HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Lindsey Graham: Kentucky ...

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 12:24 PM

Lindsey Graham: Kentucky Clerk Must 'Comply With The Law Or Resign'

Source: TPM

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said on Tuesday that the defiant Kentucky clerk who has repeatedly refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples must follow the law.

"As a public official, comply with the law or resign," Graham told clerk Kim Davis when asked by conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt how Davis should proceed.

Hewitt then asked Graham if there is a middle ground between complying with the Supreme Court ruling and refusing to issue licenses.

"The rule of law is the rule of law," Graham said. "We are a rule of law nation. And I appreciate her conviction, and I support traditional marriage, but she’s accepted a job where she has to apply the law to everyone and that’s her choice."



###

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/lindsey-graham-kentucky-clerk-comply-law

55 replies, 9273 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 55 replies Author Time Post
Reply Lindsey Graham: Kentucky Clerk Must 'Comply With The Law Or Resign' (Original post)
DonViejo Sep 2015 OP
beac Sep 2015 #1
DonViejo Sep 2015 #2
Elmer S. E. Dump Sep 2015 #16
Raster Sep 2015 #41
randys1 Sep 2015 #26
Raster Sep 2015 #3
Ikonoklast Sep 2015 #40
Angry Dragon Sep 2015 #45
Geronimoe Sep 2015 #4
avebury Sep 2015 #10
Elmer S. E. Dump Sep 2015 #17
closeupready Sep 2015 #12
Elmer S. E. Dump Sep 2015 #18
Jim Lane Sep 2015 #28
hamsterjill Sep 2015 #50
Jim Lane Sep 2015 #53
hamsterjill Sep 2015 #55
rladdi Sep 2015 #5
Geronimoe Sep 2015 #7
Elmer S. E. Dump Sep 2015 #19
yeoman6987 Sep 2015 #27
Psephos Sep 2015 #46
KT2000 Sep 2015 #6
csziggy Sep 2015 #21
KT2000 Sep 2015 #38
csziggy Sep 2015 #39
steve2470 Sep 2015 #8
valerief Sep 2015 #9
still_one Sep 2015 #11
riderinthestorm Sep 2015 #13
LanternWaste Sep 2015 #29
riderinthestorm Sep 2015 #32
KarenS Sep 2015 #14
SCantiGOP Sep 2015 #22
drray23 Sep 2015 #35
jtuck004 Sep 2015 #15
kiri Sep 2015 #30
jtuck004 Sep 2015 #33
SCantiGOP Sep 2015 #20
47of74 Sep 2015 #23
NotHardly Sep 2015 #24
MrScorpio Sep 2015 #25
Hekate Sep 2015 #37
Angry Dragon Sep 2015 #44
Hekate Sep 2015 #47
Angry Dragon Sep 2015 #51
PatSeg Sep 2015 #31
Skittles Sep 2015 #48
PatSeg Sep 2015 #52
SummerSnow Sep 2015 #34
Angry Dragon Sep 2015 #43
Hekate Sep 2015 #36
Angry Dragon Sep 2015 #42
Major Hogwash Sep 2015 #49
freshwest Sep 2015 #54

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 12:40 PM

1. Well, color me surprised!

Then again, this might just be his attempt to be "moderate" and part of his delusion that he has a snowball's chance in Kim Davis' hell of becoming POTUS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beac (Reply #1)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 12:46 PM

2. Color me surprised also but, then too,

Last edited Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:36 PM - Edit history (1)

Graham is a lawyer and was a member of the Judge Advocate General staff while serving in the Air Force. So, I guess we'd have to give him some credit for being able to distinguish his ass from his elbow; at least on this issue

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Reply #2)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:55 PM

16. I will agree - on this issue.

 

Otherwise he's a complete asshat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Elmer S. E. Dump (Reply #16)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 06:39 PM

41. And I will agree on your entire post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Reply #2)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:25 PM

26. No GOP or Teaparty elected official can take a position in favor of the clerk unless they

wish to admit they hate the Constitution, rule of law and the USA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beac (Reply #1)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 12:47 PM

3. I agree, also colored surprise. However, ONLY LOGICAL RESPONSE.

I keep imploring: THINK THIS ONE THROUGH. Everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE - even if you agree in principal with Davis - should encourage Davis - and anyone else that may try this stunt - to comply with the law. This door can swing both ways. When Davis can claim the "authority of God" and her personal beliefs to justify her actions, we ARE ALL IN TROUBLE.

Oh Dear Lord,
Forgive me my sins and pass the Magic Windex, so that I may cleanse my glass house,
so that I may more perfectly hurl your Sacred Stones at others I deem to be unworthy.
In Jeeezus name, AAh-myen.

#MagicWindex

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raster (Reply #3)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 05:16 PM

40. This nation would cease to be otherwise.

If every person in a government job, elected or not was allowed by the SC to first follow their personal religious convictions instead of following the law, you will soon get this as a result and it would be allowed to stand:


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #40)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 07:02 PM

45. good one

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 12:48 PM

4. Next question....

 

What if she refuses to resign because her God told her not to....

What is lunatic Hewett thinking, that there could be middle ground? Probably that she, her son, and her husband go to the office locked and loaded and they stand their ground. Another guns for Jesus moment.

Resigning and refusing her pension is the proper thing to do. If she works for amoral Government who work against her God, she should not be taking the dirty and evil money.

Of course this is all nonsense. Her clerical work is only that. She is not sanctifying marriage or performing the ceremony. She is only verifying that a form was filled out properly. Of course this moron, can never be fired because she works (not really) for the Government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Geronimoe (Reply #4)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:27 PM

10. IF she continues to refuse then let her sit in jail for

contempt of court. As sitting in a jail cell is not an acceptable reason for being gone from work her benefits should be frozen. Her multiple marriages and adultery should be admissible in court to impeach her religious belief argument. She should not be allowed to use her religious beliefs only when it is convenient for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to avebury (Reply #10)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:59 PM

17. The only thing the court will care about is whether she did her job.

 

The courts, being secular (ha! for the most part) will not entertain her religious fantasy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Geronimoe (Reply #4)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:31 PM

12. "stand their ground" - reportedly, one of her supporters called that out to her,

 

"Stand your ground!" Scary people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to closeupready (Reply #12)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:00 PM

18. She has no ground to stand on. Remember Wiley Coyote any one?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Geronimoe (Reply #4)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 03:06 PM

28. I don't think middle ground is inconceivable.

 

I've been wondering -- what happens when she goes on vacation? Are people completely unable to get marriage licenses? If there's some provision for a substitute, it could be used here.

For example, if in her absence the Mayor or the Deputy Clerk or some such person can issue a license, then a practical accommodation is possible. When a same-sex couple comes in, she uses .1 hours of her vacation time and someone else issues them the license. She's still being an idiot, but the applicants get the license they're entitled to, with no waiting, and she gets to keep her job.

I'm sure she wouldn't agree to that. She's better off, as Dan Savage as written, setting herself up as a martyr, with all the bigot money that will flow to her as a result.

A lot of marriage equality advocates might also be upset by this middle ground. They needn't worry that it might happen, though. She's in martyr mode.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #28)

Thu Sep 3, 2015, 12:19 PM

50. No, I don't think she'd agree to that.

Because issuing the license is certainly not sanctifying the marriage. But she's using that point to make her pathetic statement.

So, in her view, if one of her subordinates issued a license, she'd still think she was going to hell because she's in charge of her subordinates.

I don't want her going to hell. But I do want her going to jail!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hamsterjill (Reply #50)

Thu Sep 3, 2015, 06:54 PM

53. Update: You and I were both right about what this whacko would do.

 

From this ThinkProgress article about her incarceration:

Attorneys representing the same-sex couples in this case reportedly offered a deal, that Judge Bunning agreed to, which would allow Davis to leave jail if she permitted several of her deputy clerks to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. According to multiple sources on Twitter, however, Davis has refused this deal and elected to remain in jail.


