KY clerk refuses to issue marriage licenses

[FaithManor]

Thanks for the likes to the above! I was just thinking aloud about government waste. I see this kind of stupid all the time, and think, "Gee, the community center could use that money to provide more meals to the homeless and low income IF they stopped wasting so much." I just get frustrated because it seems to me that it should be a matter of simple common sense not to put personal employee names pre-printed on these documents, and to instead issue from the state or county with a seal.

 

There I go thinking again! As Imp used to say, "Common Sense is so uncommon that it is a super power!"  :lol:

[Corraleno]

But what gets me about this kind of ignorance is it just feeds the false persecution complex, which really, Kim Davis has just become a pawn for. You've got these supporters falling all over her to hold her up as some sort of martyr, but they've completely missed the mark (intentionally or unintentionally) about what this is about or even how the system works. And in the process, they're just creating more unnecessary divisiveness. 

 

Wow. It sounds like she got everything she wanted.  Her name isn't even on the licenses. 

That should diffuse the protesters.

She is still collecting her $80,000 I assume.

 

They may think they're "winning," but only because they are incapable of seeing the bigger picture. The truth is that every time they pick some ridiculous, legally indefensible battle like this one, even if they seem to "win," they're just one step closer to losing the whole war. By inventing a "war on Christianity" that doesn't exist, by allowing idiots like Kim Davis and Josh Duggar and Mike Huckabee and the Westboro nuts to be the most vocal, visible face of Christianity in America, they convince hundreds of thousands of people every year that Christianity is little more than an ignorant, judgmental, discriminatory refuge for bigots. 

 

I know and respect many devout Christians who are NOTHING like Kim Davis, who are involved in social justice and feeding the poor. My kids attend a coop that rents space from a Protestant church that runs a large food bank, helps people find jobs, provides emergency aid. I chat with the pastor every week while I'm doing "community duty" there and he's a lovely man. My undergrad college was nominally Christian and many of the professors there were very active in the civil rights movement — several of them had marched in Selma and Montgomery with King. I have nothing but the utmost respect for people like SWB and the Barrs and the other Christians I know who are nothing like Kim Davis.

 

But here are the cold hard facts:

 

In the 7 years between 2007 and 2014, the % of Americans who identify as Christians has dropped nearly 8%.

 

The number who identify as Atheist/Agnostic/No religion has increased by almost 7%.

 

Among younger millenials (ages 18-24) only 56% identify as Christian and 36% identify as A/A/N.

 

Among older millenials (ages 25-34), the A/A/Ns have increased from 25% to 34% in just seven years.

 

In every age group, even the very senior group, there are more people leaving Chrisitanity than joining it. In fact, for every one person who was raised without religion who converts to religion, four more people who were raised in a religion become nonreligious. The Atheist/Agnostic/None category is by far the fastest growing category.

 

It seems clear to me that the very nasty and aggressive response to CIVIL marriage equality in this country on the part of religious extremists is doing far more to hasten the day when Christians will no longer represent a statistical majority of Americans than any imaginary "anti-Christian agenda" ever could.

 

Kim Davis's "victory" is nothing more than an "own goal."

[BrookValley.]

I have a question:

 

If this was a Muslim and they refused to issue ANY business licenses for their term, because they would also have to issue them for those that sell pork, non-halil (excuse spelling), alcohol, and tobacco products, because it's against their religious belief AND they prevented any clerks in their office of any other faith from doing so also, then those that support Kim Davis now would also support a Muslim Clerk under the same?

 

No, of course not, because that clerk would not be following "God's Law."

 

There's only one God's Law, and it's the one Kim Davis and her supporters follow. 

[albeto.]

I have a question:

 

If this was a Muslim and they refused to issue ANY business licenses for their term, because they would also have to issue them for those that sell pork, non-halil (excuse spelling), alcohol, and tobacco products, because it's against their religious belief AND they prevented any clerks in their office of any other faith from doing so also, then those that support Kim Davis now would also support a Muslim Clerk under the same?

