Kim Davis gets out of jail

[kenny]

I have mixed feelings about her being sent to jail.
Yes, she broke the law by refusing to issue marriage certificates but I think jail was an overreaction by the judge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/09/us/kim-davis-same-sex-marriage.html?_r=1

Partial snip:

Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who was jailed last week after she defied a court’s order that she issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, was ordered released on Tuesday.

In a two-page order issued Tuesday, the judge who sent her to jail, David L. Bunning of the Federal District Court, said he would release Ms. Davis because he was satisfied that her office was “fulfilling its obligation to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples.”

Judge Bunning ordered that Ms. Davis “shall not interfere in any way, directly or indirectly, with the efforts of her deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples.”
He he said that any such action would be regarded as “a violation” of his released order.

 

[telephone89]

I dont think it was an overreaction. She's an elected official of the law who stopped following the law. I'm sure she had an oath when she was elected, and she failed it. If she doesn't want to do her job, she can just resign

I'm interested to see how long/if she follows through.

eta - She wasn't just denying same sex certificates, she was denying ALL marriage licenses. So stopping ANYONE from getting married, because SHE disagrees with gay marriage. Its the same if a KKK (or other closed minded person) decided that because black folk can now buy land, that he/she will not issue ANY property deeds. Want to stand up for your beliefs? Resign.

 

[kenny]

Call me cynical but I think Davis is about to become a very rich person, book deals, movie deals, TV interviews, touring the lecture circuit.

What she did is insert herself into the epicenter of perhaps the most controversial issue of our time.

I'm not putting her down, or suggesting she did it for the money.
I believe she's sincere and her actions resonates with many people.

Oh, and it makes me mad the media brought up her being divorced.
So what!?!
What matters is what she did that broke the law, nothing else.
Character assassination is slimy.

 

[telephone89]

I dont disagree. She could have her own reality show. She needs a flow chart to keep track of her baby daddies (daddys?)

 

[telephone89]

Call me cynical but I think Davis is about to become a very rich person, book deals, movie deals, TV interviews, touring the lecture circuit.

What she did is insert herself into the epicenter of perhaps the most controversial issue of our time.

I'm not putting her down, or suggesting she did it for the money.
I believe she's sincere and her actions resonates with many people.

Oh, and it makes me mad the media brought up her being divorced.
So what!?!
What matters is what she did that broke the law, nothing else.

I think its relevant. Someone who claims to be upholding gods law, denying other folk their lawful RIGHT? Not fair. She wanted to play dirty, she got it.

 

[iLander]

HOW is she any different than the people who spat on black children walking into white schools during desegregation?

They also had "beliefs" that ran contrary to the law. They "believed" black people were subhuman and unequal, that they did not deserve respect and that the law of the land did not apply to them. Their parents had taught this bigotry for generations, and their "beliefs" were unshakeable. I'm sure they also had a book or two that they could quote from that confirmed their prejudices.

So HOW is this woman any different? Her "beliefs" are her excuse for her idea that the law of the land does not apply to her.

She's wrong.

Her boss, the country, even the state legislature of Kentucky should all be ashamed of themselves that they are allowing this to continue. They do it because they secretly believe she is right. They are covered with the slime of her bigotry.

This is a land of laws, not a land of personal preference.

Allowing her to continue is to invite anarchy.

 

[aljdewey]

I don't feel that jailing was an overreaction.

The judge's goal was to take action that would compel her to comply with the law. His options were really fine her or jail her.

With so many folks committing to help defray any fines she faced, fining would not have compelled her to comply; jail was far more likely to. I honestly think they should have secured her verbal agreement not to interfere when she returns before turning her loose, because you know the moment she gets back, she's going to impede and then they'll have to take her back in. Waste of everyone's time and money.

I have no issue with her personally objecting to gay marriage if it conflicts with her religious beliefs, but I do object to her refusing to do her job based on those beliefs. If she really feels that strongly about the matter, she should resign the position and find another that doesn't conflict with her religious beliefs. Go issue dog licenses or something, yanno?

