Kentucky clerk still won't issue same-sex marriage licenses; What is your opinion on this article?

SGT John Rauch — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 12:42:00 -0400

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/01/will-clerk-issue-gay-marriage-licenses-after-court-ruling/?intcmp=hpbt1

Kentucky clerk still won't issue same-sex marriage licenses

The Supreme Court ruled against the county clerk who refused to issue gay marriage licenses, leaving her with perhaps her toughest decision yet: Hand out licenses or risk potential fines or even possible jail time.

Response by SGT John Rauch made Sep 1 at 2015 12:43 PM

SGT John Rauch — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 12:43:11 -0400

personally, I stand with the clerk, put in her shoes I would do basically the same thing. SCOTUS overstepped their bounds on this one, but I want to hear everyone elses opinions too

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 12:52 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 12:52:43 -0400

It's completely her prerogative to not do her job. It's also her boss' prerogative to fire her.

edit: or has been mentioned, the electorate's job to impeach her
It is still criminal to not carry out the job you are elected to, so though "fire" may not be the right word, she is certainly facing punishment. She should probably resign herself unless she feels making the point is worth the potential jail time (which she very well may).

Response by CW4 Guy Butler made Sep 1 at 2015 12:59 PM

CW4 Guy Butler — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 12:59:29 -0400

It'll be interesting to see how big the contempt of court will be.

Also interesting to see how soon the Kentucky AG appoints a special prosecutor to look into impeachment (it's an elected position).

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Sep 1 at 2015 1:01 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:01:20 -0400

She should be fired. She has the right to believe anything she wants, and I support that. But you have a job to do. If your religious/personal beliefs prevent you from executing your job/mission, then you need to be removed and replaced with someone that will.

Response by COL Jean (John) F. B. made Sep 1 at 2015 1:04 PM

COL Jean (John) F. B. — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:04:12 -0400

SGT John Rauch - I admire her for standing by her beliefs (and I agree with her), but, if her beliefs keep her from doing her job, she should quit or risk being fired.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Sep 1 at 2015 1:09 PM

SGT Jeremiah B. — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:09:36 -0400

I bet she issues divorce certificates no problem though. And marriage licenses to divorcees!

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Sep 1 at 2015 1:20 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:20:11 -0400

There are strong irreconcilable forces on both sides.

Response by SPC Greg K. made Sep 1 at 2015 1:39 PM

SPC Greg K. — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:39:29 -0400

Then Jesus said to them, "Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." And they were amazed at him. -Mark 12:17

Response by SPC Bill Earley made Sep 1 at 2015 1:52 PM

SPC Bill Earley — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:52:08 -0400

I think in America while it still lasts we have the right to our individual believes. She should not be forced to go against her believe right are wrong. I'm sure there is someone nearby who would do this for them without this lady being bullied into it. If we let others bully us to get there way , where are we headed as a nation!

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Sep 1 at 2015 1:52 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 13:52:33 -0400

Freedom includes Consequences.

Edit: Spelling

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 2:02 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 14:02:57 -0400

This should be such a non-issue. Of course she is an elected official, so she cant just get the boot. Everyone already knows she is a huge hypocrite for issuing licenses to other "sinners". So how she gets support is beyond me. Her fight is about to be over real quick though. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of consequence. She is really going to earn those fines should she remain stubborn. Of course someone will set up a go fund me account(probably already have) that'll have $1M in within 24 hours to support her "persecution".

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 2:03 PM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 14:03:58 -0400

let her go let her go

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 2:29 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 14:29:07 -0400

Regardless of your religious feelings, it is now the law for same sex marriages. If she refuses, she is in violation of the law and as such, should be punished. Just because she is the county clerk, does not mean she is above the law.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 2:36 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 14:36:02 -0400

I am all for someone standing firm in their beliefs. Following your beliefs is understandable and respectable, however you have to choose rather those beliefs are more important to you than your job. If the job is more important, put your beliefs to the side and do your job. If your beliefs are more important and preventing you from doing your job, then its time to put the job to the side and follow your beliefs. If you are incapable of making this decision on your own, especially after an order from the supreme court, then it is time to have the decision made for you.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 2:58 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 14:58:27 -0400

I'm beginning to shy clear of these discussions as they get into territory our active duty SMs may not be comfortable with. That said, as a private citizen, here's my two cent's worth-No matter what the laws of the land determine, a person is accountable to their own conscience.

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Sep 1 at 2015 3:11 PM

LCpl Mark Lefler — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 15:11:52 -0400

she needs to do her job or get a different job... I get the whole religious liberty but she has a job and needs to do what is in the job description.

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 3:28 PM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 15:28:39 -0400

ALL county clerks in the state of Kentucky are required to recite the below oath. It's interesting to note that they swear BEFORE GOD to execute the duties of their office impartially. I guess they conveniently forgot about that part.

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 discharge 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 or partiality, so help me God." The fact that the oath has been administered shall be entered on the record of the Circuit Court.
Effective: January 2, 1978
History: Created 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 21, sec. 2, effective January 2, 1978.

Response by SGM Steve Wettstein made Sep 1 at 2015 3:45 PM

SGM Steve Wettstein — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 15:45:59 -0400

You know there were/are plenty of laws that I didn't/don't agree with but I still enforced them. When you are an officer of the court you do not have the option of picking and choosing what laws to enforce. This lady needs to be cited for contempt and then fired. IMO

Response by MAJ Bill Maynard made Sep 1 at 2015 5:06 PM

MAJ Bill Maynard — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 17:06:14 -0400

She has great courage to stand for her convictions. I pray that God blesses her and her family. She may lose her job and position, but she will gain much...

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Sep 1 at 2015 5:16 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 17:16:36 -0400

A couple of comments to add in with the others here. First, as an elected official, she should resign if she is forced to do something that she feels goes against her faith. I also believe that she has been married more than once (I could not find that confirmation so that may rumor). I do wonder how many licenses she issued to people getting married for the second time. How does she reconcile that with her views on the sanctity of marriage? Finally, as an Evangelical Christian myself, I look at the witness she is giving to these people. Christian means "little Christ" and we are supposed to be examples of him on earth. Christians are called to love everyone and that is one of the hardest tenets to do. But how does this show love that we are to do. Jesus never rejected any sinner so that is the example I believe she should do if she is calling on her faith.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Sep 1 at 2015 5:28 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 17:28:43 -0400

The feds have already taken the power from states that voted to oppose same sex marriage. By that logic, the next step will be to make marriage licenses a federal document.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 6:05 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 18:05:08 -0400

What would happen to you or me if we did not follow the law?

It is certainly her right to not issue licenses, but, it is only her right if she resigns.

People in charge of lawful processes need to be a model of following the laws.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 6:06 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 18:06:47 -0400

Easy, fire this independently-thinking woman.

She has every right to hold her opinions and stand firm on them--ON HER OWN TIME AS JOSIE Q. PUBLIC. When she is being paid to do the coursework of her job and fails to do it, she no longer requires employment in said job.

Response by Sgt Kelli Mays made Sep 1 at 2015 6:34 PM

Sgt Kelli Mays — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 18:34:03 -0400

She may not like it,but if it's in her job description then it seems to me she should be issuing the licenses. Either, that or be prepared to be fired....or go find a job that won't require her to do something she doesn't believe in or that she will refuse to do because of her beliefs.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 6:45 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 18:45:03 -0400

Gee, I wonder how many orders I could refuse based on personal beliefs before I got kicked out. I have to follow orders I don't like all the time. Why should she be any different? Does she refuse to issue divorce decrees? Remarriage certificates? How about marriage certificates to mixed-race couples? This isn't about religion or free speech; it's about having ONE job to do and refusing to do it.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 7:02 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 19:02:06 -0400

She should be in jail for contempt of court, violating a court order, and malfeasance in office. She took an oath and she is not living up to it.

Response by SGT Christopher Churilla made Sep 1 at 2015 7:04 PM

SGT Christopher Churilla — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 19:04:59 -0400

Transfer her to another department, one whose duties will not conflict with her beliefs.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 1 at 2015 8:30 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 20:30:22 -0400

If a female Muslim is told by her employer, she isn't allowed to wear a hijab or burka, the company would be fined for violating the woman's First Amendment rights. Likewise if a male Muslim man is told he cannot where a beard or a Punjabi cannot wear a turban, the company would fined for violating the First Amendment rights of the person. All of these are religious beliefs and the first Amendment clearly states, "Congress SHALL make no law... religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

SCOTUS is not Congress and the legislative power is given to the Congress by the US Constitution that we all swore an oath to defend, period. She is freely exercising her beliefs and has every right to. If she is fired, she will have a legitimate lawsuit and if I was an attorney I'd take it pro-bono.

Response by SSgt David Tedrow made Sep 2 at 2015 2:44 AM

SSgt David Tedrow — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 02:44:31 -0400

She is entitled to her religious beliefs, but when those beliefs interfere with her elected position then it is time that she steps down since she can no longer perform the duties expected of her.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 2 at 2015 5:01 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 05:01:58 -0400

Her job description requires her to issue marriage licenses right? Gay marriage is legal there right? The Supreme Court told her she had to do it right? Fire her ass with extreme prejudice. Hopefully a Homosexual Ditch Digging company gives her the job she deserves.

Response by SGT David T. made Sep 2 at 2015 9:59 AM

SGT David T. — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 09:59:40 -0400

While I do respect this Civil Servant's right to believe how she wants, she is in fact a pubic servant with certain duties, roles, and responsibilities. If she will not do her duty she should resign or be impeached. She is claiming 1st amendment protections but that same amendment is exactly why what she is doing is wrong. There is a separation of church and state and she must adhere to that. There are times when I do no agree with the policies of the government, but as a Civil Servant I have an obligation to do my duty to the best of my ability even if I personally disagree with it.

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 2 at 2015 2:50 PM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 14:50:43 -0400

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 2 at 2015 2:51 PM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 14:51:06 -0400

I'll just leave this right here...

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 2 at 2015 3:04 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 15:04:39 -0400

I am not sure why she has become such an important person. I am baffle she is a clerk for cry not loud fire her for not doing her job and hire someone that can do the job.

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Sep 2 at 2015 4:02 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 16:02:14 -0400

Either do your job or go elsewhere that is more suited to your liking.
The Mayor and Governor have let this become a farce by their inaction to remove this person from office for refusing to do her job based on her religious beliefs. I could see if this courthouse did not issue marriage licenses, then no problem they have to go elsewhere. So what is next for her, refusing building permits to a gay couple because they are gay?

