• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Kentucky clerk Kim Davis denies same-sex marriage license again, despite end of stay

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Kemal86

Member
Zyae said:
What is surprising about this? Hes a Supreme Court Justice. Hes just affirming what the court and law says. Hes dong his job.
Click to expand...


It's surprising because it's actually a clickbait article - Scalia hasn't said jack shit about this case in particular.
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Zyae said:
What is surprising about this? Hes a Supreme Court Justice. Hes just affirming what the court and law says. Hes dong his job.
Click to expand...

tkscz said:
The fuck else is supposed to happen? This is a job after all, and when you don't do your job, you get fired. So she either does her job, or get fired.
Click to expand...

Please read, the article is making the assumption he would say that.
Since he is such a piece of shit, it would not surprise me if he would disagree.
 
S

Schwowsers

Member
I just want to really underline the hypocrisy of Mrs. Davis' actions given her marriage record. Simply pointing out the Bible's condemnation of divorce doesn't do the situation justice. The fact is that divorce isn't a one-time sin that can just be forgiven and forgotten as with acts like lying or stealing. Rather, that Mrs. Davis has been divorced and remarried puts her in a situation analogous to gay couples.

The problem with gay marriage according to the Bible is simple; gay marriage does not exist. The Bible defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Perhaps a larger problem, though, is that the act of gay sex is a sin. So even if god recognized marriages between same-sex couples, those couples would repeatedly be sinning each time they had sex.

Unfortunately for Mrs. Davis, divorce has similar issues. The Bible states that god does not recognize divorce with few exceptions such as divorcing a cheating spouse. Because of this, if a person "divorces" and then sleeps with someone new, they are an adulterer. In god's eyes, they are still married to their first spouse even though they believe they are divorced.

Mrs. Davis can point to the fact that all of her divorces and extra-marital sex occurred before she was "born again," but unless each of her divorces were because of infidelity, she repeatedly sins each time she has sexual relations with her current husband. In this way, she is in exactly the same situation as the gay couples she condemns.
 
F

fuzzyset

Member
Hex said:
The problem is, you make her a martyr.
That is the catch with any resolution.
Click to expand...

A martyr for what? The anti gay marriage coalition fought and lost their battle. The SC won't revisit this case (if ever) for years. Any laws passed to change that will be instantly struck down. Let her be a martyr for a cause that is over and done with.
 
U

UncleSporky

Member
Schwowsers said:
I just want to really underline the hypocrisy of Mrs. Davis' actions given her marriage record. Simply pointing out the Bible's condemnation of divorce doesn't do the situation justice. The fact is that divorce isn't a one-time sin that can just be forgiven and forgotten as with acts like lying or stealing. Rather, that Mrs. Davis has been divorced and remarried puts her in a situation analogous to gay couples.

The problem with gay marriage according to the Bible is simple; gay marriage does not exist. The Bible defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Perhaps a larger problem, though, is that the act of gay sex is a sin. So even if god recognized marriages between same-sex couples, those couples would repeatedly be sinning each time they had sex.

Unfortunately for Mrs. Davis, divorce has similar issues. The Bible states that god does not recognize divorce with few exceptions such as divorcing a cheating spouse. Because of this, if a person "divorces" and then sleeps with someone new, they are an adulterer. In god's eyes, they are still married to their first spouse even though they believe they are divorced.

Mrs. Davis can point to the fact that all of her divorces and extra-marital sex occurred before she was "born again," but unless each of her divorces were because of infidelity, she repeatedly sins each time she has sexual relations with her current husband. In this way, she is in exactly the same situation as the gay couples she condemns.
Click to expand...

She could also claim that she has asked for forgiveness for her sins. IIRC adultery (due to divorce) isn't considered an unforgivable sin. We see it as a major point of hypocrisy because divorce is so noticeable, but lying is on the same list, and everyone lies.

I mean that's part of the point of Christianity, everyone inevitably sins, you ask forgiveness and you're clean again. That doesn't mean it's not assholish to judge others like this.
 
K

Kenai

Member
Hex said:
The problem is, you make her a martyr.
That is the catch with any resolution.
Click to expand...

Fine the fuck out of her. Gofundme can't be used for criminal activity, and take the defense of marriage funding into accont so that won't cover it.

Between the time she is wasting with the court and the amount of people harmed by this there should definitely be plenty of precedence. Can you imagine having to put your wedding and all things ranging from honeymoon to legalities on hold for an indeterminate amount of time over something like this?

If the substantial legal fines fines don't work then throw her in federal penitentiary cause religious whiners are going to continue to whine no matter what happens.

fuzzyset said:
A martyr for what? The anti gay marriage coalition fought and lost their battle. The SC won't revisit this case (if ever) for years. Any laws passed to change that will be instantly struck down. Let her be a martyr for a cause that is over and done with.
Click to expand...

It's the way the usual suspects will spin it. "See?!? They said we'd still have religious freedumb but they're out to get poor innocent us! Look at what she gets for staying tru to her faith!?!" That type of shtick will galvanize the base.

I don't think that should actually be considered a problem though. No need to step around on eggshells and make these people feel too relevant.
 
D

Damaniel

Banned
Hex said:
The problem is, you make her a martyr.
That is the catch with any resolution.
Click to expand...

I don't give a fuck if she becomes a martyr - at this point, any resolution short of letting her continue to deny licenses will be considered an act of martyrdom by the conservatives who eat this shit up. Since Fox News will no doubt give her the commentator slot she's almost certainly earned, might as well go all the way and give her a punishment that will actually compel her to comply (or quit).
 
S

Sanjuro

Member
She technically is already a martyr based on how she is being treated. The demographic that support her are in despite what happens now.
 
B

BkMogul

Member
Sorry if this has been asked and answered but how has she not been fired yet? I see she's an elected individual but she is basically violating a law now.
 
C

Cyan

Banned
I have worked in the Rowan County Clerk’s office for 27 years as a Deputy Clerk and was honored to be elected as the Clerk in November 2014, and took office in January 2015. I love my job and the people of Rowan County. I have never lived any place other than Rowan County. Some people have said I should resign, but I have done my job well. This year we are on track to generate a surplus for the county of 1.5 million dollars.

In addition to my desire to serve the people of Rowan County, I owe my life to Jesus Christ who loves me and gave His life for me. Following the death of my godly mother-in-law over four years ago, I went to church to fulfill her dying wish. There I heard a message of grace and forgiveness and surrendered my life to Jesus Christ. I am not perfect. No one is. But I am forgiven and I love my Lord and must be obedient to Him and to the Word of God.

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. 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. I have no animosity toward anyone and harbor no ill will. To me this has never been a gay or lesbian issue. It is about marriage and God’s Word. It is a matter of religious liberty, which is protected under the First Amendment, the Kentucky Constitution, and in the Kentucky Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Our history is filled with accommodations for people’s religious freedom and conscience. I want to continue to perform my duties, but I also am requesting what our Founders envisioned – that conscience and religious freedom would be protected. That is all I am asking. I never sought to be in this position, and I would much rather not have been placed in this position. I have received death threats from people who do not know me. I harbor nothing against them. I was elected by the people to serve as the County Clerk. I intend to continue to serve the people of Rowan County, but I cannot violate my conscience.
Click to expand...
"Render unto Caesar" etc. Government-issued marriage licenses are pretty straightforwardly one of those things that are Caesar's.
 
P

Par Score

Member
On-top of everything else, this whole shit-show is ruining the word martyr.

Until the Gaystapo drag this piece of shit into the street and force her to partake in a lesbian threesome she is not a god-damn martyr!
 
K

Kenai

Member
Par Score said:
On-top of everything else, this whole shit-show is ruining the word martyr.

Until the Gaystapo drag this piece of shit into the street and force her to partake in a lesbian threesome she is not a god-damn martyr!
Click to expand...

That's one of the more infuriating aspects of stuff like this. They get in trouble for being prejudiced bigots under the guise of whatever belief they have then cry that they are being oppressed. It's so incredibly hypocritical it grinds just about every gear in my body.
 
S

Schwowsers

Member
UncleSporky said:
She could also claim that she has asked for forgiveness for her sins. IIRC adultery (due to divorce) isn't considered an unforgivable sin. We see it as a major point of hypocrisy because divorce is so noticeable, but lying is on the same list, and everyone lies.

I mean that's part of the point of Christianity, everyone inevitably sins, you ask forgiveness and you're clean again. That doesn't mean it's not assholish to judge others like this.
Click to expand...


Divorce itself is not a sin; it's what follows an invalid divorce that can be sinful. With a couple exceptions, as far as god is concerned, divorce is imaginary. A couple can get "divorced" and go off to find new partners, but in god's eyes they are still married. The pretend divorce is not a sin, but if they sleep with someone new they are then committing the sin of adultery since they are still technically married according to god.

Davis can claim that she repented and was born again after all of her divorces, which indeed she has, but that only cleans her slate of previous sin. It does not alter who she is bound to by god. My point is that, unless all of her divorces were due to infidelity, her current legally-recognized husband is not the same as the one recognized by god. Thus, she is committing new sins each time she sleeps with her current husband. Just like a gay couple.
 
C

CapitalismSucks DonkeyBalls

Banned
Schwowsers said:
Divorce itself is not a sin; it's what follows an invalid divorce that can be sinful. With a couple exceptions, as far as god is concerned, divorce is imaginary. A couple can get "divorced" and go off to find new partners, but in god's eyes they are still married. The pretend divorce is not a sin, but if they sleep with someone new they are then committing the sin of adultery since they are still technically married according to god.

Davis can claim that she repented and was born again after all of her divorces, which indeed she has, but that only cleans her slate of previous sin. It does not alter who she is bound to by god. My point is that, unless all of her divorces were due to infidelity, her current legally-recognized husband is not the same as the one recognized by god. Thus, she is committing new sins each time she sleeps with her current husband. Just like a gay couple.
Click to expand...

Really informative. However, I doubt your run-of-the-mill Christians--the ones who are probably in support of this Looney Toon--know fuck all about these provisions.
 
L

LakeEarth

Member
Schwowsers said:
Divorce itself is not a sin; it's what follows an invalid divorce that can be sinful. With a couple exceptions, as far as god is concerned, divorce is imaginary. A couple can get "divorced" and go off to find new partners, but in god's eyes they are still married. The pretend divorce is not a sin, but if they sleep with someone new they are then committing the sin of adultery since they are still technically married according to god.

Davis can claim that she repented and was born again after all of her divorces, which indeed she has, but that only cleans her slate of previous sin. It does not alter who she is bound to by god. My point is that, unless all of her divorces were due to infidelity, her current legally-recognized husband is not the same as the one recognized by god. Thus, she is committing new sins each time she sleeps with her current husband. Just like a gay couple.
Click to expand...

According to someone in this thread, her first divorce did involve infidelity: hers.
 
U

UncleSporky

Member
Schwowsers said:
Divorce itself is not a sin; it's what follows an invalid divorce that can be sinful. With a couple exceptions, as far as god is concerned, divorce is imaginary. A couple can get "divorced" and go off to find new partners, but in god's eyes they are still married. The pretend divorce is not a sin, but if they sleep with someone new they are then committing the sin of adultery since they are still technically married according to god.

Davis can claim that she repented and was born again after all of her divorces, which indeed she has, but that only cleans her slate of previous sin. It does not alter who she is bound to by god. My point is that, unless all of her divorces were due to infidelity, her current legally-recognized husband is not the same as the one recognized by god. Thus, she is committing new sins each time she sleeps with her current husband. Just like a gay couple.
Click to expand...

Yes, and I'm saying that all people commit new sins every day regardless of whether they are divorced or not. She could claim that what separates her from what she perceives as the sin of gay marriage is that she repents of her sins daily, but granting the license would be allowing an unrepentant sinful relationship to exist. Assuming she really wants to not appear hypocritical.

Or she could consider herself part of a denomination that doesn't see divorce as an ongoing sin, but does see gay marriage as an ongoing sin. You might say she is hypocritical according to the bible, but some people only recognize hypocrisy/sin when it comes to what their denomination teaches them (as their unique biblical interpretation).

But again, she's still being an ass and not doing her job and is a poor representative for her religion.
 
BennyBlanco

BennyBlanco

aka IMurRIVAL69
How has this person not been fired unless her bosses agree with her?

Anyway, I foresee a huge gofundme success story in her future.
 
S

sangreal

Member
Netherscourge said:
Even SCOTUS Justice Scalia states she must issue the licenses or leave her job: (using the anti-death penalty morality as a reference)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...censes-to-same-sex-couples-or-find-a-new-job/


She got nobody on her side.
Click to expand...

did all the people quoting this actually read it? Scalia didn't say anything, the author just quotes an old comment of Scalia's about the death penalty. The underlying (and laughable) assumption is that Scalia is not a hypocrite
 
S

soleil

Banned
sangreal said:
did all the people quoting this actually read it? Scalia didn't say anything, the author just quotes an old comment of Scalia's about the death penalty. The underlying (and laughable) assumption is that Scalia is not a hypocrite
Click to expand...
Or the alternative explanation popular among people these days is that a person's position "evolved."

If someone can be against gay marriage as late as 2004 and claim they are for it now, why can't Scalia change his mind about religious objection?
 
T

truly101

I got grudge sucked!
META said:
Really informative. However, I doubt your run-of-the-mill Christians--the ones who are probably in support of this Looney Toon--know fuck all about these provisions.
Click to expand...

Technically its a sin to have sex without the intention to procreate. The fact remains is the separation of church and state exists for this typ of fuckery and we do not need any laws based SOLELY on the whims of an invisible sky wizard.
 
S

slit

Member
If she's so compelled by her beliefs then FUCKING QUIT!

I guess she puts her paycheck before god though, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Female Kentucky Judge Accused of Having Threesomes with Co-Workers in Her Office
NSFW
33
5K
Foamy replied
No Job, Loads of Debt: Covid Upends Middle-Class Family Finances - WSJ
Social
17
3K
daveonezero replied
Homophobe Kim Davis in Romania to help ban gay marriage
2
50
8K
geomon replied
Lesbian couple win $10,000 damages from county clerk who called them an ‘abomination’
17
3K
hydrophilic attack replied
  • Locked
Texas Senate OKs bill setting new rules when clerks refuse to issue same-sex marriage
2
53
6K
Ithil replied
Top Bottom