Posted on 09/03/2015 5:29:33 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
She has not been sentenced...per say...
She has been detained under the judges discretion in contempt of court for refusing his order.
Gov. Beshear is a democrat. ‘Nuff said. Hopefully Kim Davis will withdraw her membership in the democratic party.
Maybe impeachment might mean something to him??
I beg to disagree with that. In this particular case, the underlying law is blatantly unconstitutional, for many reasons but the one I will use here is real simple...
Under the Constitution the State has sole jurisdiction to regulate, and to litigate marriage issues, like marriage, divorce and any contested issues.
The Federal government has absolutely no power in this legal area and the SCOTUS decision is tragically flawed and therefore is unconstitutional and illegal, no matter what they say about it.
117 of 120 county clerks? Well, who else isn’t doing it, and why aren’t they in jail?
DOMA is still the law of the land.
What a piece of sh*t that Governor is. He would spend hundreds of thousands on a barbeque i’ll wager.
And for some reason, there are a lot of Freepers who seem too stupid to grasp this basic concept. I am astonished at the number of people who keep think this will go away if they just appease them again.
We executed "gays" for sodomy during the founding era, and we locked them up in Asylums until the late 1950s thereafter.
On what basis do you claim that our laws have to include "gays"?
Where did you get this idea?
Isn’t this judge a G.W. Bush appointee?
Yes it can. That is our entire History up till now. Gays are "non compos mentis". They were legally nuts up until 1973 when armies of faggots started threatening the member of the American Psychiatrists association.
They intimidated them into removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders.
Why should any Christian every run for County Clerk ever again when are required to legitimize sodomy?
First thing the Nazis did was to pass laws banning Jews from government jobs or offices. This "ruling" accomplishes the same thing through the back door.
Christians who regard homosexuality as an abomination will feel as though they must exclude themselves from any office which is required to endorse such sick unions.
It is the Nazi Doctrine, imposed indirectly.
If I can’t find someone running for Clerk in my County on the basis of defying this non law, I may run myself. And if my County elects another Clerk that legitimizes sodomy, I’ll find a State & County that won’t.
You didn't explain it very well, if you actually can explain it. In Post 23 you wrote:
The Supremes merely changed the interpretation of the existing laws. Based on the equal protection clauses. Therefore, if there is a marriage statute it applies to any two unrelated people considered adults.
In addition to what I wrote before, Ohio Revised Code 3101.01 also states: "Male persons of the age of eighteen years, and female persons of the age of sixteen years, not nearer of kin than second cousins, and not having a husband or wife living, may be joined in marriage."
Note that anyone under the age of twenty-one is a minor in Ohio and needs parental consent to get married, but they can still get married under the law. Note that if they are related as second cousins they can get married under the law. Your statement "...if there is a marriage statute it applies to any two unrelated people considered adults" is less than sufficient.
Also note the difference in the age requirement for males and females. Many state laws have this difference. If the "equal protection clauses" come into play as you say, this will have to be changed. Sooner or later someone else will conclude that.
I don't buy your explanation that "The Supremes merely changed the interpretation of the existing laws."
I think they bollixed up at least some if not all of the laws and we need new laws which we don't have yet.
I wonder how many marriages undertaken since the SCOTUS decision are legal, since we don't have good laws.
I don’t believe you, any more than your sign up date.
That’s not how this works. this is not a first amendment issue.
They have to include everyone. Period.
Look, I am not defending gays. I have stayed that over and over.
Yeah, I hacked my join date to get into a discussion defining why something happened.
I don’t support gay marriage. It’s been in MA for years. I just don’t care that much.
Like I said....
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.