Kentucky clerk seeks Supreme Court help to deny gay marriage licenses

Print More
Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis appearing at the Federal Courthouse in Covington. Photo by Mike Wynn, The (Louisville, Ky.) Courier-Journal.

Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis appearing at the Federal Courthouse in Covington. Photo by Mike Wynn, The (Louisville, Ky.) Courier-Journal.

Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content by logging-in here.

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (Reuters) If forced to approve marriage licenses for gay and lesbian couples, the "searing act of validation would forever echo in her conscience," her lawyers said in their Supreme Court request for a stay pending appeal.

  • Pingback: Kentucky clerk seeks Supreme Court help to deny gay marriage licenses - mosaicversemosaicverse()

  • Greg1

    This is a very good move on the part of the clerk, as freedom of religion is actually part of our Constitution, and not just some corrupt emotional “decision” based upon the “feelings” of the SC justices. I say it is time for every Christian county clerk or similar position to ALL refuse to issue licenses. Take a page out of the Leftist’s book, and show that there is power in numbers. Civil disobedience must be the way of the Church going forward: marches on Washington, lying in the streets in protest, bullying our way into campaign speeches, and being loud, etc. The Left has shown us the way to victory, so let’s use their tactics, and turn this tide around into the direction facing “normal.” Let’s go all you clerks, start a movement!

  • Jeffsfla

    Greg1 your are wrong. She is a government employee who took and oath to serve the citizens of the county. I am expecting she will go the whole way on this issue and will not back down. Unfortunately, we will witness her being hauled off to jail and we will see images of her kneeling in her jail cell. The majority of the citizens of this country will just laugh at her and it will reflect badly on all of us.

  • Ben in oakland

    That’s what we gay people have been saying all along. Start dealing with the real issues facing with the country, instead of upsets you know what to people you don’t know are doing.

    As for your Xenophobia, I’m pretty sure that speaks for itself.

  • Ben in oakland

    If you’re so concerned about the rest of the country laughing about you, perhaps you should be more upset about people like Kim Davis. She is claiming what a certain class of so-called Christian always claims: Christian exceptionalism. That means, but she doesn’t have to obey the laws that govern all of us, nor her oath of office, nor her violation of the biblical principles by being on her fourth marriage, Your indeed, anything that doesn’t comport with her personal prejudices. It is time that the Christians who claim they are not like all the other questions – i.e. like Greg – to stand up to the so-called Christians exactly like Greg, and stop excusing their bad behavior.

  • Lloyd E Anderson

    “The national government will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality.

    Today Christians stand at the head of our country. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit. We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press……in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of LIBERAL excess during the past few years.”

    ~Adolph Hitler~
    The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872

  • Dominic

    Good for the clerk. Fight for your rights. Her job description has changed midstream to include gay marriage, an inclusion that attacks her religious beliefs. Her faith is being denied expression in lieu of the State’s demands….a clear violation of the 1st Amendment.
    Her agreement to dispense marriage applications was made before a redefinition of marriage was created by the Supreme Court. A new window needs to be opened at the office for Gay applications.

  • Greg1

    If that’s what it takes to make a point, then so be it. The Left does it all the time. The thing is, she is a government employee who has Constitutional right, including Freedom of religion. The Constitution does not say free worship of religion, it says free exercise of religion. That means Monday through Sunday, you have the right to believe and practice what you believe. When she took her job she was not then told she had to marry men with men, women with women, animal with human, or multiple husbands or multiple wives with one spouse, no she took her job and it included issuing marriage licenses to one man and one woman. That is the basis by which she needs to contest this thing. And if the SC refuses it, then she needs to continue on in her contestation.

  • Dominic

    Hitler used a Machiavellian approach to make Germans believe his actions were for the greater good. He meant not a word of what he spoke, the speech is a cover for his evil objectives.

  • Richard2

    U.S. District Judge David Bunning is supposed to settle cases which come before him, not allow every trivial dispute to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. At the same time judges are properly reluctant to tell elected officials how to perform their duties. The preferable options would be to have Ms. Davis defeated in the next election, or impeached and removed from office. In this case Ms. Davis’ inaction is doing little harm, as compared to the situation when entire states were refusing to permit marriages or recognize those performed in other states, so Judge Bunning could properly extend his stay long enough to give the Supreme Court time to act. Or he could defend his own office by throwing Ms. Davis in prison and fining her a thousand dollars a day. His judgment on what to do is probably better than mine.

  • Fred Friendly

    Date: 30 Aug 2015
    Dear Ms. Davis,

    What is religious freedom, anyway? Should a Muslim be able to exercise their religion freely in the United States the same as a Roman Catholic? Or a Buddhist? Or a Sikh? Or even an Atheist?

    Well, every precedent says yes, they all have the same right to freely practice their religion as one another, provided they’re not causing anyone any physical harm or inciting violence through their practice of religion.

    But how, exactly, does this work, anyway? If one only looks at their own personal freedoms, then it’s clear: you get to grant or deny anyone anything you want, using your beliefs as a hammer to use on anyone you judge to not fit within that belief system.

