Rowan Clerk refuses Same Sex Marriage License

[Rapscallion]

Update. I said above that she divorced before she found her born again (or whatever) current christian creed. Turns out that she converted to her current christianity from ... being a baptist. They're pretty dead set against divorce as well.

http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slo...bout-kim-davis

Hands are raised - I admit I was wrong or misinformed. She was a hypocrite for her own divorces that went against her religion and then using the same religion to deny others their rights.

Rapscallion

[jedimaster91]

If you really look, most religions have something to say against divorce. They also usually have something to say against abusing ones spouse or offspring and those are the ones who really need a way out.

[Kheldarson]

And she's probably going back to court now:

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement...uty_s_attorney

[s_stabeler]

yes and no. Basically, what this latest bit is about is if the altered forms- without Davis's name on- are valid marriage licenses- and if Davis requiring the new forms counts as attempted interference, which would violate the previous court order. ( To be honest, I don't think the forms are invalid- but they really should have space for the deputy clerk to sign them. At any rate, it's a good idea to have it specifically stated in law if the licenses are valid or not, in case Davis later on tries to claim they aren't valid.)

[wolfie]

At any rate, it's a good idea to have it specifically stated in law if the licenses are valid or not, in case Davis later on tries to claim they aren't valid.)

Congratulations to the deputy clerk for wanting to get this cleared up now (and I hope they tell anyone getting a license that there's some question as to whether the altered ones are valid but that it's being looked into) rather than waiting (possibly years - with countless licenses being issued in the meantime) for it to be questioned after the fact (that would be a big can of worms). Can you imagine what would happen if someone became incapacitated, and there was a dispute between their spouse and their sibling(s) over their care, with the blood family alleging that the spouse had no legal standing due to the marriage license not being valid?

I do take exception to something in one of the news articles about this - it says that Davis confiscated the old forms. No, she didn't - she seized them. "Confiscated" implies that the person/agency involved had a legal right to seize the item(s) in question.

[s_stabeler]

actually, confiscate IS the right term. Off the top of my head, there is no legal problem with rounding up the old copies of a form that is being redesigned- so, in other words, Kim Davis had the legal right to take the copies of the old form. What is (potentially) illegal is trying to compel the issuance of marriage licenses that you know are not valid. If the court rules that the new licenses are valid- or that Davis believed the new licenses were valid- then Davis was within her rights to do it. ( I say that Davis believing the new design was valid matters since it means that she wouldn't actually be in contempt provided she either uses the old forms, or changes the new ones to something that actually is valid)

[Kheldarson]

And she's stated that she has no idea if they're valid, and doesn't think so personally.

[s_stabeler]

Then we need a ruling from a judge that either says "yes, these ARE legitimate marriage licenses" or she needs to go back to prison. Possibly face charges of criminal contempt, as well.

[Gravekeeper]

Her lawyer is now claiming that he and Davis secretly met with the Pope who is totally a big fan of theirs even though neither of them are Catholic and they're both terrible people.

Just in case there was any doubt remaining about where on the Attention Whore spectrum these two were.

[s_stabeler]

actually, that makes me wonder about their sanity ( both collectively, and individually)- that's a fairly impressive devel of delusion.

[the_std]

Turns out that she did actually meet with the Pope.

Please excuse the long link, I'm on mobile.

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blo...h-pope-francis

[Kheldarson]

....I'm feeling very disappointed right now.

[TheHuckster]

Just because she met with the Pope doesn't mean he agrees with Davis. I mean, Pope Francis also visited inmates in prisons, which similarly doesn't mean he endorses their crimes. Because the Vatican will not disclose what was discussed, we can only speculate on what went on or what Francis said. I would hope Francis said something along the lines of, "Yes, you have a human right to refuse to do something you object to, but if such a objection is contrary to the law of the land, you have to exercise that right by resigning your position."

As we know, the Pope is very open to meet just about anyone who so much as asks, regardless of whether he agrees with their positions or not.

[Kheldarson]

Just because she met with the Pope doesn't mean he agrees with Davis. I mean, Pope Francis also visited inmates in prisons, which similarly doesn't mean he endorses their crimes. Because the Vatican will not disclose what was discussed, we can only speculate on what went on or what Francis said. I would hope Francis said something along the lines of, "Yes, you have a human right to refuse to do something you object to, but if such a objection is contrary to the law of the land, you have to exercise that right by resigning your position."

As we know, the Pope is very open to meet just about anyone who so much as asks, regardless of whether he agrees with their positions or not.

Actually, he was asked about being a conscientious objecter, and he said it was a basic human right that should be allowed for those in any office.

Hence my disappointment.

[s_stabeler]

unfortunately, it seems to be true- the visit was apparently to show support for nuns who are opposing a mandate that contraception coverage be offered by healthcare plans offered under the ACA.- he is more-or-less agreeing that religious concerns trump the law. This makes me EXTREMELY disappointed.

It's also a shame as there IS an element of truth to it- in certain situations, someone's beliefs- even if they are religious- DO trump a duty. However, I'm thinking of imposed duties- for example, if the draft was ever re-imposed, then if people had religious issues against killing, I would wholeheartedly support them being exempt. However, Kim Davis decided to take a job that required her to issue marriage licenses according to criteria set out by law. That has NOT changed. She does not get to overrule the US Supreme Court, who decided gay people are entitled to marry. After all, what's next? a muslim man insisting he can commit bigam because the Koran says you can have up to 4 wives?