Freedom of religion means you are free to worship in the faith of your choosing without persecution; it doesn't not mean you have to right to impose those beliefs on others who do not share them, and it doesn't mean you are entitled to a job that you are unwilling to perform.

 

[aljdewey]

And the "so what?" about her being divorced is this:

She's refusing to perform her job because it conflicts with tenets of her faith, but divorce (which she's done several times) also conflicts with her faith. If she was able to step outside of her religion's prescribed behaviors to proceed with divorce but won't to proceed with fulfilling the job she took an oath to fulfill, that's hypocritical.

That was the point.

 

[momhappy]

I don't feel that it was an overreaction. She was being asked, as part of her job as a public official, to certify that same-sex can be married in the eyes of the State (not the eyes of God), which is a simple, legal question to which her faith is completely irrelevant, so there's no conflict.

 

[AGBF]

I am glad that she was, apparently, not mistreated in jail. Some people who are jailed are not so lucky. A recent news story showed a woman (Sandra Bland) stopped by a policeman for a traffic offense who either committed suicide or was killed in her jail cell in Texas. Now that is when the law becomes truly abusive. In this case, I do not believe the judge abused his authority when he jailed Ms. Davis for contempt of court.

I also see no reason why we, regardless of our opinions on same-sex marriage (I strongly support it) should call Ms. Davis names as if we have a right to meddle in her personal decisions and question her personal morals. In my opinion, all we have a right to do is see that she does the job she was elected to do. And as I said above, if a judge finds legal authority to jail her when she refuses to do her job, I have no problem with that either. I have a lot of trouble with people calling her demeaning names.

AGBF

 

[Matata]

In the article I read, it said that M. Huckabee (and I think Ted Cruz) was heading to Kentucky to meet with her and to hold a rally for her. I think it's possible the judge released her in an effort to prevent the circus that will turn into. Can public officials be fired for non performance of duties? If so, she should have been fired when she lost her legal appeals and certainly when she was jailed.

 

[aljdewey]

Deb, I'm not sure that people were questioning her personal morals so much as making the observation that said morals appear to be only selectively applied.

That said, though, she's the one who opened the door on commentary about her beliefs/morals when she cited them as the reason she refused to obey the law and fulfill her employment duties.

 

[ame]

I dont think it was an overreaction. She's an elected official of the law who stopped following the law. I'm sure she had an oath when she was elected, and she failed it. If she doesn't want to do her job, she can just resign

I'm interested to see how long/if she follows through.

eta - She wasn't just denying same sex certificates, she was denying ALL marriage licenses. So stopping ANYONE from getting married, because SHE disagrees with gay marriage. Its the same if a KKK (or other closed minded person) decided that because black folk can now buy land, that he/she will not issue ANY property deeds. Want to stand up for your beliefs? Resign.

This. Exactly. And imagine if it were gun licenses, also protected under the law. I don't agree with those, but I am not going to not do my damn job to see fit that no one gets one.

I am not even going to start picking apart her picking and choosing what is morally correct about her life choices.

 

[telephone89]

In the article I read, it said that M. Huckabee (and I think Ted Cruz) was heading to Kentucky to meet with her and to hold a rally for her. I think it's possible the judge released her in an effort to prevent the circus that will turn into. Can public officials be fired for non performance of duties? If so, she should have been fired when she lost her legal appeals and certainly when she was jailed.

NOPE. The same way you can't 'fire' the president. You can impeach them, but I believe there was some sort of issue with Kentucky that they wouldn't be able to do it until next year, and that's IF they decide to get rid of her based on her beliefs...

Honestly, as long as she does her job, I don't care what she believes.

 

[Niel]

Call me cynical but I think she's already getting funded by some conservative group to keep this charade up.

 

[telephone89]

Call me cynical but I think she's already getting funded by some conservative group to keep this charade up.