    But one’s own personal freedoms aren’t the only ones that matter. You’re not the center of the universe. No one is. We live in a society of many people, and each and every one of these people believes something different from the other.

    So how do we enable everyone to share…

  • Sheiswrong

    Everyone lives in her county!
    Everyone does not go to her church!
    She can keep her belief system, but must do her job for Everyone or let someone else do it!

  • The answer is simple: Your rights end where my nose begins. And vice versa. A Jewish OB/GYN can’t mandate that all boys he delivers are circumcised, a Jehovah’s Witness doctor can’t withhold a life saving blood transfusion from a dying patient, and an Apostolic Christian county clerk can’t deny two consenting adults the right to share in a system of pooling monetary resources, complete with state and federal tax benefits in order to promote household stability. That system, by the way, is what this country calls Marriage—it’s nothing more than that. The relationship between the couple and God is not the same thing as the relationship between the couple and the state. And, according to the first amendment, the government isn’t allowed to establish a religion, so the state’s definition of marriage therefore cannot have anything whatsoever to do with the Bible’s definition of marriage.

  • This is the bottom line:
    Your free practice of religion (or absence thereof) should not be able to legally trump my free practice of religion (or absence thereof)—and if we allow that balance to be upset, if we say one person’s religious freedom matters more than another person’s religious freedom, then no one has free practice of religion. You have the freedom to practice your religion, but not to impose your religious beliefs on others–because imposing your religion on others infringes their respective free practice of religion. And by denying your constituents marriage licenses, you are in fact imposing your religion on others.

    I sincerely hope you see the light of reason.

  • Ali Abboud Fakhoury

    Absolutely agree! As a devout Muslim it is a violation of my religion to issue a driver’s license to a woman. Just because I work at the Kentucky Division of Motor Vehicle Licensing doesn’t mean I must leave my religious beliefs at the front door! That means Monday thru Sunday!

    Thank you

  • Mary O’Connor

    Absolutely agree! As a devout Catholic it is a violation of my religion to issue a marriage license to an already married couple. If you haven’t been issued an annulment by the Roman Catholic Church, you’re still married according to the tenets of my faith. Just because I work as a county clerk doesn’t mean I must leave my religious beliefs at the front door! That means Monday thru Sunday!

    Thank you Greg1

  • This is the dumbest manufactured controversy in, well … a week or so. This woman is on her third or fourth marriage.

    She has two legal options: Do her *^#$ job or resign. That’s it. A conservative federal district court judge told her that she must issue the licenses. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals would not issue a stay — primarily because she has no chance of prevailing. Hopefully Justice Kagan will put an end to this disgraceful saga tomorrow.

    BTW, she is in contempt of court as is.

  • Brandon Jones

    Absolutely agree! As a devout Evangelical Christian it is a violation of my deeply held religious beliefs to issue a building permit to religious groups that preach false doctrine (Catholics, Jews, Mormons etc.). Consequently, I just won’t place my signature on those permits even though I work as a permit officer at the Louisville Department of Permits and Licensing. That means Monday through Sunday, I have a right to believe and practice what I believe

    Thank you Greg1 !!

    Thank you

  • Aaron Stein

    Absolutely agree! As a devout Orthodox Jew it is a violation of my religion to issue a food safety permit to any restaurant that does not serve kosher. Just because I work at the Fayette County Health Department here in Lexington doesn’t mean I have to put my signature on permits for the local Red Lobster! Freedom of religion doesn’t mean I must leave my religious beliefs at the front door where I work! That means Monday thru Sunday!

    Thank you Greg1

  • Richard Rush

    Her religious freedom does not include the freedom to deny freedom to other people to live in accordance with their own religious freedom consistent with the laws of the United States.

    This case clearly demonstrates the reality that TrueChristians hate religious freedom, except for themselves.

  • Larry

    Much like evangelical Christians make people like yourself believe that discrimination and treating others badly is for the greater good. Evil objectives are rife with people who think God absolves them of all of their harmful conduct to others.

    After all anything is considered moral, no matter how malicious, if you can quote scripture to excuse it. That is what how you guys describe Christian moral concepts.

  • TimCA

    Greg,

    You might want to rethink your silly notions of what religious freedom really means

  • Richard Rush

    Thanks for demonstrating a bit of the mindset that is helping the post-Christian movement grow.

  • Larry

    There is a good case for impeachment. After the injunction runs out she will be committing contempt of court. An offense which can lead to some minor prison time if a judge is so inclined. Her inaction is not as bad as a statewide refusal, but it is still county-wide.

    I don’t know how many people live in her county, but it is a tangible harm. Plus she is wasting hours upon hours of court time on what is clearly a frivolous action. Defense counsel could easily make a case for sanctions or possibly even their legal costs.

  • Sam James

    Kim Davis cannot (and will not) win this fight. That would mean that all Clerks would be able to cherry pick laws and decide whom he or she should serve within a public.