My only complaint about Judge Bunning's action is that I wish he'd imposed a daily fine as well. Her supporters would presumably have rallied to pay it, but that money might as well go into the public coffers instead of being donated to RWNJ political candidates or whatever other vile use would have claimed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #53)

Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:22 PM

55. We are both smart cookies!!! LOL

I agree with you as to the fine, and even wonder if since she's a county employee, they might not be able to garnish the fine from her wages somehow. Nah, I'm sure I'm hoping for too much!!!

Hope you have a great Labor Day Weekend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 12:50 PM

5. Lets charge this clerk, put her in Prison for LIFE. She is just a stupid conservative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rladdi (Reply #5)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:01 PM

7. Charge with hate crime

 

This really is bordering on hate crime. Hope those rejected and ridiculed by this County clerk and her surrogates will file a class action lawsuit against county and State.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Geronimoe (Reply #7)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:03 PM

19. Make an example out of the ass.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rladdi (Reply #5)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:36 PM

27. For life? I thought we were trying to lower the population in Prison

 

She is a democratic supporter who is wacky on this issue. She needs to resign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rladdi (Reply #5)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 09:08 PM

46. She is a registered Democrat, and holds office as one. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 12:59 PM

6. she must have taken an oath of office

unless it says she should uphold the laws she agrees with and no others - she has to go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KT2000 (Reply #6)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:14 PM

21. The Kentucky Constitution has specific language she should read

Section 5. Right of religious freedom.
No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person
be compelled to attend any place of worship, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed; and the civil rights,
privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in anywise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma or teaching.
No human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience.
Page 7
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/lrcpubs/ib59.pdf

(Emphasis added by me.)

While the last sentence worries me, which should take precedence - her right to her beliefs or the rights of citizens who are paying her salary to not have their civil rights taken away by Kim Davis in her capacity as County Clerk? If I were judge, I would say that the average citizen has more rights than does any person acting as an instrument of the government at any level.

Kim Davis has a choice to perform her duties or to resign her office. Citizens do not have a choice - they must go to the civil authorities in their community for the services that they have elected to be performed by the employees of the community.

It's time for Kim Davis to resign and to take her religious beliefs to a venue not supported by taxpayer money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to csziggy (Reply #21)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 04:50 PM

38. found her oath of office:

30A.020 Oath of clerk and deputies.
Every clerk and deputy, in addition to the oath prescribed by Section 228 of the
Constitution, shall, before entering on the duties of his office, take the following oath in
presence of the Circuit Court: "I, ....., do swear that I will well and truly dis
charge the
duties of the office of .............. County Circuit Court clerk, according to the best of my
skill and judgment, making the due entries and records of all orders, judgments, decrees,
opinions and proceedings of the court, and carefully filing
and preserving in my office all
books and papers which come to my possession by virtue of my office; and that I will not
knowingly or willingly commit any malfeasance of office, and will faithfully execute the
duties of my office without favor, affection o
r partiality, so help me God." The fact that
the oath has been administered shall be entered on the record of the Circuit Court

Looks like she is in violation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KT2000 (Reply #38)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 05:06 PM

39. Yeah, I posted it in another thread - she's in violation for sure

And she swore to her god to abide by that oath so if she believes in a god, she needs to re-examine where she should be putting her efforts.

Since she seems to be saying that her allegiance to her god is more important than abiding by the oath she took when she got into her secular office, she needs to resign from her county clerk job and let someone who is willing to obey the law of the country, the state and the county.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:10 PM

8. stopped clock, good for you Sen. Graham nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:16 PM

9. Okay, so she won't resign and won't comply. Who gets rid of her? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to valerief (Reply #9)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:30 PM

11. Then she gets terminated for not performing her job

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #11)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:48 PM

13. She's an elected official. Can't be fired

 

gah! I feel like I've now typed that a million times on DU...

Someone could attempt impeachment proceedings but the KY Senate is firmly Republican so it would go nowhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #13)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 03:07 PM

29. Additionally, the state attorney general may investigate...

Additionally, the state attorney general may investigate whether or not she is engaged in official misconduct possibly resulting in criminal charges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #29)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 03:25 PM

32. Yup, there's options out there to make it painful for Davis for non-compliance

 

just not firing.

The notion that she can be fired is persistent here. It's good info to have the facts about what can be done to her.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #11)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:48 PM

14. They cannot fire her...

It is an elected position. I read that they can impeach her or vote her out next election cycle.

I guess they could jail her for contempt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KarenS (Reply #14)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:14 PM

22. Judge can definitely jail or fine her

She can only be removed by impeachment by the legislature, which won't happen. But I expect the judge on Thursday to give her a firm order to comply with the law, or resign if she wants to avoid contempt actions against her.
Judges tend to get a bit riled up when people tell them they have decided to oppose court rulings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KarenS (Reply #14)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 04:04 PM

35. they should jail her until she either complies or is removed by impeachment

Since it will take the next legislative session to impeach her if it even happens, she would be sitting in jail for many months. She might be all fiery right now but sitting in a 9x13 cell for a few months would surely make her reconsider. It will also send a clear message that in this country, an elected official as to follow the law of the land.

Fines would not achieve the same thing. There would be supporters who would pay the fines. Sitting in Jail directly affects her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 01:49 PM

15. Putting Amotion in Motion: Removal of an Elected Official by a Municipal Governing Body for Just Cau

 

This is from North Carolina...

Putting Amotion in Motion: Removal of an Elected Official by a Municipal Governing Body for Just Cause

CATHRYN M. LITTLE*
INTRODUCTION
When an elected official has been sworn into office, and subsequently
becomes unfit to hold office or engages in misconduct which
could rise to the level of “just cause” for removal from his elected position,
a legal question arises regarding the grounds and procedure
through which a municipal governing body may legally remove that
official from office under North Carolina law. Since North Carolina
has no statutory provision outlining the procedure for removal of an
elected municipal official for misconduct or lack of fitness to hold
office subsequent to election, the answer is found in the common law.
This Article will examine the development and application of North
Carolina common law addressing the removal of an elected municipal
official through the process of “amotion.” Amotion is recognized as an
“inherent power” of the governing body of a municipal corporation to
remove an elected official for reasonable and just cause due to misconduct
or unfitness to hold office.1
...


http://www.law.campbell.edu/lawreview/articles/32-1-75.pdf

You can't fire an elected official. But you can remove them. I don't know what the law is in Kentucky, but I suspect there are ways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #15)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 03:08 PM

30. reduce her salary

Her paycheck comes from public funds, and her salary is set by law or regulation from some governing body. (Judges are different; their salaries cannot be reduced.) But ordinary officials are not so protected. Simple, pass a new law/regulation setting the salary of the county clerk at $5.00 per month.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kiri (Reply #30)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 03:56 PM

33. She has thousands of supporters who would pay her far more than she is getting on her job. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:10 PM

20. It's amazing that it is newsworthy

When a Republican acts like a normal, sane American.
If he weren't such a warmonger Lindsey would almost be tolerable as a member of the opposition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:14 PM

23. You know you've gone so far out on a limb that it's broken off...

 

...when Lindsey tells you to STFU and do your damn job already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:17 PM

24. Knives on the edge of a downward slope ...

There is a major problem with the doctrine of "sincerely held belief" and its the long game not the single play. If persons, businesses, public officials (elected or appointed) are allowed to declare a vague sincerely held belief regarding legal compliance, rules of law, employment activities, duties, obligations and etc. as they wish to or as they declare, the cutting edge of those declarations could serve to satisfy any sort of bias, prejudice, reluctance, or bigotry ... if there were a draft for the military today or in the future, that should sure cause an interesting twist. And that is just the edge of that blade.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 02:23 PM

25. I commend Graham for his appreciation of the rule of law...

Last edited Wed Sep 2, 2015, 07:45 PM - Edit history (1)

However, I do think it remarkable that he threw that little comment in there about "traditional marriage."

