Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/04/2015 7:33:37 AM PDT by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/chapter.aspx?id=39205


2 posted on 09/04/2015 7:34:24 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (The world map will be quite different come 20 January 2017.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2

And that is why she should sue the feds for $$$$$$.


3 posted on 09/04/2015 7:35:46 AM PDT by TMA62 (Al Sharpton - The North Korea of race relations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2

IIRC, and please correct me if I’m wrong, but I seem to have read or heard that she was not issuing marriage licenses to ANYBODY, hetero or otherwise...................


4 posted on 09/04/2015 7:36:19 AM PDT by Red Badger (READ MY LIPS: NO MORE BUSHES!...............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2

From all that information, why is she even in jail?

And why should a Federal Judge be involved in this at all???

I would sue the hell out of the Judge and the State over this, sounds like they didn’t like her and this was the only way to get rid of her...

Wonder how much Mc Connell had to do with this????


5 posted on 09/04/2015 7:40:58 AM PDT by HarleyLady27 ("It's the hard working, tax paying citizens of the United States that are suffering...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2
...and insofar as SCOTUS issued a ruling declaring such law unconstitutional it is by default null and void - therefore there is nothing for the federal judge to coerce Kim Davis into acting on. So when a leftist state like California has a restrictive gun law scrapped by SCOTUS, does California have to allow the sale of X gun immediately or does it simply mean that you have to wait for California to rewrite the law? Because I've never heard of a SCOTUS ruling that we liked ever having to wait until a state rewrites laws. It happens then and there.
6 posted on 09/04/2015 7:41:38 AM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2
This is an excellent resource, but there's one problem with it:

From everything I've read, it looks like Kim Davis never made any of these legal arguments in Federal court. Her whole case was based on a "religious freedom" argument, when a simple reference to the statutory requirements under Kentucky law would have sufficed.

If anything, the legal argument here would be that Kentucky doesn't really have any marriage statutes at all ... which begs the question of how she could be compelled to sign any marriage certificates.

9 posted on 09/04/2015 7:47:37 AM PDT by Alberta's Child ("It doesn't work for me. I gotta have more cowbell!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2

Why are the Oath Keepers not involved? They should be escort her out of jail (peacefully, but fully armed in case there is resistance) and protect her until a constitutionally viable resolution is found.


12 posted on 09/04/2015 8:00:48 AM PDT by GodAndCountryFirst
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2

Can you marry your first cousin in Kentucky? If they are the same sex as you are? That will prolly happen too.


15 posted on 09/04/2015 8:06:44 AM PDT by batterycommander (- a little more rubble, a lot less trouble.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2
Note that these have not yet been repealed/vacated, certain prohibitions remain in place, and insofar as SCOTUS issued a ruling declaring such law unconstitutional it is by default null and void - therefore there is nothing for the federal judge to coerce Kim Davis into acting on.

It is totally incorrect to say every time a court strikes down a state or federal law then the entire law ceases to exist.

Sometimes, a court will, in fact, throw the whole thing out. Sometimes it may strike down only part.

In this case, SCOTUS voided all laws and state constitutional amendments as they apply to prohibiting gay marriage. It did not throw overboard all states' entire laws that apply to all marriages.

Don't you think Davis's attorneys would be making that case if it had any basis in reality?

16 posted on 09/04/2015 8:13:43 AM PDT by gdani (No sacred cows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2

This Democrat sure did find a great way to get some smoke screen over the Clinton email issues.


20 posted on 09/04/2015 8:22:34 AM PDT by AmericanCheeseFood (Walker Cruz Carson | hard targets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2

Can anyone be coerced into IMPEACHMENT of Judge Bunning for his unlawful acts?


23 posted on 09/04/2015 8:25:05 AM PDT by StonyBurk (ring)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2
First of all, I agree with Kim's right to her conscience.

But what Kim should have done was what Thomas More did. He would not betray his conscience, so he quit his job.

More was only arrested after he had been gone from the scene awhile when the king insisted that he take the oath. The refusal was a capital offense.

Kim should have quit her job. I can't see the government running after her like the king did to More.

Things are so screwed around.

28 posted on 09/04/2015 8:32:40 AM PDT by Slyfox (If I'm ever accused of being a Christian, I'd like there to be enough evidence to convict me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2

Here’s what I think. My Facebook friends are in no danger of brain burnout.

Kim Davis violated “the law”(their words) by refusing to issue marriage certificates to same sex couples.
Mayor of San Francisco Gavin Newsome violated the law by issuing same sex marriage certificates when it was against the law in California.
So if you are opposed to politicians breaking laws they feel are morally wrong, you are standing on both sides of this issue.
I love my FB friends but when it comes to politics, they avoid thinking too much.


42 posted on 09/04/2015 12:50:45 PM PDT by AppyPappy (If you really want to irritate someone, point out something obvious they are trying hard to ignore.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson