I disagree with Kim Davis

[Anonymous]

Issuing marriage licenses in a secular institution like a court house does not conflict with our faith..



If pastors in gospel churches were being forced to perform wedding ceremonies for same sex couple, yes, but that is not the case for Kim Davis..



The church and state are separate, so she cannot force her convictions on a secular government institution..



If she cannot carry out her duties as a civil servant in a job that pays over $100,000 per year, then she should seriously consider getting a new career in a Christian environment or transfer to a different government department that won't force her to violate American law.



 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/kim-davis-kentucky-county-clerk-still-won-t-authorize-marriage-licences-1.3226886">http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/kim-davis- ... -1.3226886">http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/kim-davis-kentucky-county-clerk-still-won-t-authorize-marriage-licences-1.3226886

Kim Davis, Kentucky county clerk, still won't authorize marriage licences

Clerk Kim Davis returned to work Monday for the first time since being jailed for disobeying a federal judge and said she was faced with a "seemingly impossible choice" between following her conscience and losing her freedom over denying marriage licences to gay couples.  



With her voice shaking, she said she decided not to interfere with the marriage licences, but declared they would not be authorized by her and she questioned their validity.



In her first day back in the office after a five-day stint in jail, Davis said she was torn between obeying God and a directive from the judge that "forces me to disobey God." Davis, an Apostolic Christian, believes gay marriage is a sin.

[Renee]

Agreed, she cannot stand on religious convictions and at the same time hold a position in state, federal or municipal government while imposing those convictions on others. it's fucking wrong and I don't give on single shit what "Jeebus" would do in this situation.



And I might add, that even though I disagree with the basis of the extremely broad interpretation that the SCOTUS used to formulate their ruling granting marriage rights to same sex couples, the ruling is now law. Even a conflict with federal law on a state level cannot stop the issuing of licences to same sex couples.  Under article VI of the US Constitution the ruling trumps state law.



It is clearly covered under the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the federal constitution, which says, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

[Anonymous]

Agreed, she cannot stand on religious convictions and at the same time hold a position in state, federal or municipal government while imposing those convictions on others.



And I might add, that even though I disagree with the basis of the extremely broad interpretation that the SCOTUS used to formulate their ruling granting marriage rights to same sex couples, the ruling is now law. Even a conflict with federal law on a state level cannot stop the issuing of licences to same sex couples.  Under article VI of the US Constitution the ruling trumps state law.



It is clearly covered under the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the federal constitution, which says, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

I am so out of my league Renee..

 

I don't have your knowledge of the American constitution Renee..



I am glad we agree..



How could I possibly counter what you have posted.

[Renee]

Agreed, she cannot stand on religious convictions and at the same time hold a position in state, federal or municipal government while imposing those convictions on others.



And I might add, that even though I disagree with the basis of the extremely broad interpretation that the SCOTUS used to formulate their ruling granting marriage rights to same sex couples, the ruling is now law. Even a conflict with federal law on a state level cannot stop the issuing of licences to same sex couples.  Under article VI of the US Constitution the ruling trumps state law.



It is clearly covered under the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the federal constitution, which says, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

I am so out of my league Renee..

 

I don't have your knowledge of the American constitution Renee..



I am glad we agree..



How could I possibly counter what you have posted.

You don't have to counter me because we agree.  



I also want to add there are times when stat law supersedes federal law. In cases where state law grants people more rights than federal law, state law prevails. This is why in states that have legalized medical marijuana, federal law cannot stop the sale or distribution even though marijuana legalization is in violation of federal law.

[RW]

Why wasn't Kim Davis just fired for failing to do her damn job?  Why do people think that their personal feelings (see religious convictions) can be applied to their employment?  When I went to work, I left my biases at home and did my damn job.



There should be no accommodation for this crap.  She should be fired.  End of story.

[Anonymous]

Issuing marriage licenses in a secular institution like a court house does not conflict with our faith..



If pastors in gospel churches were being forced to perform wedding ceremonies for same sex couple, yes, but that is not the case for Kim Davis..



The church and state are separate, so she cannot force her convictions on a secular government institution..



If she cannot carry out her duties as a civil servant in a job that pays over $100,000 per year, then she should seriously consider getting a new career in a Christian environment or transfer to a different government department that won't force her to violate American law.



 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/kim-davis-kentucky-county-clerk-still-won-t-authorize-marriage-licences-1.3226886">http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/kim-davis- ... -1.3226886">http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/kim-davis-kentucky-county-clerk-still-won-t-authorize-marriage-licences-1.3226886

Kim Davis, Kentucky county clerk, still won't authorize marriage licences

Clerk Kim Davis returned to work Monday for the first time since being jailed for disobeying a federal judge and said she was faced with a "seemingly impossible choice" between following her conscience and losing her freedom over denying marriage licences to gay couples.  



With her voice shaking, she said she decided not to interfere with the marriage licences, but declared they would not be authorized by her and she questioned their validity.



In her first day back in the office after a five-day stint in jail, Davis said she was torn between obeying God and a directive from the judge that "forces me to disobey God." Davis, an Apostolic Christian, believes gay marriage is a sin.

 I agree.  I feel she should have stepped down.

[Anonymous]

Why wasn't Kim Davis just fired for failing to do her damn job?  Why do people think that their personal feelings (see religious convictions) can be applied to their jobs?  When I went to work, I left my biases at home and did my damn job.



There should be no accommodation for this crap.  She should be fired.  End of story.

 She's an elected officail.  Can't fire her. She can resign, or be impeached. The issue is in KY, homosexual marriage was not wanted by the people. It voted against everytime....so....she probably won't be impeached.  It's a complicated situation I don't think we are going to see the end of. Our government is pretty corrupt.

[RW]

Ah elected.  That complicates things. :/

[Anonymous]

Yeah its a circus.

[RW]

Why do you guys elect so many people down there?

[Anonymous]

Because its supposed to keep a tyrannical government at bay. I've given up, to be honest.

[RW]

That's rather paranoid wouldn't you say?

[Anonymous]

No...not when you consider American history and our Constitution and thongs that have gone down in the world. I mean at this point, our constitution is compromised anyway....so paranoid? Naw. Futile? Seems so.

[Frood]

We had a shipload of thongs go down in Northern Australia decades ago. Islanders were over the moon for weeks.

[RW]

A Constitution should be a living and evolving document IMHO.



I just don't understand this need to keep the government in its place.