Kentucky County Clerk still Refuses to issue Gay Marriage License

[BruceVC]

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/01/will-clerk-issue-gay-marriage-licenses-after-court-ruling/

 

Here are some more details around the clerks view, what is particularly interesting is the text below 

 

“I never imagined a day like this would come, where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage,” Davis said in the statement. “To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. It is a Heaven or Hell decision. For me it is a decision of obedience.”

 

So for her she clearly feels she faces eternal damnation if she issues these gay marriage  licenses...mmmm...

I have to ask why some one of such religious conviction would work for a secular institution like government. It's like a devout Muslim becoming a bartender and being like, "I can't believe I have to hand out alcoholic drinks!"

 

Yes as usual you ask pertinent questions. But she has been proved to be a fake ...and Volo wants us to feel sorry for her. Do you think I should ....maybe I'm being unreasonable. You will be honest ?

[Calax]

The thing is, everyone makes these comments about the Clerk because they think "It won't matter to her, I'm just a guy on the internet" The woman deserves to get her head handed to her metaphorically by the government, but not to become the villain in a "Message" movie.

 

GD, I think that you'll find many liberals don't want government for the sake of government, they want government for the sake of protection from companies. A libertarian's paradise ends up being a world in which you have a very strict class structure defined by where you were born simply because those on top are able to define the "game" to their heavy advantage, while those at the bottom work... but have most of their pay taken back in return for room and board. A larger and better funded government means that your schools would be better, your roads wouldn't be the bumpiest things on the planet, and you wouldn't have a foster care system that is rampant with abuse.

 

Yes the government would want to tax you more, but in an ideal world, those taxes would be put towards preventing situations like those found in schools these days from occurring (where teachers are graded and given pay raises... based on a formula used for breeding cattle).

 

This thing with the clerk highlights the elephant in the room. We're not a society defined by a majority, we're a society defined by the most extreme elements. Those on the left think those on the right are a bunch of "'murica! **** YEAH!" racist gun nuts who want to blow up the world. Those on the right think those on the left are communist gays who want to have a world of no consequences and to be babied. Those who are atheistic think that the religious are all young earth creationists, while those who are religious think that atheists all burn the bible and make love to goats, just to get back at the whole "morality" schtick.

 

And here we have a woman who's a bigot, probably without realizing it. Many people are socialized with these sorts of built in hatreds simply because they had no real exposure beyond stereotypes. I personally can come off as a massive racist, because when I grew up there was 1 black guy in my entire schooling. I make snap judgements in my head about my customers based on their looks (when I give them credit checks usually) and get surprised when they have decent credit (well enough to rent a car), simply because I grew up in the rich red part of California. And this Clerk probably views homosexuality as a mortal sin, while her divorce is much more accepted. But if this was the Tudor dynasty, she'd be much more against the concept of divorce simply because that's the law of the day.

[BruceVC]

The thing is, everyone makes these comments about the Clerk because they think "It won't matter to her, I'm just a guy on the internet" The woman deserves to get her head handed to her metaphorically by the government, but not to become the villain in a "Message" movie.

 

GD, I think that you'll find many liberals don't want government for the sake of government, they want government for the sake of protection from companies. A libertarian's paradise ends up being a world in which you have a very strict class structure defined by where you were born simply because those on top are able to define the "game" to their heavy advantage, while those at the bottom work... but have most of their pay taken back in return for room and board. A larger and better funded government means that your schools would be better, your roads wouldn't be the bumpiest things on the planet, and you wouldn't have a foster care system that is rampant with abuse.

 

Yes the government would want to tax you more, but in an ideal world, those taxes would be put towards preventing situations like those found in schools these days from occurring (where teachers are graded and given pay raises... based on a formula used for breeding cattle).

 

This thing with the clerk highlights the elephant in the room. We're not a society defined by a majority, we're a society defined by the most extreme elements. Those on the left think those on the right are a bunch of "'murica! **** YEAH!" racist gun nuts who want to blow up the world. Those on the right think those on the left are communist gays who want to have a world of no consequences and to be babied. Those who are atheistic think that the religious are all young earth creationists, while those who are religious think that atheists all burn the bible and make love to goats, just to get back at the whole "morality" schtick.

 

And here we have a woman who's a bigot, probably without realizing it. Many people are socialized with these sorts of built in hatreds simply because they had no real exposure beyond stereotypes. I personally can come off as a massive racist, because when I grew up there was 1 black guy in my entire schooling. I make snap judgements in my head about my customers based on their looks (when I give them credit checks usually) and get surprised when they have decent credit (well enough to rent a car), simply because I grew up in the rich red part of California. And this Clerk probably views homosexuality as a mortal sin, while her divorce is much more accepted. But if this was the Tudor dynasty, she'd be much more against the concept of divorce simply because that's the law of the day.

