Kim Davis, Released From Kentucky Jail, Won’t Say if She Will Keep Defying Court

The Rowan County clerk, who was held in contempt for defying a court order to issue the licenses to same-sex couples, was ordered freed.

Comments: 329

  1. Why ? She is a danger to society.

  2. takes one person to start a social movement. before we know it we will have some bible thumpers telling us how to live. Oops we already have two people running for president trying to do that...Cruz and Huckabee.

  3. Judges are masters at fixing stupid.

  4. Scalia?
    Thomas?
    Alito?
    REALLY????
    Bybee?
    Brown?
    Please....

  5. Since when does "religious liberty" give anyone the right to dictate what others can or cannot do?????!!!!!

  6. And vice versa. You do not have the right to dictate law where there is none. There is NO federal same sex marriage law. Judges are not legislators. Congress makes legislation, and the president signs it into law. Kim upheld the only law that she swore to upholdl: the Kentucky Constitution; that says the only legal marriage contract is between a man and a woman. Until Congress passes such a law, there is no legal same sex marriage. PERIOD

  7. Is there legislation against segregation in schools? No. But there is a law banning it based on Brown v Board of Topeka...a supreme court case.

    The supreme court is the final authority when deciding how to interpret the Constitution. They recently found in June that there is no legal justification to withhold the civil right of marriage between same-sex-couples. Hence, it is now law.

    I am glad that Ms. Davis did what she did, if it helps more people understand how this country's government actually works. The more informed people are, the better decisions they make when they go to vote.

  8. You need to read the US Constitution and get someone to help you understand it. And no, right wing talk radio hosts won't help with your understanding. Start with an understanding of individual rights as guaranteed by the Constitution.

  9. Smart order by the Court.

  10. apparently she has backed down.

  11. Or the judge bowed to public pressure. I'm disappointed that he didn't hold her for the full week he'd originally planned. Nothing in the statements coming from her attorney shows they backed down an iota.

  12. Judges don't make the law and aren't above it.

    No of course not, they interpret the law and make rulings about its violation in their courtrooms. This is the law of the land. Her job is to give out licenses, not make moral judgements about who can and can't have one.

    She was ordered to do the job and refused. Its that simple. Her options are to resign, be impeached, or sit in jail for refusing to follow a court order to fulfill her government job responsibilities.

    We need Bill Bellichick here to tell them "DO YOUR JOB!"

  13. To my knowledge there is no "Law of the land" regarding ssm. If there is - please point it out to me...

  14. "or sit in jail for refusing to follow a court order to fulfill her government job responsibilities."

    When has this ever been done?

  15. Again, what actual law did Kim Davis break/disobey? Name the statute.

  16. One step closer to theocracy. If people want to unite church and state, they should go establish a new country.

  17. They are doing just that in Africa, where they've convinced Ugandans and others to criminalize homosexuality through their missionaries. They're about as "christian" as Hitler, Mussolini, or Stalin--authoritarians who were honest about it and totally secular!

  18. ISIS is doing exactly that.

  19. They also have the option of joining ISIS or Al Quaeda.

  20. I still can't fathom how "religious liberty" includes denying legal rights to others you don't like.

  21. To someone like Davis, signing a same-sex marriage license means being an accessory to a crime against her god. It's very easy to understand why she won't do it. What is harder to understand is why she insists on holding onto a job that requires her to.

  22. Totally agree. One thing I've always found interesting about Rhode Island, which was founded on the principle of religious liberty, is that it's the most tolerant place I've ever lived.

  23. What law did Kim Davis break? Please cite the statute. A SCOTUS opinion is not "the law of the land" until Congress, the only law-making body in the US, passes a bill.

  24. There go this week's GOP talking points.

  25. I hope this is at least a little chip out of narrow religious oppression.

  26. Funny thing about that phrase "religious oppression." It can mean "oppression OF religion," or it can mean "oppression BY religion."

  27. I'm not holding my breath that we've heard the last of difficulty obtaining marriage licenses in Rowan County.

  28. The Left will not be satisfied until they break this woman and extract their revenge.

  29. I don't want revenge. I want democracy.

  30. Dr. John, am neither right nor left her religious beliefs have rendered her useless in her job. If she cannot carry out HER FULL DUTIES as Clerk she has no right holding that position..............PERIOD.

  31. Not revenge - punishment - for willfully and self-centeredly depriving people of their civil rights. Rational-minded people just want her to do her job. Jeez.

  32. She should be relieved of her job, it's that simple.

  33. Sad state of affairs when citizens have no idea of how government works, how laws are made, how laws are tested in the courts.

  34. ...and she's an elected official!

  35. Not only citizens but elected officials running for presidency of the US. that is downright scary and should be opposed vigorously.

  36. It's even sadder when those running for the highest office in the land make statements indicating they don't know how government works, laws are made and how they're tested in courts, even those with Harvard law degrees like Cruz!

  37. Could he be giving her more rope?

  38. Authority figures are falling like pine bark beetle infested forests...perhaps Bunning dreamed about his disbarment. Dreams matter.

  39. It was probably a smart move by Judge Bunning. He made his point and now the licenses are being dispensed. It will be hard for Davis to undo that when she goes back to work.

  40. He's probably afraid things will escalate among her followers and supporters.

  41. And it prevents Kim Davis from being a martyr and attracting self-aggrandizing Republican politicians.

  42. "Ms. Davis’s argument and incarceration have resonated deeply among Christian conservatives, many of whom fear an erosion of religious liberty, and transformed the clerk of a rural Kentucky county into an unyielding symbol of opposition to same-sex marriage."

    It's not about "..an erosion of religious liberty.." It's about an erosion of religious control.

    Those christian conservatives still can believe whatever they want.

  43. What a fabulous line. You are so correct. It IS about religious control (and not liberty). Well said, Bob Woods!

  44. The intllctual dishonesty amongst the so called conservatives (paleo-preservatives more likely) is scary and the decade long silence of the oligarch controlled presson the matter a sad reality we have to endure.

  45. Outrageous. She should be jailed indefinitely for breaking the law. This woman is no better than the Ayatollahs in Iran.

  46. You know who else jails people indefinitely? The Ayatollahs in Iran.

    I do not in any way support Davis's actions, but see no harm in releasing her as long as, as published in the article, the deputy clerks are able to do their job and issue marriage licenses to whoever applies for them. Jailing people indefinitely for their beliefs is not a road I want to travel.

  47. Overkill, she just needs to be fired.

  48. One wonders if John feels the same about sanctuary cities, which blatantly violate federal law. OR do you just get outraged when people do stuff you don't like?

  49. Another state I will never visit.

  50. That's a bit rash. I'm sure there are many nice attractions for you to enjoy. This is one individual.

    -Kentucky Board of Tourism

  51. And you are in agreement with every single person in New York?

  52. As if anyone cares! The hubris of New Yorkers who constantly threaten everyone with their absence is almost funny.

  53. I think this was wrong this woman is a real Christian and these people have list their minds they are not Godly because this is not in the bible and when he comes back those who have betrayed him will be punished this is her religion and you put her in jail so wrong please you have murders on the street that you let it that will do it again but omg you put a woman in jail for this for doing Gods work may God help you

  54. Wow, is punctuation also against your religion?

  55. Murder is already illegal. Are convicted murderers not serving prison time in your state?

  56. Even God uses punctuation.

  57. This case was handled well. Ms. Davis was not allowed to use the office in which she worked as an extension of her personal beliefs. Her current release also takes away from the idea of "criminalization of Christianity," in Mike Huckabee's ever-hyperbolic take.

  58. Or, to put it more simply, it punches a hole in her martyr's balloon.

  59. I don't know why. So many of them, who claim to be christians, really are criminals.

  60. Huckabee and Cruz will not be able to make as much of her "imprisonment" now.

  61. Oh...do not underestimate the Huckster and Cruz. These guys will reenact some photo op scene so they can use this pathetic public employee for their gain.

  62. Religious belief > law = theocracy. If these people want to live in a country where the First Amendment means "Christians can disobey the law if God tells them to," I wish they would go start that country somewhere else, rather than trying to turn THIS country into a Christian theocracy.

  63. TB I agree with you and I think that's what the Pilgrim Founding Fathers would have wanted as those Brownish English Dissenters left England because of a separation of Church and State issue. I am so tired of the lack of that separation and wish that we could all trust our laws rather than God.

  64. Yep, if they want to live in a theocracy, they should go to Iran.

    Oh, yes...I forgot...

  65. Agreed. Last I heard, Somalia was still looking for a government. Maybe they could go there and start their christian theocracy.

  66. I am deeply afraid for my religious freedom. I am an atheist. When an elected official can impose her/his religion on all citizens through their legal position, the first amendment is violated. "The congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion." Kim Davis' opposition to gay marriage is a religious belief and should not be imposed on others through her state position.