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Sep 2 at 2015 4:41 PM

SGT Bryon Sergent — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 16:41:42 -0400

Good for her!

Response by CDR Michael Goldschmidt made Sep 2 at 2015 5:51 PM

CDR Michael Goldschmidt — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 17:51:15 -0400

I say eliminate ALL state involvement in marriage. I shouldn't have to have some third party's permission. What matters is what the people involved want. Everyone else, BUTT OUT!!!!

Response by CW4 Guy Butler made Sep 2 at 2015 5:52 PM

CW4 Guy Butler — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 17:52:19 -0400

Mike Huckabee just brought this into the Republican race:

"Mike Huckabee called a Kentucky clerk who is refusing to issue gay marriage licenses Wednesday to offer his prayers and support for "not abandoning her religious convictions."

The Supreme Court turned away a request by Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis to be excused from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, but the clerk continues to refuse to issue those licenses, calling the requirement a violation of her religious liberties.

[Supreme Court rejects county official’s request in gay-marriage case]

"I spoke with Kim Davis this morning to offer my prayers and support. I let her know how proud I am of her for not abandoning her religious convictions and standing strong for religious liberty. She is showing more courage and humility than just about any federal office holder in Washington," Huckabee said in a statement."

http://wapo.st/1iiLQrp

Ought to be noted that Graham, Fiorina, and Kasich all came that, while they don't agree with the SCOTUS ruling, Davis needs to comply with it.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Sep 2 at 2015 6:10 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 18:10:27 -0400

Something about pots and kettles.

Response by SGT Scott Bell made Sep 2 at 2015 8:07 PM

SGT Scott Bell — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 20:07:00 -0400

SHE NEED FIRED

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 2 at 2015 8:59 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 20:59:24 -0400

Your misguided and hateful beliefs should never leave your own mind. She'll hopefully be unemployed within the month so she can reflect on how much of a bigot she is.

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 2 at 2015 10:25 PM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Sep 2015 22:25:43 -0400

Exclusive. Just conducted an interview with Cecil Watkins, the Rowan County Attorney. Watkins (who to my knowledge) hasn't given any interviews.
Watkins indicates that Kim Davis "does not represent" Rowan County and is not representative of its inclusive values.
From Day One, Watkins told David I "will not and cannot support" you in her defiance of the law. Not only that he was clear he would not represent her as the law in the case of same sex marriage is clear.
While he has no stance on same sex marriage, well-established federal law must be followed.
Watkins wanted to emphasize several other things.
First that everyone who works at the courthouse has endured cursing as they enter the building. And it's not just at her office. Everyone in the courthouse is scared to come to work.
Second that Liberty Counsel will leave Kim Davis high and dry when this charade is over. Watkins thinks the funds they raise off the case should go to Rowan County.
Finally and most importantly he has learned that deputy clerks would issue lawful marriage licenses. They are simply afraid to do so. And if Judge Bunning instructs them to do so . . . they will.
Davis has put, in the words of Watkins, her employees and everyone in the courthouse in a "terrible position."
Watkins, in his role as the County Attorney, will be in court tomorrow for the hearing at 11:00 in Ashland. He is pictured being sworn in.
Ed. Note - The takeaways from the Watkins interview are clear. Davis is acting alone in her zealous mission. Her conduct has terrorized not just her staff but everyone that works in the courthouse. And all for a foolish mission aided by out of state charlatan lawyers trying to raise money for their "religious liberty" mission.
Shannon Ragland
Kentucky Trial Court Review

Response by Cpl James Waycasie made Sep 3 at 2015 4:22 AM

Cpl James Waycasie — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 04:22:50 -0400

If this were me in this position, I would resign. I could always protest it legally after resigning. I have an Aunt who said she would never shop at BI-LO again because they started selling beer and wine. I asked where do you buy your gas? Her reply was well the closet convenience store when I need it. I said and which one of them does not sell beer and wine? She said I see your point.

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 3 at 2015 7:47 AM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 07:47:24 -0400

Listen, marriage is strictly between 4 men and a woman! Even when completely out of order!

Response by SFC Joseph Weber made Sep 3 at 2015 8:43 AM

SFC Joseph Weber — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 08:43:40 -0400

Giant hypocrite that should be arrested and charged with whatever they can in KY. Three times divorced and an adulterer. Wow.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 3 at 2015 10:16 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:16:01 -0400

Religious liberty does not mean you get to impose your religion's rules on others, and you damn sure don't get to use a government position to do it (*cough*Kim Davis*cough*).
Plenty of people want to cite the 1st Amendment, but they conveniently gloss over the first part.
"Congress shall make no law RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof......"
That means you are free to practice your religion, but you are NOT free to impose your religion's rules on others. That's not religious liberty, that's oppression.
Marriage was around before Christianity was around, and you don't get exclusive jurisdiction over a word.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
And to those "why does the State need to be in the marriage business at all" folks.... I'm calling bullshit. This never became a huge issue until same-sex marriage became an issue.
There are TWO types of marriage, civil marriage and religious marriage. Big Religion (tm) is trying to claim dominion over the former, when it is only entitled to dominion over the latter.
Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's (Matthew 22:21)

