Posted on 09/03/2015 4:57:23 PM PDT by markomalley
The main contestant on this week’s edition of Internet outrage theater is Kim Davis, a Democratic clerk in Kentucky who is refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. Davis, who was arrested by police today for not issuing the licenses, says her religious beliefs prohibit her from rubber-stamping applications for same-sex marriage licenses:
U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning placed Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis in the custody of U.S. marshals until she complies, saying fines were not enough to force her to comply with his previous order to provide the paperwork to all couples and allowing her to defy the order would create a “ripple effect.”
“Her good-faith belief is simply not a viable defense,” Bunning said. “Oaths mean things.”
Davis, who was tearful at times, testified that she could not obey the order because God’s law trumps the court.
“My conscience will not allow it,” she said. “God’s moral law convicts me and conflicts with my duties.”
Davis’s arrest was met with cheers by same-sex marriage advocates who for some reason did not demand imprisonment of officials who lawlessly issued gay marriage licenses in clear contravention of state and federal laws. Take, for example, Democrat Gavin Newsom, who is currently the California lieutenant governor. Back in 2004, when gay marriage was banned under California state law, Newsom openly defied the law and used his power as the mayor of San Francisco to force taxpayer-funded government clerks to issue gay marriage licenses:
Newsom unleashed a political and legal tempest February 12 when he ordered the city clerk to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Nearly 3,200 same-sex couples have gotten licenses in a nine-day frenzy that included thousands of family, friends and soon-to-be betrothed couples ringing City Hall, sometimes for days.
Just like Kim Davis, who is an elected Democrat, Newsom justified his lawlessness by citing his own conscience and beliefs about right and wrong rather than deferring to the actual laws of his state.
If you look for evidence of gay rights advocates chastising Newsom for his blatant lawlessness, you won’t find it. Because it doesn’t exist. You similarly won’t find any evidence of these principled law enforcement purists chastising California state officials for refusing to enforce or defend the Prop 8 ballot initiative in California, which was passed overwhelmingly by California voters.
And don’t you dare look for evidence of high-minded progressives demanding prison sentences for the Washington, D.C. bureaucrats who openly defied federal court orders to issue concealed carry permits in the nation’s capital. Nope. Instead of enforcing the law as handed down in multiple Supreme Court cases, D.C. officials kept manufacturing new reasons to justify their refusal to comply with federal gun laws.
Don’t even get me started on federal laws regarding drug possession. You won’t find progressives calling for the prosecution of scores of Colorado officials in open defiance of federal drug bans, or calling for the heads of federal officials who refuse to enforce federal drug laws in Colorado. No, those federal laws are icky. Sure, they’re indisputably the law of the land. And sure, officials have a duty to equally apply and enforce standing law, but icky laws are different. Only non-icky laws need to be enforced.
Perhaps natural marriage advocates should abandon their religious liberty arguments and instead declare whole cities to be marriage sanctuaries. That strategy has worked splendidly for open borders advocates. Who cares what the federal law requires when it comes to illegal immigration? Those laws restricting citizenship rights to citizens are icky, so they don’t need to be enforced. Sanctuary cities are great, so long as they provide sanctuary from icky laws of which progressives disapprove.
Oh, and those laws regarding the proper handling of classified national security information? Meh. Yeah, those are icky, too. So lay off Hillary Clinton, you dirty law truther. Who cares if she ignored clear law and policy by setting up an unsecured, unsanctioned e-mail server which was then used to house and distribute classified information? Who cares if President Barack Obama himself signed the executive order mandating the protection of national security information, the unauthorized release of which could damage American safety and security? Who cares if she intentionally sent classified information to people outside the government who were never cleared to receive it? Progressives think that law is icky, too, so you’ll have to excuse them from not caring about Hillary’s blatant violation of it (laws regarding the handling of classified information are totally not icky, though, when applied to Republicans like David Petraeus or Scooter Libby).
