On Kim Davis of Rowan County, Kentucky

Kim Davis, Clerk of Rowan County, Kentucky, who has defied the Supreme Court in denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Kim Davis, Clerk of Rowan County, Kentucky, who has defied the Supreme Court in denying marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

I was born and raised in Kentucky. And while I’m not from the foothills of Appalachia in eastern Kentucky, I’ve been there enough—even to Rowan County—to know what it’s like.

It’s poor. People live in trailer parks and small wood frame houses. Kids entertain themselves on Friday nights in the parking lot of the local shopping center. A night out is a trip to McDonald’s or maybe the local Chinese restaurant. People are in church not only on Sunday mornings, but Sunday nights and Wednesday evenings as well.

Although Rowan County is the home to Morehead State University, about sixty percent of its residents over the age of twenty-five have attained a high school diploma or less. Most people who have a decent job work for the county or the university. There’s more religion than education in these parts; more piety than opportunity.

It’s always surprising to see some little rural town that you know personally on the national news, but it’s not surprising the currents of the culture war around marriage equality clash in a place like this. It was bound to happen in some forgotten hamlet that hadn’t gotten the news the world had changed. Why else would we remember Dayton, Tennessee or Selma, Alabama?

The scenes on the news of opposing protesters outside the Rowan County courthouse brought out feelings of both affection and frustration in me. One side made up of holy rollers shouting in their Kentucky twang, “We love Jesus, yes we do! We love Jesus, how ‘bout you!” The other side made up of mountain lesbians singing, “I Will Survive.” I turned to my husband Fred and said with a sigh, “My people.”

And so, Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis, with no makeup or jewelry and long, straight untrimmed hair that marks her as a Pentecostal (Baptist women can wear bling and “tease it to Jesus”) finds herself in a moral bind between God and the oath she took to uphold the Constitution.

"We love Jesus, yes we do! We love Jesus, how bout you!" The scene in Morehead, Kentucky, outside the Rowan County courthouse.
“We love Jesus, yes we do! We love Jesus, how bout you!” The scene in Morehead, Kentucky, outside the Rowan County courthouse.

The video of David Ermold and David Moore confronting Davis in the County Clerk’s office was ugly. When Davis told the couple she was not issuing marriage licenses, they asked, “Under whose authority?” Davis, who had worn a bureaucrat’s mask up to that point, became defiant, “Under God’s authority.”

Ermold then resorted to the “I pay your salary” line. (I doubt he pays much of it.) He then mentioned that he had been with his partner for seventeen years, and just to twist the knife, added, “What’s the longest you’ve been married to somebody?”

Davis’ marriage history has become one of the points of debate in this conflict. She is on her second marriage to her current husband, and has been married to two other men.

In an interview on MSNBC, Seattle gay commentator Dan Savage remarked that her statement through her lawyer was particularly ironic: “I never imagined a day like this would come,” Davis said, “where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage.” See, Jesus condemned divorce but never condemned same-sex marriage.

Fred remarked that she reminded him of the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well in John 4, who was living with her sixth man after five husbands.

Of course the point of that story was how Jesus treated the woman as a human being, addressing her as an equal even though she was of a despised ethnicity, and a woman, and apparently, a serial monogamist.

It was kind of disgusting to see Savage, a nationally-syndicated sex columnist, denouncing Davis for having children out of wedlock and being on her fourth marriage. His point was that she is a hypocrite, and in Savage’s judgment, was planning to make money off her own martyrdom:

“I think Kim Davis is waiting to cash in,” Savage said. “I predicted from the beginning that she would defy all the court orders, defy the Supreme Court, she would ultimately be held in contempt of court, lose her job, perhaps go to prison for a short amount of time. And then she will have written for her, ghost written books. She will go on the right-wing lecture circuit and she’ll never have to do an honest day’s work ever again in her life.”

Even if this is true, and I’m not sure Davis has thought that far ahead, what then? Will she have “won?” A woman who has lived in a backwater her whole life and maybe just got her life together by turning it over to Jesus and is now having her personal life dissected on national TV because she’s somehow oppressed Dan Savage?

Liberals, it is time to admit that we can be vicious people.

We sit in our enclaves judging Kim Davis and people like her as useful idiots for our causes. We zing them with our hashtags and slogans, and mock them on The Daily Show. But the culture is changing at a rate faster than their education and values have trained them to accept. That in itself is a form of oppression—to neglect some people from educational and economic opportunity, then judge them when they can’t get on board with the agenda of the more progressive element of society.

I’m not defending Davis’ actions. If she can’t do the job she was elected to do for the people of Rowan County, she should resign. That would be a true act of conscience—not to indulge in the martyr’s status of being sent to prison or fined, not to benefit in any way financially from this ruckus, but simply to step aside.

But we have to remember that the point of being progressives is we’re supposed to be for people. We’re supposed to be able to see through the lies of the overlords that divide people who should be standing together. The point is to create a more just and equitable society for everyone, not just the people who can spout the right political catchphrases, or can demonstrate an advanced critical analysis of race, class, sexuality, and gender.

We may welcome the changes that are happening to our society—the demographic and technological uprisings that have led to newly-invigorated movements for LGBTQ equality, an end to the oppression of women, and the dismantling of white supremacy. Indeed for many of us, these changes are a matter of life and death.

But somebody needs to find a way to explain all this to the Kim Davises of the world. In words she can understand. The operative emotion we should have for those that feel the world is leaving them behind is compassion, not contempt.

"Jason Isbell is country?"

At SXSW2017: Music Festival Day 3
"Ryan, will you change this yet?Jason Pollack literally changed facts and made up stuff. He's ..."

At SXSW2017: STRANGER FRUIT
"Now that the unedited video is available and it shows that Pollock has created a ..."

At SXSW2017: STRANGER FRUIT
"Jason Pollock is a fucking idiot. The film is a scam; cut and pasted, tons ..."

At SXSW2017: STRANGER FRUIT

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Doug

    Thank you. Yours is a voice of sanity in a time when everyone is throwing brickbats at everyone else. I’m a liberal, but one of the most distressing things I’ve observed is how illiberal some liberals can be — to use your word, “vicious.”

  • Andrew Dowling

    She makes $80K a year; she is not some poor “backwater” woman. And the woman at the well never denied anyone a legal marriage license. This woman is an arrogant bigot. She will not be “converted” but she should be put in jail.

    • Mr. Annoying

      I would argue that putting her in jail is exactly what the Liberty Council (her alleged defenders) want. One picture of her being led away in handcuffs and they will be able to push their lie that the people who oppose LBGT rights are “the real victims here” to the moon. The donation will come flooding in faster than they could ever hope to count them.

      My suggestion, go after her one true love; money. suspend her salary and fine her. A gofundme account will be set up, of course, but the rewards will be short-lived as no one can be expected to just hand her money forever.

      • DrLindsay

        I do wish the couples involved, rather than denouncing her or bringing up her personal life, would take the initiative and practice some civil disobedience. Steal the “oppression” argument from the Liberty Council and show themselves willing to put their bodies on the line to demand their rights. Just because I argue that Davis should be treated humanely doesn’t mean she shouldn’t be confronted–respectfully and nonviolently. The couples hinted at staying in the office until the police came. I think a whole group of them should sit-in, vigil, get arrested, do whatever it takes to demonstrate the injustice of this situation. I have participated in these kinds of actions against the religious right when I worked with Soulforce.

        • $136305622

          I agree she should be treated civilly. I don’t see how pointing out her hypocrisy with regard to marriage is treating her poorly.the thing about liberals? We ARE for everyone. We don’t care if she has been married 7 times. We do have a problem when she has no serious religious belief about the sanctity of marriage based on her personal experience and then claims to use said belief to deny someone their right to marry. Big difference between liberals and cons that way.

        • Mr. Annoying

          With regards to the couples practicing civil disobedience, the obvious question is why should they have to? The LBGT community has taken every proper and legal step to bring about marriage equality. The law is on their side, why should they pretend it isn’t?

