General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn defense of Kim Davis
People attain their knowledge in various ways
Imagine, for example, someone who has been repeatedly sent by the courts to driving school, in lieu of fines or prison time for repeated traffic violations. We can expect that such a person, after taking many classes, may obtain an outstanding knowledge of the rules of the road and safe driving practices and may easily ace written tests for license renewal, which we can probably all agree is a good thing
In this spirit, let us not underestimate Ms Davis
She has now been married four times, which suggests she has much more experience with marrying the wrong person than most Americans; and she has perhaps become somewhat of an expert on ways marriages can fail. How many women can honestly say that they became pregnant by cheating on their first husband, divorced him and persuaded their second husband to adopt those children, then divorced the second husband to marry their earlier partner in adultery? It is the sort of experience mere money cannot buy
Ms Davis has worked hard for years to bring her resulting insights to Rowan county as a whole. She understands firmly that marriage is about family; and her whole career has been family centered, from that day long ago when her mother as county clerk first hired her as a deputy clerk, until today, when her own son works under her as a deputy clerk. Unlike many people, who only marry once or twice, Ms Davis is now on her fourth marriage, which surely makes her something of an expert on the subject. Her current stand is so altruistic that it is almost heroic: concerned that some people might choose their partners unwisely, she has chosen to issue no marriage licenses whatsioever. Yet what is her reward for trying to save others from the marriage misery she knows all too well? She is hounded to the ends of the earth, as liberal judges threaten to torture her to death!
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Liberty Belle
(9,707 posts)
PatrickforO
(15,425 posts)There's a law in effect, and she as a public employee is bound to uphold that law. Period.
I have a counseling background, and most of my career has been spent in agencies. I tell new staff that I train that when they took the job, they tacitly agreed to try and achieve the agency's objectives. That's the deal. If Ms Davis cannot in good conscious uphold her responsibilities under the law, then she should resign and find another position more amenable to her personal convictions.
Logical
(22,457 posts)PatrickforO
(15,425 posts)aware of.
still_one
(98,883 posts)field on marriage"
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)
csziggy
(34,189 posts)
Geronimoe
(1,539 posts)I think what everyone has missed is the timing!
The Supreme Court decision on same sex marriage occurred before Kim was elected and sworn into office. She apparently took an oath to perform, knowing her imaginary God would not allow her to perform. She lied for the $80K salary and now is sitting in prison where she belongs, for a very long time. Hopefully she will remain in prison long after, she is voted out of office and her salary ends.
The timing seems to make her more a liar and thief rather than a religious zealot.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)I'd sort of assumed that she had taken office before the SCOTUS decision. She has violated the oath she took and that she swore to her god to uphold. Doubly damned!
If I lived in that county I would be agitating for her to be impeached and charged with malfeasance and theft of county funds for collecting her salary while not doing her job. Plus she should have to personally pay back the county for every penny this has and will cost it.
On the other hand, she is probably unable to do anything else. She worked for her mother in that office for 27 years while her mother was county clerk. I wonder if she's ever had any other job? Oh, and her son - who is now working in that office and who is the only clerk who refused to issue licenses when the judge asked - should be immediately fired.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)I cited your post and was asked for links. Here is a link to my post with what I found: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7139805
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)brush
(61,033 posts)until I read it.
Brilliantly creative, it almost makes one feel sorry for little miss K . . . wait, no it doesn't. It doesn't at all.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)in jail, just being drawn by Christian compassion.
Of course, should he turn out to be gay, she may
just have to look for salvation to another one.
Oh dear, what a hardship for that poor vessel
of god.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)the sarcasm thingy? 
longship
(40,416 posts)Please! Take a bow!
underpants
(196,493 posts)
No Vested Interest
(5,297 posts)Is that a pro or a con to your argument?
underpants
(196,493 posts)Married #1, divorced, gave birth to twins 5 months later.-NOT #1's.....
Here's where it gets interesting
Husband #2 was not the father but he adopted the twins. About 10 years later they divorced.
She married #3 who IS the father of the twins but they later divorced.
#4 is actually #2 - they remarried and are still married.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)
I'm JOKING! (sorta.... sounds like a scene from "Sordid Lives". But heteros do seem to take marriage more for granted than gays. Maybe that's just because there are more of them.... and gays couldn't marry each other.)
I wonder if her Christian Martyr stunt will put more people off religion.
Petrushka
(3,709 posts). . . didn't have or need a marriage license and, so, why should anybody else bother?
FWIW: I was wondering where the concept of the marriage license began and did a Bing search. I gave up searching when I came across the following link:
http://www.mercyseat.net/marriagelicense.html
P.S.
Then, there is this ---> http://www.edrivera.com/?p=1508
. . . and (ta-duh!) a brief version of the mercyseat article at the first link, above) ---> http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/a-brief-history-of-marriage-licenses-in-the-us/blog-393357/
csziggy
(34,189 posts)That were pretty expensive. One of my ancestors paid $100 back in the 1700s in (I think) Massachusetts as a marriage bond; another couple in a different place paid far more - about $1500. In leiu of a bond often a family member or friend had to vouch for the couple.
In early New England colonies, the churches were integral parts of the local government so their requirements for marriages were instilled into the government requirements. Later with establishment of colonies such as Rhode Island where a particular church was not built into the government of the colony, records of marriages became much more chaotic and can be hard to find.
As a genealogist I'm lucky that so many of my and my husband's ancestors were Quakers. Couples had to apply for permission to marry. The men's and women's meetings would appoint people to research to make sure the couple was eligible and report back to the meetings for two or more months. Then the two groups would compare notes and give permission. After all that the couple would finally have their formal declaration of marriage which would often be at one of the monthly meetings. And every step of the procedure was carefully recorded, often at two different Quaker groups if the prospective bride and groom were from different communities.
