SCOTUS rules: gay marriage approved

[sportage]

This thread could go on and on, but most people, even republicans, believe the law should be followed. Nuff said.
Republican governors are siding with the rule of law. Most sane presidential candidates are siding with the rule of law.
Which tells me this pressing of religious freedoms (so called, cough cough) in court will absolutely never win the day.
Up and down the legal system, the court system, law of the land is just that. Law of the land.
I really don't know what these few nut cases and their lawyers are trying to accomplish?
SS marriage is settled law in our nation. And religious freedom is in no way threatened.
Reminds me of George Wallace blocking the entrance to the school in Alabama. A stunt, like with this lady and her lawyers, which failed with no chance of succeeding.
So why bother?
What is she really up to? And her lawyers?
This country, the good ole US of A, may be highly divided and confrontational, but when it come to obeying the law we still all agree for the most part.
After all, this isn't Iran, just yet.
Thank God in this case, common reasoning still prevails.
I sure hope she brought a clean change of underwear for her little jail house adventure.
After all, this whole stunt stinks to high heaven. Or is it her underwear?

 

[blankslate]

Best post of the thread....


...

 

[Fanatical Meat]

The legal system is already in place. An example I gave is in the states authority/involvement over construction contracts. A simple law could be written in a few days that says "Standard Marriage Contract 1-A EZ is now recognized as an official marriage contract if it is witnessed and presented to the state blah blah blah." It doesn't have to be complicated.

I love these arguments. First it accomplishes nothing other than government out of marriage but somehow ignores all the insurance, wills, medical rights and hundreds of other things to set up something that is exactly like marriage but called something different.
I challenge you to be the first one. Head home to your wife and say "Great news honey we're no longer married we are now a 1-A EZ coupled!".

 

[Fanatical Meat]

You can pay the piper now, or later.

-John {The Pied Piper}

"I pity da fool"

- B.A. Barcus

 

[Newell Steamer]

http://news.yahoo.com/no-kim-davis-cant-beg-041235821.html

Oppression!!!

OPPRESSION!!!

 

[Mike64]

I really don't know what these few nut cases and their lawyers are trying to accomplish?

If I were cynical, I might suggest it's mostly a publicity stunt to encourage donations from all the True Believers... but they'd never really do that, would they?:whiste:

 

[Bitek]

'Equally entitled" to anything, means Government is the most important thing. To make sure people are "equally entitled."

Pure Government.

Socialism, Communism.

-John

Holy shit, you are stupid.

He's an embarrassment to the state. Pure babbling nonsense.

 

[Mike64]

The legal system is already in place. An example I gave is in the states authority/involvement over construction contracts. A simple law could be written in a few days that says "Standard Marriage Contract 1-A EZ is now recognized as an official marriage contract if it is witnessed and presented to the state blah blah blah." It doesn't have to be complicated.

(Sorry, I missed this earlier.)

I'm sure you'll be delighted to hear that I'm not going to try to give you 3 years of law school in a forum post, but - ignoring for the moment the fact that what you're suggesting is basically just a change of terminology, not any fundamental change in the legal nature of marriage - it's really not the same. You could, I suppose, write a law that says "'Standard Marriage Contract 1-A EZ' when properly executed by legally competent parties and filed with the appropriate state authority is now recognized as creating a legal marriage between the parties thereto," but that would simply create a new way to "get married", not create a new legal relationship in place of "marriage" as it now exists.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

(Sorry, I missed this earlier.)

I'm sure you'll be delighted to hear that I'm not going to try to give you 3 years of law school in a forum post, but - ignoring for the moment the fact that what you're suggesting is basically just a change of terminology, not any fundamental change in the legal nature of marriage - it's really not the same. You could, I suppose, write a law that says "'Standard Marriage Contract 1-A EZ' when properly executed and filed with the appropriate state authority is now recognized as creating a legal marriage between the parties thereto," but that would simply create a new way to "get married", not create a new legal relationship in place of "marriage" as it now exists.

Plus some yahoo somewhere will have a problem filing the 1A-EZ form because it is in essence a marriage so we'd be back here.

 

[Humpy]

(Sorry, I missed this earlier.)

I'm sure you'll be delighted to hear that I'm not going to try to give you 3 years of law school in a forum post, but - ignoring for the moment the fact that what you're suggesting is basically just a change of terminology, not any fundamental change in the legal nature of marriage - it's really not the same. You could, I suppose, write a law that says "'Standard Marriage Contract 1-A EZ' when properly executed by legally competent parties and filed with the appropriate state authority is now recognized as creating a legal marriage between the parties thereto," but that would simply create a new way to "get married", not create a new legal relationship in place of "marriage" as it now exists.

Thanks. It's not difficult for me to admit that I'm in over my head with some of this stuff.

I think that's all I was getting at, a new way to get married that didn't require prior approval and would reduce the possibility of the current situation.

 

[Humpy]

Plus some yahoo somewhere will have a problem filing the 1A-EZ form because it is in essence a marriage so we'd be back here.

The form would probably end up looking like a Comcast terms of service agreement.

 

[sportage]

Again, watching TV coverage over this. Something I have to stop doing.
Some suggesting all it would take is a simple adjustment to the "form", removing the need for a signature to grant a license.
Or, with changing the wording on the form to something generic.
Change to something that clerks with religious objections could live with when granting SS marriage license.

HEY! I KNOW...
Why not just change THE FK-ING LAW so that ANY state employee that refuses to do their job can have their ass kicked out of that job ?????
Makes sense to me.
WHY in the hell change wording or smooth over the process of granting a marriage license just to accommodate these nut jobs that refuse to do what they were put there to do and paid to do?
Let them rot in jail.
Or better yet, change THAT law so that the state governor can kick their ass to the curb the moment any clerk refuses to service the "general public".
The "general public" being anyone and everyone legally allowed to obtain a marriage license.
Regardless!
Regardless of sex, weight, color, height, nationality, and sexual orientation.

Employees such as this crazy looney toon scare crow of an state employee need not have their whiny little namely pamby feelings accommodated in any way what-so-ever.
Simply change the state law. Then let the states governors fire their ASS.
.
.

 

[RY62]

Again, watching TV coverage over this. Something I have to stop doing.
Some suggesting all it would take is a simple adjustment to the "form", removing the need for a signature to grant a license.
Or, with changing the wording on the form to something generic.
Change to something that clerks with religious objections could live with when granting SS marriage license.

HEY! I KNOW...
Why not just change THE FK-ING LAW so that ANY state employee that refuses to do their job can have their ass kicked out of that job ?????
Makes sense to me.
WHY in the hell change wording or smooth over the process of granting a marriage license just to accommodate these nut jobs that refuse to do what they we put there to do?
Let them rot in jail.
Or better yet, change THAT law so that the state governor can kick their ass to the curb the moment any clerk refuses to service the "general public".
The "general public" being anyone and everyone legally allowed to obtain a marriage license.
Regardless!
Regardless of sex, weight, color, height, nationality, and sexual orientation.

Employees such as this crazy looney toon scare crow of an state employee need not have their whiny little namely pamby feelings accommodated in any way what-so-ever.
Simply change the state law. Then fire their ASS.
.
.

Maybe because some of us still respect the rights of ALL individuals.

I know, it's crazy cool to be bigoted against Christians right now so just join the crowd, call them nut jobs, put them in jail, whatever it takes to eradicate them or drive them into obscurity. Maybe that works for you but I'll take a compromise that preserves the rights of all parties any day.

I was led to believe that a compromise had been offered but that she had refused it. I've since learned that the compromise story was not true. The, so called, compromise still involved her signing her agreement to every license, which is the act her religious faith doesn't allow her to do.

Her lawyer says that she is willing to allow her office to hand out licenses, if she is not required to sign them. This seems like a good compromise, especially since that is what they are doing while she's in jail.

I pray for God to protect and strengthen her. You can now feel free to hate me as well.

.

 

[Ns1]

Her lawyer says that she is willing to allow her office to hand out licenses, if she is not required to sign them. This seems like a good compromise, especially since that is what they are doing while she's in jail.

explain this then...

n attorney for jailed Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis said Friday that the marriage licenses issued by her deputies to several same-sex couples are invalid.

“They are not worth the paper they’re written on,” Mat Staver said outside the Carter County Detention Center, where Davis is being held on a contempt charge.

Speaking at an afternoon news conference in Grayson, about 35 miles from the Rowan County Courthouse, Staver said: “Our position and the position of the clerk of Rowan County is that those licenses are void.”

The licenses issued to same-sex couples Friday aren’t valid, Staver argued, because they were issued under the county clerk’s authority — but Davis hasn’t granted that authority.

The marriage forms issued Friday did not bear Davis’s name because of her refusal to endorse them. Instead, the clerk’s office included a space for a deputy clerk to sign his or her name.

 

[RY62]

explain this then...

The Kentucky county clerk, jailed for failing to follow a judge’s orders to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, wants her name removed from the marriage certificates, her attorney Matthew Staver told ABC News.

“She has a very strong conscience and she’s just asking for a simple remedy, and that is, remove her name from the certificate and all will be well,” Staver said. “That simple remedy has simply been ignored by the court and by the governor and that’s what should have been done.

“I think it’s reprehensible that she’s in jail for this when a simple fix could have been easily handled.”

http://abcnews.go.com/US/jailed-kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-offers-remedy-sex/story?id=33532686

 

[HomerJS]

Maybe because some of us still respect the rights of ALL individuals.

I know, it's crazy cool to be bigoted against Christians right now so just join the crowd, call them nut jobs, put them in jail, whatever it takes to eradicate them or drive them into obscurity. Maybe that works for you but I'll take a compromise that preserves the rights of all parties any day.

I was led to believe that a compromise had been offered but that she had refused it. I've since learned that the compromise story was not true. The, so called, compromise still involved her signing her agreement to every license, which is the act her religious faith doesn't allow her to do.