    She is FORCING her own religious beliefs on Rowan County and making all of the County follow according to her own personal religious compass. My religious beliefs hold that it is valid to grant ALL marriage licenses. Why do her beliefs get to trump mine? I am a law abiding tax paying citizen.

    She swore to uphold an oath in government. She needs to keep it. A function of her job is to issue marriage licenses as she knew when she was elected. Her clientele is the only thing that changed, not her duties. I don’t buy the argument that she’s the victim because she thought she’d only have to issue “traditional” marriages going into the job terms. She needs to grow up.

    She obviously cannot function in her job duties as required by law and should seek other employment. Perhaps at Westboro Baptist Church or…

  • Richard Rush

    Regardless of whether Hitler meant his words or not, the fact is the German Christians eagerly gobbled them up.

  • I got some marshmallows. Maybe I can roast them off the burn Greg1 is getting.

    John Oliver put it best last week:

    “Religious freedom is not like the star in Super Mario Brothers. It does not make you immune to everything.”

    Religious freedom guarantees this clerk has as much entitlement to attack the rights of gays seeking marriage licenses as I do to sacrifice her to the dark lord Cthulhu. Religious freedom is not license to harm others. Never has been.

  • bqrq your religious freedom does not excuse your child molestation activities. Cease at once and turn yourself in to the local authorities.

    All those gay couples getting married is not driving you to pedophila. That is all you. Quit blaming others for your sickness.

  • Sam James

    Wrong Greg. Her duties include issuing marriage licenses just as they always have. Nothing has changed except for the clientele. Gay couples, whether you religiously approve or not, are now eligible by U.S. Law to marry.

    No one is asking Kim Davis to sanctify these marriages. No one is asking her to perform the ceremony. She is simply an agent of the State verifying that the eligibility requires are met for the certificate to be issued. It is a clerical task, not a personal blessing or extension of blessing from God.

    Holy matrimony, not to be confused with marriage, is between God and the couple. Marriage, however, -is between the gov. and the couple. Period.

    The minute your religious freedom tramples on mine, there’s a problem.

    She is forcing HER religion on the County, holding that the public must comply with her beliefs in that marriage is man and woman only. This is WRONG. And she doesn’t have a “snowballs chance” at winning this. Stop wasting my tax dollars…

  • Ben in oakland

    Absolutely agree. as a devout atheist. I have a constitutional right not to do anything for the God botherers, though I will usually bother to be polite to them so that I don’t hurt their delicate feelings.

  • Ben in oakland

    Well, thank you, Dominic, for describing to a T the money grubbing, money worshipping grifters that exploit the very real issues of religious freedom, faith, family, and morality in their never ending quest for money, power, and dominion.

    I’ll even throw you a little bit of red meat. Ken Mehlman, uberhomo and tool of the religious right, in order to win a second term for the disaster to the country and the world known as George Bush.

  • Ben in oakland

    Then she should just resign if she can’t do her job. By the way, you should note that she is also refusing to issue her licenses to heterosexual couples. What were you saying again?

  • Ben in oakland

    In YOUR mind she is doing little harm.

    That’s what so many Christian dominionists have been claiming about the very real harm they have been wreaking on the lives of gay people for years,cascades, centuries, and millennia.

  • Ben in oakland

    It is amazing what slime like you will say as long as you can do it anonymously on the Internet.

    Let’s see how brave you really are, and name a gay married couple in your state as child molesters the next time you want to defile the Internet with your pornographic imagination.

    Perhaps you can claim religious freedom in your slander trial.

  • Greg1

    I love how the Left operates; and I absolutely disagree: the woman must be “grandfathered in.” Whenever a person takes a job, it is imperative that there is no violation of conscience should the rules change during the time in which the job was issued, which cause grave harm to the person, either mentally, physically, or financially. Should the SC deny this challenge, then the SCOTUS is a political entity (which we know it really is). She will win her case and be grandfathered in. Religious rights will triumph in this case. But going forward, I would agree: new applicants must be willing to marry anything from cats to polygamy. And Aaron, I want a roast pork sandwich sent to my home, ASAP!

  • THIS CLERK was sworn to hold up the US Constitution!
    “Congress shall make no law establishing a religion…”

    THIS IS WHY THE US CONSTITUTION
    HATES RELIGION:

    “Execute them”- JESUS (Luke 19:27)
    “Hate Them” – JESUS (Luke 14:26)
    “Avoid Them” – ROMANS (16:17)
    “Do not associate with the GUILTY..” (1 Corinthians 5:11)
    “Bad company….” (1 Corinthians 15:33)
    “Do not even to eat with such a one.” (1 Corinthians 5:11)
    “Do not receive him…or greet him..” (2 John 1:10)
    “tell him his fault.” (Matthew 18:15)
    “Have nothing to do with him!” (Titus 3:9-11)
    “LET HIM BE REMOVED” (1 Corinthians 1:13)
    “In the name of Jesus..keep away from him!” (2 Thess 3:6)
    “CURSE HIM” – (1 Cor. 16:22)
    “Deem them unworthy” – JESUS (Matt 10:13)

    It is ancient, vicious, hateful, divisive, bigoted gobbledegook !