  67. Exactly. I don't even think the bible should be in a courtroom. If one wants to lie, a stack of them doesnt make a difference.

  68. Good point. Religious freedom or freedom from religion. A public official should obey the law of the land. Otherwise why be a public official? If there is a new law that the official disagrees with, the official has a choice to make: follow the law, let others in her department follow the law, or leave her position.

  69. You are exactly right. This Kim Davis case is a textbook First Amendment issue, only Kim Davis is the government in this situation and the gay couples being denied marriage licenses are the innocent citizens whose beliefs are being trampled by an oppressive government. It's deeply unsettling that so many conservatives don't understand that.

  70. This was clearly not a case about religious liberty. Those who believe it is are either uneducated or willfully ignorant. As for the politicians making hay with this issue, and we all know who they are, the less said the better.

  71. Nothing could be more ignorant than the incessant claims that these cases are not about religion.

    Seriously, are people so narrow-minded and/or anti-religion that they think religious adherents are faking their religious convictions? Do they understand so little about faith that they believe ideology trumps faith every time? How could they possibly be this ignorant?

    Talk about serious denial.

  72. I don't think she's faking her religious convictions, but she can't use those convictions to deny people their legal rights. If her religious views go against the duties of her position (which she has sworn under oath to carry out), she needs to resign!

  73. My guess is she will immediately interfere with the issuance of additional licenses and will be jailed again, which is right where she wants to be.

  74. It may be that she begins her interference again. If she does, she has been warned that she will return to jail, this time under criminal contempt. She has been warned.

  75. Being supported (probably literally) by the Liberty Counsel crowd, as well as the well-known fundamentalist "Christians", she may well try to force the issue. It may be she is intended to be their test case, and frankly, I hope that, if so, she and they all get a good judicial slap-down from the Supremes--not that the actions they've taken so far have had any effect.
    Maybe fines in realistic amounts--enough to give the people behind her extremism pause.

  76. Well, that certainly takes the wind right out of her sails now, doesn't it?

  77. Laughable.

  78. Sounds like a reasonable accommodation by the judge. But the willful misunderstand of "religious freedom" among this group of Americans -- especially among Republican presidential candidates -- scares me.

  79. Why does this "scare" you, Chris? If you are scared, are you going to vote?

    This all makes me mad. Willful misunderstanding of "religious freedom" to usurp the Constitution in support of an invented Christian victimization in the secular world makes me angry. When I get mad (and even when I'm not mad) I vote. I hope Rowan County voters kick Kim Davis to the curb at their earliest opportunity, but that is up to them. I will not vote for any politician who makes me angry like Cruz and Huckabee are doing right now. Being afraid of them isn't going to help anything.

  80. Did all the Republican candidates declare Davis was in the right or is this just another made up story by an uninformed voter?

  81. Doesn't scare me. It disgusts me.

  82. We continue to be a nation of laws, not religions!

  83. Tell that to the Sanctuary cities.

  84. Kudos to Bunning for what appears to be a simple, thoughtful solution -- if necessarily a temporary one.

  85. Smart judge....unwilling to make a martyr out of her and to let the pols use her. Next step: she will try to block her deputies from issuing licenses. This ain't over yet.

  86. @DWBH: indeed, let's see how it can be argued to violate Davis's personal religious freedom when other people (her deputies) issue licenses... the bog mindles.

  87. Oh, poo. This means Teddy boy Cruz won't be able to visit her in jail. Now, what's he going to do all day?

  88. Teddy is missing his special photo op. Could you imagine the two of them kneeling and praying in the cell? The sun beam (properly placed lighting) beating down on their heads. Just like "Daniel in the Lions Den". What an image!

  89. Wait till she returns to jail very soon. Then he can visit her.

  90. If religious freedom is good enough for Hobby Lobby, it is good enough for Kim Davis and Charee Stanley (the Express Jet muslim flight attendant).

  91. Kim Davis is acting as a government employee and the first amendment clearly forbids the government from establishing a sanctioned religion. Hobby lobby and Express jet are not parts of the government, so completely different.

  92. A comparison cannot be drawn drawn between private companies or their employees and a government actor such as a County Clerk. Each government entity must grant the citizens its serves their civil rights, and those who serve in the capacity as a government agent (employee) must in that capacity fulfill the government's obligations.

  93. Oh please, let the Charee Stanley case go all the way to the Supreme Court. Perhaps they will then see the folly of their Holly Hobby ruling.

  94. What is to stop her now from forbidding the people who work for her to issue licenses?

  95. Fear of going back to jail and not being let out after a few days, I suppose. Not much more than that. She's kooky.

  96. The order from the judge says she cannot "in any way, directly or indirectly, with the efforts of her deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples."

    What you described surely falls under this. She would face consequences.

  97. The judge's ruling:

    Judge Bunning ordered that Ms. Davis “shall not interfere in any way, directly or indirectly, with the efforts of her deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples.” He he said that any such action would be regarded as “a violation” of his released order.

  98. The "obscure local official" went on a power trip. 15 minutes is up.

  99. We are all obscure while we're sheep. When one stands up, he or she stops being obscure.
    Civil disobedience is a respectable way to communicate as long as no harm was done.

  100. It was excessive. She could have been suspended without pay. This is the law running amok.

    In the past, slavery was the law, and people who opposed it, went to jail. That changed. I hope this state of affairs in marriage changes as well, but I am sure it will not.

  101. A federal judge cannot suspend someone without pay. Sanctions for contempt of court are fines or jail.

  102. She's not some administrative assistant, she's an elected official. The punishment for contempt of court is fines/imprisonment. Period.

    In the past, laws to oppress people were commonplace. Over time, these things correct themselves. Surely you realize this is entirely different. Instead of fighting AGAINST oppression,you're fighting FOR oppression, which is wrong, which is why you're correct in assuming it will not change. The SUPREME COURT has ruled. Better get over it and move along.

  103. She was voted into office, so a Federal Judge could not suspend her without pay, nor could the Governor, nor the State Legislature. Impeachment, on the other hand, is an option.

  104. She broke the law and did not perform her duties per her Federal job description - fire her and put her back in jail

  105. typical progressive. doesn't just want this lady fired, where she would have no more control over marriage licences. He then wants her jailed. Because she had the temerity to disagree with the new prevailing progressive religion.

  106. Congratulations to Judge Bunning for shutting this circus down. Meanwhile, gay marriage is still the oxymoron of the century.

  107. ...and it will be until many older--narrow minded--folks pass on. Future generations will look at the debate as a low-point in American history and with wonder that anyone would believe that people's rights depended on their sexual orientation.

  108. Why is it not called a Gay Union? I would not be opposed to that.

  109. " Meanwhile, gay marriage is still the oxymoron of the century."

    You've obviously forgotten "compassionate conservative." But the rest of us haven't, and I hope we never will.

  110. Ms. Davis made two vows. One to the state to uphold the laws of the land, and one to her newfound born again Christian beliefs. She should not have contradicted herself and then ask the courts, or anybody else, to clarify her own vacillation.

  111. What law of the land? The Supreme court can not and does not write law. So by the law of the land (the Constitution) there is no law for gay marriage. I hate to break it to you. The Constitution makes if abundantly clear, the Federal government cannot tell you who you can and cannot marry, hence DOMA was unconstitutional, well if congress cannot tell you who can marry, why can the supreme court? Only the states and can tell you who you can and cannot marry and that was happening on its own and would have resolved this issue once and for all.

  112. She has made a whole bunch of marriage vows too, but I guess those didn't count? Hypocrisy is grand isn't it?

  113. This self-righteous, self-appointed "guardian of marriage" Ms. Davis also made a third vow (repeated on multiple occasions), namely "to love, honor and obey, till death do us part", which she then proceeded to violate repeatedly through divorce. Not only does she confuse a secular job with a religious one, but she is a clueless hypocrite as well. And one who judges others, adding insult to injury.

  114. Why is she no longer in contempt? What has changed?

  115. Her office, and the deputies, have been ordered to issue licenses and they have been issuing them. The county and state say they are valid licenses (though her lawyer disputes that). The contempt was because she (and her deputies) were not following the order and issuing licenses, and now the licenses are being issued. Whether she likes it or not!

  116. The plaintiff's who brought the motion to have her held in contempt requested her release because the licenses had been issued to them. It was not her lawyer who won her release If she interferes with the clerks who are issuing the licenses, she will go back to jail which is really what her lawyers want because it serves as a great fund raiser for them.

  117. Protection of the U.S. Constitution no longer requires Davis's active compliance, only her acquiescence.

    If Davis actively interferes with her deputies, she is going to have to fabricate a whole new theory to rationalize her misbehavior.

  118. In before she interferes with it again.

  119. Kim Davis and her team will actively interfere with the duties of her office so that she can cement her status as the symbol of this so called "War on Christianity" - whatever that means. I would hazard to guess that she'll be back in jail for violating Judge Bunning's release order before the end of the week all in the name of her inconsistent and arbitrary religious beliefs.