When you really think about it, though, this whole kerfuffle is obviously the fault of Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who refuses to issue gay marriage licenses. She shouldn’t known better. She should’ve thought this whole thing through.
If Kim Davis really wanted to avoid the ire and attention of progressives and their media allies, she should’ve just videotaped herself killing babies and then selling their organs. Then she could operate with total impunity.
Yup. Doesn’t matter what the freaking Left thinks.
PEOPLE OF KENTUCKY: Submit a signed referendum in Kentucky for a special ballot (I don’t care how much it costs, it’s worth it) to outlaw the unconstitutional federal act of overturning Kentucky’s anti-gay-marriage laws with the State of Kentucky pledging to protect its citizens from this unconstitutional federal tyranny.
Besides, in her case she is not the one breaking the law as defined by her state legislature and the people’s vote which was 75% for defining marriage in the normal way. The judges are the ones with contempt for the law.
Average people people like Kim Davis are held in contempt and jailed.
What law? Does Kentucky actually have a validly legislated law on the books stating marriage licenses must be issued to same-sex couples?
we need marriage sanctuaries for sure
Kim Davis christian Martyr-put in jail by an unjust Temple Court High Priest just like Peter and the other Apostles in the Acts of the Apostles Chapters 4: and 5: Time for Christians everywhere to stand up and ROAR Time for Mass Christian civil disobedience.
She isn’t breaking a law, she is refusing to comply with a judges mandate.
Kim Davis is an elected official. She was elected PRIOR to this new law. She can and should argue that fact. She must be allowed a conscience clause.
The County Sheriff needs to arrest this judge for violations of civil rights under false color of authority.
L
EXACTLY.
I have asked several people to point out the law she has supposedly violated.
No takers, yet.
Everybody keeps saying she broke the law but I have yet to hear what law she broke. Also there’s the fact that conscience objections have a long history in America without resulting in jail.
In the case of jury nullification there is no recourse at all. If a judge sets aside a jury verdict there is a chance of appeal but its a slim chance. In the case of a conscientious objector they’re given another duty or excused outright. In each case its a matter of someone refusing to do something against their conscience. ( A jury can’t convict where no law has been broken and a Judge can’t set aside a not guilty jury verdict) Its always no.
While we may not be able to jail Obama for refusing to enforce the existing laws, that doesn’t make the law cease to be. Its particularly hard to do and congress doesn’t have the will but the law can be enforced even if he won’t. On the other hand, Obama has passed many decrees that force others to do things against their will.
What law? See Post 5.
What new law was legislated?
The judge’s order applying the 14th amendment to equal treatment of same-sex civil marriages is law, just like the common law of tort and contracts are law even though most principles of tort and contract law are not recorded in statutes.
By this logic, the federal government could ignore the Hobby Lobby decision because it is only a court order, not a piece of legislation, limiting its ability to punish corporations for not complying with the contraceptive mandate.
You really don’t want to live in a world where people can ignore judge’s orders with impunity. If you don’t like what judges are ordering, the answer is to win elections and get better judges appointed.
This is why elections matter even if the GOPe and the democrats are two wings of the same party. Having conservatives in control of the senate and a moderate republican president is much better for judicial nominations than if either senate or presidency is held by the dems.
E.g., I am pretty sure that if harriet miers or a kerry appointee had alito’s seat, hobby lobby would not have gone the way it did.
Unfortunately, same sex marriage is a law as defined by the fact that “laws in the United States are made by federal, state, and local legislatures, judges, the president, state governors, and administrative agencies.”
“In the United States, same-sex marriage has been legal nationwide since June 26, 2015, when the United States Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that state-level bans on same-sex marriage are unconstitutional.[1][2][3] The court ruled that the denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples and the refusal to recognize those marriages performed in other jurisdictions violates the Due Process and the Equal Protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. The ruling overturned a precedent, Baker v. Nelson.”
There isn't a legislated law that she violated. But the judge made one up in order to jail her....
“Her good-faith belief is simply not a viable defense,” Bunning said. “Oaths mean things.”
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.
