"
Five of six deputies in the office of a Kentucky county clerk jailed Thursday for her refusal to issue marriage licenses after the Supreme Court allowed gays to wed say they will process the paperwork starting Friday."
But Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, whom U.S. District Court Judge David Bunning found in contempt of court, said through her lawyers that she will not authorize any of her employees to issue licenses in her absence. The judge placed her in the custody of U.S. marshals and had her taken to Carter County jail.
Kim Davis who is an elected official (cannot be fired, can only be impeached) is in a case "of competing revolutions — with Kim Davis defying Justice Kennedy’s revolutionary act with a revolutionary act of her own."
We knew from the beginning which revolutionary held more power, and we also know that the worst revolutionaries show no mercy to dissenters. There were many options short of imprisonment for Davis (how many leftist legislators are in jail for lawless “sanctuary city” policies that actually cost lives?), but the court was apparently in no mood for moderation. So off she goes to prison. Judge Bunning’s decision is a means of control It is a means of maintaining order. It is the selective application of law to advance a particular radical ideology. But spare me any talk of justice. There is no justice today in Judge Bunning’s court.
46 comments:
Not much to add to Mr. French's analysis, but I find it amazing that only two months ago, the law was on her side. Then five priests in black robes studied the entrails of a sacrificial goat and determined that a centuries old definition of marriage was now verboten. So it's off to prison with Ms. Davis.
Haven't been over to TOP, but I imagine they're doing hand springs over this ruling.
Haven't been over to TOP, but I imagine they're doing hand springs over this ruling.
She's been doing the predictable thing for days, but today she is trying to stifle Davis's Twitter detractors (sort of).
Today's TOP ire is directed at the federal judge in TN who won't grant a SSM divorce.
The Tennessee judge's response to the divorce petition is excellent. After all, if he doesn't know which spouse is the husband, how will he know which one to bankrupt in the settlement.
"Don't tell me to sit in the back of the bus."
There was a time when defiance of the law was applauded.
The show trials in kangaroo courts will continue until you submit.
Sympathy, so much sympathy, is being ladeled out for the lady in the photo who is sitting next to Ms. Davis. Unfair proximity! Somebody might get the Wrong Idea. No thought given to why this other lady wasn't simply given the job of signing over marriage licenses (if she was so inclined) so Ms. Davis would not be obligated to violate her religious belief.
The first of many Christians who will be imprisoned by the gays and their supporters.
Soon enough it will be priest and rabbis and ministers who preach against homosexuality.
When we talked about the laws of unintended consequences, then this is a good illustration of exactly those unintended consequences and why making laws and rights out of whole fucking cloth should demand revolutionary reactions to them until they are either rescinded or those who made them are made to suffer greatly (which they never are by the way).
Let the 2% - 4% of the homosexuals and their sycophants come, they will be met with resistance and I hope it's violent and it's bloody and they learn their lessons to stop fucking with our institutions and our majority.
I believe this is a deliberate push towards conflict. They want this fight, the problem is, is does the majority have the balls to follow through, or will the majority become so inflicted with legislative and regulatory weight on their backs to effectively squash any resistance to this fundamental transformation of hope and change to our country.
And another point of fact. People are lambasting this women for her recent conversion to Christianity as a means to ridicule her in the form of her prior 'godless and lascivious' life and now to her religious life which is exactly what the left has always demanded; an acceptance of their ever fluid mind-changing from choice to sexuality and orientation. This woman comes along, is a democrat, is a recent christian convert, who holds a political position of power over their ability marry, which she is denying because her 1st amendment religious right and conscience will not allow her to have her name associated with such acts in an official capacity. She is saying, I am being forced at the point of law to go against my conscience and furthermore as an official of my state, I am being forced into sullying my reputation to do so.
Guts.
She's probably the best man in the county, too.
Henry Clay and Daniel Boone must be spinning.
Trooper York said...
The first of many Christians who will be imprisoned by the gays and their supporters
So, is Anthony Kennedy's penumbra the Nuremberg laws or the Anglican Establishment?
Methadras said...
Let the 2% - 4% of the homosexuals and their sycophants come, they will be met with resistance and I hope it's violent and it's bloody and they learn their lessons to stop fucking with our institutions and our majority
More like 1%, but you can see a few who are beginning to understand the Gaystapo stuff will backfire the harder it's pressed.
