By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
Kentucky was faced with another case of drama and failure to perform statutory duties and the federal courts. The Casey County Clerk announced that he would refuse to issue marriage licenses to couples who’s marriage he objects to.
The clerk, in a bit of irony, is named Casey Davis.
Davis insists that he has a duty to himself to violate state law but oddly he feels the Commonwealth should pay for an attorney to represent him.
Kentucky governor Steve Beshear in July granted an audience with Mr. Davis and thereafter ordered him to issue licenses to all couples regardless of their gender or resign. Defiantly, the county clerk stated, “I’m going to trust the Lord with all my heart, my position remains.”
Governor Beshear issued the following statement:
“This morning, I advised Mr. Davis that I respect his right to his own personal beliefs regarding same-sex marriages,” the Governor’s statement reads. “However, when he was elected, he took a constitutional oath to uphold the United States Constitution. According to the United States Supreme Court, the Constitution now requires that governmental officials in Kentucky and elsewhere must recognize same-sex marriages as valid and allow them to take place. One of Mr. Davis’ duties as county court clerk is to issue marriage licenses, and the Supreme Court now says that the United States Constitution requires those marriage licenses to be issued regardless of gender. Mr. Davis’ own county attorney has advised him that his oath requires him to do so.”
Here is a video of Mr. Davis speaking before supporters:
By Darren Smith
Source:
The New Civil Rights Movement
MSNBC Photo Credit
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
Wasn’t Noah fathering children at the age of 790?
Seriously, as an a scientist, then you surely be aware of animal studies that have shown homosexual behaviors. Bonobos are one of our primate relatives that exhibit a lot of these behaviors.
Frankly, having read your opinions on this subject, it seems to me that you have a problem, and when I saw the Yahoo News story about the prevalence of psychological problems among homophobic people, I thought of you straight away (no pun intended).
It appears that, having lost the battle against dungarees and rock and roll, and “hedonism” in general, you are frantic over the idea of equality for gays. Just out of curiosity, how much money do claim to given Kim Davis for her legal bills?
Karen S,
Let’s be clear.
The sex drive exists for procreation which marriage was established to facilitate.
There is NO purpose for mankind other than procreation.
Without procreation mankind ceases to exist.
Without procreation as mankind’s purpose, there is no mankind.
Homosexuality equals the end of mankind’s existence.
Homosexuality represents nothing, literally. Homosexuality is suicide of the species.
Homosexual marriage is impossible since homosexual activity cannot result in procreation.
Homosexual marriage proponents have no standing in any court.
The Constitution would be an irrational and invalid document if it provided for any perversion of nature or
suicide of the species.
The Constitution does not establish or otherwise provide for homosexuality, homosexual marriage
or suicide of the species.
Civil rights do not exist to establish different and superior homosexual rights – not superiority of perversion.
The SCOTUS did not represent or uphold the Constitution.
The SCOTUS, by approving homosexual marriage, is guilty of precisely the same “overreach” that
Prof. Turley is suing the executive branch for.
The executive branch does not have the “power of the purse” and it cannot spend money.
The judicial branch does not have the “power of procreation” or the “power of extinction.” It may not legislate
or modify the Constitution by imposing homosexual marriage.
The Constitution must be read, not interpreted.
The judicial branch has absolutely no power to modify or alter the Preamble, Constitution of Bill of Rights
through “interpretation” that changes the meaning of the words of the writers.
The important interpretation that must occur in America is the interpretation of the acts of the Supreme Court
as subversion and treason and a direct assault on the very constitutional republic itself, as the SCOTUS
clearly supports the principles of communism.
The Supreme Court has not only misinterpreted and misrepresented the Preamble, Constitution and Bill of
Rights domestically, here in America, but overseas, disparaging the founding documents on foreign soil.
No greater treason exists.
The Supreme Court must be severely term limited, impeached and convicted for subversive “high Crimes
and Misdemeanors.”
Bent people got no reason.
Bent people got no reason.
Bent people got no reason to live.
They go little bitty eyes.
Little bitty feet.
Little bitty voices going peep peep peep.
Dont want no bent people.
Dont want no bent people.
Dont want no bent people round here.
(From Randy Newman’s song: Short People– with some changes)
Dear David,
I can’t say that I’m sorry that you’re gay. But I am disgusted that you are turning your own denial into such pathetically obvious hate. I really do kinda get it. You can’t help how you’re made no matter how hard you’ve tried. But please at least try to accept it instead of trying these ridiculous mental gyrations to avoid admitting the truth to your own self. Hurting others won’t help you. You have to come to terms with this on your own, and neither hate nor phonied up religion is going to help.
No confident heterosexual man has a problem with homosexual guys (hey, more girls for us, right?), but your pitifully obvious denial and self hatred does nobody any good- including and especially yourself.
Peace.
John smith
“Secession is only a right if the state wins it in war.”
__________
Lincoln suspended the Constitution, including the right to secession, and started a war.
I rest my case.
America has been lawless since Lincoln’s despotic “Reign of Terror.”
The singular American failure has been the judicial branch.
The Supreme Court and the judicial branch have systematically and incrementally disarticulated the
Preamble, Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Subversion and treason is one of the “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” for which impeachment is the
constitutional remedy and Congressional duty.
Some fertility cult? Infertile, non reproducing couples would have no right to marry in Davidm’s kingdom?
Davidm said…
“We allow some latitude because often we do not know for sure about fertility. Men 100 years old have produced children. However, I would favor laws restricting such to marry before I would support Same Sex Unions being treated as marriage.”
————————–
Issac said…
“Who is ‘We’? Who gets to decide these latitudes?”
************************
I too am curious who this “we” is. The royal “we”? Plans for the future of mankind?
davidm:
“From a biological perspective, the sex drive is meant purely for reproductive purposes. It is a driving force that brings the male and female together for the purpose of procreation. Any purpose other than that is a deviation and a mistake.”
I just don’t understand this. Are you saying that after they’re done having children, a married couple should never have sex again, because it is no longer for the purpose of procreation? What about merely enjoying the act and getting closer to your spouse? Our land and resources are finite. If we all had as many children as we are able to biologically have before our bodies give out, then at this point we would be over populated within a generation. In nature, those cycles of over population cause famines and massive die offs.
The Song of Solomon shows great joy in the bodies of the beloved. It certainly did not make God’s creation of sex into a purely reproductive only activity. God made sex joyful and pleasurable, a bonding act within a marriage.
And I do not agree that the acceptance of homosexuality encourages more people to try it. As you may know, I’ve ridden horses since I was a child. For some reason, lesbians are extremely common in English riding, from jumping to dressage. I’ve met more lesbians riding than anywhere else. One of my best dressage instructors was a lesbian, very talented. Although such exposure made me quite relaxed about homosexuality, I never found myself suddenly wanting to experiment. I am attracted to men, and no masculine quality that arouses me can be found in women. When a lesbian would ask me out, I would take it as the compliment that it was and politely decline, as I would a man.
On a side note, it is interesting that I never met a gay man in my type of riding. Park and Saddle Seat, which I avoided like the plague because I vehemently opposed that style of riding, was completely full of gay men. They would make the most beautiful displays at shows, even bringing fountains and fake grass, and putting luxury car hood ornaments on their golf carts. None of the lesbians or straight riders ever put in that much effort at beautifying the stalls at jumping or dressage events.
Karen S wrote: “Are you saying that after they’re done having children, a married couple should never have sex again, because it is no longer for the purpose of procreation? What about merely enjoying the act and getting closer to your spouse?”