Response by SSG Dwight Amey MSA, MSL, BS, AS made Sep 3 at 2015 10:18 AM

SSG Dwight Amey MSA, MSL, BS, AS — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:18:32 -0400

SGT John Rauch, she is living her convictions. More power to her! I believe she is absolutely correct. I personally would not go to jail for it. God did not want to grant the children of isreal divorce, however he allowed Moses to give them circumstances of when to remarry. Well homosexuality is different than divorce, but when mixed in with the law of the land we have to abide by the laws to an extent. I believe homosexuality is a sin just like murder, stealing, lying, etc. We don't need to discriminate or treat them cruel. I really don't buy the born into homosexuality because too many people "decide" to turn homosexual after a bad experience. Sexual desires for the same sex have to be resisted. Politicians and the chief justices decided that marriage is between two human beings and I definitely disagree. But we must follow the laws, don't mean we agree or sanction the error in their ruling. I am free to voice my objection to homosexuality as an "acceptable" sin. No sin is acceptable lying or murder all will get us to Hell. In fact, simple disobiedance will get us to hell because of adam and eve disobeying God's command not to eat from the tree of life. This is where our problems started.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 3 at 2015 10:24 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:24:08 -0400

My thought is that she should be fired.

Response by SPC Nathan Freeman made Sep 3 at 2015 10:31 AM

SPC Nathan Freeman — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:31:45 -0400

She has the right to live by her religious beliefs. It is religious expression.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made Sep 3 at 2015 10:47 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 10:47:31 -0400

Remember then the Church was the State?
Wasn't life easier back then?

Response by Capt Walter Miller made Sep 3 at 2015 11:08 AM

Capt Walter Miller — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 11:08:10 -0400

She has absolutely no right to interject her religion into her official duties. She should be terminated. -- from her employment.

Walt

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Sep 3 at 2015 11:21 AM

SGT Ben Keen — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 11:21:24 -0400

It's one thing to stand up for what you belief in, it's another to have those ideas get in the way of doing your job and adhering to the rules and laws that govern your job. It is no longer, nor was it ever her place really, to say who can and who cannot be issued a marriage license. That is why the case when to the Supreme Court, not her desk.

I'm sure she is fully aware of what can happen to her if she continues to refuse to issue these licensee to same-sex couples. And I'm sure she sees herself fighting "the good fight" but again, the Supreme Court made it's ruling and therefore public officials must recognize it.

Now, the one thing people must keep in mind is that some churches, which of course run independent of the federal government and have their own rules and laws that bind their officials, can still refuse to take part in having same-sex marriages done on their property as well as refuse to provide clergy to officiate the ceremony.

Response by 1SG James Rouse made Sep 3 at 2015 12:51 PM

1SG James Rouse — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 12:51:23 -0400

You see that’s the difference between military, ex-military, and civilian personnel way of thinking. Military minded personnel know that if you are given a lawful order, and in this case the US States Supreme Court deemed it lawful to have same sex marriage a law, regardless of what you, and I may personally think about it, it's still a law, and If the county clerk feel so passionate about not issuing the marriage license she should resign from her position. Also, the onus should be put on her supervisors as well. "Do your job or lose your job", those are your choices.....

Response by SPC James Butler made Sep 3 at 2015 1:55 PM

SPC James Butler — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 13:55:49 -0400

Marriage in Christianity is between one man and one woman (I won't talk about the Mormons). I can't argue that one. A marriage license is a government issued document that opens doors to federal benefits. That is where I stray from my church. I don't believe you can deny a legal document based on an orientation.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 3 at 2015 1:56 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 13:56:28 -0400

I don't believe it's really that uncommon to realize that a job your doing just isn't for you. I remember working as an installer, and while I enjoyed the travel, I can't say I really enjoyed the work. The same holds true for some of the other jobs I had, all had aspects of the job I enjoyed... however I wasn't really that happy doing the work.

It seems to me that the job of county clerk is no longer suitable for her, she should resign so that someone who is able to comply with the law can take up that position. If she insists on staying in this position she should be fined an amount equivalent to her salary. I don't agree with jail, since she doesn't pose any real threat to the public.

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 3 at 2015 2:32 PM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 14:32:38 -0400

By ALAN BLINDER
SEPTEMBER 3, 2015
ASHLAND, Ky. — A federal judge here on Thursday ordered a Kentucky clerk jailed for contempt of court because of her refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The clerk, Kim Davis of Rowan County, was jailed after a hearing before Judge David L. Bunning of Federal District Court. The contempt finding was another legal defeat for Ms. Davis, who has argued that she should not be forced to issue licenses that conflict with her religious beliefs.

“The court cannot condone the willful disobedience of its lawfully issued order,” Judge Bunning said. “If you give people the opportunity to choose which orders they follow, that’s what potentially causes problems.”

Judge Bunning said Ms. Davis would be released once she agreed to comply with his order and issue the marriage licenses.