I wish you guys would stop making excuses for her, its not like she is on death row I would gladly tell her to her face what I think about her ...trust me I stand by what I say about her behavior. I went into great detail explaining what she did. I am surprised more of you guys haven't said " thanks Bruce, that makes sense " ...I know you guys think I'm modest but sometimes I do like a little credit    That's what I like about my girlfriends and women generally. They much more empathetic than men and know how to flatter men in a nice way, they so sweet and pay me these little comments "there, there...you so clever Brucie " 

I have to assume this is some sort of first world perspective conundrum where you feel sorry for her, I have explained in great detail what she decided to do and how that must have humiliated the various gay couples. Lets not drag this out where you guys seriously think we shouldn't criticize Davis 

Edited September 5, 2015 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

You know what guys I have mentioned this before but I was raised by my mom and in a matriarchal society. And in RL I have a real group of girlfriends who I love talking to and interacting with, many of them are my friends wives or girlfriends and some are my single friends. But the point being I really enjoy the company of women in a non-sexual way ( obviously there are girls I am attracted to )

 

Anyway the reason I am mentioning this is I miss the fact we dont  have many women on these forums and with  my joke above I realized how much I miss there more gentler and sympathetic views. And I can't be only one...have we ever established why there are NO women on these forums

 

Its weird, if I think about all the married or involved members like Hurlshot, Shady or TN don't you guys think it would nice to have some ladies commenting? Its not like I don't talking to you guys but lets be honest we all lack that empathy and relationship building skills that women are so great at. And we can't keep expecting Volo to provide this 

 

Why don't you guys try to invite some women so we can balance the gender equation...I know loads of girls of all ages but to be honest none of them play games and the idea of a forum would be weird to them..the ones I told about these forums think its quite eccentric . Remember in South Africa we are behind in forums and games

Edited September 5, 2015 by BruceVC

[Volourn]

"You feel guilty, thats exactly what I wanted."

\

feel guilty about what?

 

Youa re the one who is saying it is okay to  bully someone simply b/c they have a different opinion than you. LMAO

[BruceVC]

"You feel guilty, thats exactly what I wanted."

\

feel guilty about what?

 

Youa re the one who is saying it is okay to  bully someone simply b/c they have a different opinion than you. LMAO

Okay yes I can see you are now thinking about what you said and yes I accept your apology. Lets try to remember that when someone writes a long post for you that you asked for its polite to maybe say " thanks for the read" ...trust me people appreciate the small considerations 

[213374U]

But I work in the financial sector and this  has been studied extensively because the whole world was close to a depression. I watched an interview with 

Lloyd Blankfein CEO of Goldman Sachs about the penalties and fines most of the investment and commercial  banks have paid, check this link

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/08/big-bank-fines-total_n_5659317.html

 

http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-123.htm

 

 

Goldman Sachs has very few fines despite what you may think, anyway he was quite clear that there is no such thing as a true Capitalist country and he acknowledged government  regulation and monitoring going forward. And he is a Jewish American Capitalist and a real financial genius. So if he can admit government interference then you can

 

This guy really is a walking comedy show. Do you even read the links you post? Oh, what am I saying, of course you don't. You don't have time for "evidence" and "reading", and expecting either from you is "annoying"!

 

From the first link: "Since 2009, the American banking industry alone has racked up nearly $503 billion in profits, according to FDIC quarterly data through the first quarter of 2014."

 

$128bn worth of fines spread across the whole financial sector doesn't even amount to a slap in the wrist. $550M fine for Goldman Sachs? Wow, that's really going to hurt them, they only made ~13bn in 2009. Get real.

Edited September 5, 2015 by 213374U

[BruceVC]

 

But I work in the financial sector and this  has been studied extensively because the whole world was close to a depression. I watched an interview with 

Lloyd Blankfein CEO of Goldman Sachs about the penalties and fines most of the investment and commercial  banks have paid, check this link

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/08/big-bank-fines-total_n_5659317.html

 

http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-123.htm

 

 

Goldman Sachs has very few fines despite what you may think, anyway he was quite clear that there is no such thing as a true Capitalist country and he acknowledged government  regulation and monitoring going forward. And he is a Jewish American Capitalist and a real financial genius. So if he can admit government interference then you can

 

This guy really is a walking comedy show. Do you even read the links you post? Oh, what am I saying, of course you don't. You don't have time for "evidence" and "reading", and expecting either from you is "annoying"!