  • DanH

    She is not a church secretary scheduling marriage in a church(Holy Matrimony)she is a government employee issuing civil marriage licenses.As there are thousands of faiths in America she is not the arbitrator of people religious beliefs and who shall and shall not be afforded their civil rights.

    As I explained to somebody else you can believe in the Almighty Chia pet, go to the Almighty Chia pet church, base your life on the Almighty Chia pet,and even(as long as your not a nuisance)talk to people on the street about the Almighty Chia pet and nobody will care that is your religious right.

    However when based on your belief in the Almighty Chia pet you feel you have the right to deny citizens their civil and Constitutional rights people are going to have a problem with you.

  • @Dominic,

    “Good for the clerk. Fight for your rights.”

    What are you talking about?
    The clerk is under orders to uphold the constitutional rights of citizens WHO SHE SERVES – her rights do not trump other their rights.

    SHE DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO HER JOB IF SHE DEFIES HER DUTY!

    WHAT’S NEXT?
    Christian Police refusing to protect Jewish Synogogues?
    Jewish Firemen refusing to protect Muslims in burning homes?
    Hindu Doctors refusing to protect Pakistani children?

    She already has the right to work elsewhere.
    She doesn’t have to fight for that!

    Religion is like booze, smoking and gambling – a public nuisance.
    You have a right to it – but GOOD GRIEF what a hassle it all is.

  • Greg1

    Then there is no reason to deny a marriage to a Chia pet and a man or woman, or a dog and a baby, or a blood brother or sister. There is no sense of reason to your argument. Why are polygamists denied marriage licenses?? Why? because it is against both the natural law, AND religious principle. That is the same reason why gay marriage is not licit.

  • DanH

    First polygamy is allowed in the Bible it was outlawed by man’s law.
    Second as far as natures law many animal groups are one male and many female(Lions,Deer)just for example.
    Third homosexual behavior is present in thousands of animals.

    Three strikes I guess they didn’t cover this stuff in homeschooling.

  • Richard Rush

    bqrq, on behalf of the growing post-Christian movement, I thank you for your helpful words.

  • Greg1

    Go down to the Kentucky courthouse and ask for a marriage license between yourself and three other gay men. That should be simple, as it only violates “religion,” according to you guys on the “Leftist” side of things. Secondly, the original laws of this nation were based upon the natural law, with a sprinkling of common sense mixed in. That common sense is no longer implicit in the average American. If, however, we are to look at animals only, regarding the natural law, then it would be justified for me to take your dinner from you, and eat it (survival of the fittest). Lastly, define your statement of “homosexual behavior in animals.” I would like examples, showing mating for life, and the ability to reproduce. And don’t say worms, as they are unisex.

  • Sam James

    Greg1, Kim Davis basically already lost. She won’t be winning any part of this case and I’m sorry that you cannot see that. She is a loser!

    She will; however, cost the taxpayers money. I hope she gets sued until she’s left with nothing, personally.

    The rules did not change.

    Her job role DID NOT CHANGE from when she was sworn in, she is to issue marriage licenses. More people are eligible for those licenses now. That’s all.

    The ruling from June did not create something new. It did not make a new law. There’s nothing to grandfather. It’s not same sex marriage, it’s just “marriage”. She is to issue marriage licenses and now any COUPLE of consenting ADULTS are eligible including two PEOPLE of the same sex.

    The whole “marry your toaster” type argument is just plain dumb and deflects from the real issue at hand here.

  • Greg1

    BTW: I am a product of the Public School System USA, and have a Bachelor’s degree. Chemistry has always fascinated me. No home schooling for this Yankee, only the school of common sense, and that is becoming less and less common.

  • Marken

    Greg1, actually, common sense is often wrong. You are an embarrassment to our public education system.

  • Dominic

    Wrong again, Larry. Morality is and always has been defined by the Church, and the Church cannot reverse it’s laws to suit any need. The Church does expand the definition of moral behavior as the secular world invents new depravities; abortion had to be included in the “Thou Shall not Kill” commandment, because folks like yourself may just think it is not murder.

  • Dominic

    That is a simplistic answer, unfair to all Germans living in 1930’s Germany. It is said that a large majority of the world will adore and follow the anti-Christ innocently. Hitler was but a precursor of that being.

  • Dominic

    She has other duties than handing out marriage applications, this isn’t Vegas. She’s protecting her religious beliefs by refusing all duties towards marriage licences until she is heard.

  • Fran

    When the Sanhedrin or Jewish high court in Jerusalem brought the apostles before it and stated that they were positively ordered by it to quit teaching on the basis of Jesus’ name, yet they continued to do so, Peter and the other apostles replied:

    “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.” (Acts 5:27-29).

    This was done after they had been imprisoned for preaching and then miraculously set free (Acts 5:21-26).

    The point to be made here is that in this case, if the woman is not allowed to follow her conscience due to the Supreme Court’s decision (which goes against God’s laws, principles and commands), then obeying God as ruler rather than men (and their courts) should apply.

