Ky. County clerk makes a stand against feds

[Contumacious]

All the sudden we accept SCOTUS as Gospel now?

Do homosexuals have the right to life, liberty, property and to pursue happiness?

Do their right to get marry infringe on any of your rights?

Assuming that the 14A is valid, why doesn't it apply to homosexuals?

.

 

[euphemia]

For whatever reason, they choose to come to Rowan county and they are simply asking the clerk do her job.

Which she is doing. The Kentucky Constitution specifically defines marriage as one man and one woman.

 

[euphemia]

Like a clerk/administrator responsible for dolling out SS cheques saying something like "it is against my religion to give money back to xxxx"
Because I don't ever remember seeing means testing in the bible. And if somehow means testing is prescribed in the bible, then just imagine I said "use criteria in the religious text other than means testing?"

Davis does not work for the federal government. She was elected by the voters of Rowan county, in Kentucky, and they are governed by the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

 

[erowe1]

Do homosexuals have the right to life, liberty, property and to pursue happiness?

Yes. But there is no case to be made here that Kim Davis has in any way infringed on those rights. She has harmed no one. She has taken nothing away from anyone. She has done nothing to impede anyone's ability to exercise any liberties they have. If she has committed any crime (which I would defy anyone to show that she has), then it is the kind of empty victimless crime for which no one should ever be jailed that libertarians consistently speak against as undeserving of the label "crime."

Also, please note that the question you ask here is entirely different than the matter of the Supreme Court's interpretation of the 14th Amendment you mentioned above. This question, about actual right and wrong, is much more important and relevant than the mere opinion of 9 individuals no different than any of the rest of us.

 

[Contumacious]

Yes. But there is no case to be made here that Kim Davis has in any way infringed on those rights. She has harmed no one. She has taken nothing away from anyone. She has done nothing to impede anyone's ability to exercise any liberties they have. If she has committed any crime (which I would defy anyone to show that she has), then it is the kind of empty victimless crime for which no one should ever be jailed that libertarians consistently speak against as undeserving of the label "crime."

Supremacy Clause




The Supremacy Clause is the provision in Article Six, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution that establishes the United States Constitution, federal statutes, and treaties as "the supreme law of the land." It provides that these are the highest form of law in the United States legal system, and mandates that all state judges must follow federal law when a conflict arises between federal law and either a state constitution or state law of any state.

 

[Sola_Fide]

Supremacy Clause




The Supremacy Clause is the provision in Article Six, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution that establishes the United States Constitution, federal statutes, and treaties as "the supreme law of the land." It provides that these are the highest form of law in the United States legal system, and mandates that all state judges must follow federal law when a conflict arises between federal law and either a state constitution or state law of any state.

Someone who has "don't tax me bro" and a Samuel Adams quote in his signature is appealing to the "supremacy clause".

I love to see all these "libertarians" losing their principles over homosexuals.

 

[specsaregood]

./

 

[Christian Liberty]

This is an argument that Ayn Rand made years ago. Basically, she said it was "moral" to seek out entitlements or to gain favors from government because we have already been stolen from. And people like John Robbins pointed out the absurdity of that argument. Theft is still wrong (and getting benefits from theft is still wrong). Theft isn't justified by stealing from someone else. Ayn Rand pretty much destroyed her own "freedom" philosophy with this "moral" right she created.

Not a fan of Rand, but let's push this to the extreme.

Say we lived in a full blown communistic state. Taxes are at 100% and all business is run by the State. In that situation I'd say you should stay away from being a part in the enforcement class and try to subvert the State wherever you can. But is it wrong to work, say, as a government garbage collector? Yeah, its stolen money but what realistic choice do you have?

I'd be curious to read the Robbins article you're bringing up. I'm not 100% on this issue.

 

[euphemia]

But that is not the same as an elected official upholding the law as she swore an oath to do. The Constitution covers the judge, but does not cover anything having to do with what Kim Davis does.

People consider the 10th amendment to be pretty important, too. Citizens of Rowan county, Kentucky elected Davis to do what she does. She acted within the full scope of her authority. It will be up to the citizens of Rowan county to do something about it if they choose to do anything.