I was saying that from a BIOLOGICAL perspective, the sex drive is about reproduction. I am speaking as a scientist, from a scientific perspective. If there are religious reasons for sex without the goal of reproduction, I don’t know what they are. If there are bonding issues involved, that might be a valid argument. But the bonding purpose only makes sense if you are talking about coitus. It does not make sense to me that sodomy or oral sex would be involved. I don’t do those things in my marriage. I don’t think we should police marriages about those things, but I’m being open about the fact that I don’t see those forms of sexual relations as having anything to do with marriage. It seems to me that homosexuals are trying to legitimize those forms of sexual expression (some might say sexual perversion) by hijacking the institution of marriage.
Karen S wrote: “And I do not agree that the acceptance of homosexuality encourages more people to try it.”
Statistically, people trying homosexual relations is on the rise. Girls reporting to be lesbianism or bisexual especially has increased dramatically in correlation with the changes in laws legalizing and embracing homosexuality. I have shared links on this blog about these statistics in the past. You could also watch the Jerry Springer Show sometime to get a barometer of our culture indicating how many people are now trying it. 🙂
davidm2575 writes: “Statistically, people trying homosexual relations is on the rise. Girls reporting to be lesbianism or bisexual especially has increased dramatically in correlation with the changes in laws legalizing and embracing homosexuality. I have shared links on this blog about these statistics in the past. You could also watch the Jerry Springer Show sometime to get a barometer of our culture indicating how many people are now trying it. :)”
David, what business is it of yours? You cannot be worried about keeping up birth rates in this country, so what is it? I can’t help but conclude you’re hiding something. Quit worrying about what others say and think. Get on out there and find yourself, man. Sheesh.
davidm:
I disagree with you that procreation is essential to marriage. A straight couple would have to undergo a fertility test to determine whether they should marry or go into a domestic partnership. You seem to say that the childless couple is “less” than the one with a family. Even with no diagnosable fertility issues, only God knows if a couple will conceive naturally. In addition, some couples want to marry their soul mate and never have children. The book, “The Longest Ride” portrayed a man who became infertile after catching the mumps in the army during WWII. It was very unlikely that he could father any children, but the love of his life ultimately chose him over walking away and finding someone else to marry and have children with. One of my own ancestors lost 4 children in 7 days due to illness and went out of her mind with grief for a long time. It almost ended their marriage. Eventually, they had more children, who survived. But it would have been understandable if her heart was too broken to try to have any more.
I’ve known so many people who went through the heartbreak of fertility problems. Their love and commitment to each other was not lessened, nor was the validity of their marital bond, because they struggled to have children. I have also known people who knew great joy in marrying in their golden years. Others married and blended their existing families without having any more children.
Couples having trouble conceiving have enough stress and heartache on their plate without being considered “less” of a married couple.
Karen S wrote: “I disagree with you that procreation is essential to marriage. A straight couple would have to undergo a fertility test to determine whether they should marry or go into a domestic partnership.”
No, we do not do fertility tests because procreation is not the sole foundation for marriage. Gender diversity and the completion of a person with male and female coming together is part of the equation. However, my point was that procreation was essential for the development of the institution of marriage. If it were not for the creation of children, the creation of a family, and the duties and obligations that go along with that, marriage would never have been instituted. All you would have had is cohabitation with much less duties and obligations involved and no family unit. Nobody would have held that you had to go to law to get a divorce. It would have been a private matter between the parties, and one party could just walk away.
Davidm
“We allow some latitude because often we do not know for sure about fertility. Men 100 years old have produced children. However, I would favor laws restricting such to marry before I would support Same Sex Unions being treated as marriage.”
Who is ‘We’? Who gets to decide these latitudes? It appears that you have one position and that is the one that is similar to those who decide whether or not this combination of races and genes gets to procreate, whether or not this race or that religion gets the protection of the state, whether or not blond haired-blue eyed people are the preferred sort. In the end David, you come across as nothing more than that which the entire world has fought against, and decided it does not want.
However, there are in this country, protected by the Constitution and the freedom of speech, places for your type; this blog for instance.
davidm
What has legalizing SSM done to your marriage?
