible alternatives don't make a political statement.

Wanna put an over/under on when the divorce is final? Days? Weeks? or Months?

34 posted on 08/27/2015 11:47:06 AM PDT by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: gdani

You work for a court, you represent the court, not yourself.

_________________________________________

Having just rewatched ‘Judgment at Nuremburg’, you should know that’s the line the Nazi bastards gave in their defense as they upheld “laws” that sent millions to the camps and to their deaths.


35 posted on 08/27/2015 1:25:02 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (With Great Freedom comes Great Responsibility)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Having just rewatched ‘Judgment at Nuremburg’, you should know that’s the line the Nazi bastards gave in their defense as they upheld “laws” that sent millions to the camps and to their deaths.

Are you OK with a local sheriff rejecting CCW applications because he does not think citizens should have guns & believes SCOTUS ruled incorrectly in Heller?

36 posted on 08/28/2015 7:07:32 AM PDT by gdani (No sacred cows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson