rowan county
- Thread starter herdit44
- Start date
In this case, if the two dudes wanted to marry locally, which one has to assume they do, then the clerk is keeping them from being able to do so. For the record, believe it or not, I'm against gay marriage. However, with that said, the clerk will likely lose her job over refusing to abide by the law. I understand her reasoning for not wanting to do so, but more than likely, she'll need to find work in an area that's more in tune with her beliefs.
I agree with all of that. I too am against gay marriage, on a Biblical basis, not a constitutional basis.
Not true. You can go to Ohio to get one. You can go to WV to get one. You could go to Wyoming and get one.You get it where you are going to get married.
You could also get in the car in Rowan County and go get one in Lawrence County or Boyd County.
She will lose her job. Honestly, I would recommend her just resigning and then stating that it was a conflict of her beliefs.
She will likely either start doing this or be held in contempt of court and will be jailed until she decides to perform the marriages or decides to resign.
My understanding from what I read it would take a special prosecutor to remove her or at the earliest until the KY legislature meets next year to remove her.
I have a feeling she will resign when the court throws in her jail. I understand her convictions but all she is doing is issuing a government permit. She should let someone else(the man above) judge the marriage.
She will likely either start doing this or be held in contempt of court and will be jailed until she decides to perform the marriages or decides to resign.
My understanding from what I read it would take a special prosecutor to remove her or at the earliest until the KY legislature meets next year to remove her.
I have a feeling she will resign when the court throws in her jail. I understand her convictions but all she is doing is issuing a government permit. She should let someone else(the man above) judge the marriage.
We already covered this. Having to go somewhere else to get a license is still malarkey.
i don't know man, i can see her wanting to become a martyr for the christian right for this...that said in the request to hold her in contempt of court, they requested no jail time, but significant fines to her...which is all fine and well, but they'll start a gofundme campaign and raise whatever her fines are for her in no time.
I would probably get promoted to manager...
No seriously. she is an elected official. She is arguing a constitutional right. This is a little different. It will be heard by the court again and she will be removed at some point(by resignation or removal by the KY legislature).
If i were a state I would make getting a license a state issue and take it away from the country clerks. You want one? Apply at the capital or on-line. $500 fee. 30 day mandatory waiting period.
You want it folks...you go it. Nobody said it had to be easy or cheap. So, you can blame the gay agenda and the left for making it a pain in the ass.
You want it folks...you go it. Nobody said it had to be easy or cheap. So, you can blame the gay agenda and the left for making it a pain in the ass.
Except it's not a pain until someone refuses to abide by the constitution. If a gay was being refused the right to buy a gun, the conservative nra would be "up in arms".
I can't buy a pistol in WV or SC or KY. I can't buy a pistol/gun without going through a FBI background check. Plus each state has its own laws in regard to purchase of guns.
Nobody said it had to be easy.
Issuing marriage license to gay couples was not part of the office she ran for and won. That changed later and, as I have said multiple times, she should resign as that is now a requirement of her job. With that said, I can understand why she isn't looking at that as a first course of action. She has worked their her whole adult life, it's a good paying job in a part of the state where there aren't a lot of those and she was elected to do the job by the people of the county. She is a victim of infringement on state's rights.
I am pretty sure I read that KY law says you need to get your marriage license in the county of residence.
Here in Indiana, that is the law...the county of residence of at least one of the couple getting married.
Here in Indiana, that is the law...the county of residence of at least one of the couple getting married.
Ah, states rights.....that argument bigots usually pull out.
There is no state right to enfringe on the Constitution of the United States of America. None. Zero. Zilch.
Why don't I hear conservatives applaud states rights when a state wants to pass extremely strict gun control?
There is no state right to enfringe on the Constitution of the United States of America. None. Zero. Zilch.
Why don't I hear conservatives applaud states rights when a state wants to pass extremely strict gun control?
10th Amendment. We have forgotten that one in this country. Nothing bigoted at all about it.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people
I take back my post from earlier...
The point is many are using her four marriages as a mark of Christian hypocrisy on this issue. As in "How can you be for the sanctity of marriage if you don't show it in your own life?", which is not an entirely unfair question.
The difference in this case is that she only recently became a Christian and adopted a Christian world and life view.
It is illogical to hold her to a standard of morality in 2015, which she did not hold to at the time of her divorces.
The point is many are using her four marriages as a mark of Christian hypocrisy on this issue. As in "How can you be for the sanctity of marriage if you don't show it in your own life?", which is not an entirely unfair question.
The difference in this case is that she only recently became a Christian and adopted a Christian world and life view.
It is illogical to hold her to a standard of morality in 2015, which she did not hold to at the time of her divorces.
No more ignorant statement, misrepresenting the constitution has ever stated on this board.........
Tough shit, Rufus, you are wrong again.
Stick to something you know, like not turning a profit.
It doesn't apply here. The Tenth does not overrule the Fourteenth. Tough shit.
While this is probably the case, it certainly is immaterial to the hypocrisy question concerning her prior marriages
And as an addendum to this on the judgment thing...
Part of the problem here is conflating what the Bible means by judgment.
For example, you have these two passages:
"Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you." -- Matthew 7:1-2
and
"Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment." -- John 7:24
In the first passage you have Jesus saying the same thing you have Him saying in the second passage.
Judgment (decision making) must be done according to a righteous standard? Well what is that? The Moral Law as summarized in the Ten Commandments (see further Jesus' two greatest commandments, which are themselves two quotations from the Old Testament, Matthew 22:37 = Deuteronomy 6:5 and Matthew 22:39 = Leviticus 19:18).
Judgment by the individual on particular ethical quandries ≠ eternal condemnation in Hell forever by that individual
Part of the problem here is conflating what the Bible means by judgment.
For example, you have these two passages:
"Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you." -- Matthew 7:1-2
and
"Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment." -- John 7:24
In the first passage you have Jesus saying the same thing you have Him saying in the second passage.
Judgment (decision making) must be done according to a righteous standard? Well what is that? The Moral Law as summarized in the Ten Commandments (see further Jesus' two greatest commandments, which are themselves two quotations from the Old Testament, Matthew 22:37 = Deuteronomy 6:5 and Matthew 22:39 = Leviticus 19:18).
Judgment by the individual on particular ethical quandries ≠ eternal condemnation in Hell forever by that individual
True, but my point is I don't think this has as much to do with religion as it does good old fashioned bigotry...and I think she expects to cash in somehow
If you are not a resident, you can go anywhere. If you are both residents of Clark County, you can't get the license in Floyd County.
On the initial question she in clear violation of Federal law and will face the temporal consequences for doing so.
I don't disagree with that.
But from a Biblical standpoint there are a couple of things going on here that are probably way too far in the weeds for a college message board combox. According to Romans 13 the civil authorities are to make judgments according to what is "good" and what is "evil" according to the author of what is "good" and what is "evil", namely the Triune God of course, says is "good" and "evil", which we are told in the Ten Commandments, and as Jesus summarizes in the Two Greatest, etc...
That being said there is a Biblical doctrine known as the "lesser magistrate" whereby a government official is not in violation of the Law of God to "Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor." (Rom. 13:7) if the higher body (in this case the Supreme Court) acts in contradistinction to the one to whom ultimate honor is due. In other words God trumps the U.S. Constitution. Though I highly doubt this lady has actually considered her judgments to this minutiae.
As an addendum Jesus two greatest are just summaries of the two tables of the 10 Commandments (1 through 4 being duty to God and 5-10 being duty to neighbor).
I don't disagree with that.
But from a Biblical standpoint there are a couple of things going on here that are probably way too far in the weeds for a college message board combox. According to Romans 13 the civil authorities are to make judgments according to what is "good" and what is "evil" according to the author of what is "good" and what is "evil", namely the Triune God of course, says is "good" and "evil", which we are told in the Ten Commandments, and as Jesus summarizes in the Two Greatest, etc...
That being said there is a Biblical doctrine known as the "lesser magistrate" whereby a government official is not in violation of the Law of God to "Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor." (Rom. 13:7) if the higher body (in this case the Supreme Court) acts in contradistinction to the one to whom ultimate honor is due. In other words God trumps the U.S. Constitution. Though I highly doubt this lady has actually considered her judgments to this minutiae.
As an addendum Jesus two greatest are just summaries of the two tables of the 10 Commandments (1 through 4 being duty to God and 5-10 being duty to neighbor).
Last edited:
I don't think this argument in this discussion is about the 14th Amendment.
The State of KY is not denying folks the right to marry, nor is marriage really mentioned in the constitution. One county out of a 100 is in flux right now because of the elected official not passing out permits. The permit process is still going on. They have multiple outlets to obtain marriage at their disposal.
Last edited:
You know what they say about coalfield Democrats.....they have pictures of Jesus and FDR on the wall.
Seriously, the only two questions that matter in Eastern KY are, do you love Jesus, and do you love Coal.
Are the clerks in Cabell County and Lawrence County arbitrarily setting the rules or do the laws make it more difficult to obtain a Marriage License in those counties than the laws in Kentucky?
No need for desegregation, all the black family has to do is drive up the road to the school that will accept their kind.
No need for desegregation, all the black family has to do is drive up the road to the school that will accept their kind.
This isn't about blacks.
A Democrat in Kentucky, West Virginia, Virginia, Tennessee, and many other Appalachian states can be very different from a Democrat along the West Coast or North East.
It seems like her Christian beliefs only surfaced when her hatred toward homosexuals was riled up. She feels uncomfortable with gay marriage, so she conveniently uses the "traditional marriage" garbage. Point 1: marriage existed long before Christianity was created. They can't claim ownership of it. Point 2: does that make the marriages of athiests, like myself, null and void, simply because the ceremony had nothing to do with god?
It seems like her Christian beliefs only surfaced when her hatred toward homosexuals was riled up. She feels uncomfortable with gay marriage, so she conveniently uses the "traditional marriage" garbage. Point 1: marriage existed long before Christianity was created. They can't claim ownership of it. Point 2: does that make the marriages of athiests, like myself, null and void, simply because the ceremony had nothing to do with god?