  120. Speaking as a Christian, if there's a "War on Christianity" in order to keep Christians from establishing a Theocracy in this country, sign me up.

  121. As a practicing Catholic, I will co-sign. We live in a constitutional democracy. I have no desire whatsoever to live in a theocracy.

  122. Separation of church and state is core to the founding of the nation. Judge Bunning's rulings walked the delicate line between enforcing this cherished principle and unnecessarily harsh punishment for Ms. Davis.

  123. It would help if you understood why church and state were "separated". Hint: It wasn't to keep religion out.

  124. We disagree on "unnecessarily". She broke the law and deserves to stay in jail.

  125. Please show us where in the Constitution (the founding document, written by our founding fathers) does it say there is a separation if church and state? I believe that you only have a letter written by Jefferson that speaks of a separation, but you misinterpret the meaning of his letter. Since the Constitution is the law of the land, show us the wording that states there is a separation of church and state. Maybe it is right next to the "only the militia is allowed to have guns, and they can only be muskets" clause. I will wait for you patiently.

    I enjoy differing opinions, but please argue from a foundation of facts please. It is OK to be ignorant, really, but not to be willfully ignorant.

  126. My guess is Huckabee is furiously rewriting his speech at this moment? Also, I'm assuming that he has a revised version of the President's oath of office that he would like the Chief Justice to consider at the next inauguration? Something like ..."and will to the best of my ability [and according to my personal religious convictions], preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

  127. Kim Davis should fade back into obscurity, rather than be regarded as some kind of modern-day martyr.

  128. The hate-based "Christians" who admire her should crawl back into their caves, but that is not going to happen either.

  129. Exactly. However this is her answer to a completely dismal life. She'll never do an honest days work again. The religious zealots will regard her with awe AND MONEY.

  130. Bunning rolls over, "thank you, judge!"

  131. Do not assume that Bunning sold out. Bunning may be trying to reduce the martyr to human proportions and pack up her revival tent.

    Davis may be tired of jail and/or already have gathered all the publicity and funding she needs to fuel her political ambitions. If marriage licenses continue to be issued by her deputies, Davis becomes a footnote - at least until she runs for (and gets elected to) Congress as a proven "Christian" theocrat.

    Wait and see what happens. The federal detention center is not going anywhere.

  132. I read of no personal defendant/bench agreement and, anyway, why would any sane individual want to get used being incarcerated? Perhaps she will run for senate (which I have stated in an unpublished comment) so her children can attend law school to become future judges.

  133. Because there are greater things worth living and dying for, and being right with GOD is one of them, which few will under stand until Judgement.

  134. Just an hour ago, her lawyer said she would not allow licenses to be issued if she is released from jail, so how do you think this is going to go?

    Ryland Barton ‏@RylandKY 1h1 hour ago

    Mat Staver, chair of defense team representing Kim Davis, says if released from jail she won't allow licenses to be issued

  135. Yep, she's going to stand there and tell her staff, "Don't do it, I say"...and they're going to look at their shoes, and mutter under their breaths, and then issue those licenses, because they know perfectly well that she lacks the power to compel them. She's under a court order not to interfere, and they're under a court order to issue licenses. I don't think their decision will be that hard, except maybe her son's.

  136. IF that is the case and she violates the Judges orders I would suspect she'll be held in contempt and be sent to jail for a much longer and fixed time.

  137. Then she'll be back in jail.

  138. This is both good news and iffy news. It's a good decision in that it diffuses the growing media and political circus. It's a practical solution that is less than perfect but gets on with the business of allowing gays and lesbians who live in the county to get married. It's the no drama fix.

    On the other hand, what if everyone in that office refused to sign the documents? The Kim Davis' of this country need to understand that this is a secular country, not a theocracy, where government employees can randomly deny people's rights on a county clerk's say so.

  139. They already have signed them. When Ms. Davis was jailed, the six deputy clerks were given the option of following the law or facing contempt charges themselves. All but one--her son--agreed within forty-five minutes (one clerk even congratulated the couple who brought the law suit. Judge Bunning--a G.W. Bush appointee and son of the conservative Sen. Jim Bunning and a Catholic--said as long as the licenses were issued, that satisfied the law. My question was about the recourse suggested by her attorney: that the licenses be filled out and then simply "recorded": what if no one wants to record them?

  140. I am aware of that. But as a hypothetical question, what if no one was prepared to sign the documents?

    The judge's solution seems like a good one in this case, but the larger issue of county workers refusing to marry gays and lesbians, has only kind of sort of been dealt with.

  141. Fascinating. I was wondering how long it would take for pressure from the Left to spring her. It was too dangerous to the same-sex cause to allow her to be made into any sort of sympathetic figure. Far too dangerous.

    So we have established precedent now that upholding your faith against Government orders is worth 5 days in the slam.

    Wonder what the next one will be? How many days in jail, how many dollars in fines or lawsuits will it cost honest Christians when they refuse to bake a cake, arrange flowers, sing, play the organ, take pictures, cater, or otherwise assist in the celebration of a same-sex wedding?

    And then, how many Churches will lose their not-for-profit status as they wrestle with how to bless unions that violate their faith? Or do we just paint "BIGOT" or "HOMOPHOBE" in red on the side of the Church and start charging them taxes? What's the next step?

    I await with Great Interest the next phase.

    WR

  142. Personally, I look forward to seeing guys like Creeflo Dollar and Pat Robertson audited, as I've love to see them try to account for the mansions, the clothes, the cars and the jets.

    But that's a side issue. Despite your earnest mosrepresentation, nobody got persecited for being a Christain.

    An elected official who violated her oath of office, defied the law of the land, and violated a judge's order (despite being offered a compromise) was jailed for contempt of court.

    Sorry you dislike the Constitution.

  143. Again

    " upholding your faith against Government orders"

    is the false narrative that has emerged. She is jailed because she attempted to abuse her authority and obstruct lawful citizens their civil rights. Get it straight.

    Just like the false narrative of Michael Brown of "Hand Up Don't Shoot" the far right have their own "She was jailed because of her godly faith"

  144. This case is not comparable to those you list -- because people who don't want to bake a cake or arrange flowers for a same-sex wedding (also called a "wedding") are not representing the government. In her job as clerk, Ms Davis is a representative of the government, and is therefore enjoined by the First Amendment from favoring one religion.

    Whether the private individuals you describe are guilty of discrimination is an entirely different issue.

  145. She believes in the sancitity of marriage so much so she's done it four times now. Good she's out of jail now she should resign sooner than later. Ms. Davis, since your religious beliefs are hindering you from doing your job you should quit. And let someone in there who can do your job.

  146. How many times she has been married is irrelevant beyond being obnoxiously humorous. It doesn't promote the legitimacy of your point, however, and therefore doesn't help validate your opinion.

  147. Practice makes perfect...

  148. She got into all of those prior relationships BEFORE she became a follower of Christ, who has now transformed her life and given her the ability to know what's right and what's wrong.

  149. John 13:34: A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

    Apparently Mrs. Davis missed that bit.

  150. What does this have to do with love? I love same sex attracted people yet I still know that God forbids homosexuality. What does one have to do with the other?

  151. will this offence to american democracy, Kim Davis, fight for rights of Muslims to practice their religious while holding power such as she has in her office? I don't think so? She should not receive the slightest accommodation. This is a shame and a sham. She should sit in jail like any other criminal held in contempt of court until she complies with the law of the land, which she, in faith, vowed to uphold when she took office. The judge has folded and it is a shame. She is a blackmailed, a bully, a self-righteous anti-democratic process extremist. In short, she is anti-America and all it stands for in terms of true rights for all.

  152. I'm afraid jail is exactly where she wants to be right now. It is a sort of accommodation of her martyr complex to put her there.

  153. A perfect example of the willfully knowledge-challenged mindsets of Kim Davis' defenders: “Judges Don’t Make Laws And Are Not Above The Law.”

    This is an ugly result of happens when one reads the bible exclusively and watches FOX.

  154. I watch FOX and I supported this women being jailed. Just because it's a different prejudice you display doesn't make it right.

  155. Did you major in "Broad Generalizations" in College?

  156. I assume you know about Fox because you watch Fox often enough to form an opinion.

  157. She's a "civil servant" and by joining the government she has an obligation to carry out the laws. Just as a member of the military does not have the right to decide which wars s/he will participate in, neither do civil servants have a right to decide which laws to follow. Those who have moral or other objections need to pursue different careers.

  158. The mayors of all the sanctuary cities are civil servants and have an obligation to carry out the federal law on illegal immigrants. How they are not held to a higher standard than Kim Davis is quite baffling; after all, the illegals committing heinous crimes ( Kate Steinle) are here because the sanctuary cities are ignoring the law. The mayors and city councils of these cities should be charged with a crime.

