Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Anti-Gay Kentucky County Clerk Jailed for Refusing to Issue Marriage Licences


TOMapleLaughs

Recommended Posts

I didn't, I just didn't think it needed being added to, other than the bit I quoted.

You didn't add $&!#, you changed it entirely. She's no in jail for being a bigot, but for being unwilling to compromise and accept a reasonable accommodation to her beliefs. The unreasonable part is why she's in jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You didn't add crap, you changed it entirely. She's no in jail for being a bigot, but for being unwilling to compromise and accept a reasonable accommodation to her beliefs. The unreasonable part is why she's in jail.

Isn't that technically being a bigot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does "pro-gay" or "neutral" apply? No. But I guess you could use "pro-Christian?" However in this context "anti-gay" seems more suitable, considering this is of course a gay rights incident, of which there has been several since the marriage law was passed. Sometimes isn't media bias as much as what's actually happening.

No, in all cases it is inflammatory reaction-inducing conjecture pre-judging her beliefs and reasoning. "White woman jailed" would actually be less indicting, as at least that's something verifiable.

If you (a) don't realize media is extremely biased and (B) don't realize they purposely write things the way they do to cause controversy and divide people, then that would explain why you don't see it. They are not "news writers" or "reporters", they do what they do for a purpose, and many are simply useful idiots and lemming-like parrots, willing accomplices but oblivious to it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, in all cases it is inflammatory reaction-inducing conjecture pre-judging her beliefs and reasoning. "White woman jailed" would actually be less indicting, as at least that's something verifiable.

If you (a) don't realize media is extremely biased and ( B) don't realize they purposely write things the way they do to cause controversy and divide people, then that would explain why you don't see it. They are not "news writers" or "reporters", they do what they do for a purpose, and many are simply useful idiots and lemming-like parrots, willing accomplices but oblivious to it all.

Can you set the record straight then -- what is reasonable about what she did?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oath Keepers put ‘boots on the ground’ to guard oath-breaking Kim Davis from ‘dictator’ judge

The Oath Keepers, an armed, camouflage-wearing volunteer militia famous for hunkering down at Bundy Ranch, now say they have “boots on the ground” to protect Kentucky clerk Kim Davis, who they believe was denied her right to a jury trial.

Davis, the elected clerk of Rowan County, has become the current celebrity of the anti-gay movement for staunchly refusing to issue marriage licenses after the Supreme Court’sObergefell v. Hodges ruling in June legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. After defying the highest court and subsequent court orders to issue the licenses, a federal judge held her in contempt and jailed her.

In a teleconference uploaded to YouTube, Oath Keeper founder Stewart Rhodes discussed the operation with Kentucky sheriff Denny Peyman, Missouri Oath Keeper John Karriman, and West Virginia Oath Keeper Allen Landieri. The group claimed that their new mission had nothing to do with same-sex marriage and insisted they were only offering to guard Davis because the judge had acted illegally.

“People should consider her under our protection,” Rhodes says in the teleconference. “We’ll make sure that our people are keeping a close eye on the situation and we’re going have boots on the ground to keep watch regardless, because this judge needs to understand that he’s not going be able to just go grab this lady whenever he feels like it.”

In a press release published on their website, the group says they have been in contact with Davis’ attorney, Mat Staver, and are acting because Judge David Bunning “grossly overstepped his bounds and violated Mrs Davis’ due process rights, and in particular her right to a jury trial.”

Contempt of court is not a criminal charge or civil complaint that results in a jury trial or hearings. It’s punishment for dismissing court authority, disobeying court orders or impeding the ability of the court to perform its function, according to Law.com. Contempt is determined by the judge overseeing the case. Fines or brief jail time are common sanctions.

In Davis case, she was slapped with a class action lawsuit by same-sex and straight couples who could not get married at the Rowan County Clerk’s Office as a result of Davis’ actions. Davis lost the case and was ordered to begin issuing marriage licenses. She filed all possible appeals and lost, yet still refused to issue marriage licenses, resulting in the contempt ruling.

