Posted on Jul 23, 2017
State of Kentucky must pay nearly $225,000 in legal fees for Kim Davis case
3.98K
94
59
9
9
0
Kim Davis just cost Kentucky almost a quarter of a million dollars, merely because she was unable to do her job.
State of Kentucky must pay nearly $225,000 in legal fees for Kim Davis case
Posted from kentucky.com
Same Sex Marriage
Law
LGBTQ+
Religion
Christianity
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 14
9
9
0
She was an agent of the State, so I'm not persuaded that her personal views should foreclose her obligation to issue marriage licenses. The fact that her name would be on the license does not mean she endorses gay marriage, nor would any reasonable person draw that conclusion. When I lived in Las Vegas, the County Commission was also the County Liquor Licensing Board. If I ran for office, I would be expected to act in that capacity, regardless of whatever personal views I may have on drinking. In some counties, the Sheriff issues concealed carry permits. If I live in a 'shall issue' State, the Sheriff can't deny me a CCW just because he or she may be against non-LEOs carrying.
If I cannot in good conscience fulfill the lawful duties of my office, then the ethical thing to do is resign--not pick and choose which laws I will obey. This is not how you engage in civil disobedience.
If I cannot in good conscience fulfill the lawful duties of my office, then the ethical thing to do is resign--not pick and choose which laws I will obey. This is not how you engage in civil disobedience.
(9)
(0)
Maj John Bell
Capt Gregory Prickett - Then it is my non-lawyer opinion that the state should be on the hook for every penny awarded those couples that were denied marriage licenses at that county office.
(1)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Maj John Bell - that was the judge's opinion too. He had a choice of finding the county liable or finding the state liable. He found the state liable, and mentioned the governor's refusal to act as part of his reason.
(2)
(0)
Maj John Bell
Capt Gregory Prickett - Sort of related question. As far as the government is concerned, isn't "marriage" essentially legal short hand that certain rights and responsibilities are now invested in party A and Party B to the marriage agreement? Essentially resolving a lot of things like who is now legal next of kin (no longer Mom, Dad, or siblings, etc.)?
My interpretation of the same sex marriage issue was that the state was denying access to that short hand, but the same thing could have been done through a legal document. Granted the document would have probably been huge because certain things are essentially established precedent in the "state of marriage."
My interpretation of the same sex marriage issue was that the state was denying access to that short hand, but the same thing could have been done through a legal document. Granted the document would have probably been huge because certain things are essentially established precedent in the "state of marriage."
(0)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Maj John Bell - some of the legal issues could be taken care of, but not all of them. In any event, it is a moot point, same sex couples have a right to be married.
(2)
(0)
6
6
0
If she didn't feel comfortable doing part of her JOB she should have resigned or she should have been fired for not doing her JOB. This wasn't a private citizen taking wedding pictures. She was acting as an agent of the state and her personal beliefs don't matter. She has to fufil the law or resign/be fired.
(6)
(0)
4
4
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google