  159. Yes - image an army commander whose religion forbade killing under any circumstances. Admirable perhaps, but in definitely in the wrong job!

  160. Perhaps an "uncivil servant"?

  161. People like Kim Davis say they want religious liberty, but what they really want is the right to force their religion on everyone else, and force everyone to recognize their religion as above the law. The key thing is that she will not be allowed to stop the deputy clerks from issuing marriage licenses, or she'll be put back in jail. In the meantime, she should be impeached for unambiguously violating her oath of office.

  162. Kim Davis would have to be impeached by the state legislature for violating the Constitution of Kentucky, which at the moment, states that marriage is between a man and a woman. Question is, will the state legislature defy the SC ruling and not ratify the June decision? Answer: Kim Davis

  163. Liberty for me, not for thee! I believe that's an appropriate observation under the circumstances.

  164. How do you know she doesn't want religious liberty?

  165. Why say something like: "Christian conservatives, many of whom fear an erosion of religious liberty" without qualifying it in some way. It makes it seem a reasonable fear. There is no erosion of religious liberty at stake. This is about maintaining the separation of church and state and denying someone to impose her religious beliefs on others through the authority of her government job. She has the liberty to practice her religion so long as it doesn't stand in the way of others' rights under the law. She was not asked to marry another woman, or to preside over a same sex marriage in her church or even attend one.

  166. I'm not saying I agree with Kim Davis' supporters, but what qualifier would you have used?

  167. You are right; but that is the state of our current generation of journalism. Caving to the irrational screamers on the right. Started in Florida during the hanging chad fiasco.

  168. As I understand it, after the marriage the license must be returned to the clerk who then must forward it to the state for recording. Is she going to do that?

  169. She may try not to...in which case she'll be right back before Judge Bunning, and her handlers will be right back to raking in donations.

  170. "It is only the savage, whether of the bush or the American gospel tent, who pretends to know the will and intent of god completely and exactly."

    HL Mencken, 1918

  171. It is not that hard to know the will of God when he states it explicitly in Leviticus. Anything else is pure divination.

  172. Whoa... I like this.

    Randy Smith a preacher who was rallying to release Davis asked god to "unseat" the 5 SC Judges who decided on same sex marriage. He wasn't praying for God's will but for God to do his will.

  173. Mencken also said "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people." That one makes me think of Donald Trump.

  174. The ginned (trumped?)-up frenzy of Christian conservatives; the picnic-and-fairgrounds atmosphere; the pandering of political candidates heedless of the harm they cause with their cynical exploitation: The Scopes Monkey Trial, ninety years later.

    "He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind." -- Proverbs 11:29

  175. Understand what has happened here: Judge Bunning's duty was to ensure that the laws are followed, not to prevent Davis from becoming a political martyr. Yet Davis was not merely refusing to issue gay couples marriage licenses, but also not permitting her deputies to do so. The Judge's goal was -- as it had to be -- to get those licenses issued, as required under a Constitutional ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Davis testified that she would have funds available to pay a fine, and you can be sure -- as was the Court-- that, if she didn't pay, her supporters would have done so. Therefore, fining her wouldn't have solved the problem. The State did not seem eager to step in to overrule Davis and order deputies to process licenses; politically unpopular in KY, and legally problematic because she hadn't been impeached. The Court's only alternative was to jail Davis.

    Which worked. With Davis in jail and unable to process licenses, the State stepped in and ordered the deputies to do so. Regardless of what Davis's lawyers now claim, that is a done deal, and the continuing processing of licenses by clerk's deputies is a condition of Davis's release. The State has to do nothing more than let the process continue; if Davis tries to interfere, back to jail she goes.

    A convoluted way to solve the problem, but one predicated on the Judge's duty to enforce the law.

  176. Well said!

  177. When your religion starts hindering others exercising their rights, your religion is the thing that becomes unlawful, not the other way around.

  178. These religious zealots are not much different than the Taliban -- just a different name.

  179. From the Salem witch trials, to the extreme religious fundamentalists of the 1970s and beyond, to Kim Davis, it's all about their rights and to hell with the rights of those who they oppress...

  180. How about my rights as a Buddhist to not issue hunting licenses?
    How about my rights as a friend to see my friends get married irrespective of their gender?
    You know that Kim was married 4 times and had a child with an ex husband when married to the new husband. Couldn't she trade one of those marriages with a gay couple?

  181. The very thing we revolted against almost 250 years ago from England. Hmmm.

  182. Now that she's out, here come the television appearances and speaking engagements as she cashes in big time on her 15 minutes of fame. Go Kim go (away).

  183. Why does the author refer to the "debate" regarding "gay" marriage, when the debate ended with the US Supreme Court ruling that SAME SEX marriage is the law of the land. Just like in the Civil War, the debate ended when one side won and the other side lost. End of story.

  184. Sure. The gay marriage debate ended with the SCOTUS decision just as it did with Roe. If it were just about a SCOTUS decision, there would be no carping about Citizens United, and Bush would have been considered a legitimate victor.

  185. Hmmm,

    "Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth" Sounds about right!

    “Governments (derive) their just powers from the consent of the governed” Yes yes yes!

    “For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed is the very definition of slavery.” In total agreement

    “No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority.” Hit the nail on the head, how prophetic!

    But now that they Supreme Court has ended the "debate" (NOT) the mantra now is: move along, nothing to see here, it is just a trampling of the Constitution, please go back to you Isomething device.

  186. Not quite. While it's true that the ruling makes it legal for same sex couples to marry, it doesn't end the debate. People are still taking sides and arguing about it, just as people are still taking sides and arguing about abortion, despite it's being legal now since 1973. It would be lovely to think that a SCOTUS ruling would bring about "end of story," but with highly contentious issues, it never does.

  187. While I applaude the judge for sending her to jail for contempt, I believe he gave in too easily. What's a 3 day stint in jail when faced wait disobeying a Supreme Court opinion and becoming a martyr?

    I feel as though this will only encourage other bigots who are in a position of power to test their luck and see what will happen when they defy a court order.

    As a federally licensed attorney, I'm sickened that people in this country really believe that biblical law trumps constitutional law. That is one of the key foundations of our government and of our country. Our country is not founded on judeo-christian law. Our country is not a christian nation, so say the Framers. People are not allowed to pick and choose the laws they want to obey, especially if you're a government official. This is a democratic republic founded on the rule of law, not god.

  188. So very succintly said, John, and I too am sickened by the like of this clerk throwing her weight and beliefs around ... cutting her own personal cloth to measure. What an outrageous waste of money, time and energy. Let's hope this one is finally laid to rest.

  189. As a federally licensed attorney, you should know that contempt penalties are imposed to for compliance with a judge's orders, not to punish the miscreant. Once the judge sees that things are moving along, there is no reason to keep the sanctions imposed. In this case,the deputies seem to be issuing licenses normally, so the no one's right to a marriage license is being trampled on, so the judge really had no choice than to release her. If she interferes with her deputies, that''s a matter for the judge to take up later.

  190. "Our country is not a Christian nation." --->> No it isn't, but so many people 1,000% believe that it is.

  191. I understand the need and desires to attach Kim Davis' actions to religious and/or constitutional issues but the issue here is simple. She is a public employee that refused to do her job and should be fired for that.

  192. we live in a world where flying from continent to continent in mere hours, packaged cupcakes that last 30 years, augmented breasts, corrective lenses & wifi are the norm & somehow we gays are supposed to feel most unnatural?

    whatevs. christian morals & godly nature have little to do with a highly functioning society (see Denmark). the ability to live free from religion is not something these people can understand. hopefully the law continues to win out be bypassing their stupid~

  193. sounds like the hillbilly vote will continue to be ripe fruit for the republicans. as for the intellectual's sign about judges and laws...well, no they don't and no they aren't. the usa has a constitution which is usually considered to be a fairly significant legal document. laws have something to do with it......

  194. You do realize Ms. Davis is a Democrat, right?

  195. yes i do. as were many of the southern states until the civil rights act. it's hard to believe she would be considered a democrat in any state north of the mason dixon line. also, that she'd still have a job in any other western democracy. religion is used as fig leaf to justify crazy in the usa.....just as militia mention in the constitution is used to justify crazy gun lovers

  196. Refuse to do your job? Quit, or get fired. As for me, I refuse to recognize her divorce decrees, unless she gets absolution, and a "get". But then again, her violating my religious beliefs is not my business.

  197. If you were the responsible government official, would you have denied her divorce?

  198. Judge Bunning is doing the pragmatic thing. The deputy clerks are complying with his order, marriage licenses are being issued, and there is no reason to hold her in jail unless she takes steps to interfere with the process now going on. In his order, he says that if she interferes, she may be hauled back into court for a new contempt hearing. But this seems to be the "compromise" that her lawyer says she was looking for. In particular, that the clerks are not writing her name on the license form. And the state's Attorney General says the licenses are valid without her name on them. If this holds up, the problem is solved.