    She can seriously take this matter to God through prayer and ask for his assistance in obtaining a different job or employment which would not harm her conscience. God always helps those who diligently do their best to serve him, just as He did for those first-century Christians.

  • Eric

    “Let’s go all you clerks, start a movement!”

    A bowel movement, maybe, which would be an apt description of what you’re imagining. Fight the power, Greg1. It’s fun to watch bigots lose.

  • Eric

    Yes, let’s complain about all those poor *Germans,* the real victims of Hitler’s rule. But hey, Dominic, thanks for showing us there is no limit to far you will go to ignore reality in the name of your triumphalist Christian fantasies.

  • Eric

    “Good for the clerk. Fight for your rights. Her job description has changed midstream to include gay marriage, an inclusion that attacks her religious beliefs. Her faith is being denied expression in lieu of the State’s demands….a clear violation of the 1st Amendment.”

    More lies from Dominic, I see. I mean, how poor must your understanding of the Constitution be to think Davis’ rights are at stake in any way at all here? I suppose I should thank the likes of you and Davis, though: the more you try to hide your bigotry and discrimination behind your “religious beliefs” and rights, the less credibility your twisted version of Christianity has.

  • bqrq

    Why do they find it so difficult to understand that we love our children? Why do they call it hate when we uphold simple, traditional time-honored family values? Why do they insist on depravity? It seem like they do not understand that we must protect our children.
    May God Have Mercy.

  • Kris

    Its actually a very poor decision on her part. As a public servant (paid for by tax payers), religion has no place in her decision making as part of her job. OUTSIDE her job, she’s free to do as she wishes. While on the job, she’s obligated to perform as a public servant — separation of church and state, remember? Civil law is NOT religious dogma.

  • Larry

    Greg1, when you are a public servant, you are duty-bound to serve the entire public within the limits of the laws. If your religious beliefs inspire you to abuse your position and act in a discriminatory manner, then you are unsuited for the job. You cannot perform your duty. She should have quit.

    This clerk feels that God expects her to treat others like crap and to break her oath of office. Well then she doesn’t need to keep that job. Nobody has to accommodate her desire to hate and attack others.

    You have no concept what religious freedom is. Never did. You always thought it meant that Christians can do anything they want and everyone else be damned. Well tough crap. It never worked that way. You demean the term “religious freedom” at its very core.

  • Well that is a load of bullcrap.

    You chose to follow that church because it appealed to you, Out of the many choices of belief, that hateful immoral bigoted one was the one you chose. So instead of blaming God, own up to your own beliefs. Stop blaming God for your own personal beliefs.

    You have no problem with born women being murdered by hacks in back alleys. There is no scriptural support for protecting a fetus over a born person. In fact they are not considered alive under the Bible until their first breath. So you believe in an anti-abortion religion because you chose to do so.

    You hate people and have no problems with giving your hate color of law. You are a terrible, immoral person. Stop blaming God for your own bad behavior and anti-social ideas. Its all you. I am not going to give your views any kind of deference or respect because you chose to pretend its religious belief. Bad ideas are always bad ideas.

  • Those poor Germans who profited greatly from the rapine of Europe and the professional vacancies from all those Jews forced out of their livelihoods. Especially those who profited from slave labor and wholesale theft.

    They thought treating others badly and attacking their basic human dignity was the right thing to do as well. Just like you.

  • We know you love children bqrq but in a carnal way. That is why you think that blaming gays people for your predilections will assuage that guilt. It won’t work. The best way to protect children is to keep them far from you.

  • Sam James

    Kim Davis is the parody of Kentucky.

    She has proven to be a “Holier than thou” glutton who is forcing Rowan County to go by her own religious beliefs, all the while, she tries to send the business (that would be income for her own county) to a neighboring county. She cannot establish religion in the workplace. She has no pride in her own county, sending it’s business to another – she should be charged for that alone, but I digress.

    She claims “freedom of religion” while she imposes her beliefs on the office staff that work under her and the County.

    It is sort of nice, because as this is the first test case of Obergefell, it will set an example of what will happen when clerks do not fall in line with the law. Let me give you a clue, Dominic. She won’t win anything. …I haven’t even gotten into her 3 divorces yet… I doubt she was giving marriage applicants a morality questionnaire before she would “approve” marriages before Obergefell. She ignores her own…

  • Sam James

    She is ignoring her own daily sinnings.

    She is picking and choosing from what laws to abide by.

    Her religious beliefs do NOT need to be further protected, nothing has changed. She is still free to do everything she did before Obergefell. And her religious beliefs DO NOT trump mine as she is trying to do for this entire County.

    Her job function is not to approve marriages, only to certify information is accurate and correct.

    She is (supposed to be) a public servant and she should get back to work. As I’ve said previously, her job role never changed – only her clientele.

  • The Kangaroo

    Protect your children from what? Reality?