 

The fact that we all know the answer to this question shows just how blatantly the hypocrisy goes.

 

As Bill Maher says, "I don't ridicule religion. It ridicules itself." This stuff will be the fodder for jokes and mockery for years to come. And why not? It's absurd, it's ridiculous at its very core, for reasons you so clearly imply.

 

[BrookValley.]

They may think they're "winning," but only because they are incapable of seeing the bigger picture. The truth is that every time they pick some ridiculous, legally indefensible battle like this one, even if they seem to "win," they're just one step closer to losing the whole war. By inventing a "war on Christianity" that doesn't exist, by allowing idiots like Kim Davis and Josh Duggar and Mike Huckabee and the Westboro nuts to be the most vocal, visible face of Christianity in America, they convince hundreds of thousands of people every year that Christianity is little more than an ignorant, judgmental, discriminatory refuge for bigots. 

 

I know and respect many devout Christians who are NOTHING like Kim Davis, who are involved in social justice and feeding the poor. My kids attend a coop that rents space from a Protestant church that runs a large food bank, helps people find jobs, provides emergency aid. I chat with the pastor every week while I'm doing "community duty" there and he's a lovely man. My undergrad college was nominally Christian and many of the professors there were very active in the civil rights movement — several of them had marched in Selma and Montgomery with King. I have nothing but the utmost respect for people like SWB and the Barrs and the other Christians I know who are nothing like Kim Davis.

 

But here are the cold hard facts:

 

In the 7 years between 2007 and 2014, the % of Americans who identify as Christians has dropped nearly 8%.

 

The number who identify as Atheist/Agnostic/No religion has increased by almost 7%.

 

Among younger millenials (ages 18-24) only 56% identify as Christian and 36% identify as A/A/N.

 

Among older millenials (ages 25-34), the A/A/Ns have increased from 25% to 34% in just seven years.

 

In every age group, even the very senior group, there are more people leaving Chrisitanity than joining it. In fact, for every one person who was raised without religion who converts to religion, four more people who were raised in a religion become nonreligious. The Atheist/Agnostic/None category is by far the fastest growing category.

 

It seems clear to me that the very nasty and aggressive response to CIVIL marriage equality in this country on the part of religious extremists is doing far more to hasten the day when Christians will no longer represent a statistical majority of Americans than any imaginary "anti-Christian agenda" could ever do.

 

Kim Davis's "victory" is nothing more than an "own goal."

 

 

Exactly. 

[Mergath]

Okay, I know I was going to stay out of the thread now, but I just saw online that Kim's lawyers have released a statement saying she's going to stop her staff from issuing marriage licenses again as soon as she gets back to work. On my phone so I can't link, but omg. I just can't even. This woman is such a moron.

[mommaduck]

So she can be held in contempt again and be a martyr. She's turning out to be a you-know-what. May not be very Christian of me, but I see her being more nasty that Christ-like (review back to her smirking).

[Mergath]

Gonna try to link the article.

 

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/lawyers-vow-kim-davis-will-violate-court-order-and-halt-marriage-licenses-after-release-from-jail/

[kahlanne]

I have a question:

 

If this was a Muslim and they refused to issue ANY business licenses for their term, because they would also have to issue them for those that sell pork, non-halil (excuse spelling), alcohol, and tobacco products, because it's against their religious belief AND they prevented any clerks in their office of any other faith from doing so also, then those that support Kim Davis now would also support a Muslim Clerk under the same?

 

Think about how you answer that question. Is this REALLY about her religious freedom or is this really about gay marriage? (Ftr, Kim Davis' beliefs should have also kept her from issuing licenses for business because of the alcohol and tobacco sales as well as and licenses for people that are remarrying, as all those are things the UPC hold strongly against).