  199. Yes, it's a good compromise, but it's one she was offered before she went to jail and she refused it. Even though she isn't signing the forms her name is still printed on them as the county clerk, and she has said even that is unacceptable. Let's see if some time in the pokey has suddenly made it a tad more "acceptable".

  200. Maybe they just need a rubber stamp with her signature on it to solve the whole thing....

  201. I would bet that Judge Bunning was always in complete sympathy with Ms. Davis, Initially, sending her to jail was the BEST thing he could do for her. He transformed this unhappy woman into a martyr. Now she is a symbol to keep the anti-gay marriage forces steamed up. Now, in return for just a few days in jail, she will undoubtedly reap financial rewards in speaking engagements, paid interviews and so on

  202. Not exactly, TJK. Judge Bunning did not want to fine her because, as he stated, other groups would pay her fine, and Davis would have received no consequence for her refusal to perform the job she swore to do. He did not want to send her to jail. He gave her every opportunity to avoid jail, including allowing her five clerks to issue marriage licenses. Davis refused Judge Bunning's ever attempt to reach a compromise. If she found herself in jail, it was her own effort to posture as a religious martyr, in no way related to what Judge Bunning had hoped for, as a resolution. Ultimately, the law is the law is the law. Society has moved forward, and those who refuse to accept those social changes need to move with the inclusiveness of society or step down. That way, they will not be violating their religious beliefs. Imposing those beliefs upon others is not legal in any way. She put herself in jail, and she has the ability to walk out of that cell any hour of the day or night. Just follow the law.

  203. If Ms. Davis is unwilling to perform her job and issue marriage licenses to same sex couples, she should be disciplined and fired -- same would be true for failure to follow any other work instructions/policies/procedures/laws. And then there is the obvious insubordination that ended her in jail for contempt. If she is unwilling to follow the laws/policies in place and the direction of her superiors her employment should be terminated.

    What happened to the separation between church and state?

  204. Yes, disciplined and fired for her refusal to fulfill the job she took an OATH to perform. At this stage of the debacle, it's too late for her to reclaim another position. She has let her contempt for same-sex marriage permeate the land as a disordered, illegal union, and she should not be permitted to resume her duties. She needs to be disciplined and fired for attempting to write her own laws in America.

  205. As an elected official, she cannot be "fired". She can be impeached by those who elected her, however.

  206. In certain parts of the country separation between church and state means certain "Real Christians" are free from the state and a therefore impose their will on the rest of society because they answer to a higher law.

    What really burns my toast is the 2 clown Chucklebee and Duzee. To me the GOP should immediately disqualify them from running for POTUS. Imagine if everyone could ignore any law they want by claiming their religious freedom is a higher law the the government.

  207. The right wing is now saying that the marriage licenses issued after Ms. Davis was held in contempt are not valid. The county and state say they are, and are treating them as valid.

    What's a right-wing theocrat to do? For a week, they've had a martyr. But if they now go after the couples, gay and straight, that have gotten married on licenses issued against Ms. Davis's wishes, then they're making martyrs instead of being martyrs, and showing the mean vindictive streak that peeks out every now and then from behind the 'christian' mask. Nor do Huckabeen or Cruze have any conceivable standing to assail those licenses...they'd be rightly laughed out of court.

    So my guess is that Ms. Davis's handlers will have her try to initiate some official action to revoke those licenses...which will of course put her squarely in Judge Bunning's sights as repeating her contempt of court by specifically violating his release order...just what the publicity machine pretending to be lawyers behind her want.

  208. Hopefully she does repeat her stupid folly and ends up back where she belongs; behind bars.

  209. I suppose these same right wing hypocrites would support a muslim town clerk or DMV clerk who refused to issue drivers licenses to women or marriage licenses becasue a burka wasn't being worn? Be careful what you wish for right wingers.

  210. Is it me or are American conservative Christians like the least tolerant people in the country?

  211. it is not you; it is them, and they will destroy our democracy if allowed.

  212. And have the least grasp of what freedom of religion actually means.

  213. Yes, you are right, but the ultra-conservative Christians are not "like" the least tolerant people in the country. They ARE the least tolerant people in the country. They do not grasp that we live in a secular democracy, and so they continue to promote the fiction that we live in a theocracy of a "Christian nation." They do not understand Jefferson's adamant belief of separation of church and state, nor do they have any idea how that law protects their right to practice their own religion freely. Instead, the ultra-conservative Christians labor under the impression that their religious ideology must be embraced fully by all Americans. They have no concept how repressive and terrifying it would be for us to live under a theocracy. They honestly need to read the Constitution and take the most basic course in Civics.

  214. Very wise judge. Out of jail, she's not a martyr. His order precludes her from interfering with her deputies' issuance of licenses. A stunning and continuing rebuke: she has to sit in her office all day and watch licenses being issued by her deputies. An exquisite denouement of Greek-tragedy proportions.

  215. Solomonic.

  216. Actually I suspect there will be a very low volume of SSM requests once this all settles down. However I also suspect being the divorce belt there will be plenty of Adultery Certificates (marriage of divorced people per the bible) order she could consider refusing.

  217. Tens of thousands of gays should go there to get their licenses so she has to witness it. Her head may exploid.

  218. The way for her to be true to her convictions is to resign on the grounds that her beliefs no longer allow her to live up to her oath, which is to uphold the law of the land.

  219. I agree. Allowing this 3X divorced hypocrite out of jail solves nothing. She broke the law and has stated she will continue to break the law.

  220. 5 corrupt judges and a lawless administration cant make or change the law the way they have been! Pesky constitution...

  221. I completely respect her position. After all, issuing certificates for gay marriages would cheapen each and every one of her own four marriages. All of those hetero unions are precious and must be defended!

  222. Beautifully put! Sure wish there were a snark font, don't you?
    Now, I can't wait for, oh, say, Newt (three marriages, two adulterous affairs, two divorces) Gingrich, or Rush (four marriages, three divorces) Limbaugh, to join in Ms. Davis' praise, for her "heroism". Ay-yi-yi!

  223. Watch out, you'll give her ideas. All the toxic agitation for gay marriage in the U.S., that's what poisoned her 4 marriages. Yes, that must be it.

  224. I find it interesting that, despite mentioning the visits of several Republican presidential candidates to support this woman, the NY Times does not find it relevant to mention that Ms. Davis is a Democrat.

  225. Who cares what party she affiliates herself with? She could call herself a communist for all I care. She obviously has no idea what the separation of church and state means.

  226. I've seen this same comment over and over. Why is it relevant?

  227. Doesn't matter if she's a Klingon, the panderers are out in force.

  228. "Rural backwardness?" How about religious extremism? I admire her convictions, but she was clearly in the wrong. She should have simply resigned, if she wasn't looking for her 15 minutes of fame.

  229. I respect Ms. Davis' right to refuse to wed certain types of people. However, she should not be able to hold her position and refuse to do her sworn duties. She should resign. She was elected to do a job, all parts of her job, and even if those parts of her job change, based on changing laws, she has to do it. She may not support it, but she has to do it. Or, she has to step down. Or, if she does not do her job nor step down, then she faces the consequences. This is not a question of open-mindedness. This is a question of upholding the law that one was elected to implement. You have some interesting values and beliefs, but they are somewhat off-base and impertinent to the main point.

  230. it was her refusal to let other clerks in the office issue the licenses that your are ignoring. i doubt you are a lawyer

  231. Her right to refuse stopped with the Supreme Court decision. By your way of thinking, those who refused to allow people to have equal rights under the Civil Rights Act should also be "celebrated" for their refusal to obey the law because that's they way we always did it. There is nothing open minded in being a bigot and it is an abomination to "celebrate it."

    Ms Wallace Davis McIntyre Davis should resign and take her brand of Christianity and go find another job. One that doesn't have her flaunting the law.

  232. A point made on the Sunday talkies resonates with me: there are 3,143 counties in these United States, many of which are in states that had not recognized same-sex marriage until the Supremes ruled.

    Of that number, all of one (count it!) county refused to comply -- that's evidence of the strength of respect for the Rule of Law, and ought to be recognized and celebrated.

    This is yet-another media circus that attracts demagogues like flies, and feeds preposterous claims of Christian persecution among the credulous. Glad it's over.

  233. Actually, I think there are a couple of other counties in Kentucky and a few in Alabama that are not complying. They just have not been brought to court.

  234. Yeah but Ms. Davis may get her own Fox TV show out of this.

  235. Here in the great state of Alabama, there are currently eleven counties not issuing marriage licenses to either gay OR straight couples as a direct result of the supreme court decision.

  236. Well, that was pretty short-lived, no? I hope if I get arrested for breaking the law I only have to spend a weekend in jail. Whatever happened to "jailed until she complies with the law"?