The US Constitution does not define marriage. The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Kentucky does. A judge's responsibility is to interpret the law. It is written nowhere in the US Constitution that people have a right to marry at all, much less that people are forced to authorize marriage against the laws of their state/commonwealth

 

[Christian Liberty]

Someone who has "don't tax me bro" and a Samuel Adams quote in his signature is appealing to the "supremacy clause".

I love to see all these "libertarians" losing their principles over homosexuals.

I remember this guy defending a disgusting act of police brutality so I'm not surprised.

I'll admit I'm not a libertarian but yeah... the hypocrisy is strong.

 

[Contumacious]

Someone who has "don't tax me bro" and a Samuel Adams quote in his signature is appealing to the "supremacy clause".

I love to see all these "libertarians" losing their principles over homosexuals.

Are homosexuals individuals?

Do they have a right to pursue happiness?

Is Ms Davis a state actor within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. 1983?

Do the state of Ky allow same sex unions?

Yes to all you said?

Contumacious rests.

 

[euphemia]

Do the state of Ky allow same sex unions?

No. The citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky overwhelmingly voted to amend their constitution to narrowly define marriage. That definition defines marriage as one man and one woman. It passed with 75% of the vote, so go figure.

 

[Contumacious]

In that case, we better start clamoring for all the cops and judges in CO to start enforcing the law, doing their job and closing the retail marijuana businesses down and arresting their customers. who is with me!?

But they re enforcing the law.


Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution


The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


Does the Constitution authorizes Congress to infringe on WE THE PEOPLE's right to self medicate?


No, you said.

The Ninth Applies.


.

 

[erowe1]

Supremacy Clause




The Supremacy Clause is the provision in Article Six, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution that establishes the United States Constitution, federal statutes, and treaties as "the supreme law of the land." It provides that these are the highest form of law in the United States legal system, and mandates that all state judges must follow federal law when a conflict arises between federal law and either a state constitution or state law of any state.

Let's imagine for the sake of argument that the Constitution has some legitimate right to declare itself the law of the land.

And let's further suppose for the sake of argument that 14th Amendment does entail the obligation of court clerks like Kim Davis to issue same-sex marriage licenses.

Has Congress passed any legislation codifying that? If so, can you please cite that legislation?

Again, the final clause of the 14th Amendment is as follows:

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

 

[thoughtomator]

No. The citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky overwhelmingly voted to amend their constitution to narrowly define marriage. That definition defines marriage as one man and one woman. It passed with 75% of the vote, so go figure.

And yet they elected a Democrat as Attorney General, twice, knowing that no Democrat would protect the state's legal rights in opposition to his own party's platform.

Idiocracy at work.

 

[Contumacious]

No. The citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky overwhelmingly voted to amend their constitution to narrowly define marriage. That definition defines marriage as one man and one woman. It passed with 75% of the vote, so go figure.

Kentucky Governor to Christian clerks: Perform gay ‘marriages’ or lose your jobs

 

[erowe1]

Do the state of Ky allow same sex unions?

According to its own laws, no.

As of now, Congress has also not passed any legislation that would compel the state of Kentucky to do this either.

All we have is the opinion of the Supreme Court, which has not yet been followed by any actual legislation passed by either of these relevant bodies.

 

[erowe1]

Kentucky Governor to Christian clerks: Perform gay ‘marriages’ or lose your jobs

He is violating the Constitution. He should do the right thing and pursue the passage of legislation that deals with this issue.

 

[Contumacious]

No. The citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky overwhelmingly voted to amend their constitution to narrowly define marriage. That definition defines marriage as one man and one woman. It passed with 75% of the vote, so go figure.

Hitler was a duly elected Fuhrer.

Did he have the right to incinerate/gas Jews?


Are our rights subject to majority rule?


Inquiring minds want to know.


.

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

And yet they elected a Democrat as Attorney General, twice, knowing that no Democrat would protect the state's legal rights in opposition to his own party's platform.

Idiocracy at work.

The Democrats didn't support gay marriage in their platform in the 2011 elections.