 

I can only speak for myself. If the Muslim clerk took the job knowing full well that he would have to take action on a current law, I have no sympathy and think he should be expected to do his job. However, if the law came into effect after his entering office, regardless of whether it was expected or not, I would hope there would be some type of compromise such as what Kim Davis accepted or he would resign his position thus being able to not compromise his religious beliefs. If he refuses to accept the compromise or resign, jail him for contempt of court. I don't care whether it is a Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, etc.

[albeto.]

I can only speak for myself. If the Muslim clerk took the job knowing full well that he would have to take action on a current law, I have no sympathy and think he should be expected to do his job. However, if the law came into effect after his entering office, regardless of whether it was expected or not, I would hope there would be some type of compromise such as what Kim Davis accepted or he would resign his position thus being able to not compromise his religious beliefs. If he refuses to accept the compromise or resign, jail him for contempt of court. I don't care whether it is a Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, etc.

 

Well then here's a question, and believe it or not it is genuine.

 

Does a belief have to be aligned with a religion for it to be weighed with more value more than a law?

[kahlanne]

Okay, I know I was going to stay out of the thread now, but I just saw online that Kim's lawyers have released a statement saying she's going to stop her staff from issuing marriage licenses again as soon as she gets back to work. On my phone so I can't link, but omg. I just can't even. This woman is such a moron.

 

Then she should be placed back in jail immediately.

[Truscifi]

Okay, I know I was going to stay out of the thread now, but I just saw online that Kim's lawyers have released a statement saying she's going to stop her staff from issuing marriage licenses again as soon as she gets back to work. On my phone so I can't link, but omg. I just can't even. This woman is such a moron.

 

Of course. Otherwise no one would pay attention to her.

[FaithManor]

Okay, I know I was going to stay out of the thread now, but I just saw online that Kim's lawyers have released a statement saying she's going to stop her staff from issuing marriage licenses again as soon as she gets back to work. On my phone so I can't link, but omg. I just can't even. This woman is such a moron.

Liar, liar pants on fire. So she indicates that she will accept the solution with every intention of going back on her word.

 

Nice. :glare:

 

To be honest, regardless of where you fall on this particular issue, I don't think the collective "you" should want this person to occupy public office, period. Who needs a county clerk with ZERO integrity!

 

And again, I go back to that "oath" thing. If one is going to follow the NT pretty closely, then taking the oath to uphold the law of the land in order to gain the position then not honor the oath is viewed pretty darn dimly by the Apostles. They didn't take lying too kindly! Don't go into that kind of job, don't take that kind of oath because you can't guarantee that you will always agree with the law of the land enough to do the job, and lying to keep one's job is not a NT ideal anyway. Go do something else. Go into retail, or be a nurse, or work construction, or road maintenance, or secretarial, or lab tech, or.....lots and lots of jobs one can train for that does not require one to choose between the law and conscience.

 

Those that have supported her in the past need to get serious. The spokesperson for that viewpoint should probably not be someone who lies with such efficiency and premeditation.

[kahlanne]

Well then here's a question, and believe it or not it is genuine.

 

Does a belief have to be aligned with a religion for it to be weighed with more value more than a law?

 

For my part, yes.

 

I wish I could elaborate but I cannot seem to get the correct words to convey my thoughts.

[LucyStoner]

I can't help but feel like it is a win. Marriage licenses will be issued to all as the law requires and she doesn't have to compromise her beliefs by allowing her name on the license. I originally thought she should resign but am happy with this compromise.

I would feel that way if her attorneys weren't trying to contest the validity of the workaround licenses. And if she had any intention of complying with the court order.

[melmichigan]

Gonna try to link the article.

 

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/lawyers-vow-kim-davis-will-violate-court-order-and-halt-marriage-licenses-after-release-from-jail/

I saw this as well, but I'm confused.  If the licenses aren't valid because her name isn't on them, then how is she going to prevent them from being issued because her name is on them?  :willy_nilly:

[idnib]

I have a question:

 

If this was a Muslim and they refused to issue ANY business licenses for their term, because they would also have to issue them for those that sell pork, non-halil (excuse spelling), alcohol, and tobacco products, because it's against their religious belief AND they prevented any clerks in their office of any other faith from doing so also, then those that support Kim Davis now would also support a Muslim Clerk under the same?

 

Think about how you answer that question. Is this REALLY about her religious freedom or is this really about gay marriage? (Ftr, Kim Davis' beliefs should have also kept her from issuing licenses for business because of the alcohol and tobacco sales as well as and licenses for people that are remarrying, as all those are things the UPC hold strongly against).

 

I support companies that make religious allowances for people, but not the government. So if a  company decided a Muslim could avoid pouring wine while waiting tables and her coworkers were okay with that, I could care less what private arrangements they all make. When someone is a representative of the government, I don't agree. Even if a compromise has been reached with Davis not signing and having her name removed from the document, to me she is still not doing her job.  She's not paid by her company's owner, she's paid by citizens who have no choice but to pay taxes or go to jail and/or lose their property.

[mommaduck]

When Fox News even calls your lawyers "stupid"...

[albeto.]

For my part, yes.

 

I wish I could elaborate but I cannot seem to get the correct words to convey my thoughts.

 

Then you advocate political anarchy.

[mommaduck]

Yep. Even as a military BRAT (a civilian) my freedom was limited. My parents and husband, definitely limited.

[BrookValley.]

Yep. Even as a military BRAT (a civilian) my freedom was limited. My parents and husband, definitely limited.

 

Absolutely. With my own work (and I don't work directly for the government) I am limited. I can't even discuss how or why I'm limited.  :laugh:  I generally dislike the argument "if you don't like it, get another job," because I feel that's often used unfairly (it's not always easy to "just get another job"), but it's kind of the bottom line, isn't it? I knew what I was signing up for, and if I was that uncomfortable with it, or morally opposed, I would have to look for work elsewhere. 

[Hkpiano]

When Fox News even calls your lawyers "stupid"...

Just what I was thinking!!

[MomatHWTK]

This pdf  (ACLU from 2012) introduces some of the underlying law with regard to religious protections specifically. The text was written for prison advocacy, so the section beyond the introduction may not be applicable, but you will references to the laws in play.  

 

Here is the Department of Justice's page on the topic.

 

In brief, it is part of U.S. law and tradition to protect some "rights" more than others but the topic clearly remains one subject to constant scrutiny and change.  

[mommaduck]

There were military that were against what was going on in Vietnam. They didn't have a choice. They couldn't even simply remove themselves like Kim can. They weren't allowed to talk about it. Period. I'm sure there are military not happy about the Middle East. They don't speak up, because they aren't supposed to. They signed up, some long ago enough that they probably didn't expect to go. But they are required to do the job they troll an oath for. Same with Kim. Even if things "changed". Tough cookies. You took an oath come hell or high water, not "just until I disagree".

[albeto.]

"Imagine the uproar if that lady in Kentucky refused to give someone a gun license"

 

Source: God

[mommaduck]

Someone on Facebook, went off on me and claimed that if she were Muslim or Jewish then she never would have been jailed or taken to court. I think some people are ignorant, of the law, of how things are run, and the fact that Kim was given preferential treatment not usually given.

[bibiche]

Someone on Facebook, went off on me and claimed that if she were Muslim or Jewish then she never would have been jailed or taken to court. I think some people are ignorant, of the law, of how things are run, and the fact that Kim was given preferential treatment not usually given.

Cos Muslims have it so good in this country....

 

Poor, oppressed Christian majority. :sob:

[Word Nerd]

Someone on Facebook, went off on me and claimed that if she were Muslim or Jewish then she never would have been jailed or taken to court. I think some people are ignorant, of the law, of how things are run, and the fact that Kim was given preferential treatment not usually given.

 

Yes, devout Christian judges really have it out for other Christians.

[albeto.]

I can understand this position as well. I thought it would be better for her to resign from the beginning but am happy with the compromise.