  237. The clerk's office is complying with the law as Davis's deputies are issuing SSM licenses. Her release is conditioned upon her not interfering with that and has a requirement of fortnightly reports from the deputies so indicating.

  238. If only I had realized that so many of her supporters would be gathering in one location. I have some leftover snake oil I would like to sell to some easy marks.

  239. Projecting one's behavior/thinking onto others is bad enough, spare us the high moral spiritual ground ....

    Ms. Davis and her ilk have a massive credibility issue when it comes to integrating into today's secular society?

    The theocratic influence on their spiritual lives should never be present outside the confines and sanctuaries within place of worship, including churches, synagogues, temples, cemeteries, etc

    Elsewhere, check your spiritual obligations/needs/projections at the door please

  240. Look, I'm not a religious person, but I think it's going a bit far to say that people of faith should in essence keep it to themselves. This is a country where we have freedom of speech, even/especially those we disagree with, and if they want to publicize or proclaim their beliefs, or even make their personal political decisions based on those beliefs, that is their prerogative, up to the point where their actions violate the law.

  241. A comparison between the constitution of the United States and the Bible can not be done because not everyone believes in the Bible and not everyone is a Christian, and not everyone believes in God etc. etc. At the same time not everyone is gay and not everyone believes in gay marriage, etc. etc so who are you to decide which law is more important?

    When you say to someone to check their spiritual obligations at the door, boy you are being very ignorant to other people's point of view and how they decide to live their life. Many people would say that their spirituality is FAR MORE important than anything else in life.

    So what you are basically telling hundreds of millions of people in the United States is that the government is now their God, forget about that stupid invisible guy called Jesus, forgot about everything you were taught in the Bible in Sunday school and in church none of it is true its all fake. Just follow whatever your government tells you to do. Right..

  242. It is irresponsible to state the fact that some Christians fear an erosion of liberty without also stating that other people (Christians and otherwise) feel that this has nothing at all to do with religious liberty. Not all viewpoints are equal, and stating some facts without stating mitigating facts makes it look like they are.

  243. The Lord is good and his mercy endures forever! I am rejoicing with Christians everywhere. I pray that all those who prayed and stood up for righteousness would be immensely blessed by our Lord and savior Jesus Christ.

  244. Yes, indeed, I am sure that Judge Bunning and the happy couples are grateful for your prayers.

  245. Say what?

  246. Yes, it is clear that He does not want her to interfere with any more marriage licenses; I am so grateful for the court order forbidding her from doing so!

  247. The decision sounds fair to me. Let us see how she does back at work. Now, on to the talk show tour!

  248. She denied two people their constitutional rights and intruded her
    personal religious beliefs into our society. She deserves to be
    fired, but not given any more publicity for her religious stance.

  249. It was the Supreme Court that imposed its beliefs on her. Just sayin'.

  250. Actually the constitution of her state prohibits same sex marriage.

  251. She can't be fired because she is an elected official. She can only be impeached. And the 25,000 citizens who are paying her to be County Clerk should be angry. But they aren't and that is one of the things wrong with out current political system. THE PEOPLE DON'T CARE!

  252. Literacy tests for voting were correctly banned. But perhaps elected officials - or candidates for election - should have to pass some minimum legal literacy test?

  253. I'd be satisfied if political candidates - especially conservative candidates - merely had to pass a US Constitution literacy test.

  254. Kim Davis is a criminal who also happens to be the poster child of the allegedly oppressed and disrespected ultra-orthodox religious party in our country. She embodies the fears, and the hopes, of every older, white, conservative, rural and exurban citizen. Unfortunately, her case boils down to something much more prosaic than the soaring oratory of the Republican candidates now shamelessly exploiting her in their relentless search for the votes of the paranoid and credulous who have flocked to her cause. Her case is one of a public official who was taking public money and not doing her job because of private prejudice. That does not make her a hero, or a martyr; it makes her a criminal.

  255. Actually she was obeying her oath to the constitution of her state.

  256. Madame, I wouldn't paint all older, white, conservative, rural citizens with Davis's bigotry. My parents, who check all those boxes and are staunchly Catholic to boot, support gay rights. There is something particularly hypocritical and entitled about Davis and her supporters, but I'm betting a lot of quiet support is coming from urbanites and black- and brown-skinned evangelicals.

    Everything else you write, I'm totally in agreement with!

  257. Some comments are frightening. The 21st Century and we are calling homosexuals immoral and abnormal? Perhaps the scariest accusation is that being gay means you are a deviant who will victimize children. As a father of two, the last thing I worry about is my children being corrupted by a gay couple, married or single. I am proud that both of my children feel able to talk about sexual preference without prejudice or ignorance. The change and acceptance of gays in my lifetime has been profound and is a hopeful sign that other forms of prejudice will eventually give way to rational thought.

  258. Kim Davis will not resign for her religious beliefs, but I suspect she will resign to become a Fox News commentator.

  259. Or possibly to be a republican presidential candidate?

  260. She won't resign because she makes $80,000. Had she made $8,000 instead, I wonder if her loyalty to her God would have taken second place to a jail cell. Likely.

  261. Being Devil's Advocate here..............I wonder what the consensus would be if someone were to order a cheeseburger in a Kosher restaurant or say a Muslim woman who refuses to do the same thing as Ms. Davis.

    Would be interested if people on both sides of the political alley had any thoughts on this.

  262. The kosher restaurant isn't discriminating against persons, it is simply refusing to serve certain food and a private business can do that. A county clerk who is a Muslim is under the same rules as Ms. Davis is.

    For a real-life example of a single employee who has an issue with something that the organization generally provides, there is a Muslim flight attendant who does not wish to serve alcohol on flights. A reasonable accommodation is permissible, in her case consisting of other available attendants doing so. Ms. Davis is being released under similar circumstances--that she simply not interfere with her deputies issuance of SSM licenses.

  263. Apples to oranges.

    Any restaurant can choose its own menu, and you can't force them to sell food items that are not on the menu.

    That is not how government offices work. Government offices have certain obligations to the public that they need to meet. If it is against your personal religious beliefs to provide those services, you are probably not the right candidate to the job.

    Now if the vegan Hindu waiter at the Kosher restaurant refuses to serve meet dishes to the customers, or the Jewish waiter at the kosher restaurant refuses to serve Christians or Muslims because they are not Jews, or the Muslim waiter at the kosher restaurant refuses to serve women who don't have their hair covered, I am pretty sure the restaurant can fire the waiter for good reason.

  264. Cheeseburgers aren't on the menu of Kosher restaurants, and clerks in restaurants aren't legally obligated to comply with off-menu orders.

    Public officials, such as Ms. Davis, are legally obligated to comply with all lawful requests; wouldn't make the slightest reason what her motives are, she has to comply.

    Please tell us what you're fishing for here. Your question seems tendentious, to say the least.

  265. Will Mathew D. Staver, the lawyer, be replacing the felon behind bars?
    He should. He probably considers himself to be the barrister of God.

  266. Let the news show circuit begin. And a book in one - okay, maybe two - months.

  267. Yep, an agent, a book, and a tour---all with Huckster introducing her. Has Huckabee even read the Constitution? Does he even know what a secular democracy is? Goes to show that just about anyone under the sun can run for office.

  268. Suppose we just changed the words a bit. Suppose she said her religious beliefs don't allow her to allow interracial marriage. Suppose she believed that Jews and Christians marrying were an abomination. It's quite clear those examples would be NOW considered outrageous and unacceptable and the question religious liberty would never arise.What is the difference between those examples and what Ms. Davis believes?
    Nothing prevents her from believing what she wants, saying what she wants but the Law prevents her from substituting her beliefs for the law of the land.

  269. Religion, bringing the world wonderful things, for thousands of years.

    You know why Europe does not want Middle East refugees? They bring fundamentalism, the same fundamentalism, just a slightly different flavor, as our crazy religious citizens practice.

    Europe, and a few other well educated countries, are post religious. They don't believe in an old man in the sky. You don't see refugees from post religious countries surging into theocracies. The sooner we all get to the point where we admit it's all Stone Age nonsense the better we will be.

  270. Agree wholeheartedly, but for one small detail: Europe, although mostly well-educated, is (still) not one country, not with noble Hellas falling off the edge and all that :-)

    And the old man in the sky is bloody nonsense, no doubt about it. Cheers.

  271. "On a street near the squat jail, demonstrators lined up along the roadway, where a sign leaned against a truck and read, 'Judges Don’t Make Laws And Are Not Above The Law.'"

    Absolutely true... They decide if laws are being broken and have the power and duty to punish those who wilfully break the law, such as Kim Davis.

    It is truly frightening how lack of understanding of grammar rules and the meaning of words causes so much strife. Kim Davis' religious freedom has not been impinged, infringed, restricted, or anything. She can and does believe what she wants.

    But, religious freedom (to believe what you want, worship whom you choose) does not mean that you can force those beliefs on others. And since fulfilling your duty in a public office does not have any affect on what you choose to believe, you have no legal nor moral ground to disregard the law when deciding whether or not to issue mariage licenses.