Her lawyer says that she is willing to allow her office to hand out licenses, if she is not required to sign them. This seems like a good compromise, especially since that is what they are doing while she's in jail.

I pray for God to protect and strengthen her. You can now feel free to hate me as well.

.

"Grant unto Caesar that which is Caesar's"...Jesus

 

[RY62]

"Grant unto Caesar that which is Caesar's"...Jesus

and unto God the things that are God's

Call me when she's not paying her taxes.

 

[sandorski]

Maybe because some of us still respect the rights of ALL individuals.

I know, it's crazy cool to be bigoted against Christians right now so just join the crowd, call them nut jobs, put them in jail, whatever it takes to eradicate them or drive them into obscurity. Maybe that works for you but I'll take a compromise that preserves the rights of all parties any day.

I was led to believe that a compromise had been offered but that she had refused it. I've since learned that the compromise story was not true. The, so called, compromise still involved her signing her agreement to every license, which is the act her religious faith doesn't allow her to do.

Her lawyer says that she is willing to allow her office to hand out licenses, if she is not required to sign them. This seems like a good compromise, especially since that is what they are doing while she's in jail.

I pray for God to protect and strengthen her. You can now feel free to hate me as well.

.

Oy vey

 

[Ns1]

The Kentucky county clerk, jailed for failing to follow a judge’s orders to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, wants her name removed from the marriage certificates, her attorney Matthew Staver told ABC News.

But she's not signing them.

 

[HomerJS]

and unto God the things that are God's

Call me when she's not paying her taxes.

She had already sworn on the bible to uphold the Constitution of the United States

Doesn't mean much to her.

By the way the same conservatives (type not age) who support Davis were all in favor of jailing Muhammad Ali for refusing induction into the armed forces based on his religious objection. He was jailed and lost his right to earn a living.

Guess Mooslims don't get the same consideration

 

[Fanatical Meat]

The Kentucky county clerk, jailed for failing to follow a judge’s orders to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, wants her name removed from the marriage certificates, her attorney Matthew Staver told ABC News.

“She has a very strong conscience and she’s just asking for a simple remedy, and that is, remove her name from the certificate and all will be well,” Staver said. “That simple remedy has simply been ignored by the court and by the governor and that’s what should have been done.

“I think it’s reprehensible that she’s in jail for this when a simple fix could have been easily handled.”

http://abcnews.go.com/US/jailed-kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-offers-remedy-sex/story?id=33532686

I'll admit the link provided looks weird on my mobile.
Keep in mind before she was sent to jail the counties general counsel(title?) said she had the option of having someone else in the department sign the form if she is unwilling. She said no I will not relinquish that duty only I can sign them.
She had an simple way to comply without having to sign. Not only did she choose to follow her poorly thought out plan it appears she threatened to fire anyone who did sign the licenses.

Sympathy not found

 

[MrPickins]

and unto God the things that are God's

Call me when she's not paying her taxes.

Romans 13:1

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

 

[cabri]

The Kentucky county clerk, jailed for failing to follow a judge’s orders to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, wants her name removed from the marriage certificates, her attorney Matthew Staver told ABC News.

“She has a very strong conscience and she’s just asking for a simple remedy, and that is, remove her name from the certificate and all will be well,” Staver said. “That simple remedy has simply been ignored by the court and by the governor and that’s what should have been done.

“I think it’s reprehensible that she’s in jail for this when a simple fix could have been easily handled.”

http://abcnews.go.com/US/jailed-kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-offers-remedy-sex/story?id=33532686

If the law requires that the County Clerk is identified on the license, then such a solution is worthless.

She is now trying to grasp at straws to get out of jail free and still claim a win.

 

[Mike64]

Thanks. It's not difficult for me to admit that I'm in over my head with some of this stuff.

I think that's all I was getting at, a new way to get married that didn't require prior approval and would reduce the possibility of the current situation.

Prior approval is required to make sure that legal requirements like age of consent, among other things, are met, before the marriage occurs. That's why I mentioned "legally competent parties."

An extreme example is that until quite recently in a historical sense (within my 51-year lifetime), for example, marriage was deemed to give a woman's blanket consent during the marriage to sexual relations with her husband in many/most/virtually all US jurisdictions. It was therefore legally impossible for a man to "rape" his wife - with violence or otherwise - so marriage was an absolute defense to a charge of such a rape (and even the charge, with its attendant publicity even if later dismissed, was rarely brought in the first place.)

While the nature of marital obligations has changed a great deal (for the better, imo) even in the past 50 years, there are still many legal obligations that spring into being immediately upon marrying. Given that, I don't think it's unreasonable to require a determination that the parties are "legally competent" to enter a marriage before they marry, or purport to marry, rather than leaving their legal competence for determination after the fact, if the question arises in a legal context.

 

[fskimospy]

and unto God the things that are God's

Call me when she's not paying her taxes.

How about we call you when she is taking public funds to perform a job that she refuses to do and instead of resigning her position demands that she be able to not do her job and still be paid for it.

You're right, Christians are so persecuted. I mean how awful is it for the public to require her to do the job they pay her to do? So unfair.