          Your suggestion that they “steal” the oppression argument is downright naive. The Liberty Council is not going to let that happen. They have demonstrated the ability and the willingness to twist facts, misrepresent words and even lie for the sake of their cause. They are not going to let the oppression argument go for anything: it is literally all they have.

          As far as denouncing Ms. Davis, the fact is that she has earned every harsh word that has been spoken to her. She could have resigned her position, but as she told FOX News she would not have been able to speak for God in the office if she had. The judge gave her an out: just stop interfering with the other employees ability to service same sex couples. She refused that too. If she didn’t, her 15 minutes of fame would have come to a screeching halt.

          As a rule one gets the respect one gives. She has given no respect, she should expect none in return.

  • Mr. Annoying

    You might doubt that Ms. Davis has thought about cashing in on her newfound fame, but you are forgetting another player in this drama: the Liberty Council. If they can get a picture of this woman being hauled off to jail on a contempt of court charge it will be like a license to print donations. And I have no doubt that they have led her to think that she’ll get a share as well.

    Now, before you denounce me as a cynic, I ask you to consider the Liberty Council’s behavior to date. They and their allies have been actively at work for years portraying LBGT people as cruel, deranged or just plain bad for society. They have actively worked not just against marriage equality but also to prevent same sex couples form adopting or securing the basic right not to be fired or evicted from their homes just for their sexual orientation. And all the while the Liberty Council has maintained that they and their clients are “the real victims here.”

    So, please, cut out the tut-tutting towards those who are less than charitable towards Ms. Davis. She has willingly gotten in bed with an organization that thrives on misdirection and sowing confusion. More than that, she has allowed herself to be manipulated by them. I have no doubt that she loves all the press she is getting: it reinforces the Liberty council’s lie that she is “the real victim here.”

    • DrLindsay

      See my comment below.

  • http://stephenmatlock.com/ stephen matlock

    Great discussion. As others have pointed out (and I’m repeating) it is her actions as a government official that are at fault. Not her appearance. Not her religion. Not her personality. Not her “backwardness” or twang or “hick-town convictions.” (I’m using these to allude to the pejorations; I personally don’t consider her defective.)

    It’s a good thing to realize that we are all called to be kind, empathetic, careful, and loving, and when we fail, to call ourselves to repentance.

    It’s not a “progressive” thing to be fair. It is a moral thing, a Christian thing, and a human thing.

    I feel sorry for Kim Davis because she has been badly taught and badly led by her spiritual, moral, and civic leaders. She has been led to believe that it is a Christian duty to deny certain people their civil rights. She is wrong in her beliefs, and she was wrongly taught these beliefs are “Christian.”

    However, she also has the ability to make the choice to see her role as a government official which is to obey the law and do her duties, or resign.

    Personally, if I had an issue with an aspect of my job, that it conflicted with my moral beliefs, but that I was still required to do them, and my attempts to avoid doing them failed — I’d have to resign.

    She should do the same.

  • AKFletch

    I think your own elitist liberal bias and unacknowledged privilege are glaring in this piece. She, and hillbillies in general, are not stupid, and they are generally pretty good at recognising their own hypocrisy, at least among themselves. She’s perfectly capable of understanding the nature of her criminality and the too obvious malleability of her ethics.

  • Wagnerian_thrice

    What a crock of horse-shit. This is an adult with an $80,000 a year
    job who is engaged in willfull ignorance and stupidity. This is a person
    who is grandstanding for attention, who pretends that she doesn’t
    understand the oath of her job, the constitution, nor even her damn
    bible which says ‘Render unto Ceaser, that which is Ceaser’s’.” I grew
    up around people like this, they will never come to understanding. They
    don’t care. They are lost in their christian sickness, and they will
    never give it up because it masks and gives them permission to be the
    horrible people that they are.

    Fuck them. Fuck her, and anyone
    that would come to defense of this willful stupidity. I’m sure there are
    plenty of people in the Kentucky ‘backwoods’ that see this for the
    embarrassment that it is.

    • DrLindsay

      Thank you for proving my point.

      • Wagnerian_thrice

        Which was was what? If only we were nicer, and explained ourselves better then these people would let us exist in peace? Obviously that’s untrue.

