one thing from the church regarding marriage and forgetting everything else. She has no problem issuing licenses to people who have been divorced, or people of other religions, or people who have had kids prior to marriage. She is choosing this one thing, and that makes her a hypocrite hiding behind the curtain of her religion.
This is her problem, and if she has such a big problem with it, she should step down.
I am unfamiliar with Kentucky laws, but this would be easily solved if someone else in that office had the authority to issue the licenses. What happens when she goes on vacation and a heterosexual couple comes into the office and wants a license?
She's everyone's boss in that office. And fwiw, a couple can go to any city clerks office in the state to get a marriage license if they really want one. It doesn't have to come from the county you live in.
The main difference is that Presidents, historically, have had lots of leeway to set "prosecutorial priority" and regulations and policy that further specifies what to do in interpreting the gaps in the law. Obama's immigration changes are, in theory, being made in agreement with that precedent.
This is not what is happening. In the case of immigration, the laws are being ignored and that illegality is unenforced. Local municipalities are failing to comply with Federal Law and it is not being enforced by the Department of Justice. It doesnt' matter why the law is being ignored and unenforced for this argument, but it is fact that the law is being ignored, there is no discretion (prosecutorial priority). I disagree with the disregard for the law being demonstrated by the clerk and the disregard for the law by the Federal Government. Both are dead wrong for the same reason.
The main difference is that Presidents, historically, have had lots of leeway to set "prosecutorial priority" and regulations and policy that further specifies what to do in interpreting the gaps in the law. Obama's immigration changes are, in theory, being made in agreement with that precedent.
This is not what is happening. In the case of immigration, the laws are being ignored and that illegality is unenforced. Local municipalities are failing to comply with Federal Law and it is not being enforced by the Department of Justice. It doesnt' matter why the law is being ignored and unenforced for this argument, but it is fact that the law is being ignored, there is no discretion (prosecutorial priority). I disagree with the disregard for the law being demonstrated by the clerk and the disregard for the law by the Federal Government. Both are dead wrong for the same reason.
Oh, I assumed you meant Obama's immigration stuff. My bad.
This is also an Orange. The key difference is that it's not the local jurisdictions job to enforce federal laws. They are making the determination that they don't want to be a part of enforcing that law and traditionally they have a lot of leeway to do that.
She can't be fired, because she's an elected official.
The Kentucky state legislature isn't going to impeach her.
She has two recourses, but of which make her a martyr, which one of the two political parties would LOVE for to happen.
1. The plantiffs can ask the federal judge to hold her in contempt of court, where she faces fines and/or jail time.
2. The Kentucky attorney general (a Democrat) could bring up misconduct charges, and she would go to jail.
Now if Davis ends up in jail, the Republicans would use her as the poster child for "Christian persecution," a woman who was jailed for exercising her religious beliefs. That would LOVE to point to this and scream, "See!? It's happening!"
she could just issue licenses or resign. That kind of persecution talk would only rally up the folks that are already on her side. Make a lot of hay on Fox News but most people would wonder why she pushed it that far.
she just looks like another jackass who won't follow the law.
I think the more likely tack is those outlets asking why the scofflaws regarding immigration are not held to a comparable standard. And while there are obvious difference regarding the law on these subjects, those arguments are likely to have some traction.
"I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God's in the mix."
"I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions."
"I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage."
"I have been to this point unwilling to sign on to same-sex marriage primarily because of my understandings of the traditional definitions of marriage.
"I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God's in the mix."
"I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions."
"I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage."
"I have been to this point unwilling to sign on to same-sex marriage primarily because of my understandings of the traditional definitions of marriage.
Barack Obama 2008 - 2012
What? A politician changes his public views to match polling? Shocking! :)
Kim Davis feels so strongly about the sanctity of marriage..... Â
As elected official. She has every right not to perform her required duties and in deep red Fox News Kentucky she is not getting impeached.
I am sure every gay couple in this county is meeting with lawyers to sue this county and will win easily. I hope this bigots enjoy when their taxes ahave to be raised to pay for the religious stance
"Until all office holders in all circumstances fulfill their duties in exactly the way I think they should, no office holder can be forced to follow this Godless law"
It's reasoning like that which makes me proud to be an American.
RE: Ignorance of the First Amendment extends well beyond BBI Â
A fellow Kentucky clerk, Casey Davis, who has protested alongside Ms. Davis, insisted Tuesday that “we’ve not tried to prevent,” same-sex marriages, “we’ve only tried to exercise our First Amendment rights.”