Shes apparently a democrat..

 

[missy]

No mixed feelings for me about this. She belonged in jail because she acted against the law. Her personal beliefs are just that. Personal. If she cannot do her job because of them she does not deserve to have that job and needs to be relieved of her duties ASAP. Keep your personal beliefs out of doing your job please and serve the public as you were hired to do. The law is the law and jail is where she belongs. She is now released from jail though and if she cannot follow the law still back to jail she belongs and this time I sure hope she is fired from her job. Ridiculous.

 

[Amber St. Clare]

HOW is she any different than the people who spat on black children walking into white schools during desegregation?

They also had "beliefs" that ran contrary to the law. They "believed" black people were subhuman and unequal, that they did not deserve respect and that the law of the land did not apply to them. Their parents had taught this bigotry for generations, and their "beliefs" were unshakeable. I'm sure they also had a book or two that they could quote from that confirmed their prejudices.

So HOW is this woman any different? Her "beliefs" are her excuse for her idea that the law of the land does not apply to her.

She's wrong.

Her boss, the country, even the state legislature of Kentucky should all be ashamed of themselves that they are allowing this to continue. They do it because they secretly believe she is right. They are covered with the slime of her bigotry.

This is a land of laws, not a land of personal preference.

Allowing her to continue is to invite anarchy.

They are covered with the slime of her bigotry.

How eloquent and articulate! If they aren't ready to do their jobs they should ALL lose them and let those who will obey the law of the land get the job done.

 

[Madam Bijoux]

My prediction: She'll go on the talk show circuit and then get her own reality show, which is probably why she did what she did in the first place.

 

[lulu]

She should not have been released until she agreed to do the job she was elected to do. I am so tired of people dragging their religion into the law.

 

[iLander]

In the article I read, it said that M. Huckabee (and I think Ted Cruz) was heading to Kentucky to meet with her and to hold a rally for her. I think it's possible the judge released her in an effort to prevent the circus that will turn into. Can public officials be fired for non performance of duties? If so, she should have been fired when she lost her legal appeals and certainly when she was jailed.

So apparently Ted Cruse and Mike Huckabee, two people who aspire to be President of the United States of America, are basically saying "If you don't believe a law is right, you can ignore it"

Excuse me?!!!

WTHeck!!!

Well, my religion/belief structure says I don't have to drive 35, or pay for items from a store, or inhibit myself from shooting my annoying neighbor.

Can these presidential candidates BE any more ridiculous?

If they can't see the slippery slope they are standing on, they are absolutely not fit to be President.

 

[stracci2000]

Church and state are separate in this country, last lime I checked.

And she needs a makeover. 'Nuff said.

 

[NonieMarie]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/05/travel/muslim-flight-attendant-feat/index.html

How many people supporting Kim Davis are going to step up and support a Muslim woman that does not want to serve alcohol?

 

[MissGotRocks]

I see this woman simply as an opportunist. If you had two brain cells that touched, you had to know that this legislation was coming down the pike. If you were that morally opposed, you would have simply resigned before being asked to do something that so violated your beliefs. She certainly should have known that her grand standing would not be tolerated forever.

She chose to ride the wave and capitalize on it which I'm sure she will do. She will return to work and continue to make a ruckus and it will be lather, rinse and repeat all over again. I personally just don't get the gut feeling that this is all because of her religious convictions. If I honestly felt that way, I could have had a bit of respect for her for it but I still would never support her refusal to issue these licenses. Church and state are two separate issues and in this country you have the right to follow whichever you want to support - you just can't take the paycheck for the job if you aren't willing to do all of what it entails.

 

[VRBeauty]

As a former govt. employee, I originally applauded the judge's ordering her to jail. Government employees take an oath to uphold the constitution. They are not given license to re-interpret the law, or to uphold only those parts of the constitution that they agree with.

I'm no longer as sure the judge was right though. No, I don't agree with Kim Davis on the question of gay marriage. It's just that the law makes accommodations for peoples' religious and moral beliefs as long as they don't discriminate and other accommodations can reasonably be made. That's the whole basis for conscientious objector status in the military, particularly when there is a draft in place. (Or for a Muslim flight attendant to object to serving alcohol, for that matter... although it is difficult for me to see how that intricate dance that is food service in the cockpit could handle too many more steps.) Other jurisdictions have allowed people to opt out of issuing licenses they on the basis of their beliefs as long as there are other clerks who can and will issue those licenses. Kim Davis's issue is that her name is printed on the licenses. Apparently that's required under Kentucky law. So from her viewpoint, letting her deputies issue the licenses doesn't cut muster because her name is still on the licenses.

Some have argued that there is no good reason for the clerk's name to be on the licenses - the function is tied to the office, not the specific individual.

So what should the judge have done? Maybe... just thinking out loud here... and I don't claim to be a lawyer or constitutional scholar... he could invalidated that portion of Kentucky's law that requires the county clerk's name to appear on marriage licenses. Maybe he could have ordered her to jail but stayed the order for 5 days, during which time the Kentucky legislature could convene and pass emergency legislation to change the law specifying what must be on marriage licenses. That way the onus would be on legislature to conform the state's laws, rather than on one individual to conform her beliefs. And there would be one less martyr/holy war prisoner/poster child. Or, he could have taken a page from Kim Davis's playbook - declare all new marriage licenses in the State invalid until the State deals with its system which allows discrimination against gay couples. Surely the specter of hundreds of angry brides would compel the State to act!

 

[Calliecake]

My prediction: She'll go on the talk show circuit and then get her own reality show, which is probably why she did what she did in the first place.

From the looks of things she sure is enjoying her fifteen minutes of fame. Maybe TLC will offer her a reality show now that they need a replacement for the Duggars. On a serious note I find this whole thing riduclious. If she doesn't want to perform her job responsibilities she needs to resign and give up her $84,000 a year position. Anyone else would be fired from a job if they weren't doing what was expected of them.

 

[Niel]

Call me cynical but I think she's already getting funded by some conservative group to keep this charade up.

Shes apparently a democrat..

Irrelevant. Some conservative is funneling money to her to keep this up as long as possible

 

[kenny]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/05/travel/muslim-flight-attendant-feat/index.html

How many people supporting Kim Davis are going to step up and support a Muslim woman that does not want to serve alcohol?

... or a Quaker government employee who cannot issue a gun permit?

 

[Matata]

It's just that the law makes accommodations for peoples' religious and moral beliefs as long as they don't discriminate and other accommodations can reasonably be made.

It depends on whether the duty one refuses to do is a major function of the job. If issuing marriage licenses is a major function of the position, no accommodations need be made and the person would be deemed unqualified for the job (at least in Oregon).

 

[AGBF]

No mixed feelings for me about this. She belonged in jail because she acted against the law. Her personal beliefs are just that. Personal. If she cannot do her job because of them she does not deserve to have that job and needs to be relieved of her duties ASAP. Keep your personal beliefs out of doing your job please and serve the public as you were hired to do. The law is the law and jail is where she belongs. She is now released from jail though and if she cannot follow the law still back to jail she belongs and this time I sure hope she is fired from her job. Ridiculous.

I, also, have no mixed feelings about her having been held in contempt of court. When one chooses the path of civil disobedience in order to make a point, one must be ready to take the consequences. The non-violent civil rights demonstrators led by Dr. Martin Luther King knew that and were willing to do so. Peter, Paul, and Mary have an old song that says, "if you've gone to jail for justice, then you're a friend of mine".

However, my understanding is that Ms. Davis can only be removed from office, since she was elected by the people of her district, by impeachment. She cannot be fired.

She can, however, be prevented from flouting the law by being kept in jail until she submits to the law.

AGBF