  • Big Leo

    Ridiculing people of faith for not being chic is traditional. Pretending that she doesn’t have the right to exemption from law under the RFRA and SCOTUS guidelines, which will eventually hear this case or one like it in a few years is fascism. You want to jail a person for their religious conscience and then complain about her not being as good as you. Nice one.

    • http://stephenmatlock.com/ stephen matlock

      She’s not in jail for religious conviction.

      She’s in jail for not doing her job *AND* not obeying the various courts of the United States.

      She’s in jail for “contempt of court.”

      She can easily solve this, herself, by either doing the job she volunteered to do (no one has made her sign up; she ran for this office), or by resigning.

      She wants to get her $80,000 / yr for refusing to do her job.

      Nice work if you can get it, I suppose.

    • mruglypig

      She is not in jail for following her faith. She is jail for contempt of court, because she denied services to the public and refused all compromises. She had the opportunity of allowing a deputy clerk to issue the marriage licenses and, of course, she opportunity to resign, but she refused. She obviously picks and chooses which Bible passages to follow, as she does not discriminate against divorced people, adulterers, etc., so appears that she is acting of a personal animus to homosexuality and not on principle, but the important point is that we are a nation of laws and everyone has to follow the law. Can you imagine the chaos that would ensue if everyone claimed religious exemptions allowing to pick and choose which laws to follow. It may be against my sincerely held religious beliefs to pay taxes , but I have to pay them anyway.

  • Nicole Austin Kirkley

    Hiding behind supposed intelligence and TRYING to show your “enlightened” view point – all while talking trash about a person shows the ignorance and stupidity of exactly one person – YOU.

    The liberals and lgbtq want to wave a banner of “Love Wins” while spewing the most vile and hateful things about anyone who dare to challenge or even disagree with them. You want to attack like an angry mob. You have become the very bullies that you accuse everyone else of being. If you are looking for hypocrisy – you need look no further than your own personal mirror.

    The biggest problem in all of this is that Liberals automatically jump to the (very wrong) conclusion that just because a conservative disagrees with something – that we must hate that something. You couldn’t be more wrong and no amount of big words is going to make you right. I don’t agree with Alcoholism. That doesn’t mean I hate an alcoholic or anyone who drinks. I don’t agree with drug use – I don’t hate an addict. I want nothing more than for them to get clean and lead a better life. I don’t agree with homosexuality or gay marriage. I don’t hate gay people.

    In fact to prove you oh so wrong – I have friends who are recovering alcoholics. I have friends who are recovering drug addicts. They have changed their lives and live differently now. That doesn’t mean they don’t fight the battle every day. Yet you’re the type of asshole that rather than celebrate their sobriety – you would hold all their past wrong deeds up to their face. Whose the Hypocrite?

    And yes – I have many gay friends. More than I can possibly tell you. I love each and every one of them. Will do anything for them and know that they would return the favor. Does that mean I approve of all their choices? No. I make choices that they don’t approve of. Guess what – that is not what our friendships are built on.

    But asking me to leave my conscience and my faith at the door when it comes to politics or voting – YOU HAVE LOST YOUR EVER LOVING MIND. I will pray for you – Bless your heart.

    • mruglypig

      Elements of both sides engage in rhetorical excess, certainly not all liberals or liberals alone. You can find many, many examples of extremely vile speech coming from the conservative and anti-gay side of this debate as well. In your own post you call your opponents “assholes” (I’m not sure whom you’re referring to), which is an example of this type of speech. I agree with the author that we all need to be more open and compassionate about those we disagree with, but you have to admit that’s it’s hard for many to understand how people who views themselves as Bible believing Christians are able to easily overlook such issues as divorce, premarital sex, adultery, all condemned in the Bible as much or more than homosexuality (as with “traditional marriage” supporters, Kim Davis, Josh Duggar, and Bristol Palin), but are apoplectic about the “sin” of homosexuality and gay marriage and see acceptance as a betrayal of their faith.

      • Nicole Austin Kirkley

        I called a single person who chose to use their words in a nasty back handed and ignorant fashion an asshole. Not an entire group of people. There is a difference. When a person chooses to behave in an asshole manner; their race, religion, and ideologies fall away and they become quit simply, an asshole. There is your difference.