And I don't see the argument about standing up for her beliefs - at their core, her belief is discriminatory and hateful - what is the honor is standing up for that?
The First Amendment protects the people from the government. The government cannot force the people to practice a particular religion, or any religion. As an elected official, Ms. Davis IS THE GOVERNMENT. She is choosing to impose her particular religious beliefs on the people. So, no, she is not exercising her First Amendment rights. She is actively violating and restricting others' First Amendment rights.
I have no compassion for her. She is a bigot and a massive hypocrite. She's been divorced four times.
Jesus on Divorce
Mark 10:10-12: When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."
MOREHEAD — A federal judge has ordered Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis and her deputies to appear in his courtroom Thursday and explain why Davis should not be held in contempt of court for refusing to issue marriage licenses.
The plaintiffs made a motion -- this wasnt the judge watching the news and calling her in on his own accord.
Quote:
"Plaintiffs do not seek to compel Davis' compliance through incarceration," wrote William Sharp, legal director for the ACLU of Kentucky, which represents the couples.
"Since defendant Davis continues to collect compensation from the commonwealth for duties she fails to perform, plaintiffs urge the court to impose financial penalties sufficiently serious and increasingly onerous to compel Davis' immediate compliance without further delay," Sharp wrote.
Bunning responded by scheduling a contempt hearing for 11 a.m. Thursday at the U.S. District Courthouse in Ashland.
Separately, Attorney General Jack Conway continued to review a request from Rowan County Attorney Cecil Watkins, who wants a special prosecutor appointed to decide if Davis is guilty of official misconduct for failing to perform her public duties. The charge, a misdemeanor, could bring up to a year in jail.
"Plaintiffs do not seek to compel Davis' compliance through incarceration," wrote William Sharp, legal director for the ACLU of Kentucky, which represents the couples.
"Since defendant Davis continues to collect compensation from the commonwealth for duties she fails to perform, plaintiffs urge the court to impose financial penalties sufficiently serious and increasingly onerous to compel Davis' immediate compliance without further delay," Sharp wrote.
That's significant, except for the fact that someone will probably create a GoFundMe page and encourage morons to help pay her ongoing fines.
Fining her will result in an avalanche of donations and she'll keep refusing to issue the civil documents she is paid to issue. She'll never lay out a penny of her own money.
Factually speaking, prosecutorial discretion is not the same thing as ignoring the law. Also, prosecutorial discretion is legal, and every Pres, Rep and Dem have used it commonly.
RE: RE: Who do we fire for ignoring Immigration laws... Â
I actually think that you have a point there as well. The law is the law.
I'm sorry but you are fundamentally wrong. That executives and law enforcement have prosecutorial discretion is settled law. No court has challenged that with regards to DOCA, etal. The few judges in opposition object to measures designed, in my opinion, to make it easier to track the illegal immigrant population. The registration related portion of the exec order is what is under disagreement. The courts are not saying prioritizing who gets deported is either illegal, or abdication of duty.
My immigration stance tends to be strongly pro-enforcement. I'd even call it right wing, if the current right wing's immigration rhetoric didnt make my skin crawl.
But on a relative scale, why the fuck do I hear so much about immigration? Ohhhhh, a law going unenforced? How about the millions of Americans who filed fraudulent loan applications, which led to economic ruin? And the lenders who conspired with them to do so? How come no one is calling for the mass incarceration of all those Americans? Or all of the speeders? How come "they broke the law, period, end of story" is only relevant for illegal aliens?
Is illegal immigration really the biggest problem facing America? Because it is plainly the #1 topic in the GOP primary right now.
I think the Kate Steinly death made it a much bigger issue Â
and there has been more attention to crimes committed by illegal aliens including a lot of murders. And Trump touched a nerve on it and since then has seen his numbers go way up. So I think people feel 'politically safe' talking about it now.
from the WSJ (which I cite so we dont get into a debate about biased sources):
Quote:
They [ed. serious GOP candidates] might start by pointing out that numerous studies going back more than a century have shown that immigrants—regardless of nationality or legal status—are less likely than the native population to commit violent crimes or to be incarcerated. A new report from the Immigration Policy Center notes that while the illegal immigrant population in the U.S. more than tripled between 1990 and 2013 to more than 11.2 million, “FBI data indicate that the violent crime rate declined 48%—which included falling rates of aggravated assault, robbery, rape, and murder. Likewise, the property crime rate fell 41%, including declining rates of motor vehicle theft, larceny/robbery, and burglary.”