 

According to Raw Story (thanks, Mergath), no compromise has been reached. She just got a "get out of jail, free" card because of public pressure:

 

Savidge said that Davis’ legal team told him that they did not feel that they had won a victory because the judge had not accommodated her demands to have her signature removed from marriage licenses. 

[zoobie]

Okay, I know I was going to stay out of the thread now, but I just saw online that Kim's lawyers have released a statement saying she's going to stop her staff from issuing marriage licenses again as soon as she gets back to work. On my phone so I can't link, but omg. I just can't even. This woman is such a moron.

I'm trapped in a waiting room and CNN has some rally with her blowing kisses to the crowd. I was already sick to my stomach, but now? Ugh.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

According to Raw Story (thanks, Mergath), no compromise has been reached. She just got a "get out of jail, free" card because of public pressure:

 

Not sure it was due to public pressure.  Contempt charges are to get someone to comply with a court order.  She may talk tough, but if she doesn't interfere then letting her out is acceptable as the will of the court is achieved.

If she doesn't comply, then she will go back to the clink and the judge will (likely) be less forgiving.

[Pawz4me]

I'm trapped in a waiting room and CNN has some rally with her blowing kisses to the crowd. I was already sick to my stomach, but now? Ugh.

 

I liked it 'cause I was watching it too and understand what you're saying.  Not because you're sick!  I hope you feel better soon.

 

[zoobie]

I liked it 'cause I was watching it too and understand what you're saying. Not because you're sick! I hope you feel better soon.

 

Oh, thanks Pawz! I'm fine, just nervous waiting on DH. Outpatient surgery that should've been over 4 hrs ago, but there have been crazy delays in the surgical center. And they closed the coffee counter hours early. I'm going to shake someone soon--GIVE ME MY HUSBAND OR AN ICED COFFEE!!! :P

[Pam in CT]

Not sure it was due to public pressure.  Contempt charges are to get someone to comply with a court order.  She may talk tough, but if she doesn't interfere then letting her out is acceptable as the will of the court is achieved.

If she doesn't comply, then she will go back to the clink and the judge will (likely) be less forgiving.

I agree, and I'm glad the judge worked out a mechanism by which the rule of law is upheld without yet more martyrdom circus and yet more KY taxpayer $$$$$$ accruing.  

[BrookValley.]

Wait, I'm confused (or maybe I missed something). I thought the judge's order releasing her said that her name is to be replaced on the marriage certificates with "Rowan County" or whatever. So the article Mergath linked to says her lawyers believe she will halt the process again, once she's back in office, because the certificates have her name on them and that's her point of contention. So is she just going to refuse until new certificates are printed? Or are they not removing her name from them at all? Or... ??

[BrookValley.]

I agree, and I'm glad the judge worked out a mechanism by which the rule of law is upheld without yet more martyrdom circus and yet more KY taxpayer $$$$$$ accruing.  

 

 

The Martyrdom Circus! This has potential...  :laugh:

[BrookValley.]

Wait, I'm confused (or maybe I missed something). I thought the judge's order releasing her said that her name is to be replaced on the marriage certificates with "Rowan County" or whatever. So the article Mergath linked to says her lawyers believe she will halt the process again, once she's back in office, because the certificates have her name on them and that's her point of contention. So is she just going to refuse until new certificates are printed? Or are they not removing her name from them at all? Or... ??

 

(I know, I'm quoting myself. The ultimate in naval-gazing. lol)

 

Here's another link, which seems to answer my question: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/judge-orders-kim-davis-freed-kentucky-jail-n423541

 

So, yeah. It looks like she's just going to pull the same stunt as soon as she goes back to work. 

[mommaduck]

(I know, I'm quoting myself. The ultimate in naval-gazing. lol)

 

Here's another link, which seems to answer my question: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/judge-orders-kim-davis-freed-kentucky-jail-n423541

 

So, yeah. It looks like she's just going to pull the same stunt as soon as she goes back to work.

