Kentucky clerk Kim Davis released from jail

[Rochard]

They let this woman out of jail?

The news video is too much.....

Kentucky clerk Kim Davis released from jail | MSNBC

[dyna mo]

she should have never even been in jail.

[Rochard]

From the news article

"Earlier Tuesday, U.S. District Judge David Bunning ? the same judge responsible for putting Davis behind bars ? authorized her release pending her office?s continued compliance with an August order that she issue marriage licenses to all eligible applicants. Davis had stopped granting marriage licenses to both gay and straight couples since the U.S. Supreme Court decided in June to make marriage equality the law of the land.

Since plaintiffs in the case have been able to receive marriage licenses from Davis? deputies, Bunning said he was satisfied the clerk?s office was complying with his order to issue the licenses......"

This will get much more interesting. Now she will have to comply with the order, quit her position, or go back to jail.

Dumb asses.

[Rob]

Couldn't she refuse on grounds of religious beliefs and let another clerk issue the license? The lesbian judge in Texas is refusing to marry straight couples, instead is passing it over to another judge. No one is giving her a hard time.

I honestly don't see what all the fuss is about this. They could have easily asked for a supervisor or another clerk and gotten a license. I think they just wanted attention. A gay person seeking attention?!?! Shut up! That NEVER happens.

Just another stupid publicity stunt to get our sights off what's really wrong with America, and the world.

[L-Pink]

Couldn't she refuse on grounds of religious beliefs and let another clerk issue the license? The lesbian judge in Texas is refusing to marry straight couples, instead is passing it over to another judge. No one is giving her a hard time.

I honestly don't see what all the fuss is about this. They could have easily asked for a supervisor or another clerk and gotten a license. I think they just wanted attention. A gay person seeking attention?!?! Shut up! That NEVER happens.

Just another stupid publicity stunt to get our sights off what's really wrong with America, and the world.

The problem actually is her name on the marriage certificates. Allowing her employees to do the process still involves her name on the certificate. But the news never covers this.

[kane]

The problem actually is her name on the marriage certificates. Allowing her employees to do the process still involves her name on the certificate. But the news never covers this.

Correct. I read that over the weekend her lawyers contacted the governor and asked him to release her from jail and make changes to the licenses to take her name off of them so her clerks could issue them. He refused, but I have a feeling in January the Kentucky legislature will vote to remove her name from them.

I have a feeling between now and then her clerks will just issue to gay couples.

It's kind of funny how a few days in jail changes a person's mind about things.

[Rochard]

Seems to me she refused to issue marriage certificates. It doesn't matter who's name was on them, anyone gay was denied by her order. The only reason she was released was because her office - in her absence - was in fact handing out marriage certificates.

[Rochard]

she should have never even been in jail.

She failed to comply with a direct order from a judge. When you do that, you are held in contempt of court. Plain and simple.

Supreme Court says gay men and women can marry, and she refused to marry them. When the Supreme Court says "do x" and you decide not to do that, well, you go to jail.

[kane]

Seems to me she refused to issue marriage certificates. It doesn't matter who's name was on them, anyone gay was denied by her order. The only reason she was released was because her office - in her absence - was in fact handing out marriage certificates.

I would guess so long as she doesn't interfere and lets her clerks give out the certificates to gay couples she will be fine, but if she steps back in and refuses them again I would imagine she will go right back to jail.

[dyna mo]

She failed to comply with a direct order from a judge. When you do that, you are held in contempt of court. Plain and simple.

Supreme Court says gay men and women can marry, and she refused to marry them. When the Supreme Court says "do x" and you decide not to do that, well, you go to jail.

duh. when you fail to comply with the speed limit you violate a law and the cop can take you directly to jail for that or issue a citation with your promise to appear in court and let you go on your way.

there was no reason to go to extremes with this woman, she could have been fined not sent to fucking jail.

[dyna mo]

She failed to comply with a direct order from a judge. When you do that, you are held in contempt of court. Plain and simple.

Supreme Court says gay men and women can marry, and she refused to marry them. When the Supreme Court says "do x" and you decide not to do that, well, you go to jail.

no. she didn't refuse to marry them. she refused to issue a marriage certificate.

a marriage is a contract between the 2 getting married. not a contract between the 2 and the state they happen to be in.

you don't have a problem with your Constitutional rights being trampled on, i do.

[beerptrol]

duh. when you fail to comply with the speed limit you violate a law and the cop can take you directly to jail for that or issue a citation with your promise to appear in court and let you go on your way.

there was no reason to go to extremes with this woman, she could have been fined not sent to fucking jail.

Extremes? If a judge orders someone to do something and they refuse, you will be held in contempt and jailed. Which is way different than not complying with the speed limit! Keep trying!

[$5 submissions]

http://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...hit-storm.html

[Rochard]

duh. when you fail to comply with the speed limit you violate a law and the cop can take you directly to jail for that or issue a citation with your promise to appear in court and let you go on your way.

there was no reason to go to extremes with this woman, she could have been fined not sent to fucking jail.

She was held for contempt charges. She was ordered by the court do "X", and failed to what she was told. In that case, according to the law, she goes to jail. She remains in jail so long as she refuses to do what the court tells her to do. In this case, the only reason she was released was because her office is now in fact issuing marriage certificates to gay men and women. If she shows up for work in the morning and refuses to issue marriage certificates, back to jail she goes.

But you are right. We should not have thrown her in jail. The fact that she violated the law multiple times isn't important. Instead, we should have just stoned her for wearing threads of different cloths.

[dyna mo]

Extremes? If a judge orders someone to do something and they refuse, you will be held in contempt and jailed. Which is way different than not complying with the speed limit! Keep trying!

The judge had options. I'm actually following this, it is not a matter of trying.

And seriously. She wasn't a flight risk, she wasn't a risk to harm anyone, thus my speeding analogy and being let go on a promise.

So yeah, according to what I've read he did not have to jail her and I don't agree with it at all. I'm not trying to get you to agree, I stated my view before you had even posted.

I actually wouldn't expect gfyers to see my view on this anyway, according to them this is about her religious freedom.

[kane]

The judge had options. I'm actually following this, it is not a matter of trying.

And seriously. She wasn't a flight risk, she wasn't a risk to harm anyone, thus my speeding analogy and being let go on a promise.

So yeah, according to what I've read he did not have to jail her and I don't agree with it at all. I'm not trying to get you to agree, I stated my view before you had even posted.

I actually wouldn't expect gfyers to see my view on this anyway, according to them this is about her religious freedom.

He could have just fined her. My understanding was that he thoughts fines wouldn't sway her. She has a lot of support from the far right and those groups may have happily given her the money to pay those fines. He didn't have to throw her in jail, but it seems like the only thing that was going to convince her.

[dyna mo]

He could have just fined her. My understanding was that he thoughts fines wouldn't sway her. She has a lot of support from the far right and those groups may have happily given her the money to pay those fines. He didn't have to throw her in jail, but it seems like the only thing that was going to convince her.

It seems that way. The entire issue is embarrassing, the government certifying personal relationships. Please. She shouldn't even be issuing marriage certificates.

[$5 submissions]

It seems that way. The entire issue is embarrassing, the government certifying personal relationships. Please. She shouldn't even be issuing marriage certificates.

The private contract approach seems to have legs but the issue is enforcement.... You need courts for that....