The Oath Keepers do not seem to be aware of this key aspect of Davis’ case, however. On their website, they say, “No one man should have that kind of power in his hands alone to decide guilt and impose a sentence of indefinite detention.”

Davis spent less than a week behind bars.

“Now we see the rise of an imperial judiciary that not only legislates from the bench but is attempting to expand their ‘contempt’ power to likewise swallow up our Bill of Rights and circumvent jury trial,” Rhodes wrote. “Both methods are used to allow the powerful office holder to merely point his finger and have his opponent thrown behind bars without a grand jury indictment and without being found guilty by a jury of their peers. No innocent until proven guilty before a jury. Just ‘guilty’ because the leader says so. That is a dictatorship, whether done by a president or by a judge.”

In a separate video, Landieri insisted the group’s actions have nothing to do with gay marriage.

“This has nothing to do with gay marriage,” he said. “Now gay marriage is in the subject matter of this, but that is not the purpose of this. I have nothing against people’s lifestyles at all. Only if those lifestyles are forced upon me.”

Some have observed that it is Davis who is forcing her Christian beliefs on the general public vis-à-vis her capacity as elected county clerk.

Davis took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States when she took office — but by refusing to uphold the adjudicated constitutional right of same-sex couples to marry, she is in violation of that oath.

The Oath Keepers have a history of intervening when the federal government tries to enforce laws the group disagrees with. The group was involved in an armed standoff with federal agents in 2013 while guarding Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who was illegally grazing cattle.

Earlier this year, the group created a bit of a circus at mines in Montana and Oregon when federal officials tried to enforce land use laws and mine operators called on the group to help.

Their motives have been questioned when they have turned up during civil unrest and uprisings led by African-Americans protesting law enforcement killings of black people, where instead of guarding protesters, Oath Keepers appeared to act more like de facto law enforcers.

https://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/oath-keepers-vow-to-defend-oath-breaking-kim-davis-with-guns-from-dictator-judge/

I would love to see these morons try and prevent a lawful order from being carried out. All the killing and mothers crying aside, it would be pretty amusing to see one of these cheques finally get cashed. Not that I think they're brave enough to actually do anything.

Surely someone pointed out to them that she's the one breaking the law. Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, in all cases it is inflammatory reaction-inducing conjecture pre-judging her beliefs and reasoning. "White woman jailed" would actually be less indicting, as at least that's something verifiable.

If you (a) don't realize media is extremely biased and ( B) don't realize they purposely write things the way they do to cause controversy and divide people, then that would explain why you don't see it. They are not "news writers" or "reporters", they do what they do for a purpose, and many are simply useful idiots and lemming-like parrots, willing accomplices but oblivious to it all.

F'in right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oath Keepers put ‘boots on the ground’ to guard oath-breaking Kim Davis from ‘dictator’ judge

The Oath Keepers, an armed, camouflage-wearing volunteer militia famous for hunkering down at Bundy Ranch, now say they have “boots on the ground” to protect Kentucky clerk Kim Davis, who they believe was denied her right to a jury trial.

Davis, the elected clerk of Rowan County, has become the current celebrity of the anti-gay movement for staunchly refusing to issue marriage licenses after the Supreme Court’sObergefell v. Hodges ruling in June legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. After defying the highest court and subsequent court orders to issue the licenses, a federal judge held her in contempt and jailed her.

In a teleconference uploaded to YouTube, Oath Keeper founder Stewart Rhodes discussed the operation with Kentucky sheriff Denny Peyman, Missouri Oath Keeper John Karriman, and West Virginia Oath Keeper Allen Landieri. The group claimed that their new mission had nothing to do with same-sex marriage and insisted they were only offering to guard Davis because the judge had acted illegally.

