Posted on 09/03/2015 4:57:23 PM PDT by markomalley
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.