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 3 at 2015 2:32 PM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 14:32:54 -0400

Response by CPT Jason Mitchell, MBA made Sep 3 at 2015 4:29 PM

CPT Jason Mitchell, MBA — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 16:29:46 -0400

Hailing from Kentucky, I feel free to say this: there are still some backward hillbillies that think their biblical way trumps laws, statutes, and governmental regulations. I wholeheartedly believe that she is confusing her duties with her religious liberties. She is an ELECTED official. Her obligations are to her electorate and since the electorate places officials in leadership positions, she is BREAKING THE LAW! I grew up a Christian and am still a believer, but would never impose my will on others. There is not one shred of biblical evidence that says she will "rot in hell" if she provides LEGALLY AUTHORIZED marriage certificates to same sex couples. We (I) may not agree that it is a moral right, but due to the recent SCOTUS ruling, it is AMERICAN LAW. Since she disagrees so vehemently with providing licenses based on her religious beliefs, then she needs to find another job or shut up and follow through with the letter of the law. When we allow elected officials to "cherry-pick" laws to follow or enforce, we are setting a DANGEROUS precedent (ahem, Obama!). Someone please grab this confused religious zealot by her hair and forcibly remove her from her post. She is clearly confused about how to legally execute her duties and has willfully neglected her office. Last time I checked, God's judgement is the only true and valid form on Earth and Heaven. We are to love our fellow man, not judge based on "our" beliefs. Jesus, this country is turning into an idiot's playground.

Response by SPC George Rudenko made Sep 3 at 2015 4:58 PM

SPC George Rudenko — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 16:58:17 -0400

She took an oath of office, and thus is violating her contract with the state.

Response by SPC Jeffrey Frusha made Sep 3 at 2015 6:47 PM

SPC Jeffrey Frusha — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:47:38 -0400

Based on the SCOTUS ruling, the Constitution and Bill of Rights, our attempts to create a non-dicriminatory environment, where ALL are created equal, she's abso-f'ing-lutely WRONG.

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Sep 3 at 2015 6:51 PM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 18:51:30 -0400

She should have taken the high road and resigned. She is a public servant and that's her job. But Obama and Jerry Brown were guilty of the same things when they would not defend challenges to DOMA. Obama said it was an Imoral law. and this is before SCOTUS said anything about it. If she was a Muslim I wonder what they would have done? Religious accommodation goes booth was. May not apply here because she is a democrat and was elected .

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 3 at 2015 8:21 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Sep 2015 20:21:58 -0400

She's refusing to perform the public service that she swore under oath to perform. I respect religion, I really do. I DO NOT however respect individuals that will deny other American citizens their human rights because of their own personal beliefs. It's wrong, immoral, hateful and inconsiderate.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 4 at 2015 12:02 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 00:02:11 -0400

Why she cares......???

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 4 at 2015 9:04 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 09:04:51 -0400

Regarding Biblical guidance on divorce: http://www.openbible.info/topics/divorce

Regarding her duties as an elected official: In addition to Section 228, U.S. Constitution...as follows:
"I, _____, do swear that I will well and truly discharge 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 or partiality, so help me God."

Regarding rulings of SCOTUS: http://www.supremecourt.gov/ Marbury v. Madison 1803- "In this decision, the Chief Justice asserted that the Supreme Court's responsibility to overturn unconstitutional legislation was a necessary consequence of its sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. That oath could not be fulfilled any other way. It is emphatically the province of the judicial department to say what the law is."

That's law...here' my opinion:

George Washington himself was the first person to add "So help me God" to the Oath of Office for elected officials. Kim Davis has expressed her belief that in doing such during her own oath, she was affirming and attaching her commitment to faith to that oath. This was done prior to the ruling of the SCOTUS, and has precedence in establishing a "conditional" acceptance of her position. Her prior marital history does not factor in from a religious perspective as Christian doctrine espouses the principle of repentance and forgiveness...not to mention the intricacies of the Judeo-legal basis for divorce that would require substantive review of any and all divorce papers filed under her cognizance. More to the point, the provenance of religious practice within Christianity is one of continual discipline, which logically implies that an adherent's failure to comply with doctrine in one instance does not preclude (and in fact, adds weight) to one's decision to comply in another occurrence of the same, or other choice.

As far as arguing whether or not it is "legal" to refuse to comply with the rulings of the SCOTUS, the case of Marbury vs. Madison clearly establishes the Supreme Court as the body entrusted with preserving the spirit of the Constitution against shifting legislation. In it's own day, the case was a pivotal aspect of the Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist debate, and a leading cause of future conflict between federal and state decisions on a host of issues.

More to the point, this is the same context within which magistrates and appointed officials of the colonial government faced hard choices in 1776, and that officials in individual states and officers of the U.S. military faced in 1861. What does an official do when personal convictions conflict with the legal governance of law?

To my mind, to resign one's position under this condition would be neither obedience to law, nor opposition to it. To comply with law that contravenes one's own principles would be to reject the authority of principle in favor of law. To retain one's position while refusing to reject one's principles is to challenge the law itself in favor of principle.

This has been the decision of numerous Americans, regardless of ideology, since our inception, including such people as Washington, Revere, Lee, Jackson, Susan B. Anthony, Rosa Parks, etc.

I will not attempt to argue that Kim Davis is acting within her "Constitutional rights" because the established relationship of the SCOTUS as interpreting authority makes that a hollow debate. However, I will admit that I consider her choice to be one of the highest moral courage, and can only hope and pray that the elected and appointed officials of our nation are granted wisdom from God towards avoiding further such controversies. These arguments serve nothing but division, and illustrate the slippery slope of involving taxation and the resulting civil governance of an institution whose inception was historically and remains, deeply spiritual.