  • The Kangaroo

    Well, hwe fifteen minutes of notoriety are just about to conclude. The County Commission is making strides to remove her from office for failing to perform her duties and quite rightfully so. Ultimately this stupid, futile gesture on her part will gain her nothing and lose her a lot. But then, she’s been married and divorced three times, so, Merriam-Webster is looking into posting her picture next to their entry for “hypocrite.” I suspect this poor, deluded woman was given promises they knew they could never keep by the right-wing panjandrums exploiting her.

  • Maggie

    I don’t get it. In any ordinary job refusing to do anything you are told to do is called insubordination and is grounds for immediate dismissal. So what if something changed on her job description…that too is up to management. Unless you are a unionized worker or under some kind of contract they can change the job description any time they want to, if she won’t do the job, she should be fired. Period.

  • Religion should be gently discouraged.
    People must have their right to it, but it should also be ridiculed.

    This clerk proves religion is just a public nuisance like public drunkenness, gambling addictions and public smoking.

    By all means, believe whatever you like. But your beliefs are laughable if they are not based on reality.
    And be ready to be laughed at when you try to force those ridiculous beliefs on others.

    People are abandoning religion not only because it appears there is no god – but because it has been shown to be silly, bigoted view of reality.

  • “The majority of the citizens of this country will just laugh at her”

    As they should.
    Religious beliefs are fine when you keep it at home and you can have your fantasies by yourself.
    But when you push it on others outside of your home or church without a debate – as this clerk is doing – religion just becomes a public nuisance.

    By all means, try to sell Jesus and Allah to me.
    Be ready for my ridicule if you do so.

  • DB

    Notice how they don’t even attempt to respond to your statement, Ali. Of course none of these ‘Christians’ would stand for a second being turned away from the DMV should a clerk refuse to serve them for religious reasons. It’s only THEIR religion, and only this ONE issue of their religion that they feel should get an exemption. The clerk herself has been married three times, in clear violation of the Bible! So childish and ill-thought out and silly.

  • Ben in oakland

    There isn’t? Only in uber-Christian-Greg fantasyland.

    It is not legal for a dog to marry a baby. It is legal for two men and two women.

    If you want your dog to marry your baby, start your campaign now.

    Otherwise, the theme song will not be Konservative Khristians uber alles.

  • mark

    Anybody who claims “a crisis of religious conscience ” is missing the point. They were hired to perform specific job requirements. If their religious beliefs prevent them from performing these job requirements then; then they are not suitable for that position. They will be asked to resign or be terminated.
    The religious groups of this nation went to the supreme court for a clear guideline on this issue. The SC ruled against the religious argument and made their ruling law. The can of worms was opened up and now it has to be dealt with.

  • Richard Rush

    Since the end of World War II in 1945, Christianity has made a Herculean effort to distance itself from having any accountability in Germany’s extermination of the Jews. But the reality is that it was entirely rooted in nearly two thousand years of Christianity’s persecution of the Jewish people. And then this culturally entrenched hatred was skillfully exploited by Hitler and others. Given the fact that reality plays only a minuscule role in religion, the belief that Christianity had no accountability is just one more myth among all the other myths that comprise their sincerely held beliefs.

  • DonT

    Lloyd — Wow. Thank you.

  • Jimmy Mac

    She is not a Christian; she is a KKKristyun.

  • Larry

    So who is forcing you to be a sexual predator bqrq? That is all you. You can’t keep blaming gays for your own predilections. Just turn yourself in before anyone else gets hurt.

  • Sue Parry

    I was a state employee for many years. My job description changed fairly often,and I seldom had any input into it. And I had to rein in my freedom of speech while on the job – not as bad as not being able to mention climate change in Florida or wherever it was, but still. This clerk needs to grow up and realize that they call it ‘work’ for a reason.

    Religion needs to be confined to consenting adults in private – and that does NOT mean at work.

  • Ben in oakland

    Bingo, Richard.

  • Ben in oakland

    Honey, you think for too much about other people’s alleged sexual immorality.

    Far too much.

  • Joe

    I totally agree. As a devout Pastafarian its against my religion to serve any food that doesn’t contain pasta and glorify the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Just because I work as a Sandwich artist at Subway doesn’t mean I have to serve sandwiches. Freedom of religion doesn’t mean I must leave my religious beliefs at the front door where I work! That means Monday thru Sunday!

  • Jackson Heit

    How can you have a constitutional right to do something that is illegal just because it is part of your religious belief?

  • JenniferA

    Greg you are right freedom of religion is part of our constitution- to keep it seperate from our government. Marriage is not only a Christian idea or concept. In am pretty sure in fact, in the bible men took many wife’s, so her idea of between one man and one woman doesn’t really stand up to the actual writings of the bible. The gay and lesbian community seek the same legal protections marriage affords all citizens, not just those of the Christian faith. A marriage license is issued by the courts, and divorces are issued by the courts (of which she was granted 3 divorces) the church has nothing to do with it.

  • Richard Brorsson

    If you work for government you cant discriminate. That means equal rights for all. Your religion is not important. Marriage licenses for all couples who want one. Same sex or not. Equal rights. If you cant do that, get another job. Easy. Wrong side of history folks. Get used to this being standard. This Is the future guys and we have won. We’re here we’re queer get used to it. It’s happend already in almost all of Europe, it will happen everywhere in time.

