Jailed clerk vows not to back down; no resolution in sight

[Emster23]

Since she was elected, I assume there was a swearing in ceremony and she swore "before God" (probably) to carry out her duties. So impeach her, then let her out of jail. The US Constitution trumps religious beliefs (most of the time...). If she didn't want to carry out her duties, she should have never run for office. In similar vein I saw where Muslim flight attendant for Expressjet in trouble because she wouldn't serve alcohol on flights.

Do any of these religious "God over all" types ever have the brains to read and then think about job descriptions?

[metisdead]

More off topic posts have been removed.

[FritsSikkink]

Good for her for standing up for what is right.

so it is right to ignore the law because your imagenary friend say so. that can be very usefull, have to start my own religion with my own rules and then ignore the law

[hakuho]

Those who have declared on this forum that homosexual activities are within the penumbra of 'natural' acts need to explain where they have found this "Book of Nature". Perhaps they are prepared to explain how an Arab sheik can have a 'natural' set of 30 wives, for ex.; or why do East Indians marry 12-14 y/o girls? Also, why not indict her god, assume Jehovah, for adultery? He had unprotected sex, impregnated a human (Mary) without her consent, then refused to pay child support. Hypocrisy is rampant in religious extremism and in the case of the clerk it doesn't help to have her double-digit IQ. exposed. If she is indeed merely a 'clerk', then she prob has a supervisor who could monitor and override her decision, wouldn't you think? Now that the SCOTUS has set-up Sodomy as a legitimate, protected and sanctified act we Proles had just damn well knuckle under. Because THE LAW is always right, by definition..

[MyFriend You]

Why bother about her. She is standing up for what she believes in, the court is following the law.

She was given a choice to let others in the office to legally do what they are employed to do but she refused. She is forcing her subordinates to follow her religious views. I hope they sue her.

She is where she belongs until she agrees to let others follow their legal obligations.

In a Nutshell - Exactly!!!

[MyFriend You]

Good for her for standing up for what is right.

so it is right to ignore the law because your imagenary friend say so. that can be very usefull, have to start my own religion with my own rules and then ignore the law

A Lot of people have already done that, started their own branch of religions..........look where it got come of them - dead!!

[jerojero]

Intolerant bigot. All in the name of God. Some of the most inhumane acts were in the name of God. Cue.. INQUISITION.

[eddie61]

Good for her for standing up for what is right.

Good for you for knowing what is God's will. Since you are obviously entrusted with knowledge that is not endowed to us mere mortals, would you mind telling me if a short call option on AAPL expiring Jan 2017 at 100 USD would be a worthwhile trade. I will invest my life savings on your advice.

Ask the old lady (man/transgender/?) in your prayers and get back to me...

And by the way, is it safe to fly to america, or will I fall off the edge of the world...

[Tep]

Those who have declared on this forum that homosexual activities are within the penumbra of 'natural' acts need to explain where they have found this "Book of Nature". Perhaps they are prepared to explain how an Arab sheik can have a 'natural' set of 30 wives, for ex.; or why do East Indians marry 12-14 y/o girls? Also, why not indict her god, assume Jehovah, for adultery? He had unprotected sex, impregnated a human (Mary) without her consent, then refused to pay child support. Hypocrisy is rampant in religious extremism and in the case of the clerk it doesn't help to have her double-digit IQ. exposed. If she is indeed merely a 'clerk', then she prob has a supervisor who could monitor and override her decision, wouldn't you think? Now that the SCOTUS has set-up Sodomy as a legitimate, protected and sanctified act we Proles had just damn well knuckle under. Because THE LAW is always right, by definition..

Is penumbra a woman's part? I do know that straight sexual partners indulge in sodomy with both sexes giving and receiving with the use of sexual aids. Why is sodomy discussed as a gay marriage thing? Many magazines, you know, the cool ones for the younger generation that has passed you old men by, talk a lot about the joys of the prostate.