        The difference that most conservatives see between pre-marital sex or divorce, and homosexuality is NOTHING. We see them all as sin. Sin that needs to be forgiven. The difference politically is that I’m not being forced by political correctness or laws that I didn’t vote for to condone or endorse pre-marital sex or divorce. Please tell me when was the last time you saw a “Pre-Marital Sex Pride parade”, or better yet when have you ever seen a “Divorce Pride Parade”? Even better. When was the last time that you had people try to completely destroy your faith, while holding a banner that says “Love Wins”. Have you been to a Divorce parade and seen your faith mocked and ridiculed? If a woman goes to a Bakery and asks for a Divorce party cake, and the baker says I don’t support that – then the customer takes her business somewhere else. There is not a court case and all that has been started because of someones disagreement over the LGBTQ lifestyle.

        My state voted many years ago to say that the union of marriage was between one man and one woman. That is the right of the people of my state granted to us by the U.S. Constitution. For the Supreme Court to overstep that boundary and force my state to marry people of the same gender is called “Constitutional overreach”. So now you have taken the choice that was given to us away – to be forced by your decision. That is not right.

        As I state at the end of my last post. Asking me to leave my conscience and my faith at the door when it comes
        to politics or voting, or even when it comes to doing my job – YOU HAVE LOST YOUR EVER LOVING MIND.

        • mruglypig

          No one is saying that you shouldn’t vote your conscience or that you shouldn’t follow the dictates of your religion. I certainly vote based on mine. What people are saying is that we are a nation of laws and you don’t get to pick and choose what laws you’re going to follow based the vague and undefinable concept of a “sincerely held religious belief”. Could you imagine the chaos that would follow if people could avoid paying their taxes by claiming a religious objection to this or that tax funded policy? I believe that reasonable accommodations should be made for the practice of religion in a public role. In Kim Davis’ case she was offered the option of having a deputy clerk issue the marriage licenses, but she refused this. Beyond this, a person always has the option of resigning if a job requires them to go against their religious convictions.That would have been the correct and courageous thing for Kim Davis to do if she could no longer fulfill her required job duties. And yes, while you are not forced to personally condone divorce or pre-marital sex, a county clerk would be forced to issue a marriage license to a previously divorced person or a person with a child out of wedlock, even if their religion did not condone them marrying. Why? Because the law requires it! We are a nation of laws. No one is requiring you to approve of same sex marriage or of homosexuality, but a person acting as a public servant and being paid by the tax payers has to follow the law and serve people equally or else resign.

          • Nicole Austin Kirkley

            The Supreme Court doesn’t make laws.

            So she was acting in accordance with the Constitution which says that all matters not EXPRESSLY given to the Federal gov’t fall to the states. Marriage is not EXPRESSLY given to the Federal gov’t therefore it falls to the state.

            The laws as voted on by the people of her state didn’t change. They have the union of marriage is between one man and one woman.

            So she was following the laws of her state.

            Up to this point the State has been allowed to decide how it wanted to proceed on this matter – suddenly the Supreme Court by the action of “Constitutional Overreach” has decide that it can dictate on a matter that is not EXPRESSLY given to it. That is wrong.

          • mruglypig

            The Supreme court does not make laws, but it is the ultimate arbitrator of whether any federal or state law is constitutional. The US Constitution is the basic legal framework of our country and all laws passed by any organ of government (including the state legislatures) must be constitutional, that is, in accord with the US Constitution, as the Court interprets it. You may not agree with their interpretation, (I don’t on many issues), but once the Supreme Court has rendered a decision the only options, under our system of government, are to either accept it, wait for another Supreme Court decision to modify it or to pass a constitutional amendment to change it.

          • Nicole Austin Kirkley

            There is another way. It’s called Civil Disobedience, and that is exactly what she is doing.

            But I do love how you have strayed from the original topic that I commented on. The fact that many Liberals hide behind the banner of “enlightened thought” and “Love Wins”, while being the bullies and hypocrites that they accuse everyone else of being. Care to address that, instead of changing the topic?