When licenses first began they could be very expensive. A nearby county in Florida charged $100 in the early 1900s. An acquaintance I did some genealogical research for was embarrassed that her parents were never "legally" married - never had a license or registered a marriage. I explained to her how it expensive it would have been for her parents to go through the legal process and that they almost certainly had a church ceremony. She was very relieved since that had been a secret shame of hers for most of her life even though her parents had lived as common law husband and wife for decades.
qwlauren35
(6,309 posts)Imagine if you're trying to have a quick wedding to cover up a snuggly in the hayloft, but you have to wait two months to have your past researched. You'll go to the wedding with a bump on your belly and everyone will know.
Ouch.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)One of my Quaker ancestors and his prospective wife went through all the steps and their marriage was approved. Then seven months later they were brought up in front of the monthly meeting. They'd had their first child five months after their marriage was approved! That is the only one of their numerous children who had a birth notation in the Quaker records since the couple was kicked out of the community.
It was very embarrassing for the groom's father. He'd been a very important man in the Quaker meeting, donated the land and helped build the meeting house, and was a leader in the community.
Some years later the erring couple petitioned to be let back in and they and their children were eventually allowed to rejoin that Quaker meeting. I think it was when their children began marrying and the family needed to "mend their ways" in the eyes of the Quaker community in order for permission to be given for the children's marriages.
The reconciliation didn't last forever - one of the sons was cited for fighting in one of the wars against the Indians. Then he moved to North Carolina and he and his son were on the list of the Regulators (http://docsouth.unc.edu/nc/bassett95/summary.html) prior to the American Revolution. Somewhere along the way they became Baptists...
qwlauren35
(6,309 posts)Thanks for sharing!
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Hoop skirts and petticoats.
Petrushka
(3,709 posts)
Aerows
(39,961 posts)I know this is satire, but we as your friends, neighbors and family members aren't jokes.
We are real people that have faced real consequences for standing up for ourselves, our friends and our loved ones.
I know your heart is probably in the right place, but gay bashing still exists, and people are dying because of who they love. Has it gotten better? I'd like to think so. We are still far from eradicating homophobia.
struggle4progress
(126,147 posts)BY CHAR ADAM
09/04/2015 AT 10:20 AM EDT
"The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky filed a lawsuit July 2, 2015 on behalf of four Rowan County couples, two same-gender couples and two opposite-gender couples, denied marriage licenses by County Clerk Kim Davis. Since the U.S. Supreme Court issued a sweeping and historic decision that affords gay and lesbian couples the legal right to marry, Ms. Davis has refused to provide marriage licenses to any couple applying for one in Rowan County"
CLASS ACTION SUIT FILED AGAINST ROWAN COUNTY, CLERK FOR MARRIAGE LICENSE REFUSALS
lunatica
(53,410 posts)that we all have to fight for gay's rights to marry. Unfortunately I can't remember who it was because my change of mind didn't come instantly. He/she planted a seed in my mind and it found fertile ground. I had stupidly thought that gay equality rights would just happen. I certainly know better now.
I guarantee my story isn't all that uncommon. Most of us don't make an issue out of it, but most of us are totally on the right side of this issue. Especially on DU.
John Poet
(2,510 posts)unhappy, unfaithful, abusive, broken marriages as the rest of us.
And any other kind as well.
Sam_Fields
(305 posts)All that matters is that she learn to follow the rule of law. I don't like Ad hominem attacks on any one even if I disagree with them.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)It does when you bring up "god's laws" and your fervent beliefs that you follow so intensely.
God may not like divorce, but it's legal and she did it.
God may not like gay marriage, but it's legal so.... why can't she do that too?
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)to stand, in no uncertain terms, with us once and for all or they need to stand down and shut up and let us do for ourselves.
No one on DU would make cutesy satire like this about any other bigotry expressed toward any other minority group.
Recent events have highlighted the nasty strain of homophobia in this Party. Davis is a Democrat and her cohort is all over DU. They attack Bernie Sanders because conservatives do not like him 'It's all liberals and they are not the whole Party' snap the Straight Voice of DU.
So really, I'm sure you have good intention. I'm sick of having to assume good intentions. Soon I will assume no more for any of you.
struggle4progress
(126,147 posts)struggle4progress
(126,147 posts)UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
NORTHERN DIVISION AT ASHLAND
CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-44-DLB
APRIL MILLER, et al. PLAINTIFFS vs. KIM DAVIS, individually and in her official capacity, et al. DEFENDANTS
... Plaintiffs are two same-sex and two opposite-sex couples seeking to enjoin Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis from enforcing her own marriage licensing policy. On June 26, 2015, just hours after the U.S. Supreme Court held that states are constitutionally required
to recognize same-sex marriage, Davis announced that the Rowan County Clerk’s Office would no longer issue marriage licenses to any couples ... Plaintiffs now allege that this “no marriage licenses” policy substantially interferes with their right to marry because it effectively forecloses them from obtaining a license in their home county ...
http://www.aclu-ky.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Bunning-Rowan-Ruling-81215.pdf
Triana
(22,666 posts)*snicker*
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)The woman tried to impose her religion on het staff and through her staff on Americans who had been discriminated against their whole lives. There is no defense for that kind of cold-hearted cold-shouldering.
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)
Sid
treestar
(82,383 posts) qwlauren35
(6,309 posts)Is she really as nuts as the OP says? It's possible. I'll accept it as just "funny", but if it's true, it's hilarious.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)She's truly an expert on divorce. And divorce. And divorce.
And re-marriage.
Wash. state Desk Jet
(3,426 posts)Last edited Sun Sep 6, 2015, 07:24 PM - Edit history (1)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is a good read !