If you are not gay, you really cannot engage in any discussion about gay sex. Really. Gay sex is not relevant to non gay people. Natural? What kind of superficial nonsense is this. The animal kingdom exhibits same sex activity. Straight sex that doesn't directly produce offspring - is that unnatural? Leading people up the garden path by throwing in polygamy and bestiality and all that nonsense is meaningless. If you are not gay, you cannot claim anything about gay sex, certainly not its naturalness or otherwise.

Marriage equality is part of the developing gay culture. It is not about sodomy. Sodomy is an infinitesimal part of the GLBT experience. There is a mass of literature on GLBT culture. Many people, including noon GLBT read such literature. Just like non Black people read about the Black experience and evolution of their cultures. Information is out there for you to find. You are not entitled to demand any explanations from anyone, particularly if you are differently oriented or identify differently to those people on whom you place these demands.

[sirineou]

Good for her for standing up for what is right.

what is right, is for her to resign from a job that has duties that interfere with her religious convictions and get a job better suited for her.

Why is she n Jail? is resignation the only option available? aren't any other ways to remove her for non performance and replace her.

Is her position an elected one, and if so isn't there a recall provision?

Do Gay people have to get married in that county? while the recall process take place cant they not get marriage licences in a different county?

[Srikcir]

If she won't do what the job requires by law, terminate her for cause and turn her loose from jail to seek other employment and get on with her life.

Why is this still going on, costing the taxpayers a bunch of money?

Sorry but she can't be terminated for cause. She is not a civil service employee but an elected official.

She would have to be impeached.

The problem now is that a marriage license requires her signature for certification and she now cannot sign because she's in jail. No one on her staff has authority to sogn licenses. Any change to that process, ie., no signature required, requires State legislative action.

[sirineou]

If she won't do what the job requires by law, terminate her for cause and turn her loose from jail to seek other employment and get on with her life.

Why is this still going on, costing the taxpayers a bunch of money?

Sorry but she can't be terminated for cause. She is not a civil service employee but an elected official.

She would have to be impeached.

The problem now is that a marriage license requires her signature for certification and she now cannot sign because she's in jail. No one on her staff has authority to sogn licenses. Any change to that process, ie., no signature required, requires State legislative action.

I can not believe that the county or state does not have provisions for continuing to serve it's citizens while a non performing official is being removed.

in fact the deputy clerk ( Brian Mason) is now issuing marriage licences

I don't understand this whole controversy.

County official refuses to do her job, county initiates the process of removing her, and temporally assigns some one else to do the job, end of story.

[lvr181]

She is paid to do a job that entails obeying the law. She didn't do it - fire her.

If she feels the law is wrong then she can campaign outside of the office to have it changed. That is her right. Disobeying the law is not her right at work as an employee.

Edited September 6, 2015 by lvr181

[jerojero]

Bible thumping ignoramus. Believe your private beliefs, but public office requires obeying legal aspects. God's law does not apply to general public, I'm afraid. Go live in your little world, and stay away from our public service.

[Bulldozer Dawn]

Her lawyers are as dumb as a bag of hammers.

If were her counsel I would advise her to go back to work immediately.

And then she could sue the state for psycological injuries arising out of her employment.

The onus would then be on the state to disprove that forcing a christian to issue a licence for gays to marry has no negative impact on that person's wellbeing.

How about that can of worms...

Edited September 6, 2015 by Bulldozer Dawn

[Jingthing]

I'd say that case would be absurd and wouldn't stand a chance in any court of law.

Again, she is working in a GOVERNMENT office. She is not working in a CHURCH.

The USA isn't a Christian version of the Islamic state of Iran.

The SCOTUS has decided this issue and their decision applies to every government office in all the USA as far as issuing marriage licenses.

It has nothing to do with Christianity, or any other religion.

Edited September 6, 2015 by Jingthing

[Bulldozer Dawn]

I'd say that case would be absurd and wouldn't stand a chance in any court of law.

Again, she is working in a GOVERNMENT office. She is not working in a CHURCH.

