Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: Kentucky Clerk still refusing to issue marriage license to gay couple

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Gordon, Texas, United States
    Posts
    16,210

    Kentucky Clerk still refusing to issue marriage license to gay couple

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/09/01...s-invokes-god/

    So we have a county clerk that won't issue a marriage license to a gay couple because it is against her religious beliefs. She's not performing the marriage, just issuing county paperwork.

    This from a person who has been married 4 times to 3 men. How come we just now allow clerks to deem who should and shouldn't get married... on religious principal.
    Last edited by Julie; 09-02-2015 at 09:05 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    8,695
    If she isn't willing to do the job she should step down so one could be appointed who is willing, but that may be what the voters there want. It's their county.
    Secretary,
    Harper Valley PTA

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Julie View Post
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/09/01...s-invokes-god/

    So we have a county clerk that won't issue a marriage license to a gay couple because it is against her religious beliefs. She's not performing the marriage, just issuing county paperwork.

    This from a person who has been married 4 times to 3 men. How come we just now allow clerks to deem who should and shouldn't get married... on religious principal.
    Not "just now", Julie. Elected officials CAN run their offices any way they desire in Texas. I don't know if Kentucky law differs. Only an impeachment can remove them from office (in Texas).
    Walk softly and carry a big stick.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    5,421
    The way I look at it Kentucky has a clerk that will not toe the line. Good on her, maybe she speaks from experience.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Gordon, Texas, United States
    Posts
    16,210
    Quote Originally Posted by lamb View Post
    Not "just now", Julie. Elected officials CAN run their offices any way they desire in Texas. I don't know if Kentucky law differs. Only an impeachment can remove them from office (in Texas).
    You are saying they can operate their office in direct defiance to federal law?

    I wonder how many county clerks use this authority? Why haven't they been handing out questionnaires for those applying for marriage licenses? Sort of a morality/belief check list. That way they could deem which marriages are in line with their beliefs and which ones aren't. What about a county clerk that may be of a religion that doesn't believe in marrying outside of that religion. Have they been screaming that they can't issue a license for a Jew marrying a Christian? Maybe they can't tell what faith they are by looking at them. That's why they need the questionnaire.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Gordon, Texas, United States
    Posts
    16,210
    Just to clarify.. I do not believe same sex couples should marry. However, were I a county clerk, I wouldn't have any problem issuing a marriage license to a gay couple. It's simply a legal piece of paper that allows the recording of a marriage should they get married after getting the license (a marriage license does not make a couple married). The government needs to treat everyone the same. Adults wanting the government to recognize their marriage should be afforded the same rights as other adults whose marriages are recognized by the government.

    Now if it came to me performing a same sex marriage.. I'd have to decline on that one.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Julie View Post
    The government needs to treat everyone the same. Adults wanting the government to recognize their marriage should be afforded the same rights as other adults whose marriages are recognized by the government.
    So a County Clerk should issue a marriage license to a brother and sister, daughter and father, son and mother, and people that are already married to someone else?
    Murphy was an optimist!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    8,695
    She teaches Sunday School at Westboro Baptist.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    5,421
    Just another case of the less than 1% of the people tell the other 99 % plus how to run this Country.
    You know I went to Athens, Texas yesterday, for a good friends memorial service/funeral. I think we counted 5 or 6 different named Baptist Church's in town scattered around the Courthouse square.
    His church a huge campus like Presbyterian was about a half mile out of town, I guess they needed room to expand.
    With him being a good Democrat we got into it often about the current mess, with him being an old type setter with the Kansas City Star I often wondered how he became a track hoe operator in construction. But all things considered he was the best, he had no peers when it came to close finial finishwork.
    He has been the third of my old friends I have attended funerals for, I am getting tired of this.
    Last edited by mingus108; 09-06-2015 at 08:48 PM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,102
    Quote Originally Posted by Julie View Post
    ... How come we just now allow clerks to deem who should and shouldn't get married... on religious principal.
    Yeah, everyone knows that's a job for the Supreme Court!

    Why is the government involved at all in issuing licenses for a religious rite? And why do you need a license at all, especially in states that recognize "common-law" marriage?

    It's my understanding that the County Clerk in Kentucky stopped issuing marriage licenses to all applicants, not just gay applicants. Kentucky law (KRS 402.045) does not recognize same-sex marriage, and until that law is changed, the County Clerk is obeying Kentucky law, despite the Supreme Jokers' decision.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,537
    Thank you, Cecil.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    8,695
    Yes thank you Cecil.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Gordon, Texas, United States
    Posts
    16,210
    Quote Originally Posted by Cecil View Post
    Yeah, everyone knows that's a job for the Supreme Court!

    Why is the government involved at all in issuing licenses for a religious rite? And why do you need a license at all, especially in states that recognize "common-law" marriage?

    It's my understanding that the County Clerk in Kentucky stopped issuing marriage licenses to all applicants, not just gay applicants. Kentucky law (KRS 402.045) does not recognize same-sex marriage, and until that law is changed, the County Clerk is obeying Kentucky law, despite the Supreme Jokers' decision.
    Wonder why the clerk didn't bring that Kentucky law change up as her reason for not issuing the license? It would be a more solid leg to stand on than to refuse because her religious beliefs say she should not issue a marriage license to certain couples. How come it's taking the Kentucky so long to get their paperwork to be in line with federal law? It seems to have happened pretty quickly here in Texas and other states.