    I think it's unfortunate that she was released. I believe she should have stayed in jail for the reason she was sent there - contempt of court - because she is still in contempt unless she has decided to issue the licenses. I would have kept her in jail until a) she resigned or b) she agreed to issues the licenses.

  272. I agree with all that you say, but if I were the judge, I would release her only because her contempt of court no longer serves the purpose intended once her deputies started issuing licenses. The law is now being complied with, even if she won't comply with it, so from a legal perspective, her release make sense. It might also make sense from a political perspective in that her jailing seems to have made her a martyr, though I too, if I were the sitting judge, would have sent her to jail for contempt of court because she also prevented her deputies from issuing licenses.

  273. Kim Davis' own worldview ends where her job description begins, just like everyone else.

  274. Regardless of what you all may think of Christianity, I bet none of you would act this way if this lady was a Muslim. And no gay or lesbian couple would challenge them on their beliefs either.

  275. I agree with you NM, but why is not every Mayor of every sanctuary city jailed for not enforcing immigration laws? Does not their world view end where their job description begin?

  276. More and more, I feel like I need to be convinced that many of these beliefs are "religious". What makes her homophobia "religious"? That there's a line or two in her Bible? Among many that she disregards? Why is that when someone has a belief, and then claims it's a religious belief, all the rules of logic and reason are put aside? Why do proclaimed "religious" beliefs deserve special status? Even to SAY that there are special beliefs that are religious itself expresses a religious belief: that some higher authority has domain over this claim and is to be respected in a special way just for that reason. It's nonsense! I am totally in favor of religious freedom, by the way, but when someone's behavior or belief has impact on others, it must face the democratic agora of argument, evidence, and logic.

  277. People like her quote a passage from Leviticus: "A man shall not lie with a man". However, there are two problems with this, which I do point out:
    1) this quote Does NOT exclude Lesbian relationships, and nothing in any other part of the Bible excludes them either;
    2) Leviticus is part of the Old Testament. Just above that quote is this admonition: "Thou shalt not touch the skin of a pig".
    So I always ask someone who relies on Leviticus to spout off their anti-Gay falsehoods whether they eat pork. And they always respond: "Jesus did away with all those rules". So I respond by saying that if you follow one 'rule' in Leviticus, you must follow ALL of them. Jesus never said to "keep" the prohibition against Gays, but you can stuff yourself with pork.
    Invariably the other person gives me a serious Glare and walks off. Probably to participate in some serious barbecue.

  278. Time for the circus to leave town. The Huck can go back to being irrelevant again, as his latest foray into headline grabbing probably garnered him a sum total of 32 votes. Why do we have Judges? So that people who do not understand the Constitution, like Ms. Davis and her holier than thou crack legal team of Mat Staver and his acolytes (0-3 on the season) do not get to force their interpretation at the expense of others.

  279. Huckabee and Cruz: The opportunists rush to the big tent, play to the crowds, hoping to make points in the polls. The clown car arrives, beep, beep....out pop Huckabee and Cruz..."Freedom. God, Liberty, etc. etc. etc." We've heard it before so please, don't cover this part of the story; just focus on people getting married and exercising their freedom as Americans to the same rights as everyone else
    !

  280. One side-story to this drama is that it present yet another example of the obscene cronyism that takes place in appointing federal judges. Bunning is the son of a former U.S. senator from Kentucky. He was nominated while his father was still in the Senate. The ABA found Bunning unqualified for the position of a Federal District Court Judge due to his age of 35, a lack of complex civil case experience as a federal attorney, and his "middle-of-the-class law school" experience, yet he was confirmed by his majority party. ALL judges, especially at this level are career politicians, long ago screened AT LEAST once by their own political parties, often with little to no real world courtroom experience, usually coming from a political appointed/elected position, or otherwise living off the public spigot as they do now.

  281. This is irrelevant to the matter at hand and not worth a side-note. Regardless of the way he came into his position, I think his decisions are sound (although I'd leave her in jail longer & not bow to the pressure of the bleating sheep outside).

  282. "An EROSION OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY"? (Caps mine... and yes, I'm shouting).
    This woman's GOVERNMENT JOB now requires that she issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Period. The grandstanding by Ms. Davis and her supporters is nothing short of sanctimonious posturing and discrimination cloaked in religious robes. It baffles the mind that in an age of terrorist groups such as ISIS and others, groups literally beheading innocent humans in the name of religion, that we are playing out our own miniature version here in America... our beloved and alleged land of the free.

  283. I would think that conditions would have included that Kim Davis and her attorney drop any challenges she had to her the marriage licenses issued by her deputies, that isn't mentioned.
    I am troubled that it's pretty obvious that Davis was the one discriminating against others based on her religious beliefs. There needs to be a definitive declaration, if not a Constitutional Amendment stating the Constitution's Primacy over any religious belief. There is a very clear movement afoot to legitimize discrimination with the justification that one is allowed to violate the Rights of another because not doing so infringes on their religious freedom. Davis is allowed to discriminate against gay because for her not to do is, in her myopic view, curtailing her freedom of religion.

    That is precisely the argument presented here, that Davis had the Right to violate gay couples rights because of her religious beliefs. The intent of the First Amendment was not so much to protect an individual's Right to Freedom of Religion, but more importantly to protect everyone from having anyone force their religious views on them. Much less to do it as Kim Davis attempted, in the capacity of an elected government official

  284. Once and for all it needs to be clear that the United States was never founded, nor should it be, a "Christian Nation." The United States *was* founded and *should be* a nation where the free exercise of religion is asserted as a result of enforcing individual liberty and Constitutional Rights.

    Hence Ms. Davis should clearly be respected --but she should respect others as well and not interfere in the liberty of others to marry. It is fine for her to not agree with same-sex marriage, but should respect the choice of those that interpret religion differently than she does.

    Clearly, Ms. Davis expects that her government honor her current marriage even after she divorced. Even though Catholicism and many other Faiths do not consider divorce possible --in the same manner-- so do same-sex couples deserve that government does not force religious interpretations of others on their persons.

  285. No, she should not be respected.

    She believes in ghosts and shadows in the dark; she believes in anti-science. She believes spirits talk to her; she's merely uneducated. She is to be pitied, except for the fact she would deny my rights in a heartbeat.

  286. So your okay with the government's newly established religion of Licentious? Kim should not be forced to act in accordance with your religion either!

  287. America was started by extreme Christians called puritans who left the British soil because they couldn't stand the lack of holiness. Your constitution was based on the bible...and now that you have been blessed because of your forefather's faithfulness to God. You mistake any stance for holiness as backward and intolerant. Gay marriages were never in your original constitution for obvious reasons. This lady has stood for the truth...The law of God overrides the law of the land if the law of the land is contrary to the word of God.

  288. Were Kim Davis not a Christian, but say, oh, a Muslim, would Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee still visit her and support her religious freedom?

  289. Exactly. Would kiss-up politicians be visiting her to support her if she were a Muslim man denying women drivers' licenses? Would they be sitting in her jail cell and praying along? I don't think so.

  290. I guess what disturbs me the most about this whole travesty is that this is a woman who is defending "her" beliefs of her religion in complete hypocrisy! Per the facts known about her, she was married to one man and carrying the children of a man who was to become her third husband, she divorced her first husband to marry her second husband who adopted her children (remember they are the product of adultery with a future husband), eventually divorces the second husband to marry her third husband (the father of her previously born children) and then caps it all off with divorcing her third husband to marry her fourth husband. Where were her practice of her Christian beliefs during those years? Is this the product of selective religious deafness? You know, picking and choosing the commandments you like and disregarding the ones you don't?
    To call oneself a Christian is, in my understanding, to emulate Jesus Christ as best as possible in your own life. And, one of His memorable directives was "Judge not, lest ye be judged."
    This woman is at best confused and mentally disturbed - at worst, corrupt and looking to make money out of the attention.
    She is not being discriminated against for her religious views but for the failure to meet the requirements of her job under civil law, as she rightfully deserved. She may have been released from jail but she should either be fired or put on suspension from her job until her term of office runs out.

  291. She wasn't a christian till recently, after those failed marriages. Everyone is a sinner (including me and you), the difference is christians are forgiven and seek to follow Jesus. Jesus NEVER said don't judge the way you are inferring. Check the context. By the way... what do you do with your guilt?

  292. seems pretty clear to me as well. why the hoopla? why the media? why the discussions over and over and the unending attention rivet?
    Terminate her or suspend her but for God's sake, shut this sideshow down.

  293. If God/Jesus/Saint Peter will forgive her for all you listed, she would certainly be forgiven for signing a marriage license for a gay couple.

  294. It is so hypocritical that some are so quick to condemn Ms Davis for not following the law while the same group celebrate and champion those who break the laws like illegal immigrants.