Basically Huckabee is saying, "screw everyone else's freedom, only mine, Kim Davis', and those that agree with us count."

[MomatHWTK]

The release from jail was based on the court's determination that the conditions of it's contempt order had been satisfied:

 

 

"On September 8, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a Status Report at the Court’s behest. According to the Report, Plaintiffs have obtained marriage licenses from the Rowan County Clerk’s Office.¹ The Court is therefore satisfied that the Rowan County Clerk’s Office is fulfilling its obligation to issue marriage licenses to all legally eligible couples, consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in Obergefell and this Court’s August 12, 2015 Order. For these reasons, the Court’s prior contempt sanction against Defendant Davis is hereby lifted.

 

1 While the Status Report reflects that Plaintiffs’ marriage licenses have been altered so that “Rowan County†rather than “Kim Davis†appears on the line reserved for the name of the county clerk, Plaintiffs have not alleged that the alterations affect the validity of the licenses. Nor do the alterations impact the Court’s finding that the deputy clerks have complied with the Court’s Order."

 

Full Text of Order  Or search: CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-44-DLB

[Corraleno]

1 While the Status Report reflects that Plaintiffs’ marriage licenses have been altered so that “Rowan County†rather than “Kim Davis†appears on the line reserved for the name of the county clerk, Plaintiffs have not alleged that the alterations affect the validity of the licenses. Nor do the alterations impact the Court’s finding that the deputy clerks have complied with the Court’s Order."

 

 

So it seems that the clerks who are issuing the licenses are crossing or whiting out or somehow covering up Kim Davis's name and replacing it with Rowan County?

 

And Kim Davis is saying that as soon as she gets back to her office, she will prevent the other clerks from continuing to do this, in defiance of the Judge's explicit order?

[melmichigan]

So it seems that the clerks who are issuing the licenses are crossing or whiting out or somehow covering up Kim Davis's name and replacing it with Rowan County?

 

And Kim Davis is saying that as soon as she gets back to her office, she will prevent the other clerks from continuing to do this, in defiance of the Judge's explicit order?

From the photo they simply typed Rowan County instead of Kim Davis.

[Stacia]

So it seems that the clerks who are issuing the licenses are crossing or whiting out or somehow covering up Kim Davis's name and replacing it with Rowan County?

 

And Kim Davis is saying that as soon as she gets back to her office, she will prevent the other clerks from continuing to do this, in defiance of the Judge's explicit order?

 

Yeah, i've been wondering the same thing.

 

And, I'm a little worried that since the plaintiffs have not alleged that the licenses are not legal (since they are missing Davis' signature), that somewhere, somehow other Davis-like cronies will make legal problems for some of these couples down the road. Or even non-Davis-like cronies. If it is KY law that Davis signs them, if that law itself hasn't changed, & if she doesn't sign them, it seems like, legally, those licenses could be challenged as invalid (to the heartache & inconvenience of the couples, not to Davis). It seems like the onus is on the couples to dispute the validity? It seems an unfair burden to put on the couples when it should be the responsibility of the licensing office to ensure that what they issue is legally valid.

[Corraleno]

From the photo they simply typed Rowan County instead of Kim Davis.

 

Well that just makes things even more confusing. :confused1:  I thought she was arguing against letting others issue them because her name would always be on the licenses, no matter what — as if they were printed on the licenses.  If there's just a blank line there and the deputy clerks are signing their own names and typing their titles as deputy clerks, she has no grounds for objecting whatsoever. 

[MomatHWTK]

Ok, here's the marriage license law regarding its form.  (Scroll down to 402.100)

 

IMO, the form requires an authorization "statement" initially, but no actual signature is required until the final certificate is recorded.  The signature requirement specifically references clerks and deputy clerks.  

