How is Kim Davis (county clerk) a democrat?

[steppinthrax]

I agree.

Do you feel the same about this person?

Edit. She performed the first gay marriage in TX thereby being rewarded for her failure to do her duty.

Dude 2012

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Oh goody, she is going to be released from jail. How that week behind bars must weigh on her


http://abcnews.go.com/US/kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-set-released-jail/story?id=33601309

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

She's free! It's a miracle!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Dude 2012

You are correct chronologically. She didn't perform her duty for several years, until she performed her first marriage for a homosexual. I believe she was never sanctioned. Does the year change that? She's up for reelection BTW. Kim Davis failed to do her duty and should be removed. This judge failed her duty as well and should have been removed. Didn't cause a blip on the radar. Just checking the P&N Standards-o-meter.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

That story is from 2012. But, yes, if she is currently refusing to issue same sex marriage licenses for personal reasons, she needs to step aside as she is not performing her job as a public servant.

You are correct chronologically. She didn't perform her duty for several years, until she performed her first marriage for a homosexual. I believe she was never sanctioned. Does the year change that? She's up for reelection BTW. Kim Davis failed to do her duty and should be removed. This judge failed her duty as well and should have been removed. Didn't cause a blip on the radar. Just checking the P&N Standards-o-meter.

As your basic, tree-hugging, bleeding heart liberal, I think I answered fairly and justly to this question, was it not a blip on your radar?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

As your basic, tree-hugging, bleeding heart liberal, I think I answered fairly and justly to this question, was it not a blip on your radar?

I wasn't aware of it before today. Now that I know that this judge failed to do her duty I hold her to the same standard as I hold Davis.

Now do you believe that a person who has willfully failed to perform their duty in office should be treated similarly regardless of ideology? This requires a yes or no.

Edit, you posted before this response. You are consistent and so I applaud you for it. I was referring to someone else who cited the date as if my point was irrelevant. Since the person in question was not sanction and indeed holds office equal application was clearly not had and that's where I was going.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Yes, if someone's personal beliefs prevent them from doing their job duties, they should seek alternate employment.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

As much as they make christian nuts out to be heavy right-wing, gun-tottin' bible thumpers.... Religion is a plague that infests anyone and everyone of any political party.

Democrats love guns too, they aren't about to give them up.
~98% of blacks voted democrat and they have entire churches dedicated to black people.

So the whole christian fundamentalist thing isn't just Sarah Palin conservative nutbags.

 

[HomerJS]

As much as they make christian nuts out to be heavy right-wing, gun-tottin' bible thumpers.... Religion is a plague that infests anyone and everyone of any political party.

Democrats love guns too, they aren't about to give them up.
~98% of blacks voted democrat and they have entire churches dedicated to black people.

So the whole christian fundamentalist thing isn't just Sarah Palin conservative nutbags.

Where exactly is this church dedicated to black people?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Yes, if someone's personal beliefs prevent them from doing their job duties, they should seek alternate employment.

Don't fall for HR's false equivalence. It's not that judge's obligation to perform marriage ceremonies nor is she using her position to deny marriage to anyone.

Update: Judge Parker released the following statement to the media on Thursday afternoon.

I faithfully and fully perform all of my duties as the Presiding Judge of the 116th Civil District Court, where it is my honor to serve the citizens of Dallas County and the parties who have matters before the Court.

Performing marriage ceremonies is not a duty that I have as the Presiding Judge of a civil district court. It is a right and privilege invested in me under the Family Code. I choose not to exercise it, as many other Judges do not exercise it. Because it is not part of our duties, some Judges even charge a fee to perform the ceremonies.

I do not, and would never, impede any person’s right to get married. In fact, when people wander into my courtroom, usually while I am presiding over other matters, I direct them to the Judges in the courthouse who do perform marriage ceremonies. If my deputy is not busy, I will even ask him to escort or help these individuals find another Judge who performs the ceremonies. I do this because I believe in the right of people to marry and pursue happiness.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Gay-Dallas-Judge-Wont-Perform-Marriages-140154903.html

There's a reason no one had heard of this until someone started grasping for draws in this Davis fiasco.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Take your pick?

If African is in the name... something tells me black people play a significant role in the general target audience of attendee's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Methodist_Episcopal_Church
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Methodist_Episcopal_Zion_Church


But go ahead and turn this into a bleeding heart issue

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Don't fall for HR's false equivalence. It's not that judge's obligation to perform marriage ceremonies nor is she using her position to deny marriage to anyone.


http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Gay-Dallas-Judge-Wont-Perform-Marriages-140154903.html

There's a reason no one had heard of this until someone started grasping for draws in this Davis fiasco.

Jesus fuck, toss that dumb bitch in a cell too.

I guarantee she gives gays a pass and marries them in her district since she is one

 

[paperfist]

There is a bit of a difference in following the law and enforcing the law.

Certain officials have discretion of enforcement. If you notice cops don't write a ticket to everyone that exceed the speed limit.

This is a little more serious then speeding. Cops couldn't possibly catch every single speeder anyway.

We have the feds ignoring pot laws, mayors ignoring immigration laws and nothing happening to them.

 

[1sikbITCH]

You are correct chronologically. She didn't perform her duty for several years, until she performed her first marriage for a homosexual. I believe she was never sanctioned. Does the year change that? She's up for reelection BTW. Kim Davis failed to do her duty and should be removed. This judge failed her duty as well and should have been removed. Didn't cause a blip on the radar. Just checking the P&N Standards-o-meter.

People agree with the judge's stance and disagree with the bigot.

Pretty simple concept. Same reason cops aren't busting weed these days regardless of what the law says. Weed is in .

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Don't fall for HR's false equivalence. It's not that judge's obligation to perform marriage ceremonies nor is she using her position to deny marriage to anyone.


http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Gay-Dallas-Judge-Wont-Perform-Marriages-140154903.html

There's a reason no one had heard of this until someone started grasping for draws in this Davis fiasco.

So she doesn't do her duty, she passes the buck. So I assume you are for the wedding cake bakers who didn't prevent the gay couple from getting a cake as they simply could to to another party or a pharmacist who doesn't dispense OC's.

In failing to do her duty Davis was indeed acting to prevent others and acting to in that regard. In the case of the judge, she personally decided to deprive others of her services by not doing her duty, her obligation of office as a government representative not a private citizen, but didn't order her peers to do the same. I wondered if you would justify a wrong and surely you did. I see you.

 

[woolfe9998]

People agree with the judge's stance and disagree with the bigot.

Pretty simple concept. Same reason cops aren't busting weed these days regardless of what the law says. Weed is in .

Nah, Gonad correctly explained this one above. Judges are never required to perform marriage ceremonies. By refusing to do so in a given case she wasn't failing to do her job because it isn't part of her job. Analogy fails.

 

[woolfe9998]

So she doesn't do her duty, she passes the buck. So I assume you are for the wedding cake bakers who didn't prevent the gay couple from getting a cake as they simply could to to another party or a pharmacist who doesn't dispense OC's.

In failing to do her duty Davis was indeed acting to prevent others and acting to in that regard. In the case of the judge, she personally decided to deprive others of her services by not doing her duty, her obligation of office as a government representative not a private citizen, but didn't order her peers to do the same. I wondered if you would justify a wrong and surely you did. I see you.

The judge in your article wasn't refusing to do her "duty" because a marriage ceremony is no part of her duty. It's something she's allowed to do, not something she's required to do. So the analogy to Kim Davis is a total fail.

So far as the gay baker, what are you alleging here? That the judge is discriminating against heteros by refusing to perform any marriage ceremony whatsoever?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

The judge in your article wasn't refusing to do her "duty" because a marriage ceremony is no part of her duty. It's something she's allowed to do, not something she's required to do. So the analogy to Kim Davis is a total fail.

So far as the gay baker, what are you alleging here? That the judge is discriminating against heteros by refusing to perform any marriage ceremony whatsoever?

