This is What Theocracy Looks Like

From the YouTube description (emphasis mine):

“Kim Davis will continue to defy court order Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis said she will continue to defy the Supreme Court order and will not authorize marriage licenses. Kim Davis: Same-sex marriage licenses will be issued without my name on them. kim Davis says she will take no action against deputy clerks who issue licenses, but says the forms will not be under her name of authority In a statement outside the Rowan County Courthouse, Davis told a crowd of supporters, protesters and media that she wants to continue to serve and faces an “impossible choice … her conscience or her freedom.” Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis is expected to return to work Monday amid speculation that she might risk more jail time to stop a deputy clerk in her office from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Davis took several days off to spend with family following her high-profile release from the Carter County Detention Center last week. She has remained unclear about her intentions when she returns to face her office staff, releasing only a statement saying that “I love God, love people, and love my work.”

“I hope we will continue to respect these values, and that America remains a place where all three can live in harmony,” she said.”

So those marriages will not be legal, because they will not be authorized as required by Kentucky law. If this is not the very example of a theocracy in action, I’m not sure what would be.

There’s also Santorum on her side (eww, gross!) advising her to break the law:

This entry was posted in Homophobia, marriage equality, Rick 'Frothy' Santorum (Ew! Gross!), Theocrats, We Don't Serve Your Kind. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to This is What Theocracy Looks Like

  1. roket says:

    Since she refuses to quit her job because of her beliefs, then it boils down to greed, therefore, we MUST accommodate her greed.


  2. Yeah, she (or Staver, anyway) is navigating now to get the State Legislature to authorize removal of any Clerk’s name from the license if they ‘object’ because they don’t want to give God a sad.

    That would be something they could claim to be a “victory”, ‘cos the theocratic Clerks can then keep their $80K sinecures and continue not to do their jobs.

    The licenses issued to gay couples will be materially different from those issued to straight couples, and therefore immediately recognizable and, not coincidentally, vulnerable to having their validity questioned. The ones being issued to gay couples now have “pursuant to a Court Order” written on them, just as one example.

    The judge should recognize this ploy for what it is and order her back into the courtroom, but I’m betting he won’t.
    It’s going to take more lawsuits.
    This will drag on for a long time.


  3. HarpoSnarx says:

    I don’t know who I’m more sick of: T-Rump or this Confederate clerk.


  4. Sirius Lunacy says:

    Let’s see, the God she claims to believe so much in that she is willing to go to jail for those beliefs has laid down Ten Commandments for His followers. The are not the Ten Suggestions or the Ten Recommendations, but ten things He has commanded of His followers. They really aren’t even that difficult to follow, they do not require any great sacrifice. Thou shalt not let the ‘mos marry is not one of them. Thou shalt not commit adultery is. Making other people miserable as a form of atonement for your own shortcomings shows a complete lack of understanding of everything Jesus stood for.


  5. Big Bad Bald Bastard says:

    This is a college town. The students need to vote in this community and bounce her ass. Normal people have to get involved and stay involved, let the freaks know their reign of terror is over, then end it.


  6. Osirisopto says:

    It seems her commitment to her sincerely held beliefs is limited to inflicting pain upon other people.

    She’s willing to talk the talk.


  7. Jim Heim says:

    I’m not sure where this assertion got its legs, but Kentucky law is clear: ‘According to statute 61.035, “Any duty enjoined by law or by the Rules of Civil Procedure upon a ministerial officer, and any act permitted to be done by him, may be performed by his lawful deputy.”’

    Her deputy’s marriage licenses will be perfectly legal,.


    • tengrain says:

      Well, actually, if you read Statute 402.220, it requires the signature of the county clerk. If Davis does not allow her signature to be used, then the letter of the law is not fulfilled.

      This is why Davis’ accomodation would require a special session of the legislature to resolve.




      • Jim Heim says:

        Is this the law you were thinking of?

        ‘402.080 Marriage license required — Who may issue

        ‘No marriage shall be solemnized without a license therefor. The license shall be issued by the clerk of the county in which the female resides at the time, unless the female is eighteen (18) years of age or over or a widow, and the license is issued on her application in person or by writing signed by her, in which case it may be issued by any county clerk.’

        Since it applies only to the female applicant, I see a possible Supreme Court decision conflict.


      • tengrain says:

        Jim – as the Supreme Court already addressed the issue of gender, that aspect is taken care of; it doesn’t need to go back for review. The issue it does address is about being under the age of consent for marriage, which might be a really good question for a court somewhere to address.

        Thanks for the research,



  8. Randall says:

    If there were any courage to her convictions, she’d quit her job.
    I believe she’s finding it pretty easy to play the martyr as long as those checks keep coming in.


  9. Paul Avery says:

    Hell, I’d spend a month in jail, if I could come out a wingnut icon with a bright future of hefty speaking fee and a book deal.


Comments are closed.