    I will totally agree with you that the government should get out of the relationship business. They should stick with licensing business structures, again so they know how to tax them, but stay out of who is married and who isn't. Of course if you do that, and there is still a need for the government to know who is married and who isn't for the purpose of taxation, social security, or other government benefits, then you have to decide what unions the government recognizes as marriages. If they are not putting any religious tone into their decision on that, then basically anyone who claims to be married and lives in the same household should be recognized as married. The only difference would be that some other entity married that couple other than a government employee. Would the clerks office still need to issue some paperwork so people could claim "couple" status instead of single status? If so.. aren't we still back to the same problem that we're dealing with today?

    I do not want my church to start recognizing same-sex marriages... but it wouldn't surprise me if that's not too far down the road. Most church members seem to already be quick to give a "family" of people who are simply living together in the same household the same status as a family consisting of a man and a woman who have made vows to God to stay committed to each other.

    Everyone is all up in arms about two same-sex people being recognized by the government as having the same rights as other married couples. I have a bigger concern with those churches and Christians who don't want to put the work into their own families.. too chicken to stand up against the things that break down families.. too accepting of lifestyles that are not beneficial to children. We have far more children with fractured, chaotic lives living in homes where the parents were married in church. Where's the outrage about that? I know.. the government is an easier target. You can't hurt it's feelings and it won't hate you if you disagree with it.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    881
    As an elected official, she has a duty to uphold the law. If the law says its ok, and she does not agree, she needs to find herself another line of work. Don't take me wrong...I am not for same sex marriage. Frankly, I just don't care. The highest elected official has taken it upon himself to not follow the law. There are lots of folks that think that is a crime. What makes this lady any better?

    On another note...The deterioration of the family unit is the main problem with this country now. We don't sit down as a family and have meals every day. We don't value the closeness of friends. We don't have the honor that we once had. We don't stick to our principles, unless its convenient. Unfortunately, I don't see us going back anytime soon. Heck, we don't do anything about dissecting babies, but we freak out when a 3 year old dies on a foreign shore. Ok, off the soapbox Bill.....
    Let's Make the Spin Great Again!!

  15. #15
    FWIW -Ms. Davis isn’t objecting to gays getting marriage license, what violates her religious liberties is having to put her name on those licenses.
    Under Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act, both public and private employers have a duty to exempt religious employees from generally applicable work rules, so long as this won’t create an “undue hardship,” meaning more than a modest cost, on the employer. If the employees can be accommodated in a way that would let the job still get done without much burden on the employer, coworkers, and customers — for instance by switching the employee’s assignments with another employee or by otherwise slightly changing the job duties — then the employer must accommodate them.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...t-of-your-job/
    First, a technical but important legal point: Title VII expressly excludes elected officials. But Kentucky, like about 20 other states, has a state Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) statute that requires government agencies to exempt religious objectors from generally applicable laws, unless denying the exemption is the least restrictive means of serving a compelling government interest. The federal government also has a RFRA, which may apply to federal court orders issued to state elected officials.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...t-of-your-job/

    "...democracy must be more than what the majority insists upon."
    Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by MiraculousMutha View Post
    She teaches Sunday School at Westboro Baptist.
    But you Democrats usually stick together.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Location
    Gordon, Texas, United States
    Posts
    16,210
    Quote Originally Posted by curious_george View Post
    FWIW -Ms. Davis isn’t objecting to gays getting marriage license, what violates her religious liberties is having to put her name on those licenses.
    Does the deputy clerk signature work the same? That's what they are doing while she is in jail. If their signature would work instead, then a simple solution would have been to allow one of them to sign those licenses she refused to sign. But... from what I understand she gave them orders not to sign them. If that is true, then it sounds like it wasn't just about her signature.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Julie View Post
    Does the deputy clerk signature work the same? That's what they are doing while she is in jail. If their signature would work instead, then a simple solution would have been to allow one of them to sign those licenses she refused to sign. But... from what I understand she gave them orders not to sign them. If that is true, then it sounds like it wasn't just about her signature.
    My guess is, as county clerk, her name appears on all licenses.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,537
    Absolutely true, George, even though it is not HER signature on the license.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    8,695
    A judge has ordered her released from jail so she can get to work on book deals.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    5,421
    I have a feeling the federal judge released her after seeing a vision of his future after the election. Something others of the same ilk should seek their visions
    Hopely there will be a purge after the election rivaling anything Russia had.
    Yeah thats what we need.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    8,695
    President Trump likely will not waste time fooling with social issues.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    5,421
    Just vote we can find out later. Wait a minute that sounds familiar

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    1,067

    Kentucky Clerk still refusing to issue marriage license to gay couple

    It was a setup. That "couple" doesn't even live in the county.
    Never a stranger in Ranger! and I DO NOT SUPPORT gay rights

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,102
    Kentucky oath of office for elected officials:

    I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof, and that I will faithfully execute, to the best of my ability, the office of .... according to law; and I do further solemnly swear (or affirm) that since the adoption of the present Constitution, I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending, so help me God.


    What??? They have to support the Constitution of the United States, instead of the edicts of the Supreme Court? Even the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court says that the Constitution does not address gay marriage, so what is a "lowly" county clerk to think? She was following Kentucky law.

    Those Supreme Court justices who voted to "legalize" gay marriage were simply trying to be politically correct instead of interpreting exactly what the Constitution says. Once again, political correctness is working to destroy our country and our Constitution.


    Once again, our Court has "legitimized" something that is contrary to common belief of what the Constitution says. Under their interpretations, everyone has a right to do ANYTHING they wish... except exercise Christian values.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    8,695
    Quote Originally Posted by Cecil View Post
    Why is the government involved at all in issuing licenses for a religious rite?
    And why do you need a license at all, especially in states that recognize "common-law" marriage?
    There would be no problem here except for government involvement, same as abortion.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •