Legally there is nothing to debate here this is a slam dunk case. There was a case in 2008 where Muslim cab drivers in Minnesota refused to carry passengers with alcohol had their cab drivers licenses revoked. They cited religious freedom and were defeated. While there is reasonable accommodation for religious views in that case and the Davis case they are asking for unreasonable accommodation. If she had simply accepted the compromise that she wasn't directly involved in issuing the licenses she wouldn't have gone to jail. The bigger issue here to me is one of ethics. If her religious values dictate that she should not be involved with gay marriage at all the ethical thing for her to do is to resign. Her stance though violates ethics in two ways. The first is that she is being unethical by not performing her job and second she is violating her religious ethics by being involved with a system where gay marriage is legal no matter how what she does. Ethically the only course is for her to resign.
I should've chosen my words better, sorry. I meant the "libertarian-ish"/small government rhetorical streak that crops up in a lot of conservative political statements.
Here's a shocker - West Baptist Church believes Kim Davis needs to follow the law and issue Gay Marriage licenses. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kim-davis-westboro-baptist-church_55eef2c2e4b002d5c0769a82 Although they still think Gay marriage is wrong...and they blame adulteresses like Kim Davis for Gays being allowed to marry.
She just took the stage celebrating with Mike Huckabee and martyred herself among conservatives. I'm pretty sure she'd love Palin.
So is her reasoning 100% that she won't do it because of her religious beliefs? Or is she also saying she won't do it because in 2004 75% of Kentuckians (sp?) opted to amend their constitution to outlaw same sex marriage or any "legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage"?
Supremecy clause. If that was a valid reason, segregation would still be in effect in Alabama. At least with personal beliefs, there's no argument that she really believes it.
As a Christian who personally opposes gay marriage, I could not agree with this more. For me it is truly hypocritical to make yourself into a martyr over a choice between obeying the law and giving up money. She does not represent herself, she represents the state, and that's the job she personally signed up for (and swore an oath to do, for that matter). If representing the state is no longer what she wants to do, there is simply no other option left here: RESIGN. It pains me to see all this mess that Christian conservatives put up in America. The gospel Jesus gave us to preach is not this mess. We have become modern Pharisees, busy pointing fingers and discriminating against others instead of showing them *unconditional* love and leading them to the One who showed us love first. Representing morality does not always mean representing Christ: the Pharisees represented morality too, and criticized Jesus often for standing with those who didn't fit their mold.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/...avis-photo-stunt-521604675960?cid=sm_fb_msnbc LOL No photo op for you Teddy brah
I've been curious if she thought it would boost her chances at re-election. That Clerk's job has been a major financial windfall for her family. She makes $80K, presumably plus benefits. She hired her son, and determines his compensation, the same arrangement that existed when her Mother was clerk and employed her. Of course she isn't going to resign from her position. She makes too much money. She loses this job, she probably would struggle to find private sector work at even half her current salary, and her son could lose his job.
Cruz as a supposedly sharp legal mind should know there is no legal case here and the Davis is clearly on the wrong side of the law but for him that probably matters less than the politics. Also this is the second time this week he has played second fiddle to one of this GOP competitors.
Cruz has been completely marginalized for national office. He was essentially hand picked, and moved into position to be a major national figure within the Republican, by the ruling elite. After being "gifted" his current position he has done nothing but act the part of a living and constant air sucking buffoon and embarrassment for the GOP. He is part of the splintering of the party and at some point he will be pushed further out into the party wilderness, where he can share cocktails with other former Golden Boy idiots like Dan Quayle.
I have to agree with you here. Cruz is a creation of the Texas Republican Party which is about as out of touch with reality that you can get and still be able to walk on this planet.
Quite the opposite. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...earned-by-watching-kim-davis-get-out-of-jail/ I appreciate Cruz going out of his way to use his "sharp legal mind" to highlight all of the other instances where religious privilege needs to be done away with.
All these politicians know that Davis is in the wrong. They also know that their constituents are stupid and it doesn't matter.