This is coming from someone who has never been married EVER. And he thinks that he can classify what's "traditional" for other people?

Well, Lindsay, we're living in the time right now of a new "normal." Under the laws of marriage equality, same-sex marriages are now "traditional" marriages as well.

It's time to adapt oneself to the new normality. Rather than telling that clerk to just follow orders (the law told you to do it), perhaps it's about time to both realize and inform others to this very fact: Same-sex marriages are just as valid as opposite sex ones.

Time to adopt a new language for the times, Lindsay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrScorpio (Reply #25)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 04:17 PM

37. Well, Lindsay is a confirmed bachelor and may not be up on all the nuances of ... well, nuances.

I give him major credit, though, for saying out loud that the world has moved on and the County Clerk needs to get with the program or leave the job she was elected to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrScorpio (Reply #25)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 07:00 PM

44. I do not have any trouble with his use of the term 'traditional'

I feel it will take time for same sex marriage to be totally excepted and then no one will notice

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #44)

Thu Sep 3, 2015, 03:50 AM

47. At that point, we will just call it "marriage"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #47)

Thu Sep 3, 2015, 03:07 PM

51. YES

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 03:23 PM

31. We live in a free country

and no one is forcing Ms. Davis to stay at her job. She is FREE to leave and go work somewhere that does not offend her religious beliefs. As a public official, however, she is not free to ignore the laws she disagrees with. Surely she knew that when she took office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatSeg (Reply #31)

Thu Sep 3, 2015, 04:39 AM

48. yes, she did know that when she took office

but then she became a religious freak

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skittles (Reply #48)

Thu Sep 3, 2015, 04:08 PM

52. Its funny

I'm sure Jesus told his followers basically to "mind their own business" when he said: "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" Now I have never heard evangelicals or Born Again folks quote that from their bible. Its right up there with "Judge not, lest ye be judged". They must have a different version of the bible?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 04:03 PM

34. look what i found...

?1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SummerSnow (Reply #34)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 06:57 PM

43. good find

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 04:13 PM

36. ...And the world moves on.... We have won, and it's all over but the shouting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Sep 2, 2015, 06:56 PM

42. he should sit down with Rand Paul and explain how things work

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #42)

Thu Sep 3, 2015, 06:06 AM

49. Can't be done.

There aren't any coloring books on same sex marriage out there . . .

. . . yet!!!

Rand can't stay within the lines anyway.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Sep 3, 2015, 10:44 PM

54. The issue is explained in this video:

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 11:24 PM - Edit history (1)

Clergy Rebukes Media for Asking Wrong Questions About Amendment One



Uploaded by Eric Preston - May 6, 2012

In a press conference held in Greensboro, North Carolina, Clergy from around the state gathered together to pray for the wisdom of its citizens regarding the May 8th vote on Amendment One.

In that conference, Rev. Dr. William J. Barber took the time to rebuke the media for asking the wrong questions regarding the amendment. Rev. Dr. William J. Barber, II is the President of the North Carolina State Conference of the NAACP.


Sadly, the frightwingers, who were shown to be like the miscengenation fears of the past, won the day. I hope that state is obeying the law now. One of the clear wrongs here is that she is elected to follow the law, just as Kerry was given grief for respecting. Also Democrats do believe in law to prevent a return to Rex Lex. When the articles claim she is a Democratic Party supporter, she doesn't support the platform.

Increasingly, the attack on women and minorities is being done through the private sphere. That is easier when it includes privatization. The Hobby Lobby has been buying up hospitals and schools to convert them into RW religious enforcers. They funded anti-same sex laws in the various states that passed them and fund movements to stop women from not just abortion, but getting birth control.

Our governors got involved to stop pharmacists from denying women morning after pills based on their 'beliefs.' The governor had to intervene against the attempted buy out of a rural hospital by a religious group that would have been able to deny women legal healthcare for lack of alternatives in the private hospital.

The RWNJs are increasing and so are the churches. They swallow all the lies from media and pastors. This battle is going to go on for a long time, these folks are doubling down. I suspect they're being paid for it, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread