- 23,800
- Philippines
You really think putting someone in jail for refusing to do their job is an appropriate consequence in this case?
For not doing their job, definitely no.
For defying a court order handed down by no less than the SCOTUS, yes.
You really think putting someone in jail for refusing to do their job is an appropriate consequence in this case?
You really think putting someone in jail for refusing to do their job is an appropriate consequence in this case?
For not doing their job, definitely no.
For defying a court order handed down by no less than the SCOTUS, yes.
I believe the proper approach would be impeachment or recall or some such bureaucratic procedure. Jail is a stupid overreaction IMO.Thank you, @niky!
With or without jail terms. she should certainly be removed from her job. Her duty is to issue marriage licenses. She has refused to issue any licenses at all. She is willfully refusing to do what she was elected to do and therefore shouldn't hold the office.
You really think putting someone in jail for refusing to do their job is an appropriate consequence in this case?
It should be noted that she was not jailed for failure to do her duty as an elected official (which can be up to a year in jail in Kentucky), but rather for contempt of court after she was given a very slight slap on the wrist.I believe the proper approach would be impeachment or recall or some such bureaucratic procedure. Jail is a stupid overreaction IMO.
I'm not sure exactly what that has to do with this situation.Total side point. Why does this woman get put in jail and the cities and police deptartments that are sanctuaries for illegals get a total pass?
Just a thought as it seems the law is not at all being evenly applied.
Total side point. Why does this woman get put in jail and the cities and police deptartments that are sanctuaries for illegals get a total pass?
Just a thought as it seems the law is not at all being evenly applied.
I'm not sure exactly what that has to do with this situation.
I guess you guys missed the whole "total side point" deal?I'm not sure exactly what that has to do with this situation.
Exactly. Just a point about how the law is applied when it fits a specific agenda.I guess you guys missed the whole "total side point" deal?
Saw it, still makes no sense.I guess you guys missed the whole "total side point" deal?
I guess you guys missed the whole "total side point" deal?
Why does this woman get put in jail
And yes, a federal judge has told the Obama administration to stop its amenesty plans and they are STILL doing it.
Is there anyone in jail for it?I didn't miss it at all. However, I did notice that right after the words "total side point," he said this:
Which is a clear indication he was trying to connect the two scenarios.
And even if he didn't make a connection between the two, does labeling it as a "side point" somehow exempt the statement from any kind of response? If so, what's the point of saying it in the first place?
Are you referring to the injunction issued in Texas v. United States? If so, then you're being a little misleading here. Yes, there were around 2,000 work permits erroneously issued in violation of the injunction, several months ago, but that has since been halted. To claim they are "STILL doing it" is wrong.
Is there anyone in jail for it?
Thanks. Just checking. Please continue.Over 22 outstanding permits? I doubt it.
Thanks. Just checking. Please continue.
Westboro Baptist — the Kansas church known for its virulently anti-gay agenda — has waded into the controversy over the Kentucky court clerk who refuses to issue same-sex marriage licenses in defiance of court orders.
But it is taking aim at Kim Davis, who has gone to jail for refusing to allow gay people to marry on the basis that it would violate her Christian beliefs.
Westboro, or WBC, is notorious and widely scorned for picketing funerals for service members of victims and mass shootings to draw attention to its "God Hates Fags" argument that God is punishing America for accommodating homosexuality.
Referring to Jeremiah 3:20 — the King James version of which reads, "Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith the LORD" — WBC undertook a P.R. campaign over the weekend, attacking the thrice-divorced (and legally remarried) Kim Davis in a string of Tweets and YouTube videos as an "oath breaker" and a "lawbreaker" — meaning, of course, God's law.
"Get this straight: you can NOT repent of a sin you actively live. Kim must leave that man who's not her husband," the organization said on Twitter. Attorneys for Davis, who was jailed Thursday, on Sunday filed filed an appeal, The Associated Press reported.
As if to clarify how it could so viciously attack someone who's fighting for its own principles, the group said, "Proud adulterers who divorce/remarry and refuse to call it a sin are no more a WBC member than a proud fag."
Total side point. Why does this woman get put in jail and the cities and police deptartments that are sanctuaries for illegals get a total pass?
Just a thought as it seems the law is not at all being evenly applied.
Has anyone else noticed that Kim Davis is now widely reported as having been jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples? This is not the whole truth; she has been refusing to issue marriage licenses to any couples whatsoever, gay or straight. She wasn't doing the job she was elected to do, a judge ordered to do her job, she refused, and (rightly) ended up in jail.
I took it as pointing out that the whole truth is not necessarily being reported, rather than pointing out what the whole truth is.We knew this from the start.
Has anyone else noticed that Kim Davis is now widely reported as having been jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples? This is not the whole truth; she has been refusing to issue marriage licenses to any couples whatsoever, gay or straight. She wasn't doing the job she was elected to do, a judge ordered to do her job, she refused, and (rightly) ended up in jail.
As I can find. No. However, Obama made several recess appointments that were found unconstitutional by a federal judge as well as for information from the DOJ in regards to fast and furious.Have they been successfully held in contempt?
but I swore to myself that if I used Facebook that I wouldn't get into that stuff.
To me, Kim Davis is a Grade A :censored:hole. If you don't follow the law, whether you agree with it or not, and you violate court orders you will have to face the consequences. Also her little stunt has cost taxpayers how much money? I'm guessing it's more than I even want to know.
Good Christians don't do this kind of crap and it's people like Davis and the Oath Keeper the give average, everyday Christians a bad name.
I was talking about Kim Davis, not the militia.A threat of violence is making the country great? Fascinating...