“People should consider her under our protection,” Rhodes says in the teleconference. “We’ll make sure that our people are keeping a close eye on the situation and we’re going have boots on the ground to keep watch regardless, because this judge needs to understand that he’s not going be able to just go grab this lady whenever he feels like it.”

In a press release published on their website, the group says they have been in contact with Davis’ attorney, Mat Staver, and are acting because Judge David Bunning “grossly overstepped his bounds and violated Mrs Davis’ due process rights, and in particular her right to a jury trial.”

Contempt of court is not a criminal charge or civil complaint that results in a jury trial or hearings. It’s punishment for dismissing court authority, disobeying court orders or impeding the ability of the court to perform its function, according to Law.com. Contempt is determined by the judge overseeing the case. Fines or brief jail time are common sanctions.

In Davis case, she was slapped with a class action lawsuit by same-sex and straight couples who could not get married at the Rowan County Clerk’s Office as a result of Davis’ actions. Davis lost the case and was ordered to begin issuing marriage licenses. She filed all possible appeals and lost, yet still refused to issue marriage licenses, resulting in the contempt ruling.

The Oath Keepers do not seem to be aware of this key aspect of Davis’ case, however. On their website, they say, “No one man should have that kind of power in his hands alone to decide guilt and impose a sentence of indefinite detention.”

Davis spent less than a week behind bars.

“Now we see the rise of an imperial judiciary that not only legislates from the bench but is attempting to expand their ‘contempt’ power to likewise swallow up our Bill of Rights and circumvent jury trial,” Rhodes wrote. “Both methods are used to allow the powerful office holder to merely point his finger and have his opponent thrown behind bars without a grand jury indictment and without being found guilty by a jury of their peers. No innocent until proven guilty before a jury. Just ‘guilty’ because the leader says so. That is a dictatorship, whether done by a president or by a judge.”

In a separate video, Landieri insisted the group’s actions have nothing to do with gay marriage.

“This has nothing to do with gay marriage,” he said. “Now gay marriage is in the subject matter of this, but that is not the purpose of this. I have nothing against people’s lifestyles at all. Only if those lifestyles are forced upon me.”

Some have observed that it is Davis who is forcing her Christian beliefs on the general public vis-à-vis her capacity as elected county clerk.

Davis took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States when she took office — but by refusing to uphold the adjudicated constitutional right of same-sex couples to marry, she is in violation of that oath.

The Oath Keepers have a history of intervening when the federal government tries to enforce laws the group disagrees with. The group was involved in an armed standoff with federal agents in 2013 while guarding Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who was illegally grazing cattle.

Earlier this year, the group created a bit of a circus at mines in Montana and Oregon when federal officials tried to enforce land use laws and mine operators called on the group to help.

Their motives have been questioned when they have turned up during civil unrest and uprisings led by African-Americans protesting law enforcement killings of black people, where instead of guarding protesters, Oath Keepers appeared to act more like de facto law enforcers.

https://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/oath-keepers-vow-to-defend-oath-breaking-kim-davis-with-guns-from-dictator-judge/

I would love to see these morons try and prevent a lawful order from being carried out. All the killing and mothers crying aside, it would be pretty amusing to see one of these cheques finally get cashed. Not that I think they're brave enough to actually do anything.

Surely someone pointed out to them that she's the one breaking the law. Right?

The problem is that Kim Davis doesn't think she is breaking any laws in her head. She feels it's her GOD given right to denying other American their rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that Kim Davis doesn't think she is breaking any laws in her head. She feels it's her GOD given right to denying other American their rights.

As pointed out. I would enjoy seeing others now exercising their "god given" rights as well

No condoms or birth control

No ham, bacon or meat of cloven hoof (would be sooo funny)

No liquor beer or spirit sales (would be even funnier)

No Blood transfusions or medical procedures

No arrests made for non religious crimes

Could you imagine how very fun America would be fun if everyone would start exercising their "god given" rights depending on whatever deity god or pantheon they believe in.

