Posted on 09/08/2015 2:04:58 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
A Kentucky clerk who defied orders to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples was released from jail Tuesday, but her lawyer says she will continue to resist until officials find a way to accommodate her religious opposition to gay unions.
Kim Davis emerged from the Carter County Detention Center to a swell of cheers from Christian supporters who'd been rallying outside the gates since she was ordered behind bars on Thursday.
She later was introduced to the crowd to the song "Eye of the Tiger," raising her hands above her head and weeping on stage with her husband, lawyer and Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. Out before her flew a variety of signs and banners, including an American and a Confederate flag. Davis thanked the supporters and encouraged them to act as they believe God wanted.
"Just keep on pressing," Davis said. "Don't let down. Because He is here."
Her lawyer, Mat Staver, promised earlier that she would not back down until her demands were met.
"She's not going to violate her conscience," Staver said.
That set up another legal confrontation on a case that is becoming a case study on the backlash to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that legalized gay marriage.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
[[as there are scriptures that are against divorce and remarriage.]]
Against the divorce and remarriage AS PRACTICED back during that specific time- Jews were divorcing their wives for ANY reason (Meal not warm enough, house not clean enough, wife didn’t jump high enough when husband barked”
Jews would walk their wives out into the street and say 3 times they divorce them, and the woman got NOTHING- no compensation for anything- She was thrown out into the cold with no means to defend herself or take care of herself
Things were so bad that husbands would divorce their wives on a Friday, marry a younger woman ‘for the weekend’ then divorce that woman and remarry their first wives for the rest of the week
This was the divorce God hated because it was such a mean-spirited selfish divorce which used women like cheap property
There are verses ion God’s word that talk about if a woman or man takes off, and takes up with another person sexually, then that invalidates the marriage because that spouse violated their oath both to God and to the other person, and the remaining spouse is free to go on with their lives and remarry
IF a man divorces his wife, but does not get remarried or have relations with another woman- the two are still considered married-
It’s pretty complicated really but basically, if a divorce happens because of adultery, the offended spouse if then free to remarry because the marriage has been tragically violated, and the marriage bond is dissolved
There’s also the issue of an unsaved person leaving them marriage- God states ‘let them go’
But anyways- this is about Kim Davis and there are strong arguments both for and against divorce from both sides- this is an issue that has been debated all down through history-
They already have;
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=17446
This Judge ignored law, and imprisoned Ms Davis on opinion.
This can not stand.
Apparently only THE CLERK’s ( Kim Davis ) signature makes the license valid.
**************
Well what if the Clerk is incapacitated for some reason then all things shut down
until the Clerk back at capacity. You’d think there is some way to make it legal.
Who signs stuff if she isn’t around, on vacation, out of the country, etc.
Maybe this will all come to a head and get resolved. Apparently the Judge may
have thought other could issued the license as that was his reason for releasing
Clark I believe.
The SCOTUS ruled it is legal for this type marriage. So some adjustment is going
to have to be made I’d think. We’ll see.
Samurai Jack and Samurai Jill...OK
Samurai Jack and Jack's employer...OK
Samurai Jack and Jack's several wives LLC...maybe not
(Somebody else named) Jack and Farmer Pete's Petting Zoo...maybe legal in the law but icky
Aside from marriage having centuries of common use in both church and civil history, and apart from common misuse of "civil union" and "domestic partnership" as only applying to gay/lesbian pairs, the bureaucratic circus needed to restrict civil unions to something almost acceptable to all would be horrific.
And possibly illegal in light of the growing redefinition(s)of "rights".
The other thing that worries me is that today's reports suggest that Ms. Davis intends to press on for total victory after the county (state?) has conceded to a reasonable accommodation as required by religious freedom restoration act(s). Seems to be time for her to actually negotiate; the show's over now, judge recanted, Huckabee got his camera time, and it does not look like anyone intends to push her any farther.
Bookmark
We do not resolve to give up on public policy just because everything is subject to futility in the greater scheme of things. Granting homosexuals their fantasies is bad public policy for all concerned. One does not need a scriptural basis to minimize deviance. The scriptures simply bear out more clearly what even the most depraved soul already knows in regard to basic civility.