  • Marie

    This is an easy one folks. Every aspect of her life now should be put through a microscope to make sure everything she does and has done in life is in accordance with her christian faith. If she has anything in her life which is considered against her gods laws then her argument cannot hold up. Four marriages? Well divorce is probably OK in her religion, obesity is probably not a sin. But she now has to open up every aspect of her life for scrutiny. Because if she wants to hold up her faith in this way she better be able to walk the walk.

  • Richard Rush

    Maggie, Kim Davis is an elected official, so terminating her is much more complicated than it would be for a regular employee.

  • dmj76

    Dominc

    Why does the church get to define morality? Who says they are in charge of the ethics department? What have they done to earn this?

  • CarletonHester

    You may not use your religion as an excuse to violate the rights of a protected class of citizen. This is why “Christians” will continue to lose lawsuits against them for their discriminatory practices. In no way, shape, or form does this law hinder any christian from practicing their religion in their churches. You can march, protest, commit civil disobedience to your hearts content. You will not discriminate because you don’t like them.

  • CarletonHester

    You are totally wrong here. The species defines morality. We are not the only species of animal that use moral constructs. It has been observed in nature where one species would come to the aid of another species and save it from peril. It is ludicrous to believe morality is limited to human primates.

  • Truth Addict

    So basically you are calling for the overthrow of the government. Theocrats, like you, are why the Founding Fathers made sure to include the Establishment Clause in the Bill of Rights. You are not a good American.

  • Eric
  • larry

    SCOTUS has officially told the clerk to p1ss off.

    Tough luck haters.

    She either has to issue the licenses, quit or face jail time.

    http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/08/31/436431204/kentucky-clerk-s-request-for-a-stay-is-denied-by-u-s-supreme-court

    Greg1, Dominic and others in the PsychoChristian crowd, feel free to go take your version of “religious freedom” and shove it somewhere painful.

  • Doug

    The Supreme Court has ruled that Ms. Davis, as a public official paid with tax dollars, must marry all qualified individuals who come before her.

    Her three former husbands had no comment.

  • Roni

    Nobody has taken away her right to be a Christian but she is working as a government official and when working as a government official you can NOT use your personal beliefs to not do your job. Ever heard of separation of church and state? That means you can have your religion and practice it however you want but religion has NOTHING to do with government. These are civil marriage license. Refusing to issue a marriage license is a violation of the couples civil rights. She isn’t just violating same-sex couples rights since she is not issuing ANY marriage licenses. What kind of hypocrit refuses to issue a marriage license because of religious beliefs but is on husband number 4 or 5? I lost count.

  • Roni

    The Supreme Court which is the highest power in the US (not God) ruled that marriage is between 2 consenting adults. Deal with it. Not long ago it was illegal for interracial couples to marry. There are many things that have been legal or illegal in our past that we look at now and wonder what people were thinking at the time. If you can’t handle a social progressive country that believes civil rights should be equal for everyone…then move to a third world country with your archaic views. This issue is DONE. Put a fork in it. Same-sex marriage will ALWAYS be legal now. The only way it will ever be illegal is if the US is invaded and loses to a communist regime. Keep holding your breath.

  • Roni

    Sorry but what she is doing is harming people. It’s not just same-sex couples in the lawsuit filed against her. This should have been resolved long ago. The fact that it has continued has just given other people the idea that they also have the right to deny someone’s constitutional civil rights. If you’ve never had your rights denied you can’t possibly understand. If you’re a straight, white man you have never had your civil rights denied to you so don’t tell people who have that it causes no harm when someone denies them that right.

  • Chris

    Just where are you getting ‘CHILD molesting’ out of marriage between two consenting ADULTS? Frankly, what anyone does as an adult is none of your business, including your own ADULT offspring.

  • Chris

    What is it with children? Adults are what we are talking about. It is illegal to marry a child. Duh! Sure…maybe 100 years ago, you could marry a 13 year old….but laws have happened…..or is that not the long standing traditions you were speaking of?

  • Chris

    I had no idea that the only purpose to marriage was to engage in sex!

  • Matthew Alex Curtis

    What about the religion of the same-sex couples? Don’t they deserve the same freedom of religion? Or should a county clerk be able to arrogantly force her own religious views on others?

  • Ken

    I find it funny that people like her, also are the first to declare a place “Sharia Free” but they are no different!
    You have the right to practice your religion as you see fit. However if it intereferes with your job, then you need to find something else. It’s her right to not believe in gay marriage, but it is not her right to deny those who do!

  • MarkE

    What county clerk issued the marriage license(s) for Ms Davis? Were their religious freedoms violated in affixing their names to a document that allowed a woman to be remarried after divorce three times? And if that clerk carried out their duty in such a irreligious manner, why did Ms Davis allow that certificate to stand? It is a direct violation of God’s law as clearly laid out in Scripture. Surely any Apostolic Christian (what does that mean anyhow?) believer must be appalled.