The USA isn't a Christian version of the Islamic state of Iran.

The SCOTUS has decided this issue and their decision applies to every government office in all the USA as far as issuing marriage licenses.

It has nothing to do with Christianity, or any other religion.

That's because you know nothing of the law and are biased in this case.

You can start by reading up on the egg shell skull rule as applied in the context of workers compensation.

http://www.law360.com/articles/458429/don-t-give-up-too-early-in-workers-comp-cases

Edited September 6, 2015 by Bulldozer Dawn

[Jingthing]

Sure, thing, mate. Nothing to do with this case.

[Bulldozer Dawn]

Sure, thing, mate. Nothing to do with this case.

Stunning retort JT.

You are obviously emotional because of your bias in this case.

Another way for her to sue the state would be to claim that her psycological injuries have arisen out of a "significant change in the nature of her work".

100 percent prospect of success using that rubric.

It would also set an interesting precedent that would require government employers to ensure that staff are provided with sufficient, and sufficiently premptive, training and counselling prior to requiring them to carry out work arising from of the new gay marriage laws.

Edited September 6, 2015 by Bulldozer Dawn

[Jingthing]

Zero chance of success.

You're just tripping. Nobody believes you're a legal expert with that ridiculous garbage.

Look, people, everyone knew already there would be a BACKLASH to the SCOTUS decision. This is part of it. But it won't be a big deal over time because they don't have a leg to stand on. It It will be nothing like the backlash against Roe vs. Wade.

[Bulldozer Dawn]

Zero chance of success.

You're just tripping. Nobody believes you're a legal expert with that ridiculous garbage.

Look, people, everyone knew already there would be a BACKLASH to the SCOTUS decision. This is part of it. But it won't be a big deal over time because they don't have a leg to stand on. It It will be nothing like the backlash against Roe vs. Wade.

It is obvious you have no legal training or qualifications.

I wont post any further on this topic because I know you are biased here and don't want to upset you.

But when an action arises in the US, based upon the grounds I have outlined above, remember that I warned you, and you told me that I was "tripping".

[Prbkk]

She'e not Martin Luther King.

She's George Wallace.

Except the courts neglected to put him in jail back then. So there is progress!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/09/02/we-have-reached-the-george-wallace-stage-of-the-same-sex-marriage-fight/

We have reached the George Wallace stage of the same-sex marriage fight

There's a long and not exactly auspicious history in this country of people resisting court orders aimed at defending the civil rights of minority groups.

...

Americans can and do disagree about same-sex marriage. But in public life, equal treatment under the law ranks among the hallmarks of the American experiment. The struggle to make equality real meaning consistent, unabridged and unconditional remains an ongoing project.

More Lester Maddox than George Wallace. At least Wallace eventually conceded his mistakes.

[Seastallion]

Sure, thing, mate. Nothing to do with this case.

Stunning retort JT.

You are obviously emotional because of your bias in this case.

Another way for her to sue the state would be to claim that her psycological injuries have arisen out of a "significant change in the nature of her work".

100 percent prospect of success using that rubric.

It would also set an interesting precedent that would require government employers to ensure that staff are provided with sufficient, and sufficiently premptive, training and counselling prior to requiring them to carry out work arising from of the new gay marriage laws.

Hey, Jack McCoy, there has been no change, not one little bit, to the nature of her work. With regard to marriage licenses, the nature of her work is to check the legality of the applied for nuptials with regard to age etc. That's it. If the applicants comply with the law, she must issue a stamp or whatever it is.

Gay couples, if complying with the law in other respects (age etc), comply.

There is no extra work, there is nothing different; "Do the applicants comply with the marriage laws? If so, issue a license.

No counselling needed.

You are obviously NOT a lawyer.

[Johpa]

If she won't do what the job requires by law, terminate her for cause and turn her loose from jail to seek other employment and get on with her life.

Why is this still going on, costing the taxpayers a bunch of money?

