Really...when was that memo sent out? This is the one I have....
Posted on 09/03/2015 10:03:37 AM PDT by GIdget2004
Dan Griffin @WSAZDanGriffin 2m2 minutes ago Judge says financial fines not enough. #WSAZ
Dan Griffin @WSAZDanGriffin 4m4 minutes ago BREAKING: Davis held in contempt taken by U.S. Marshals. #WSAZ
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
They could have asked others to issue a license (although in violation of Kentucky law)
Ky. Rev. Stat. 402.050(1)(b) Marriage shall be solemnized only by ... Justices and judges of the Court of Justice, retired justices and judges of the Court of Justice except those removed for cause or convicted of a felony, county judges/executive, and such justices of the peace and fiscal court commissioners as the Governor or the county judge/executive authorizes
Agreed. But it's gonna be a heck of a ride until that happens.
They would fire her for not doing her job. That actually what they should have done here, just terminated her employment. What they are doing to her now is pure theater.
All good thoughts. I would have expected her to quit if she were simply hired but when I heard that she was elected, I changed my mind. The voters in that county I assume could start a recall petition or find a way to impeach her. I’m not that familiar with the process but elections are somewhat sacred and not to be taken lightly. I would be interested to read any oath she took. Until I do I’m not going to assume that she has violated it.
Really...when was that memo sent out? This is the one I have....
Please cite the actual LAW she is violating.
Keep in mind that the LAW as written in KY specifically refuses to recognize or sanction any form of homosexual marriage.
SCOTUS ruled that was not permissible.
But the LAW has not yet been updated.
They get to impose the law as it has been for a few thousand years, not as it has been since some idiot judges presumed to claim the 14th amendment guarantees faggot marriage.
This is a "Change" in the law. You may be familiar with the word "change" because it is a major factor of Liberal philosophy.
It is not "conservative", and if you support enforcing these pretend legal CHANGES in the law, then you don't grasp the nature of conservative principles; that things are not "CHANGED" for light and transitory reasons.
If we were Liberals, we would not hesitate to defy this. They simply have more guts than do we. That's why they win and we lose.
Twitter: Reports are circulating that the deputies are saying they want to issue the licenses but Davis is forcing them not to.
If thats what the courts rule, then it IS. People need to think twice before taking a government job.
The People's laws were overthrown by a judicial diktat in all of these cases. The judges should have been removed from office and the law restored.
When the system breaks down, that's when the People have the right to remedies by other means.
“And you seem not to understand that the Natural Law trumps any Federal Law.”
Really? And who decides what “Natural Law” is?
“God burned entire cities to death because of faggotry. I think it is a little more serious of an issue than “divorce”.”
I agree, and I believe America will either repent or face His wrath. But can a county clerk decide which laws to obey? Can a county clerk refuse to issue licenses that fully comply with the law because he or she doesn’t agree with their morality?
A county clerk who is unwilling to issue licenses based on the law should resign. If she cannot be fired, then she should fall under contempt charges for refusing to obey the law.
She is not, at any time, being asked to give her personal approval of an act. She is only saying it is legal. And in this case, it is.
A journalist should ask the homosexuals why they insist upon a license from this person and not from any of the other authorized persons.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/kentucky-clerk-gop-state-senate-president-33492884
This is their's to lose.
I would be interested to read any oath she took. Until I do I’m not going to assume that she has violated it
Well you stated she wasn’t issuing ANY marriage licenses. That’s what I based my “not fulfilling her oath” comment on. Maybe I should change the word oath to duties.
Your right there!
Obviously I would differ with that opinion (of the courts), but that's why we are where we are. Interesting use of that phrase 'otherwise qualified', though. Clearly, they aren't qualified, so other than "breathing" and "of age", I would certainly take issue with any representation of a same-sex pair as 'qualified'. But there we go again.
When it suits their agenda, man—those feds can really whip snakes, huh?
Otherwise, manana .........
That may be somewhat true in todays world but it is certainly not Constitutional (SCOTUS doe not make or enforce law).
Not sure what Constitution you read but it certainly isn't in the one I read nor is it Natural Law.
Oh. You mean at some point in time it constituted a different arrangement other than a man and a woman? Well I didn't know that. Well of course, if the state's definition has ever included dogs, bugs, plant life and rocks as part of "marriage", then they have no moral or legal leg to stand on by refusing a couple or even a dozen faggots the state certificate of marriage.
KY law states that marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman. Overturning those laws means that there is no law, and therefore no authority to issue licenses.
Your argument proves your folly.
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.