Homophobic People Often Have Psychological Issues
http://www.livescience.com/52146-homophobia-personality-traits.html
“Those who engage in same sex relations bruise their inner conscience…”
Said the homophobe.
Now, what exactly is davidm drawing from to make such a statement? Personal experiences?
“The wrangling of words to make gay marriage NOT a civil rights issue is pure sophistry. ”
… fixed it for ya davidm.
Oh, I wondered when a technophile would wander in. You know what else is just around the corner according to Elon Musk, Stephen Hawkings? Autonomous AI directed killer robots.
I am pretty sure they won’t care about people being gay or not. Or religion.
That will be the ultimate Frankenstein golem of capitalism, wont it? Only real, not metaphorical.
Give it some time, folks, and we will be slaves to machines, if they decide to keep us around at all.
The era of money must die, so that man can live again.
Well, davidm, I’m sure you will be delighted to know that within a couple of years, gay couples will be able to have their own babies.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/02/23/babies-with-two-biological-same-sex-parents-could-become-a-reality-in-just-two-years/
I’m sure this will lay the whole gays-ruining-the-real-purpose-of-marriage thing for you, especially after you realize that all the research on role division in marriages is hogwash.
Sneaky ways of undermining Unionism is another form of capitalism attacking communitarian forms of resistance. Again they use the shibboleth “freedom.” They do this to destroy local resistance to their “Freedom” of capital. One “freedom” against another, and all you advocates of “Freedom’ never seem to notice what a useless, facile notion that has become.
Back to the attack on Unionism. Roosevelt, FDR, was the savior to his class, who moderated its greed for a time, allowing the American experiment to continue with a modicum of stability as the US was busy conquering Europe in WWII. But then once Europe was thoroughly subjugated, and Vietname was over, the situation was safe enough to begin offshoring.
That was great for capitalism, helped destroy the power of unions to strike.
But it wasn’t enough, they had to piecemeal “right to work” nonsense in states where it would have the most devastating effect.
Today, union stiffs are supporting Trump, who knows there is a forgotten vein of resistance to globalism latent in the working class, and is willing to tap it with glee. Just like he taps our resentment towards scab labor from illegal immigrants.
The capitalist pigs of today, are oftentimes related to the capitalist pigs of previous generations, like the Bush family.
Here’s how Greedy and Evil Yankee capitalists were before the Civil War.
The fifth amendment says the Federal regime can’t seize property without due process and “just compensation.”
If the feds were going to nationalize slaves with a countrywide manumission, all they had to do was pay the southern slaveholders “just compensation” and the war would have been unnecessary.
THAT was NEVER offered. Never on the table. Going backward, economists have determined that the Civil war cost taxpayers MORE than a national slave manumission would have.
Not to mention all the dead Yankees.
The capitalist pigs never cared. They knew there was abundant cannon fodder to overwhelm the south. Just bring in some more immigrants, yes? The southern landowners look like pikers compared to them when it comes to the human suffering they caused.
Secession is only a right if the state wins it in war.
The CSA lost.
Catalan or Scottish independence are meaningless without a sovereign currency. Just like Greek elections are meaningless now too.
Real sovereign states have 2 things for sure. 1- a military that defends its borders. and 2- its own controlled currency.
NO EU state that is in the Eurozone currency is truly sovereign. Germany isn’t either,. None of them are, NATO is an American occupation force that keeps them doing what that global plutocracy wants.
Maxi’s cavalier remarks show the compempt that the pro gay LBGT lobby has for poor white Christians in flyover. Just a bunch of rubes, huh?
You can make fun of them, but I love the Amish. I know them well. They’re wiser than most Bible thumpers by far. You may not know but they are pacifists. Who are critical towards the effect of technology on family. They’re person for person some of the wisest folks we got out here.
They are exactly the model of where the overworked, overtaxed, hated and disrespected religious folks in middle-American red states need to go. They need to abjure the realm and let this rot collapse. And mind their own farms. Just let the megacities get vaporized in the next war and the Amish won’t even notice the lights went out.