    At the same time the they would push for not enforcing laws regarding immigration but outraged by any lapse in enforcing the laws for Ms Davis's actions/inactions to protest for her own civil liberties.

  295. Illegal immigrants are not public officials who are refusing to grant government licenses to legally qualified applicants.

  296. I don't celebrate illegal immigrants breaking the law. I just recognize that there is a real humanitarian and logistical problem in sending everyone back.

  297. Would Kim Davis have disagreed if it was called a Union and not a Marriage?

  298. It is immaterial what Ms. Davis agrees or disagrees with.

  299. To paraphrase George Will, who quoted Oliver Wendell Holmes - - she has a constitutional right to her beliefs. She does not, however, have a constitutional right to be a county clerk.

    Conservatives are outraged that Barack Obama chooses the laws he wants to enforce. I agree. Why are they now supporting this clerk's "right" to choose the laws she wishes to ignore?

    Consistency is gold.

  300. So your okay with our government establishing the religion of Licentious? And even FORCING obedience to it by jailing those who don't agree.

  301. She will be back in jail before the week is over.

  302. I understand that if she does violate the judge's order a second time, then she will be returning to court under CRIMINAL contempt, not just civil contempt as before. That's fine. Davis needs to do her job, or resign. There is no middle ground. The law is the law.

  303. Repeating from the previous article on this:

    Say my religion has no problem with gay marriage, and indeed it directs me to support marriage as a testament to human and spiritual love.

    Buuuuu....t.

    Say I am one of Ms Davis's clerks.

    Isn't she preventing me from exercising my religious beliefs by performing my (perfectly legal) duties? Using her governmental authority?!

    Sounds like turtles in every direction to me. And hypocrisy of the first order.

  304. It's important that we preserve American's right to conscientious objection. Whether their beliefs are derived from religious background or some other source, wherever possible the government should not coerce people to act in opposition to their personally held moral convictions. In this case, Ms. Davis has a clear option to avoid actions she finds morally objectionable: she can resign as county clerk. The government is not forcing her personally to endorse gay marriage, it is simply requiring that the county clerk perform her legal responsibilities.

  305. The responsibility of issuing gay marriage licenses was NOT part of her job when she Was elected to this position. Liberals demand tolerance for things they believe in, yet offer NO tolerance for those things they do not believe it, the ultimate hypocrites!!

  306. I sort of agree about so-called "conscientious objection" ... except if she thinks same-sex marriage is 'wrong', she is already perfectly free not to have one.

    Her secular, civil job as a public servant is not to perform the marriage itself. It is to certify that the couple applying for the civil marriage license are who they say they are and are qualified to be married (whether or not she LIKES the fact that they qualify). These 2 fact-finding exercises are NOT "under God's authority"; they are civil matters.

    It is not in the purview of her job description to cast moral approval or disapproval on SOME citizens relationships in the first place.

    I find it unreasonable to allow HER "conscience" to dictate OTHER people's rights and freedoms, and the right to the equal protections of the secular civil law is a promise made by the Constitution and applies to ALL citizens.

    But, you are correct. She SHOULD resign.

  307. So you are saying christians can no longer hold public office unless we reject our God or disobey Him? Please think about that for a moment.

    SCOTUS has forced something that was never meant to be... the redefining of marriage to license sexual deviance... and you think that license ought to cost christians their ability to make a living? The newly established religion of Licentious will, by coercive intent, force christians into subjugation or extinction (their goal all along). If allowed... what will be next?
    What do you hold dear? ... it might be next!

  308. There is something wildly egotistical about her bedroom time being better than someone else's, because that is the only difference between Ms.Davis and those she thinks need forgiveness and reform.

  309. So long as she permits her office to issue the permits and follow the law, I don't care where she is. If she prevents this, then she must go back into custody or at least be placed under house arrest.

  310. I hope her brief incarceration will set an example for her followers. She can feel free to have religious freedom, and let others be free from her religion.

  311. And Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti should be imprisoned immediately for not enforcing federal immigration laws but we won't see that will we? Comrade Obama will make sure of that.

  312. Deft judicial navigation - if she tries to interfere with the issuance (which she would not promise to abstain from last week), she shows that she wants to control others' consciences, not just follow her own.
    We need civil disobedience; we need careful judges. Here, we have both, and no violence. Rule of law.

  313. This is good enough for me:

    Judge Bunning ordered that Ms. Davis “shall not interfere in any way, directly or indirectly, with the efforts of her deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples.” He he said that any such action would be regarded as “a violation” of his released order.

    As long as she stays out of the way and lets people in Rowan County exercise their Constitutional, civil, human rights, I think she can be left alone.

  314. Doubt Davis can keep her mouth shut, she'll sure try to intimidate the law-abiding clerks in that office. When she does (and she will), I hope they report her actions.

  315. Enough of Kim Davis already! She is not a martyr, merely an embodiment of everything that is wrong with narrow and mean interpretations of religious texts. Which were written by men, BTW. Her application of Christianity reads more like Sharia Law than do the values espoused by say, the Holy Father. (I am not Catholic) What should worry us more is the steady erosion of the separation between church and state and the blurring of the lines - all heartily endorsed by candidates pandering to special interests. We live in a pluralistic society, let's keep it this way and have sane conversations, not protests about different interpretations of essentially the same religious texts. And please leave the Founding Fathers out of the discussion too, they were mostly Deists, but also for slavery. Remember that when you drag them into all this. Times change, we change with them, per amore o per forza, it's a fact of life.

  316. I'm sorry she was freed. She should have been held until she was willing to comply or the legislature met and decided what to do about her.

  317. So you also believe that Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti should be held in federal prison for not enforcing laws pertaining to illegal aliens? Comrade Obama has praised him for putting his personal convictions before law.

    Funny how libs pick and choose the laws to be followed.

  318. Kim Davis has, in effect, taken the first step in making her religion the official religion of Rowan County. You can't get a marriage license unless Kim Davis thinks your marriage meets the requirements of her religion.

    What next?

  319. Understand what has happened here: Judge Bunning's duty was to ensure that the laws were followed, not to prevent Davis from becoming a political martyr. Yet Davis was not merely refusing to issue gay couples marriage licenses, but also not permitting her deputies to do so. The Judge's goal was -- as it had to be -- to get those licenses issued, as required under a Constitutional ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Davis testified that she would have funds available to pay a fine, and you can be sure -- as was the Court-- that, if she didn't pay, her supporters would have done so. Therefore, fining her wouldn't have solved the problem. The State did not seem eager to step in to overrule Davis and order deputies to process licenses; politically unpopular in KY, and legally problematic because she hadn't been impeached. The Court's only alternative was to jail Davis.

    Which worked. With Davis in jail and unable to process licenses, the Judge ordered deputies to do so, and the State was, essentially, off the hook. Regardless of what Davis's lawyers now claim, that is a done deal, and indeed, the continuing processing of licenses by deputies is a condition of Davis's release. The State has to do nothing more than let the process continue; if Davis tries to interfere, back to jail she goes. A convoluted way to solve the problem, but one predicated on the Judge's duty to enforce the law.

  320. So, let me get this straight. The head clerk refuses to do her job and carry out the law of the land, is cited for contempt, but gets a get out of jail free card because her underlings are doing her work for her? If I were the other clerks, I'd ask for a raise for the overtime...

  321. "Although a Supreme Court decision in June legalized same-sex marriage throughout the United States".

    The supreme court is not a legislative body. It can not make laws. It can not force states or the federal government to make laws. It can not legalize marriage.

    In Marbury v. Madison, the supreme court gave itself the power of judicial review. The constitution does not explicitly allow this and therefore, this power is unconstitutional.

    No branch of government can give itself power not explicitly given in the constitution.

    It's a quagmire.

  322. "It's a quagmire."....It is only a quagmire if you choose to ignore the "equal protection" clause of the Constitution.

  323. Jason USA:

    "The supreme court is not a legislative body."

    ****
    Nor are civil servants obligated to uphold the law according to former Attorney General Eric Holder. If he doesn't have to, why does she?

  324. My argument is not a question of whether anti-marriage laws violate the 14th amendment. Clearly, they violate the 14th amendment. My argument is whether the constitution allows the Supreme Court to perform Judicial Review, which is not annotated in the constitution.

  325. What if she violates this order? Fines? More Jail?

    Accommodating her beliefs was the wrong thing to do, IMO.

  326. Two violations of the judge's order equals criminal contempt, not just civil contempt. She does this at her own risk.

  327. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

    To say otherwise is unpatriotic.

  328. You left out, "And that marriage is defined as the union between a MAN and WOMAN. Any other combination being immoral would be detrimental to the Country".

  329. Switch the "men" to "persons" or "Citizens" and I'll agree but you seem to have forgotten that Reagan and the Christian Right got the Equal Rights Amendment thrown out in the 80's. Women are not equal in this country.