Perhaps because it is nearly impossible, and very time consuming, to terminate a public employee in the United States which is one reason why the public sector is so often a sea of mediocrity. For example, it can take up to three years to terminate an incompetent teacher, and it is nearly impossible to terminate a merely mediocre teacher. Many public employees will get paid administrative leave for up to a year or more for any allegations of misfeasance. But you are correct, simply putting her on leave until termination occurs is better than taking her to court.

[nithisa78]

Keep her there. She isn't just breaking this law. More than likely many others. Real nut bag and old hag.

She doesn't have a clue of divine law. Romans 13

Love is as essential to secular law as it is to religious law.

Edited September 6, 2015 by nithisa78

[sirineou]

Sure, thing, mate. Nothing to do with this case.

Stunning retort JT.

You are obviously emotional because of your bias in this case.

Another way for her to sue the state would be to claim that her psycological injuries have arisen out of a "significant change in the nature of her work".

100 percent prospect of success using that rubric.

It would also set an interesting precedent that would require government employers to ensure that staff are provided with sufficient, and sufficiently premptive, training and counselling prior to requiring them to carry out work arising from of the new gay marriage laws.

Hey, Jack McCoy, there has been no change, not one little bit, to the nature of her work. With regard to marriage licenses, the nature of her work is to check the legality of the applied for nuptials with regard to age etc. That's it. If the applicants comply with the law, she must issue a stamp or whatever it is.

Gay couples, if complying with the law in other respects (age etc), comply.

There is no extra work, there is nothing different; "Do the applicants comply with the marriage laws? If so, issue a license.

No counselling needed.

You are obviously NOT a lawyer.

When she run for the position, the job did not require that she issue marriage licenses to gay people, so as such the job has changed

as far as mental distress is involved , it is a non starter,

now that the job description has changed, all she has to do is resign, and sue for financial damages.

She run and spend a considerable amount of time and money for a position that now has being changed in such a way that she is forced to resign, and a good case can be made that she is compensated for her trouble. She can also claim opportunity costs

She might have given up other opportunities to peruse this one, and these opportunities might no longer be available to her.

[spidermike007]

Luckily for the lesbians the Jewish Bible (Levethicus) prohibits only male homosexuality....because those days women were treated as merchandise for marriage and were not supposed to have a sex life ....so ladies go on ....you do not have the male organs to commit sodomite perversion

""no to sodomite perversion.""

So, it's homosexuality they want to ban in the first instance. How can you ban nature?

""no to sodomite perversion.""

So, it's their opinion that it is perversion. It's only an opinion. And a minority opinion at that.

""no to sodomite perversion.""

So, how does that relate to following a lawful order?

""no to sodomite perversion.""

So, religious nutters.

Am I the only one who is completely sick and tired of hearing people who have no spiritual understanding, nor connection with their creator spouting biblical quotes or references? It sounds so hollow. Anytime a quote is based on a complete lack of understanding, and compassion for others, it reeks of a hypnotic stupor. Even a parrot can quote a verse from scripture. Does it mean anything? Is there anything behind it? This woman is the very definition of an empty suit.

[Jingthing]

She'll cash in for sure, but not from a compensation case. She'll be the darling of the foaming at mouth right wing speaker's circuit. Perhaps she was bored with that boring clerk job. Now she can see all those Holiday Inns and Best Westerns all over crackerlandia.

Gay people didn't put her in jail. She put HERSELF in jail. Personally I don't believe religious belief is her only motivation. She's already a pathetic footnote in history as the first noisy backlash to the SCOTUS decision. All she had to do was refuse to do her job.

Edited September 6, 2015 by Jingthing

[willyumiii]

The resolution is simple.

She goes to prison ( with her bible if she likes).

Someone who will do their job, gets her job.

Why is that so complicated?

[Jingthing]

I'm not a twitter tweeter, but of course the FreeKimDavis hashtag has been hijacked with an abundance of humor

Enjoy!

#FreeKimDavis is probably the sign her first three husbands put on the front lawn.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/FreeKimDavis?src=hash