 

 

 

[WVNA]

I can only speak for myself. If the Muslim clerk took the job knowing full well that he would have to take action on a current law, I have no sympathy and think he should be expected to do his job. However, if the law came into effect after his entering office, regardless of whether it was expected or not, I would hope there would be some type of compromise such as what Kim Davis accepted or he would resign his position thus being able to not compromise his religious beliefs. If he refuses to accept the compromise or resign, jail him for contempt of court. I don't care whether it is a Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, etc.

 

Current law  can and does change through a legal process which has happened on this issue. As a government employee, she must obey the law as it exists currently even if she disagrees with it.

[mommaduck]

Wss. Laws change. Military personnel are not let out of their contracts simply because laws and what the government promised them have changed. They are still held to their oath or they are court martialed.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I can only speak for myself. If the Muslim clerk took the job knowing full well that he would have to take action on a current law, I have no sympathy and think he should be expected to do his job. However, if the law came into effect after his entering office, regardless of whether it was expected or not, I would hope there would be some type of compromise such as what Kim Davis accepted or he would resign his position thus being able to not compromise his religious beliefs. If he refuses to accept the compromise or resign, jail him for contempt of court. I don't care whether it is a Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, etc.

 

Suppose a police officer was employed in a state with strict laws against the use of say, marijuana, which happened to mesh well with his deeply held religious beliefs.

If the state then changed the law and marijuana was legalized, would you be arguing that he still held the right to enforce the law he was hired under and arrest marijuana users because of his deeply held religious beliefs? Does that example let you see how absurd it is to let government officials pick and choose what laws to enforce based on when they took the job?

[Pam in CT]

Current law  can and does change through a legal process which has happened on this issue. As a government employee, she must obey the law as it exists currently even if she disagrees with it.

 

Right.  Jobs change. 

 

Foreign service officers often serve for decades.  Different party Presidents come and go, different Secretaries of States come in with substantively different foreign policy agendas.  If a new administration comes into power with a wholly different policy agenda with which a lifelong foreign service officer strenuously and sincerely objects, the job, nonetheless, is to implement that policy.  

 

New mayors come in with substantively different policies, and existing law enforcement officers have to implement them.  That's the job, sincerely held beliefs notwithstanding.

 

New superintendents come in, with new curricula or reading programs or management principles, and existing teachers have to get with the program, sincerely held beliefs notwithstanding. 

 

The hardest quandary of all, IMO, is people in the military.  They too serve under administrations of both parties, who can abruptly change policy and strategy.  Unlike everyone else, people in the military can't "just" resign if they find themselves in a situation that they find unconscionable.

 

 

It's really hard. Yet there really is no other way to run a government.

[Corraleno]

The law says:

 

 

1. (1)  A marriage license which provides for the entering of:

   1. (a)  An authorization statement of the county clerk issuing the license for any person or religious society authorized to perform marriage ceremonies to unite in marriage the persons named;
      (b)  Vital information for each party, including the full name, date of birth, place of birth, race, condition (single, widowed, or divorced), number of previous marriages, occupation, current residence, relationship to the other party, and full names of parents; and
      (c )  The date and place the license is issued, and the signature of the county clerk or deputy clerk issuing the license.  

 

 

So it would seem that, contrary to Kim Davis's claim that the licenses cannot be valid without her signature, the law explicitly states that the signature of a deputy clerk is perfectly legal. She doesn't even seem to know the law she's refusing to implement!

 

 

[Ravin]

I support companies that make religious allowances for people, but not the government. So if a company decided a Muslim could avoid pouring wine while waiting tables and her coworkers were okay with that, I could care less what private arrangements they all make. When someone is a representative of the government, I don't agree. Even if a compromise has been reached with Davis not signing and having her name removed from the document, to me she is still not doing her job. She's not paid by her company's owner, she's paid by citizens who have no choice but to pay taxes or go to jail and/or lose their property.

It is perfectly appropriate foe the government to also make REASONABLE accomodations for religious believers. For example, granting vacation requests for religious holidays, or allowing modification of dress codes that don't compromise safety.

 

The problem here is that Kim Davis's expected "accomodations" are UNreasonable.