  • Richard

    Please tell me there will be a demonstration to support the clerk. I would attend

  • TisHerself

    I am a Catholic Firefighter and it is in violation of my deeply held religious beliefs to put out any fires in any churches that’s not Catholic.
    Thank you all for supporting me in my quest to be the best Catholic I can.

  • Rei van Liempt

    …That’s not written in Islam–you’re confusing provincial law with divine law. O.o That’s culture, not religion. I think that guy who is criticizing Catholics below is probably more right though. (Which I say as Catholic.)

  • Brandon Bates

    Ladies and gentleman, introducing Dominic, another victim to the devine command theory of morality=lacking the capability to critically think on morality outside of following scripture without the ability to question it’s reasoning. You would have made a fine peasant at the hands of the nobles in pre-enlightenment Europe.

  • ruth

    a filthy, plane hijacking muslim would not be forced to violate her religious beliefs, but Christians are fair game! Double standard!

  • Garry Bryan

    Since she sworn an oath of office, presumably on a Bible, she is not just a perjurer but a blasphemer . . .

  • Jeff

    We need to stand up and put an end to this attack on our religious freedom now before it gets any worse !! All of us , every single one of us need to stand now

  • Jeff,

    “end this attack on our religious freedom…”

    Sounds like you don’t know what religious freedom means.
    We can all thank an ignorant pastor somewhere for putting that in your ear.

  • TodaysGOP

    No, she agreed to fulfill her duties as a clerk when she was elected. Her job is to give, receive and file legal documents, one of which is a license to marry.

    She is violation several times over of the Code of Kentucky. Please take note that she is not allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.
    http://courts.ky.gov/commissionscommittees/CCCCC/Documents/CodeofConduct.pdf

  • Charles Freeman

    Many Christians commenting here assume religious rights that supersede those given in the Constitution. As much as they lie about the Constitution, our national history, and religious freedom, they can’t be believed. When an employee refuses to perform her or his public funded job, then termination is appropriate. If a public employee has beliefs that have to be ignored to do such a job, and she or he performs the work, then the individual should be paid the wage appropriate and continued in the position. Kim Davis didn’t do her job that she had agreed to perform. I gather that this is a Federal violation. She should receive punishment in accord with her violation. Every person may have different ideas about morality and citizenship, but they can’t pick and chose how to do a piece of work when the employer says “do it this way”. Christians have been getting away with violations of the Constitution since the nation began. It’s certainly time to stop this.

  • Charles Freeman

    Freedom from religion is part of the Constitution according to secular historians and the Supreme Court. Your lies cannot obviate this fact. You are losing this battle for fallacious interpretation of our historical and legal past. I would be glad to see you radical Christians doing civil disobedience. I would be calling for National Guardsmen to enforce the law. Get violent, and the rest of us will be at your throats. You don’t realize just how small your faction of the world of beliefs has become. You are less than half of the Christian population of the U. S. We, who are Unaffiliated, are equal in numbers to you now. We are becoming politically organized. We oppose your special privileges and your incursions into government, our military, and education. We will toss your religious biases out of all forms of our government. Certainly, continue with civil disobedience. We will support those religious folk who act in accord with the separation principle. Good luck!

  • Ken Balduff

    The legal and moral rights of Kim Davis were not impinged. She is free to worship as she likes. BUT, that does not mean she can disregard another person’s rights. What you are advocating is tyranny by religion. Ask yourself, would you think your civil rights had been violated if a Muslim at the DMV denied you a drivers license because he/she’s faith prohibited women to drive? You cannot have it both ways.

  • Tom

    Greg, her religion says nothing about handing out certificates and she is marrying no one. What she is doing is forcing everyone else to conform to her religious beliefs. That is NOT her constitutional right. A certificate is a document that says that a state recognizes a couple’s marriage. Just because she signs a certificate doesn’t mean she’s being forced to go against her religion. Her religion has NO part in the STATE’s recognition of someone else’s religious and social rights. She CANNOT enforce her own religious beliefs on other people. Would you be okay with someone else forcing you to marry a sheep because they are a county clerk with a religious belief that men must marry sheep?

  • Tom

    “Why are polygamists denied marriage licenses?? Why? because it is against both the natural law, AND religious principle. ”

    There is nothing polygamy that is against natural law, further, nature has nothing to do with what is legal and not legal. Our laws do no base themselves off of what is natural or else houses, cars, guns, militaries, technology, and processed foods would all be illegal. Furthermore, marriage is a social construct created by man for man and not natural at all. Animals do not get married. At most they form social bonds and have families. Also (and this is important so pay attention) polygamy and homosexual activity are all very natural and have been observed in almost every order of animal known to human civilization. If anything, our exclusive tendency to attempt to have one partner and only of the opposite gender is against nature. There’s NOTHING natural about that.

    You’d think you’d know all of this given your otherwise well educated position.

  • Kelly

    If you don’t live in Rowan County, Kentucky, she is not wasting your tax dollars.