This is just the beginning. Did you know that the judge imprisoned her instead of fining her because other people would step up to pay her fine. Just as the forced "Go Fund Me " to drop the account for the flower shop. Soon enough they will be jailing bakers and photographers because they will not let people who support their position help them financially.
They are vindictive and basically evil at their core. Much like abortionists.
The question for traditional religious people is will we accept this? What will we do to resist?
I think the answer is to get the government out of the marriage license business altogether. Make available civil union documents to opposite sex, same sex, groups or any two or more people who want to commingle their assets. Let marriage be strictly a religious thing.
Oh and you atheists? You can go the Episcopalians. They don't care. They will marry anyone. The fees might keep them alive.
Your religious freedoms do not include the power to burden other people's legal rights. That is a fundamentally conservative principle. What the Kim Davises and Trooper Yorks are expressing is not conservative. It's authoritarian.
By the way, this judge is the son of Jim Bunning; ex Tiger, Philly and U.S. Senator from Ky. I'll bet they're all good friends with Mitch McConnell.
Feeling they've won, they're drunk with power.
Upholding our laws must feel quite odd to our little libruls. Next they will be securing our borders, demanding we enact Kate's Law, prosecuting Obama & Holder for Fast & Furious and demanding Lois Lerner issue the tax exempt certs to Tea Party groups.
Your religious freedoms do not include the power to burden other people's legal rights.
The rent boy gardener has become a pretend lawyer.
Do you play femme or butch, Leisure Suit Larry?
I'm surprised the ideological marriage with the Nutty Perfesser is still going on, Larry.
My experience in Woodstock is that the ideological marriage doesn't last long.
Kim Davis is the new face of Rosa Parks. Countering what she views as an assault on her liberties by the powers that be.
When you think about it, Larry is really gay married.
He's not really a man. And the Nutty Perfesser is a fag hag... so not really a woman.
Maybe the doctor could cut off his dick (assuming he has one) and sew it onto the Perfesser.
I'll bet that most black people side with Davis over this issue of shoving what most of them consider an issue that they don't agree with down their collective throats.
Sometimes the Rule of Law is Important and sometimes it's not?
Two can play at that game.
She's a Democrat. Judge Bunning, who locked her up, is a Republican. His old man is Hall of Famer Jim Bunning who was a conservative US Senator from Kentucky. W appointed young Bunning Federal Judge in 2001. Lot's of cross currents.
Meade said...
Your religious freedoms do not include the power to burden other people's legal rights. That is a fundamentally conservative principle. What the Kim Davises and Trooper Yorks are expressing is not conservative. It's authoritarian.
Tell that to the entirety of the left that has been doing that to everyone since Karl Marx wrote Das Kapital. Your argument is as stringy as your spine and as endangered as the little remaining testosterone in your body.
Davis is making an admirable stand -- doing time for her beliefs.
These sorts of affronts to common sense and common law are cumulative: they add up. This in part is the frustration that is feeding Trump. In the past however, the defiance of liberal orthodoxy has been a Republican/Tea Party thing. Davis will bring out sympathy from the Democrat side and they will eventually side with Trump.
This in part is the frustration that is feeding Trump.
I believe so.
Here is the Oxford definition of Authoritative: "1.able to be trusted as being accurate or true; reliable", and I think that this definition of Authoritative would fit Trooper York. As far as that goes, there is also this: "1.1 considered to be the best of its kind and unlikely to be improved upon" And there is this: "2. Commanding and self-confident; likely to be respected and obeyed".
Alas, Kim Davis is none of these, and she is especially not: "Proceeding from an official source and requiring compliance or obedience" That definition would fit Justice Kennedy.
To quote a movie: "You keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means".
If Kim Davis was a Muslim, this would be a non-story. She would be understood and accommodated by leftniks. But she's Christian, so she must be burned at the stake of all that is correct.
Others who defy laws, say Nelson Mandela, are lionized in leftnik history. But a Christian who defies the uber-correctness of state-mandated marriage will be destroyed. Because the left will abide no thought other than its own.
@ Leland: I agree with you. Anyone who keeps using the word "authoritative" when they mean — favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially a government authority, at the expense of personal freedom — is using the wrong word.
Michael Haz said...
