• County Clerk Calls Cop on Gay Couple in KY
    43 replies, posted
I went to uni in that town. Can vouch that a lot of ignorant hicks live there. Gonna take quite a while for this to really get into their skulls.
[QUOTE=Sableye;48153260]No, Regan firing the air traffic controllers and banning them from federal jobs basically sent the message loud and clear, besides which we shouldn't be throwing people in jail for religious convictions, firing and blacklisting is more than enough to get the message across, though I don't like blacklisting either[/QUOTE] Nobody is getting thrown into jail for religious convictions. People [I]could[/I] be thrown in jail for committing official misconduct: [QUOTE]Officials have also warned that the defiant clerks could be risking criminal charges. Warren County Attorney Ann Milliken, president of the Kentucky County Attorneys Association, said clerks could be charged with official misconduct, a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://time.com/3945354/kentucky-gay-marriage-lawsuit/"](source)[/URL] Your religious convictions become irrelevant when you walk into work as a state official in a public service role. You are bound by the law as much as anyone else and you don't get to choose which rights you ignore because you feel it unpleasant. She has the right to say and think what she wants, but when she's a public official in charge of discharging government services, she does not have the right to [I]do[/I] what she wants in that position.
Supposedly Davis has been married 4 times :V , and she has the audacity to deny them their right?
I'm pretty appalled at the amount of people abusing their position to enforce their religious ideals.
[QUOTE=James xX;48151006]I think jail would make the better example. Being fired just means your boss doesn't agree with what you are doing, where as jail means [I]the law[/I] doesn't agree with what you are doing. Maybe hold them on contempt until they give them a marriage license?[/QUOTE] I wouldn't throw anyone in jail for this, because then you make a martyr out of them. Take away their job and you take away their paycheck- that's how you punish someone, taking away their money. Make them choose, your 'beliefs' or your paycheck.
[QUOTE=soccerskyman;48150819]I dont think you understand how this works[/QUOTE] Isn't it illegal to refuse marriage licenses now? I swear that's what the Supreme Court ruling was about, wasn't it?
Way to go you stupid,bigoted woman. It's not as if the whole country thinks that us Kentuckians are backwoods,hillbilly retards anyways. :suicide:
[QUOTE=Kinversulath;48150502]Ridiculous that two of over a hundred county clerks won't do their jobs, and yet some idiots are calling on the Governor to call a special session to deal with the "problem" Only two clerks in the entire state are ducking the law, yet state legislators are acting as though there is a major revolt occurring. Fire the two offending clerks and be done with it.[/QUOTE] Make examples of them and it saves a lot of trouble down the line If you can show all the county clerks across the country that it's not okay to be dicks in one swoop instead of having to go around and deal with troublemakers individually then you've got it made
There's a whole load of ways the government denies little and big rights to same-sex couples. [QUOTE][B]Death[/B]: If a couple is not married and one partner dies, the other partner is not entitled to bereavement leave from work, to file wrongful death claims, to draw the Social Security of the deceased partner, or to automatically inherit a shared home, assets, or personal items in the absence of a will. [B]Debts[/B]: Unmarried partners do not generally have responsibility for each other's debt. [B]Divorce[/B]: Unmarried couples do not have access to the courts, structure, or guidelines in times of break-up, including rules for how to handle shared property, child support, and alimony, or protecting the weaker party and kids. [B]Family leave[/B]: Unmarried couples are often not covered by laws and policies that permit people to take medical leave to care for a sick spouse or for the kids. [B]Health[/B]: Unlike spouses, unmarried partners are usually not considered next of kin for the purposes of hospital visitation and emergency medical decisions. In addition, they can't cover their families on their health plans without paying taxes on the coverage, nor are they eligible for Medicare and Medicaid coverage. [B]Housing[/B]: Denied marriage, couples of lesser means are not recognized and thus can be denied or disfavored in their applications for public housing. [B]Immigration[/B]: U.S. residency and family unification are not available to an unmarried partner from another country. [B]Inheritance[/B]: Unmarried surviving partners do not automatically inherit property should their loved one die without a will, nor do they get legal protection for inheritance rights such as elective share or bypassing the hassles and expenses of probate court. [B]Insurance[/B]: Unmarried partners can't always sign up for joint home and auto insurance. In addition, many employers don't cover domestic partners or their biological or non-biological children in their health insurance plans. [B]Portability[/B]: Unlike marriages, which are honored in all states and countries, domestic partnerships and other alternative mechanisms only exist in a few states and countries, are not given any legal acknowledgment in most, and leave families without the clarity and security of knowing what their legal status and rights will be. [B]Parenting[/B]: Unmarried couples are denied the automatic right to joint parenting, joint adoption, joint foster care, and visitation for non-biological parents. In addition, the children of unmarried couples are denied the guarantee of child support and an automatic legal relationship to both parents, and are sometimes sent a wrongheaded but real negative message about their own status and family. [B]Privilege[/B]: Unmarried couples are not protected against having to testify against each other in judicial proceedings, and are also usually denied the coverage in crime victims counseling and protection programs afforded married couples. [B]Property[/B]: Unmarried couples are excluded from special rules that permit married couples to buy and own property together under favorable terms, rules that protect married couples in their shared homes and rules regarding the distribution of the property in the event of death or divorce. [B]Retirement[/B]: In addition to being denied access to shared or spousal benefits through Social Security as well as coverage under Medicare and other programs, unmarried couples are denied withdrawal rights and protective tax treatment given to spouses with regard to IRA's and other retirement plans. [B]Taxes[/B]: Unmarried couples cannot file joint tax returns and are excluded from tax benefits and claims specific to marriage. In addition, they are denied the right to transfer property to one another and pool the family's resources without adverse tax consequences.[/QUOTE] So its more than just a symbolic piece of paper. It grants a whole pile of rights and makes things loads easier and more fair.
What did she think would happen? That's just shooting yourself in the foot..
[QUOTE=Sableye;48150392]I don't understand how the SC didn't settle whether county clerk's can use personal religious beliefs as an acceptable defense for not doing their ONE JOB, if you have a religious obligation talk to your senator, as long as youre being paid by the federal or state government you are expected to administer the law. Somehow its only a problem when clerks did issue certificates to gay couples before it was legalized, but after its the law its perfectly fine to ignore it to not issue certificates[/QUOTE] Note, there's no reason to actually make a ruling on this, as those clerks are government employees who swear an oath. As such they are required to act a certain way, no matter their beliefs.
[QUOTE=wraithcat;48156383]Note, there's no reason to actually make a ruling on this, as those clerks are government employees who swear an oath. As such they are required to act a certain way, no matter their beliefs.[/QUOTE] Exactly! The SCOTUS doesn't need to make a ruling about this because the US has already settled that long ago. She's 100% in the wrong.
[QUOTE=Kindashort;48154487]Way to go you stupid,bigoted woman. It's not as if the whole country thinks that us Kentuckians are backwoods,hillbilly retards anyways. :suicide:[/QUOTE] Actually, it seems as though the rest of the country has improved its view of our state. The Kenctucky Kicks Ass movement has helped quite a bit too.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.