 

From the first link (second ****ing sentence, too): "Since 2009, the American banking industry alone has racked up nearly $503 billion in profits, according to FDIC quarterly data through the first quarter of 2014."

 

$128bn worth of fines spread across the whole financial sector doesn't even amount to a slap in the wrist. $550M fine for Goldman Sachs? Wow, that's really going to hurt them, they only made ~13bn in 2009. Get real.

 

2133 please lets stop this pointless bickering. 

 

Of course I read the links, I posted them. I am not going to exaggerate the issue by saying the penalties and fines have crippled the banks, thats not the point and never was.  Why would I or the world  want the international investment banks to crash due to fines ...I work in the industry and they are critical to the global economy. This is not about punishment but rather that there is real effort to ensure good banking codes of conduct

 

And that the banks understand the regulation. And yes I posted Goldman Sachs link because the interview was with Lloyd and yes they havent been heavily fined because they and all the American investment banks are working hard at not being fined

 

This should make you happy.....since its good news

[213374U]

Mate, the sole reason for fines to exist is to deter certain behaviors. If, after being caught and fined, criminal behavior is being rewarded with earnings numbered in the billions, there is no deterrence going on, rather the opposite. So no, it's not good news, because these joke fines are actually encouraging banksterism.

 

Once again, your double standards shine through: you are all for making an example out of a nobody clerk for her defiance of the SCOTUS, but imposing an exemplary punishment on a big bank that may break it to make the rest think twice is a no-no.

 

In the immortal words of Volourn: LOLOLOLLIPOP

[BruceVC]

Mate, the sole reason for fines to exist is to deter certain behaviors. If, after being caught and fined, criminal behavior is being rewarded with earnings numbered in the billions, there is no deterrence going on, rather the opposite. So no, it's not good news, because these joke fines are actually encouraging banksterism.

 

Once again, your double standards shine through: you are all for making an example out of a nobody clerk for her defiance of the SCOTUS, but imposing an exemplary punishment on a big bank that may break it to make the rest think twice is a no-no.

 

In the immortal words of Volourn: LOLOLOLLIPOP

In the past I probably would have made some dismissive comment by now as you still missing my point  but thats the old Bruce and I'm trying very hard not to be condescending as it was brought to my attention by a few members and confirmed by my girlfriend that I am. Ironically it was you who first called me  " thoroughly revolting condescending " which I found funny at the time and dismissed ..but you were right

 

I understand why you question the veracity of my post, it does seem like a minor fine and you on a personal level are dealing with austerity in Spain so of course the likes of Goldman getting these small fines seems inexplicable and unfair. But I can promise you this is much better  for the likes of Spain in its recovery and for the overall EU. But I need to explain this properly so there is no doubt from you but I'm heading off now for  a long day of drinks and food...so I will update this later

 

In summary the reality of the world economy is that the Chinese economy is really slowing down and there socialist experiment of there own stock market is  now recognized as a failure. There slowdown is dragging down many economies and emerging markets, like South Africa. So this is no time for me to gloat, this is serious but to be honest it is very exasperating as South Africa should have aligned with the Western financial markets but due to this absurd "anti-Western " sentiment from South Africa we favored the Chinese. And you use to think when I called you anti-Western that was strange, imagine Spain now if it had chosen the Chinese. So thats something you have avoided

 

The Western investment banks and investment strategies  are still the best solution for sustained growth and stability and you have to believe me on this as I do work in the financial sector and my family has several investment bankers....or at least believe me until I post later

[Guard Dog]

 

Okay well to be honest I only know the official history that the US government talks about and that goes back to Clinton and his desire for every American to have a home

 

But I work in the financial sector and this  has been studied extensively because the whole world was close to a depression. I watched an interview with 

Lloyd Blankfein CEO of Goldman Sachs about the penalties and fines most of the investment and commercial  banks have paid, check this link

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/08/big-bank-fines-total_n_5659317.html

 

http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2010/2010-123.htm

 

 

Goldman Sachs has very few fines despite what you may think, anyway he was quite clear that there is no such thing as a true Capitalist country and he acknowledged government  regulation and monitoring going forward. And he is a Jewish American Capitalist and a real financial genius. So if he can admit government interference then you can

 

I don't think you read my post. Those two links have nothing to do with what we were talking about.

 

To both you & Calax, I am not an anarchist. The Libertarian paradise is not a world with no government. And capitalism would run amok with no regulation at all. You have never heard me argue otherwise. The role of regulation should be one that defines process. Since the LBJ administration in the 1960's the US Government has gone from safeguarding process to trying to control outcome. The confusion of the concepts of equal opportunity with equal outcome is the first step to disaster. Every law I listed above was a step away from the job of "leveling the playing field" and a step towards "rigging the game".