"If Kim Davis was a Muslim, this would be a non-story."
Suppose muslim Kim Davis, county clerk, were asked, "under whose authority are you not issuing licenses?" and she answered, "under the authority of Allah." Do you honestly believe that would be a "non-story"?
Meade, I know you are slow, but do you believe Kim Davis is in jail because she is the government authority figure? Do you believe she has personal freedom today?
Separate vacations. No Pupparazzo link. Very few references to the lawnboy. I give it another 2-3 years.
My bad, there still is a link to that Jared Fogel puppy porn loser blog. I still give them 2-3 years.
Saw Annie walking through campus solo a few weeks ago. Looking bloated and haggard.
"(D)o you believe Kim Davis is in jail because she is the government authority figure? Do you believe she has personal freedom today?"
Since when does "personal freedom" mean "the right to refuse to do your job while insisting on remaining employed?"
I'll remember your defense of Davis' selective enforcement of the law the next time you try bringing lawsuits against Obama for not enforcing the law.
Do America's conservatives have any clue at all just how inconsistent and hypocritical they are nowadays? It's like they can't remember if a principle they charged their adversaries of violating just a few months ago even applies to them!
One governing faction in America is surely taking the short-bus to complete irrelevance.
Ritmo, Gavin Newsom. Compare and contrast w/ this woman.
Davis, an Apostolic Christian, was elected county clerk last fall. She is expected to remain in the Carter County jail until she agrees to obey Bunning's order or until Bunning changes his mind.
I hope she is granted a speedy trial and execution. The apparent suspension of habeas corpus is not going to sit well before a growing jury of Trump supporters.
Anybody else notice/wonder whether the sudden surge of SSM applicants in that county was from outsiders hoping to throw a hissy fit?
Rhythm and Balls said...I'll remember your defense of Davis' selective enforcement of the law the next time you try bringing lawsuits against Obama for not enforcing the law.
The whole issue of selective enforcement of the law is a troubling aspect of the Obama Administration. I think that history will show that it began as strategy under your vaunted hero. The outrage you are expressing is parallel to the outrage many people felt when the IRS/Tea Party story broke--a "non-issue" which you blew off along with Benghazi and Obama's decision not to enforce immigration laws. If my memory serves, you even cheerled a shitload of selective non-enforcement.
I'll go out on a limb here and suggest that this issue is the fault of the Oberbefehl Decision. If SSM supporters in KY had waited for a legislative redress of grievances, i.e., a vote among that population supporting SSM, then this would never have happened. In fact, such an electorate would have never voted in Davis.
Here's a prediction: SSM shock troops will seek out similar pockets in America where confrontation is likely and will provoke similar showdowns. They don't care about winning hearts and minds at this point. It's all punitive. This really is about shooting people in the head after the victory as Jonah Goldberg noted (my paraphrase). As it stands today and tomorrow, the only way to explicitly avoid future confrontations is to somehow constitutionally bar Christians from elective offices.
"a growing jury of Trump supporters."
Just like Kim Davis, many Trump supporters do seem to speak in tongues now that you mention it.
Meade replied Just like Kim Davis, many Trump supporters do seem to speak in tongues now that you mention it.
Ah, I see that Meade is of one mind with his wife. A sign of a strong bond.
When laws are selectively enforced at the very top and at the lower levels of government such as here it creates a very natural tension of where to punish when and at what level. Is POTUS high enough to be immune? Was Jerry Brown immune enough as CA Attorney General when he chose not to enforce Prop 8? Obviously, Obama is going to get away with every bit of his own law non enforcement and perhaps Hillary will as well. These facts, juxtaposed against this rather humble woman, are what drives the droves to Trump.
I believe that Scott Walker is on record saying that SSM "is the law of the land" despite his own personal views on the matter. Compare that caliber of integrity to the present resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave who I don't believe has ever uttered the words "it's the law of the land" when it came to controversial issues with which he personally disagreed.
Prove me wrong.
I see Ritmo never misses a chance to show his lack of reading comprehension. Kim Davis is in jail without personal freedom to go about doing whatever because she defied the government's authority. That's a fact, not an opinion. Try getting a GED or something and learning the difference, Ritmo.
To paraphrase the septuagenerian Justice Kennedy: You may continue to keep your little Christian beliefs but you had dare not act upon them.
Post a Comment