Response by SFC John Elam made Sep 4 at 2015 9:16 AM

SFC John Elam — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 09:16:20 -0400

This goes back to separation of church and state. She works for the county, and therefore must abide by the laws voted on and passed regardless of her beliefs. She can live a Christian life, but cannot impose her beliefs on others when working in a county government, public elected position. The right thing for her to do is resign and find a job where she doesn't have to violate her religious beliefs. Marriage is no longer an act solely conducted in a church by a ordained holy person of God. The government has decide to make a revenue out of it and laws now allow same sex marriages. This is where the ruling of same sex marriages were not in favor of her religious beliefs and to continue working for the county she is obligated to issue those licenses to authorized applicants. This country is a large melting pot of many beliefs. People who have faith in God are not the majority of people in America any more winning the majority of federal, state, county, local votes and getting laws passed.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Sep 4 at 2015 10:16 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 10:16:41 -0400

Never underestimate the human ability to not learn from history...

Response by 1SG Cameron M. Wesson made Sep 4 at 2015 10:27 AM

1SG Cameron M. Wesson — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 10:27:05 -0400

As an employee of a Country, State, County, City, town.... you get the idea... your duty is to the citizens of the community... not just the ones you agree with.. but all citizens. If she is unable to this becuase of her "beliefs" then I would first determine if there was a job for her that could "accomodate" her challenge. If there was none, I'd counsel her and offer her the options... execute or resign.

A few years ago their was a soldier who refused to wear a "UN Beret". Using brevity... he stated he did not enlist in the UN Army but in the US Army... things did not go well for him... as he forgot that he "Swore and Oath" to obey all orders... his unit was supporting an approved mission to support the UN efforts... he was chaptered.

Personally, "Much Ado about Nothing".... to quote Shakespeare

Response by SFC Mario Rodriquez made Sep 4 at 2015 11:52 AM

SFC Mario Rodriquez — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 11:52:49 -0400

Jesus never taught civil disobedience. "Render unto Cesar what is Cesar's....." This one passage exemplifies his lesson that we may not agree with civil authority, but we should follow it. That is a lesson in leadership and integrity. Do you disagree with any of GOD's laws? If so, you still must follow them to be obedient to HIS word. Remember we are talking about man's world versus GOD's world. She is right to disagree with the law, but she should remove herself from that position if it compromises her version of her faith.

Response by SPC Thomas Moosey made Sep 4 at 2015 1:21 PM

SPC Thomas Moosey — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:21:20 -0400

I support her, but I also feel that she should resign.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 4 at 2015 1:57 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:57:09 -0400

Any of you ever get a order that you did not agree with?

Did you then refuse to obey it because of (you insert the reason) Wait, i suspect you did obey it.

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Sep 4 at 2015 3:50 PM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 15:50:07 -0400

I don't know if I had commented. She in an elected government official. Who took an oath. She should have resigned. But Obama, Jerry Brown, Hillary Clinton has refused to obey Federal laws. But they get promoted and ordinary people go to jail.

Response by SPC George Rudenko made Sep 4 at 2015 5:31 PM

SPC George Rudenko — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 17:31:59 -0400

3 divorces and 2-4 kids out of wedlock, sure why not tout christian values

Response by SGT Francis Wright made Sep 4 at 2015 6:36 PM

SGT Francis Wright — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 18:36:15 -0400

She's not issuing anything right now. Inmates have no authority.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Sep 4 at 2015 9:59 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Fri, 04 Sep 2015 21:59:40 -0400

She just got sent to jail on contempt of court charges.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Sep 5 at 2015 12:17 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 00:17:28 -0400

Mr. President nails it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWc

The West Wing- Bible Lesson

The President speaking about his views of the Bible on the hit TV show "The West Wing"

Response by MAJ Keira Brennan made Sep 5 at 2015 5:47 AM

MAJ Keira Brennan — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 05:47:44 -0400

She is using her position as a government office to force her religion on others.
HEY KIM - ORANGE IS THE NEW BLACK!

Response by Capt Jeff S. made Sep 5 at 2015 7:59 AM

Capt Jeff S. — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 07:59:02 -0400

They could have driven 20 miles to another county and got their license.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Sep 5 at 2015 12:19 PM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 12:19:25 -0400

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SAME_SEX_MARRIAGE_JUDGE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-09-05-03-09-33

It seems a judge in Oregon is also refusing

Response by SGT Steve Burczyk made Sep 5 at 2015 5:15 PM

SGT Steve Burczyk — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 17:15:35 -0400

My opinion is you should not bring your religion to work with you. I respect everyone's decision of whatever religion that is your preference for your particular personal reasons. I never tried to influence or change any service members while I was on active duty, religion should be left at home and not brought to the work place.

Response by SGT(P) Crystal Marie France made Sep 5 at 2015 7:06 PM

SGT(P) Crystal Marie France — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 19:06:41 -0400

Fire her! End.

Response by SGT Apollo Sharpe made Sep 5 at 2015 7:46 PM

SGT Apollo Sharpe — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 19:46:15 -0400

There's not a single church that performs a marriage, within this whole country. What churches perform are weddings. Weddings are religious ceremonies. Marriages are legal joinings. For reference, you still have to get a marriage certificate...which is a legal document, not a church document.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 6 at 2015 12:09 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 06 Sep 2015 00:09:22 -0400

She is standing up for her beliefs. Why jail her for that? This is stuff you hear about in other countries but not in America. Im scared for the fact that we are becoming like one of these countries

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 6 at 2015 11:16 AM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 06 Sep 2015 11:16:33 -0400

There are some in the LGBT community that are supporting her religious beliefs. It's ironic that people in that community can still interpret the Constitution as it's written and don't want it changed to fit their feelings. Yet, some in the military who have swore an oath to defend it, interpret it incorrectly.

"Once again, the gay community feels the need to be sore winners," he continued. "Is it so difficult to allow this women her religion? Or must we destroy her in order for her to betray her faith. No matter how we judge, it's truth. The rights we have all fought for, mean nothing, if we deny her hers."

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/madonnas-brother-defends-jailed-clerk-820753

Madonna's Brother Defends Jailed Clerk Who Refused Marriage Licenses for Gay Couples

Madonna's brother, ChristopherCiccone, is speaking out in defense of the county clerk in Kentucky who was recently jailed after refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Response by SSG Paul Ellis made Sep 6 at 2015 12:36 PM

SSG Paul Ellis — Sun, 06 Sep 2015 12:36:02 -0400

What violent remarks?

People should just stick to the facts. The clerk's past with her ex-husbands doesn't matter and her feelings about same-sex marriage don't matter. Those factors have no bearing on why she is in jail. What matters is that she is an elected official who refuses to do her job. That's why she's in jail. (I wish we could do that to our elected officials in DC - on both sides of the aisle.)

It doesn't matter what job you do, but when you sign up for it, you sign up for the job requirements. I didn't want to go to Iraq, but it fell under my job requirements so I went and did as good a job as I could. I'm sure that before the Supreme Court ruled same sex marriage constitutional, there were some clerks who wanted to issue gays marriage licenses, but legally couldn't. Just like they couldn't before now that same sex marriage is legal, she HAS to...by law.

The clerk can have all the religious reason she wants to disagree with same sex marriage. She has a right to her opinion. But when that opinion causes her to refuse to meet the conditions of her employment, she doesn't need to do that job anymore. They can't just fire her unfortunately. The people of Kentucky will have to wait for the legislature to get off their butts and impeach her. Luckily for those waiting to get married, her deputy clerks have been issuing marriage licenses.

And to all those saying she represents them as county clerk, remember she is also supposed to represent the gays in the county as well. Simply: Leave religion at home, just do your job.

Response by PO3 Sherry Thornburg made Sep 8 at 2015 1:13 AM

PO3 Sherry Thornburg — Tue, 08 Sep 2015 01:13:43 -0400

I think she is working under the premise of religious freedom, but some others are interpreting this as questioning whether Supreme Court's decisions should just uphold or strike down a law or whether decisions can change and create new laws.

As she is an elected official, Kentucky can't just fire her and get a new County Clerk. I'm sitting on the fence watching this develop. Some Constitutional lawyer might decide to pick up this hot potato.

Response by SPC George Rudenko made Sep 8 at 2015 3:31 AM

SPC George Rudenko — Tue, 08 Sep 2015 03:31:32 -0400

for someone who mothered at least 2 children from extra marital relationships..... hope she likes prison.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 8 at 2015 4:17 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 08 Sep 2015 16:17:30 -0400

I agree with the clerk! The lord thy God gave the laws to the prophets such as 1 Timothy 2:11-15 & Deuteronomy 22:5 also Hebrews 13:4 and 27 other verses that are in the Bible. The clerk has her God giving rights and then her Constitutional rights not to serve them due to her religious beliefs. I'm but this same sex thing is a destructive nature of the human race and to the basic family principles that God laid out for mankind. You may not agree with me but I was raised as a Christian. And since I have followed the Bible, my life has been good.

Response by SPC Andrew Griffin made Sep 8 at 2015 4:58 PM

SPC Andrew Griffin — Tue, 08 Sep 2015 16:58:01 -0400

She should have followed the Law! By refusing to issue the same-sex marriage licenses only presents Bias and Prejudice!

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 9 at 2015 10:07 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 10:07:57 -0400

This whole Kim Davis thing is a media sh*t show.........just like everything on the news that is blasted at us over and over and over and over and....you get the idea.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made Sep 9 at 2015 10:12 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 10:12:16 -0400

Nope.
Mike Huckabee is already holding hands with her on the stage.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Sep 9 at 2015 10:19 AM

SSG Warren Swan — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 10:19:50 -0400

I will not use my religion against the government; I will not allow the government to inflict it's chosen religion upon me. Said. No. One. With. Kim Davis, Cruz, or Huckabee. Ever.
I'm going to wait and see when the first troop uses the SAME excuse to get out of something and see where the religious right or left is at then. I don't think the UCMJ and the discharge process will be as kind. And I'm sure Cruz and Huckabee will be nowhere to be found.