A separate IPC paper from 2007 explains that this is not a function of well-behaved high-skilled immigrants from India and China offsetting misdeeds of Latin American newcomers. The data show that “for every ethnic group without exception, incarceration rates among young men are lowest for immigrants,” according to the report. “This holds true especially for the Mexicans, Salvadorans, and Guatemalans who make up the bulk of the undocumented population.”
It also holds true in states with large populations of illegal residents. A 2008 report by the Public Policy Institute of California found that immigrants are underrepresented in the prison system. “The incarceration rate for foreign-born adults is 297 per 100,000 in the population, compared [with] 813 per 100,000 for U.S.-born adults,” the study concludes. “The foreign-born, who make up roughly 35% of California’s adult population, constitute 17% of the state prison population.”
High-profile incidents, like the recent arrest of a Mexican national in the horrific shooting death of a young woman in San Francisco, can give the impression that immigrants are more likely to commit violent crimes. But the alleged killer is no more representative of Mexican immigrants than Dylann Roof is representative of white people.
being deported. That is the issue. We have the sanctuary city issues and the policy of this administration not to enforce the immigration laws. Plus they have released many known illegal alien violent criminals. It just makes no sense.
tens of thousands of Americans tomorrow for mortgage fraud. People lied on their mortgage applications -- you can just compare the mortgage applications to tax records. These people caused economic ruin in this country, and we needed massive bailouts for the financial industry to prevent outright depression. Where are those prosecutions? Easiest prosecutions in the world. "It makes no sense". When Im on a highway, I'd guess that in good weather, they whole road save a few cars/trucks is speeding. Yet hardly anyone ever gets pulled over. "It makes no sense".
You still havent explained why immigration is the issue that captivates the right. Because even to this Democrat who is anti-amnesty and pro-enforcement, it just seems like one big dog whistle to the "they're taking away our country" set.
RE: It's funny how much I hear about immigration Â
My immigration stance tends to be strongly pro-enforcement. I'd even call it right wing, if the current right wing's immigration rhetoric didnt make my skin crawl.
But on a relative scale, why the fuck do I hear so much about immigration? Ohhhhh, a law going unenforced? How about the millions of Americans who filed fraudulent loan applications, which led to economic ruin? And the lenders who conspired with them to do so? How come no one is calling for the mass incarceration of all those Americans? Or all of the speeders? How come "they broke the law, period, end of story" is only relevant for illegal aliens?
Is illegal immigration really the biggest problem facing America? Because it is plainly the #1 topic in the GOP primary right now.
The two drug epidemics in America right now, meth and heroin, owe largely to illegal immigration. Cocaine too relies heavily on these networks. Again, that does not mean that all illegal immigrants are criminals, it is a function of the shadow world in which their legal status obligates them to live, but it is impossible to imagine these problems existing on the scale that they do without illegal immigration. So this isn't entirely a function of Donald Trump's dumbshit imagination. But he is unwilling or unable to articulate a nuanced understanding of the problem above and beyond demonizing the average immigrant.
just one side grasping at reasons to push illegal immigration among other issues. There isnt any reasonable solution on illegal immigration -- wall, drones, more ICE agents etc -- that is going to materially impact heroin and meth in this country.
Now I agree it is worthwhile to enforce the immigration laws. But I have all the reason in the world to be very suspicious of the people pushing this to the forefront of the national debate. It makes no sense.
I don't agree with her view, but I can respect that she has one and I think that she is welcome to her beliefs. But then she needs to quit.
shes wrong, AND shes an asshole - walter.
I wish the clerks who gave out gun licenses would have the same moral fortitude of this clerk in Kentucky.
Love and marriage... - ( New Window )
This is her problem, and if she has such a big problem with it, she should step down.
I am unfamiliar with Kentucky laws, but this would be easily solved if someone else in that office had the authority to issue the licenses. What happens when she goes on vacation and a heterosexual couple comes into the office and wants a license?
She's everyone's boss in that office. And fwiw, a couple can go to any city clerks office in the state to get a marriage license if they really want one. It doesn't have to come from the county you live in.
This is not what is happening. In the case of immigration, the laws are being ignored and that illegality is unenforced. Local municipalities are failing to comply with Federal Law and it is not being enforced by the Department of Justice. It doesnt' matter why the law is being ignored and unenforced for this argument, but it is fact that the law is being ignored, there is no discretion (prosecutorial priority). I disagree with the disregard for the law being demonstrated by the clerk and the disregard for the law by the Federal Government. Both are dead wrong for the same reason.
I hate my phone.
$80k in Kentucky? Wow.
If you take on this job, you have to perform the duties. Case closed.
If you take on this job, you have to perform the duties. Case closed.
Yes, she can be impeached.
But why are you insistent on taking over this thread? This is about a Kentucky clerk.
I suggest you start a new thread.
Quote:
The main difference is that Presidents, historically, have had lots of leeway to set "prosecutorial priority" and regulations and policy that further specifies what to do in interpreting the gaps in the law. Obama's immigration changes are, in theory, being made in agreement with that precedent.
This is not what is happening. In the case of immigration, the laws are being ignored and that illegality is unenforced. Local municipalities are failing to comply with Federal Law and it is not being enforced by the Department of Justice. It doesnt' matter why the law is being ignored and unenforced for this argument, but it is fact that the law is being ignored, there is no discretion (prosecutorial priority). I disagree with the disregard for the law being demonstrated by the clerk and the disregard for the law by the Federal Government. Both are dead wrong for the same reason.
Oh, I assumed you meant Obama's immigration stuff. My bad.
This is also an Orange. The key difference is that it's not the local jurisdictions job to enforce federal laws. They are making the determination that they don't want to be a part of enforcing that law and traditionally they have a lot of leeway to do that.
The Kentucky state legislature isn't going to impeach her.
She has two recourses, but of which make her a martyr, which one of the two political parties would LOVE for to happen.
1. The plantiffs can ask the federal judge to hold her in contempt of court, where she faces fines and/or jail time.
2. The Kentucky attorney general (a Democrat) could bring up misconduct charges, and she would go to jail.
Now if Davis ends up in jail, the Republicans would use her as the poster child for "Christian persecution," a woman who was jailed for exercising her religious beliefs. That would LOVE to point to this and scream, "See!? It's happening!"
I think the more likely tack is those outlets asking why the scofflaws regarding immigration are not held to a comparable standard. And while there are obvious difference regarding the law on these subjects, those arguments are likely to have some traction.
"I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions."
"I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage."
"I have been to this point unwilling to sign on to same-sex marriage primarily because of my understandings of the traditional definitions of marriage.
Barack Obama 2008 - 2012
"I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions."
"I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage."
"I have been to this point unwilling to sign on to same-sex marriage primarily because of my understandings of the traditional definitions of marriage.
Barack Obama 2008 - 2012
What? A politician changes his public views to match polling? Shocking! :)
Unbelievable.
Who worships at the county clerk office?
As elected official. She has every right not to perform her required duties and in deep red Fox News Kentucky she is not getting impeached.
I am sure every gay couple in this county is meeting with lawyers to sue this county and will win easily. I hope this bigots enjoy when their taxes ahave to be raised to pay for the religious stance
It's reasoning like that which makes me proud to be an American.
And I don't see the argument about standing up for her beliefs - at their core, her belief is discriminatory and hateful - what is the honor is standing up for that?
The First Amendment protects the people from the government. The government cannot force the people to practice a particular religion, or any religion. As an elected official, Ms. Davis IS THE GOVERNMENT. She is choosing to impose her particular religious beliefs on the people. So, no, she is not exercising her First Amendment rights. She is actively violating and restricting others' First Amendment rights.
I have no compassion for her. She is a bigot and a massive hypocrite. She's been divorced four times.
Jesus on Divorce
Mark 10:10-12: When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."
Jesus on Homosexuality
Not sure if it's a way of truncating different views or if there is an actual boogeyman but some of you guys have some obsession issues.
Not sure if it's a way of truncating different views or if there is an actual boogeyman but some of you guys have some obsession issues.
Probably about the same as the amount of Obama mentions in this thread.
Quote:
Has Fox News come out in support of this lady?
Not sure if it's a way of truncating different views or if there is an actual boogeyman but some of you guys have some obsession issues.
Probably about the same as the amount of Obama mentions in this thread.
The plaintiffs made a motion -- this wasnt the judge watching the news and calling her in on his own accord.
"Since defendant Davis continues to collect compensation from the commonwealth for duties she fails to perform, plaintiffs urge the court to impose financial penalties sufficiently serious and increasingly onerous to compel Davis' immediate compliance without further delay," Sharp wrote.
Bunning responded by scheduling a contempt hearing for 11 a.m. Thursday at the U.S. District Courthouse in Ashland.
Separately, Attorney General Jack Conway continued to review a request from Rowan County Attorney Cecil Watkins, who wants a special prosecutor appointed to decide if Davis is guilty of official misconduct for failing to perform her public duties. The charge, a misdemeanor, could bring up to a year in jail.
Link - ( New Window )
"Since defendant Davis continues to collect compensation from the commonwealth for duties she fails to perform, plaintiffs urge the court to impose financial penalties sufficiently serious and increasingly onerous to compel Davis' immediate compliance without further delay," Sharp wrote.
That's significant, except for the fact that someone will probably create a GoFundMe page and encourage morons to help pay her ongoing fines.
Is Kentucky’s Infamous Anti-Gay Clerk Getting Taken for a Ride by Her Lawyers? - ( New Window )
Having a hard time seeing why it shouldn't be...
Having a hard time seeing why it shouldn't be...
I believe it is
Factually speaking, prosecutorial discretion is not the same thing as ignoring the law. Also, prosecutorial discretion is legal, and every Pres, Rep and Dem have used it commonly.
Quote:
how about some consistency?
I actually think that you have a point there as well. The law is the law.
I'm sorry but you are fundamentally wrong. That executives and law enforcement have prosecutorial discretion is settled law. No court has challenged that with regards to DOCA, etal. The few judges in opposition object to measures designed, in my opinion, to make it easier to track the illegal immigrant population. The registration related portion of the exec order is what is under disagreement. The courts are not saying prioritizing who gets deported is either illegal, or abdication of duty.
But on a relative scale, why the fuck do I hear so much about immigration? Ohhhhh, a law going unenforced? How about the millions of Americans who filed fraudulent loan applications, which led to economic ruin? And the lenders who conspired with them to do so? How come no one is calling for the mass incarceration of all those Americans? Or all of the speeders? How come "they broke the law, period, end of story" is only relevant for illegal aliens?
Is illegal immigration really the biggest problem facing America? Because it is plainly the #1 topic in the GOP primary right now.
I'd hope she'd simply be terminated for being a colossal screw-up.
A separate IPC paper from 2007 explains that this is not a function of well-behaved high-skilled immigrants from India and China offsetting misdeeds of Latin American newcomers. The data show that “for every ethnic group without exception, incarceration rates among young men are lowest for immigrants,” according to the report. “This holds true especially for the Mexicans, Salvadorans, and Guatemalans who make up the bulk of the undocumented population.”
It also holds true in states with large populations of illegal residents. A 2008 report by the Public Policy Institute of California found that immigrants are underrepresented in the prison system. “The incarceration rate for foreign-born adults is 297 per 100,000 in the population, compared [with] 813 per 100,000 for U.S.-born adults,” the study concludes. “The foreign-born, who make up roughly 35% of California’s adult population, constitute 17% of the state prison population.”
High-profile incidents, like the recent arrest of a Mexican national in the horrific shooting death of a young woman in San Francisco, can give the impression that immigrants are more likely to commit violent crimes. But the alleged killer is no more representative of Mexican immigrants than Dylann Roof is representative of white people.
Link - ( New Window )
I wish irony wasn't as misused as begging the question.
You still havent explained why immigration is the issue that captivates the right. Because even to this Democrat who is anti-amnesty and pro-enforcement, it just seems like one big dog whistle to the "they're taking away our country" set.
But on a relative scale, why the fuck do I hear so much about immigration? Ohhhhh, a law going unenforced? How about the millions of Americans who filed fraudulent loan applications, which led to economic ruin? And the lenders who conspired with them to do so? How come no one is calling for the mass incarceration of all those Americans? Or all of the speeders? How come "they broke the law, period, end of story" is only relevant for illegal aliens?
Is illegal immigration really the biggest problem facing America? Because it is plainly the #1 topic in the GOP primary right now.
The two drug epidemics in America right now, meth and heroin, owe largely to illegal immigration. Cocaine too relies heavily on these networks. Again, that does not mean that all illegal immigrants are criminals, it is a function of the shadow world in which their legal status obligates them to live, but it is impossible to imagine these problems existing on the scale that they do without illegal immigration. So this isn't entirely a function of Donald Trump's dumbshit imagination. But he is unwilling or unable to articulate a nuanced understanding of the problem above and beyond demonizing the average immigrant.
Now I agree it is worthwhile to enforce the immigration laws. But I have all the reason in the world to be very suspicious of the people pushing this to the forefront of the national debate. It makes no sense.