I for one would rather enjoy seeing the Cthulu crowd snap and start trying to bring about the end of the world in whatever way possible almost as much as I'd enjoy seeing booze and cheeseburgers not being served or delivered to that obviously healthy American population.

No fast food booze or condom.s Let the problem sort itself out. It's the will of [insert spiritual figurehead for denomination of faith here]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As pointed out. I would enjoy seeing others now exercising their "god given" rights as well

No condoms or birth control

No ham, bacon or meat of cloven hoof (would be sooo funny)

No liquor beer or spirit sales (would be even funnier)

No Blood transfusions or medical procedures

No arrests made for non religious crimes

Could you imagine how very fun America would be fun if everyone would start exercising their "god given" rights depending on whatever deity god or pantheon they believe in.

I for one would rather enjoy seeing the Cthulu crowd snap and start trying to bring about the end of the world in whatever way possible almost as much as I'd enjoy seeing booze and cheeseburgers not being served or delivered to that obviously healthy American population.

No fast food booze or condom.s Let the problem sort itself out. It's the will of [insert spiritual figurehead for denomination of faith here]

What's the whining about US "god given rights"? These are the natural rights as described in the declaration of independence, whereby such inalienable rights are endowed by their creator.

The insecurity of non-religious people sometimes.. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the whining about US "god given rights"? These are the natural rights as described in the declaration of independence, whereby such inalienable rights are endowed by their creator.

The insecurity of non-religious people sometimes.. :lol:

Soooo....you don't think there would be a massive outcry if ANY of the above happened?

My religion has nothing to do with things, or lack there in. As my religion or lack there in allows me to accept all men and women as who they are and what they want to believe in or not believe in regardless of how heinous it is.

If people are willing to support this creature in her bigoted demands to not do her job, than they should be willing to support others based on THEIR religious beliefs as well

Right or wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soooo....you don't think there would be a massive outcry if ANY of the above happened?

My religion has nothing to do with things, or lack there in. As my religion or lack there in allows me to accept all men and women as who they are and what they want to believe in or not believe in regardless of how heinous it is.

If people are willing to support this creature in her bigoted demands to not do her job, than they should be willing to support others based on THEIR religious beliefs as well

Right or wrong?

Well, contemporary Christians tend to cherrypick those things as justification for treating gay people differently. I'm pretty sure one can find many more parts of the bible where you're supposed to treat people with respect and dignity and leave the judging to "God".

And of course liberals tend to misconstrue the "god-given" thing (people looking at 1700s writings in 2015 context), which is pretty common for people who disregard the US Constitution and it's roots. Willful ignorance and revisionist history is common for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, contemporary Christians tend to cherrypick those things as justification for treating gay people differently. I'm pretty sure one can find many more parts of the bible where you're supposed to treat people with respect and dignity and leave the judging to "God".

And of course liberals tend to misconstrue the "god-given" thing (people looking at 1700s writings in 2015 context), which is pretty common for people who disregard the US Constitution and it's roots. Willful ignorance and revisionist history is common for them.

No worries. I may have misread your comment.

I just find it highly questionable that these people are in fact leading parts of the US and then question how it became the country it once was knowing that

Then I wonder what if...just what if people of other religions in positions of office pulled the same crap, what kind of responses and support they'd get

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No worries. I may have misread your comment.

I just find it highly questionable that these people are in fact leading parts of the US and then question how it became the country it once was knowing that

Then I wonder what if...just what if people of other religions in positions of office pulled the same crap, what kind of responses and support they'd get

I would hope the same.. I can guarantee you the response from me would be the same. :lol:

Most people that would normally support this lady (i.e. her voters) essentially say she should do her job. So.. no doubt if she continues to defy the courts she'll just sit in jail in contempt until the voters remove her and elect someone else to do their job (far more likely in this case), or until she's impeached and removed (far less likely).

I hate it when smug government employees and officials, especially lowly county officials like this (akin to an upper level elected employee at, say, Peel Region's Service Ontario) believe they have far more broad powers than they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...