[HoonDing]

"But I work in the financial sector"

 

that explains a lot

[Namutree]

"But I work in the financial sector"

 

that explains a lot

Ha!

[Hurlshort]

I find life is much easier if I don't read more than the first two sentences and the last two sentences from some posters.  It saves time and sanity.

[Raithe]

Now, did I glance at a wrong headline or has the clerk now claimed they shouldn't be able to send her to an all woman jail because "they" are trying to break her will, because those jails are full of lesbians?

 

The things that social media newsfeeds stream across that you really try to avoid paying attention to.....

[Wrath of Dagon]

http://reason.com/archives/2015/09/04/remember-the-law-is-only-sacred-when-it

[Namutree]

http://reason.com/archives/2015/09/04/remember-the-law-is-only-sacred-when-it

I didn't know she got friggin' jail time! Wouldn't a simple dismissal have been sufficient? Kinda goin' overboard there government.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Namutree

[Volourn]

"In America, we have a city council in Denver that advocates shutting down a business such as Chick-fil-A because the CEO once took a public position against gay marriage. In this country, people who are here illegally can march in the streets to protest their station without any genuine fear of being rounded up and expelled. They are celebrated. Moreover, we have cities across this country that ignore immigration laws they don't like and create sanctuaries from law. We have cities that ignore federal drug laws because they find them oppressive. Yet no one finds himself in jail. When Californians approved Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage, a number of officials refused to enforce the law. They were celebrated. I may even agree with the impulse. But not one elected official has been hauled off to jail for any of these stands."

 

This is what the SJW hateful nazi bigots like Bruce need to read to see their hypocrisy in clear cut manner though I'm sure he has ane xcuse.

 

SJWs are fine with holocausts  - as long as it is the 'right' target.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Volourn

[Hurlshort]

 

http://reason.com/archives/2015/09/04/remember-the-law-is-only-sacred-when-it

I didn't know she got friggin' jail time! Wouldn't a simple dismissal have been sufficient? Kinda goin' overboard there government.

 

 

She is an elected official, she cannot simply be dismissed.  She is free to resign, or follow the court order.  Because she refuses to do either, she is being held in contempt.  It's quite a pickle, no one in their right mind wants a government that can simply remove an elected official from office without due process, but you also can't have every county clerk across the country trying to interpret the law based on their 'feels' 

[ManifestedISO]

 

This is what the SJW hateful nazi bigots like Bruce need to read to see their hypocrisy

 

I don't even know him, really, and I know he is none of those things. For shame. 

[Bartimaeus]

 

 

http://reason.com/archives/2015/09/04/remember-the-law-is-only-sacred-when-it

I didn't know she got friggin' jail time! Wouldn't a simple dismissal have been sufficient? Kinda goin' overboard there government.

 

 

She is an elected official, she cannot simply be dismissed.  She is free to resign, or follow the court order.  Because she refuses to do either, she is being held in contempt.  It's quite a pickle, no one in their right mind wants a government that can simply remove an elected official from office without due process, but you also can't have every county clerk across the country trying to interpret the law based on their 'feels' 

 

 

Isn't there usually some sort of impeachment process for elected officials? I would think that would be the next step if she's continuing to break the law.

[Volourn]

Yeah she can be impeached much like the president but that could be costly and lengthy.  Of course, last i checked, gov't officials tend to have legal requirements in orer to run/hold office. It's like saying a murderer could keep office simply because they were elected even if they get offended. This is why mayors, DAs, premiers, governors, and the like can all be removed from office even after being elected. Yet somehow we are to believe that this clerk has an iron clad hold on her position? COME ON.

[ShadySands]

I'm not familiar with Kentucky laws and I'm definitely no lawyer but I think it varies from place to place wrt removal from office and a quick search on the internet seems to back that up. 

 

Dunno if any recall or impeachment process has begun or not

[Guard Dog]

 

 

SJWs are fine with holocausts  - as long as it is the 'right' target.

Yeah that sums it up perfectly I'm afraid to say.

[Drowsy Emperor]

Brave of her to take a stand, when all the conservative christian right (in the EU and US) does is watch and grumble as their countries are trampled over by the terror of political correctness and minorities that have outright usurped the political system to advance their agenda.

 

In this particular case, I believe the dissenting opinion of the supreme court judge summed up the matter best. It has been "resolved" without true consent, in truth forced on people, so that not only is it a hollow victory - it will likely not stand the test of time.

 

PS: we have indeed gone to the ****ter when Volourn is the voice of reason in a political thread. (:

Edited September 7, 2015 by Drowsy Emperor