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Sep 9 at 2015 10:23 AM

PO3 Steven Sherrill — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 10:23:25 -0400

I will stand by my position PFC Al Sethre that they should all be fired. Beyond that, I think we need to get rid of political parties, have several candidates on the ballot, and actually have choices when it comes to whom we elect. Choosing chicken or turkey is beyond old. I think that this lady is no different than a radical Muslim who wants to see their idea of morality pushed onto everyone. As far as alienating people, I don't think that either party gives a shit about the people. If they did, we not be seeing Hillary the liar, and Donald the bankrupter as the leading candidates for the respective parties. I am happy to see that both parties are alienating their supporters. I hope that it leads to at least an honest discussion about what makes someone qualified to sit in the big chair.

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Sep 9 at 2015 10:24 AM

PO3 Steven Sherrill — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 10:24:39 -0400

Response by SGT Francis Wright made Sep 9 at 2015 10:40 AM

SGT Francis Wright — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 10:40:09 -0400

I guess if being in contempt of court is a good idea. Because if she ends up in front of the Judge again, there will be a fine and more time.

Response by COL Ted Mc made Sep 9 at 2015 10:40 AM

COL Ted Mc — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 10:40:14 -0400

PFC Al Sethre - PFC; It appears that the issue has been resolved in that Ms. Davis is not going to issue any marriage licenses personally and she is also not going to prevent other people from exercising their "freedom of religion" by issuing marriage licenses.

The weight of the judicial authority (and not just American judicial authority) is REALLY against Ms. Davis' position.

Imagine if her position was that she would not issue marriage licenses to "mixed race" couples on the grounds that "The Bible" says not to.

Do you think that she would have the slightest bit of support from any rational person?

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Sep 9 at 2015 11:52 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 11:52:01 -0400

Oh my....

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Sep 9 at 2015 12:31 PM

SSG Gerhard S. — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 12:31:57 -0400

So, an elected official refuses to abide by the established law, and gets thrown in jail for continuing to not abide by the law. Personally I believe she should be fired, but I believe jail is over the top.

Here's an interesting question though. Are not the President, and the Attorney General required to faithfully execute the laws enacted by Congress, and signed into law? Since this IS the case, I wonder if those celebrating this clerk's imprisonment, were calling for, and would have celebrated a like punishment for Pres Obama, and AG Holder for failing to faithfully execute the DOMA (defense of marriage act) signed into law by Pres Clinton? You see, on 2011 Pres Obama's Justice department under AG Eric Holder unilaterally decided this law was unconstitutional, and refused to defend it in court. We're they both, then guilty of NOT faithfully executing the laws of the United States? Just curious.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 9 at 2015 1:44 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 13:44:55 -0400

Kentucky Religious Freedom Restoration Acts

Since Kentucky have a Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) Kim Davis could have petitioned for accommodation so she did not have to be forced to issue marriage certificates, which is a part of the job she was publicly elected for. Why didn't she? Did she want to go to jail?
The answer is simple, she wanted attention and she got it. She wanted to be a martyr, but it really doesn't work that way. She could have just given her employer the chance to accommodate her situation, and she would no longer be liable for breaking the law.

This makes her a clown.

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Sep 9 at 2015 11:07 PM

SSG Gerhard S. — Wed, 09 Sep 2015 23:07:53 -0400

Just asking..., should mayors of Sanctuary Cities also be thrown in jail?

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2015 9:50 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 17 Sep 2015 21:50:56 -0400

Though I haven't read this whole thread, let's take a look at some things:
1. It is against the law in the Commonwealth of Kentucky to issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple. Regardless of what the Supreme Court's opinion is. Unless and until the Legislature of the Commonwealth write legislation to be presented the Governor, that is the way it is.
2. The Supreme Court of the United States offers OPINIONS, they do NOT make laws. Just because they said same-sex marriage is legal, does NOT make it so. Many of the states have laws on the books prohibiting same-sex marriage, they all must go through the same process to change their laws.
3. SCOTUS misapplied the 14th Amendment's "Equal Protection" clause. https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2015/09/12/how-scotus-perverted-the-equal-protection-clause-of-sec-1-of-the-fourteenth-amendment/

4. And, since marriage is NOT mentioned anywhere in the Constitution of the United States, SCOTUS over-stepped its authority. Just my humble opinion, yours may vary.

How SCOTUS perverted the "equal protection" clause of Sec. 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

By Publius Huldah 1. Harvard Professor Raoul Berger’s meticulously documented book, Government by Judiciary: The Transformation of the Fourteenth Amendment, proves by means of thousands of quotes ...

Response by SPC Thomas Moosey made Sep 24 at 2015 5:43 PM

SPC Thomas Moosey — Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:43:55 -0400

What law did she break? Congress never passed a same-sex marriage law nor has Kentucky. The supreme court cannot make up laws. All the ruling said was that states could not ban them, now it is up to the states to re-write the laws. Until then there is no law supporting it.

Response by 1LT Aaron Barr made Sep 30 at 2015 3:08 PM

1LT Aaron Barr — Wed, 30 Sep 2015 15:08:32 -0400

Not a particularly big fan of gay marriage but she's in the wrong. She took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and the Courts have ruled on this issue. If it upsets her that much, she should resign her office.

Response by Sgt Nick Marshall made Dec 6 at 2015 7:26 PM

Sgt Nick Marshall — Sun, 06 Dec 2015 19:26:08 -0500

If she doesn't follow the law of the land, she should be removed by legal means. If we will not (and should not) allow Sharia Law, we cannot allow Christian Fundamentalism.