You're wasting your time. Either he already really knows the difference or he's entirely unable to see it.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The judge in your article wasn't refusing to do her "duty" because a marriage ceremony is no part of her duty. It's something she's allowed to do, not something she's required to do. So the analogy to Kim Davis is a total fail.

So far as the gay baker, what are you alleging here? That the judge is discriminating against heteros by refusing to perform any marriage ceremony whatsoever?

You know that the judge decided to not serve heterosexuals and dancing on the issue isn't changing a thing. She decided she would show prejudice against them by her actions. If that is how an official of government decides to act they should step down and that applies for anyone, including Davis. "Oh, I'm not electing to deny anyone" I spontaneously decided to quit providing the service completely unmindful of anything. A bigot of another stripe relying on sophistry.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Anyway, I was curious if people were what they were, and they did not fail to disppoint.

Back in a couple weeks, months whatever. Have at it.

 

[OutHouse]

Wow, listening to the the religious nut job rally is making Me sick.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Wow, listening to the the religious nut job rally is making Me sick.

they have fox news on here in our break room and they're treating this idiot like she spent 20 years in solitary and was just released. fucking morons.

 

[woolfe9998]

You know that the judge decided to not serve heterosexuals and dancing on the issue isn't changing a thing. She decided she would show prejudice against them by her actions. If that is how an official of government decides to act they should step down and that applies for anyone, including Davis. "Oh, I'm not electing to deny anyone" I spontaneously decided to quit providing the service completely unmindful of anything. A bigot of another stripe relying on sophistry.

No one is dancing around anything. Frankly, you are torturing your analogy because you want it to fit. I, on the other hand, will call it as I actually see it. That's why I'm on different sides of so many issues around here.

First of all, in the judge's case she is given a privilege to perform marriage ceremonies if/when she chooses. It isn't any part of her duty. If you read the comments about Kim Davis, everyone here is saying, "she refuses to perform her duty, she should be fired." That rationale does not apply here.

As to the gay baker, the situation there was totally different legally. State anti-discrimination laws typically forbid discrimination in specified situations, the one applicable there being for retail businesses. Those kinds of laws likely don't apply in the judge's situation. But then again, you're now really making more of a moral argument for bigotry then you are any kind of coherent legal argument, so let's move on to your argument for bigotry and discrimination on the part of the judge.

Is it bigotry to say you will perform no marriage ceremonies until gay marriage is legalized? That's what you're saying, but you can't honestly believe that she is refusing to perform these ceremonies out of bigotry against straight people. She was doing so out of protest for the fact that gays could not legally be married in her state. By your logic, any time you speak out or do anything to protest discrimination, you are by definition bigoted against the majority group. This is nonsense and I think you know it.

Nor is she engaged even in non-bigoted discrimination because she is saying she will perform no marriage ceremonies while gay marriage remains illegal, but when it is legalized, she'll perform marriages for gays and straights. She is saying, if we're going to refuse to allow gays the opportunity for marriage, I'm not going to assist in marrying anyone. Suppose an old Jim Crow law says, "retail businesses cannot permit black people to use their toilets" and a business owner, in protest of this discrimination decides, fine, my toilet is no longer open to any member of the public until they end this discrimination. This person is neither a bigot against white people nor are they discriminating at all. Now, try to figure out what is different between the judge and the hypothetical situation I just presented, and if you can, I'll reconsider.

It may have seemed applicable to you at the time, but this was not a well considered analogy.

 

[flexy]

The stupid people of KY should look at "Lady Justice" and think about why she is portrayed as blind.
Having personal beliefs, this includes religious beliefs, influence a judge's duties is BEYOND ABSURD.

She has, if anything, proven she is unfit for this office. She should not speak law or perform any duties as a judge any longer.

 

[boomerang]

they have fox news on here in our break room and they're treating this idiot like she spent 20 years in solitary and was just released. fucking morons.

They do that just to make you angry and you fall for it every time.