Discussion for article #240149
Ms Davis has a right to that employment? Only if she does the freakin’ job. What a maroon.
16 Likes
As far as I see, Ms. Davis’ right to her job is not in question. Nor is her “right” not to issue marriage licenses to single-sex couples. Where she crosses the line is her refusal to allow other workers in her office to issue licenses.
8 Likes
“He argued last week that until a Supreme Court decision legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in June, it wasn’t in a county clerk’s job description to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple.”
Sure it was, and is, in her job description. It said, and says, she would issue marriage licenses to the citizens in her jurisdiction. It doesn’t say heterosexual couples only. It just says citizens (or some other such appelation) and that includes everyone, which is exactly what SCOTUS said.
“The fact of the matter is, she has a right to this employment and you don’t lose your constitutional liberties just because you’re employed by the government,"
Well, actually you do. I don’t know about state jobs, but I know that when you sign up for a federal job there are several constitutional rights you give up. The only one that bothered was the inability to engage in partisan politics. I could vote, but could not actively participate in partisan politics. But I willingly signed the oath of office because I actually agree that government employees should remain publicaly apolitical so as not to give the impression that they represent their employer and/or their employer’s opinions.
I wonder what was in her oath of office. I feel sure there was a clause something to the effect that she would diligiently do her job according to the law of the land.
Believe it or not, there are really people who run for and hold office because they actually want to serve their fellow citizens, not just to serve their own self (and selfish) interests. Too bad there are so many like Davis who are only concerned with their own schtick [sp.].
25 Likes
Plus, if you worked for the Court system, you could be forced to attend Christmas Parties and sing religious carols even if you were Jewish, Muslim, Pagan, Buddhist, or any other religion. What’s more, it isn’t just the employee who gives up those rights, it is their entire family.
Staver and Liberty Counsel have been capitalizing on the pain and suffering of LGBT people for a very long time now. They don’t care about Kim Davis. She can rot in jail for all they care. The thing is, they probably expected her to get fined instead of jailed, and they could have used the money from the fundraising to pay the fine to line their own pockets.
12 Likes
The Right Wingnuttery, from the obvious demagogues and grifters like Huckster Huckabee to the Rightie Fundie shyster lawyers like Staver, will continue to do their kabuki dance for dollars, attention and political gain until they wring all they can from this travesty.
“If you don’t allow me to impose my religious beliefs on you in my public service job, then you are persecuting me!”
What a winning argument!
http://forums-cdn.appleinsider.com/6/63/350x700px-LL-63930ce3_dead_horse.gif
They will eventually be consigned to the garbage bin of history along with the supporters of Lester Maddox and George Wallace who screeched “Segregation Now…Segregation Forever” in the 60’s . The Kim Davises and her supporters will be a loathsome and depraved footnote in the history of the fight for equality, nothing more.
20 Likes
This “attorney” also claimed that any licenses issued without Kimmi’s signature are null and void, and that no one else could sign the documents. Guess he didn’t check out Kentucky Statute
Revised Kentucky Statute:
402.240 County judge/executive to issue license in absence of clerk.
In the absence of the county clerk, or during a vacancy in the office, the county judge/executive may issue the license and, in so doing, he shall perform the duties and incur all the responsibilities of the clerk. The county judge/executive shall return a memorandum thereof to the clerk, and the memorandum shall be recorded as if the license had been issued by the clerk.
Effective: October 1, 1942
History: Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 2113.
12 Likes
I assume that Staver is sincere in his beliefs, but there’s obviously something really off about this guy. The Nazi comparison is so over-the-top that Staver seems to have lost perspective on the legal issues. As countless commentators have said, Davis’s right of religious liberty doesn’t permit her to impose her religious beliefs on others and doesn’t excuse her refusal to perform her official duties. That’s not a complicated concept and surely Staver is capable of understanding it. So he’s either become so blinded by prejudice that he no longer gets it or he has a non-law agenda; I think perhaps there’s some of both going on here.
8 Likes
“The fact of the matter is, she has a right to this employment and you don’t lose your constitutional liberties just because you’re employed by the government," he added.
Forcing your religious beliefs on others while employed by the government is against the 1st Amendment. It is that simple.
On a side note, it is entertaining to see an elected Democrat official ranting against same sex marriage, and then being imprisoned by a Republican Judge for refusing to grant marriage licenses to gays and lesbians. This world is full of surprises.
15 Likes
Even worse, they’re drinking up at the DIET DEW!
3 Likes
Our country went through this with religious fundamentalists in the past.
–God gave white people dominion over black people.
–Women should obey men and have no need to vote.
–People who drink alcohol are sinners.
–Segregation is God’s will.
Our country still moves glacially slowly when it comes to opening up to “liberty and justice for all.” Staver has found a way to monetize that for himself. Otherwise, he’d just be a lousy attorney.
10 Likes
HeadlineFix:
Meet The Crappy Lawyer Fighting A Lost Cause.
Pass.
jw1
6 Likes
Why has Staver not been disbarred? He is operating in his interests, not his client. Any lawyer that recommends their client disobey a direct order from a judge needs to be investigated by the bar. Does anyone here know if you have to be a client to initiate a review by the Florida Bar Association?
4 Likes
Please keep talking. Let the country see who you really are.
And, when we eventually find out what you did advise Ms. Davis, let’s see what happens to your license.
So much hate and bile. And for what? If the end of civilization is at hand, it’ll be because of the Putins of the world and not the gays.
2 Likes
MLK? Rosa Parks? Jews under Nazi rule?
Give me a freaking break!
Once again, self-righteous Christian theocrats attempt to play the role of the poor maligned victim, indignantly wailing (with all of the chutzpah that they can muster):
“How dare you be intolerant of my homophobic, misogynistic intolerance!
How dare you deny me my God-given right to alienate and persecute anyone who does not share my exclusionary religious mores!”
Christian conservative politicians and public servants – including judges and county clerks – strive to protect the religious freedom of all Americans … just so long as you believe in Jesus Christ.
Bottom line: these theocrats wish to impose their own dogmatic beliefs onto the rest of society and then attempt to be perceived as righteous martyrs when their efforts are rebuffed.
Sorry folks, you are the persecutors in this conflict, not the persecuted.
3 Likes
Staver strikes me as the type who, to keep this alive, will file documents alleging that Davis received ineffective counsel.
5 Likes
As an atty with almost 50 years’ experience, it has always been elementary that an atty CANNOT ETHICALLY counsel a client to knowingly & willfully violate a court order. IF Staver so counseled his client (that noxious Davis woman) to knowingly violate a court order, he should be subjected to disciplinary action PDQ. I am an ethical, moral person: it pains me to see asshats with law degrees posturing & posing & pretending to be intelligently espousing a position . . . as with the Emperor’s New Clothes, what thinking. rational people see is an idiot on a soapbox, expounding lunacy from his pulpit.
9 Likes
Yep: corrupt “activist” legal sleazebags whippin’ up an ignorant and narcissistic job-inheritor to think she has a chance at law. They’re using her.
2 Likes
According to The Courier Journal here is the oath of office that Kim Davis took:
2 Likes
According to Mr. Staver there is historical record of a jewish court clerk refusing to marry two gay nazi’s and said clerk was thrown in jail, then deported to the concentration camps, then executed. Not to defend the nazi’s, but is this hyperbole or is this a record of fact? (I suspect it’s more hysterical record than fact).
1 Like