Is this for real?
I’m asking, because I don’t twitter.
If Kim has to put up with this evil woman in the workplace, I need to double my prayers....seriously.
I don’t twitter either but someone that does sent it to me. I think the entire world has gone insane and haven’t even turned on the news this morning. I recorded several episodes of I Love Lucy and The Walton’s. I keep the tv on for noise so that’s all I’ve had on.
We’re on a camping trip, and unfortunately all we can get for news is Fox ( I use to love Fox News, now I don’t trust them)
I was glad, however, to see Kim Davis released...yesterday
And I’m looking forward to the rally today with Trump, Cruz and Phil Robertson from Duck Dynasty
It is a question of what constitutes the more immediate significance. My recollection is that Jesus told the adulteress to "go and sin no more" which in the scheme of things is pretty much a slap on the wrist.
In contrast, we have three examples in the bible of entire Cities being destroyed and everyone killed over homosexuality. (Twice by Fire, and once by the combined might of Israel.) We also have at least one scripture that says to kill homosexuals.
In the disparity between "Go and sin no more" versus "Burn Cities to death with Fire", I kinda think the weight of evidence indicates that the one thing is far more objectionable than the other.
The difference between the way the bible treats adultery compared to homosexuality is the difference between a lightning bug and lightning.
It’s hideously fake.....vile and fake all the way..
And the woman clerk, Melissa Thompson is not amused.
I truly hope she sues!!!!!
So what happens if the County Clerk is on vacation? Of if the County Clerk died while in office. Would no marriage licenses be issued?
Revenue.
The county executive can issue marriage licenses in such cases, or people can get licenses from any other county clerk. It doesn't have to be from a particular county to be valid.
I know of one, infidelity. What are the others?
Being married to heathen. So if you married a heathen or you married a believer and he/she evolved into a heathen you are good to go.
Norton, first of all...
Thank you for your reasoned response I think it’s rare to have people willing to have a discussion, even in this forum, that’s not sprinkled with alinsky type insults and barbs. I assure you that I respect yours and other peoples opinions. Any sarcasm detected in my post is generally aimed and not personal in any way, and mostly a result of my own editorial laziness.
“the bureaucratic circus needed to restrict”
more the reason why to keep the government out of this marriage business altogether.
“marriage having centuries of common use in both church and civil history”
And here is my primary issue with the government being involved. The marriage is a church and a civil institution. It is celebrated by neighbors/Friends/Family... What’s the government got to do with this and why should the government have any involvement in it at all. There was a time when the new bride had to pay tribute to the government by Jus primae noctis. But since they’re screwing all of us anyway, they’ll just take a Revenue Tribute instead. Other than that Who Cares who does or does not want to marry.
“to a reasonable accommodation”
She’s not a hired airline stewardess objecting to serving alcoholic beverages in 6” Heels, a thigh high mini-skirt, seamed fishnet stockings and a burka. She’s not a cashier at the local fast food that doesnt want to serve breakfast sausage sandwiches, or work on sunday. She is an elected official who’s exercising her judgement on behalf of her constituents. I just don’t know why we keep forgetting this?
Why should she step down? She’s standing her ground, as she should do, and under Enormous pressure. I wish there were a lot more politicians who would stand up on their hind legs and face down the media monster and the gaystapo. What’s she going to negotiate? As I understand it, as an elected official she doesn’t want her affirmation affixed to those documents that she says are unlawful. As an elected official she gets to make that determination and she risks her re-election. She’s accountable to her constituents. That’s the nature of the constitutionally guaranteed republican form of distributed government. That’s why she wasn’t fired. Because she is elected by a local constituency where such decisions belong in the first place.
To be honest I don’t really care one way or another on the issue of marriage. As I say before, I don’t know why the government’s involved in the first place. But I guess I just don’t understand why we are treating an elected official like a Walmart parking lot sweeper. I thought it was ‘progressives’ that deconstructed like that.
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.