          • mruglypig

            Civil disobedience is by definition, breaking the law. It’s done in order to demonstrate a perceived injustice, but it is going outside of the legal system. Its ultimate goal, however, would be to have the Supreme Court render another decision or to rally the public to pass a Constitutional amendment. And fine, let her try it, by going to jail. We will see if she just rallies her own supporters or if she is able to change the law on this issue. She is certainly helping fund raising for her lawyers! As far your claim that liberals are bullies, I think that there is just as much or more bad and hypocritical behavior coming from the right!

          • Nicole Austin Kirkley

            Yes,
            I will have to work very hard the next time I see a pretentious and condescending article like this to remind myself that you are the nicer people.

            I will have to work very hard the next time I see a group of liberals viciously attacking, humiliating, and trying to shame someone into silence to remind myself that you are the nicer
            people.

            I will have to work very hard the next time I see a group of LGBTQ people mocking and completely disrespecting my faith to remind myself that you are the nicer
            people.

            I will have to work very hard the next time I see yet another situation where liberals want the laws pushed to the highest extremes on their behalf, while ignored on the behalf of others who disagree with them to remind myself that you are the nicer
            people.

            Keep living in your delusions of enlightened thought. You see, I know I’m a sinner saved by grace, and I want that for everyone else. I know what it is like to live a life away from my faith. I refuse to go there again. You just think your better than everyone else. I will sit back and pray for you – bless your heart.

          • mruglypig

            You see the very worst of the people on the other side and do not even notice the hateful people on your side……first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. Bless your heart.

          • Nicole Austin Kirkley

            I speak for myself, and only for myself – and at the bottom of my comment I admit that I am a sinner in need of Grace.

            You say that I won’t admit that there are nasty people in the conservative camp – yet it was you who tried to point the finger and say that the only nasty people in this situation were on the conservative side. “As far your claim that liberals are bullies, I think that there is just
            as much or more bad and hypocritical behavior coming from the right!”

            How’s that plank feeling?

          • mruglypig

            I never said there was no bad behavior on the liberal side of this debate. I personally avoid all ad hominem attacks and name calling and try to keep any debate to a reasonably civil discussion of the issues, What I said there is at least as much, (or possibly even more) coming from the other side. That’s all. I don’t think that there is any objective way to measure it and yes, we are all very sensitive to any criticism or insults, so we tend to focus on those things and ignore the rest, So as far as I’m concerned I will leave it at that.

          • Nicole Austin Kirkley

            And I just gave you 4 examples of where there is clearly just as much nastiness and hypocrisy coming from the left. And there are many more that I can list. I chose not to.

            – You want to list the Westboro Idiots as nastiness from the right? Ok – but remember this , there are alot and I do mean A LOT of churches and organizations on the right that speak AGAINST the hatefulness that Westboro shouts. Do people on the left do the same in ANY of the situations I mentioned above?

          • mruglypig

            There is just as much hateful and false rhetoric coming from the right. The bullying of gay kids in middle and high schools is endemic and is often condoned by homophobic adults in their communities and is often tacitly encouraged by conservative churches and preachers, especially in small communities and frequently leads to teen suicides. False and derogatory myths about LGBT people are often repeated by right wing Christians and others such as; all or most gay men are child molesters; the children of same sex parents are harmed by their upbringing or are more likely to be gay themselves; gay people prey on young people and try to recruit them into the gay lifestyle; being gay is a choice that people make and people can “pray away the gay” or otherwise will themselves to become heterosexual…and many other false claims which do great harm to gay people. All these myths have been definitively refuted by the scientific and medical communities, yet right wing organizations repeat these things over and over again. Fortunately, as more and more gay people have “come out” over the years and so many straight people realize that family members, friends, neighbors, co-workers, whom they love and respect are gay, they no longer believe these myths and are willing to extend to gay people the same respect and basic civil rights that they themselves enjoy.

          • Nicole Austin Kirkley

            You just said it. There are more and more organizations who are speaking out against the hate. As I have said from my very first post – and the left refuses to hear it – saying that something is wrong does not equal hate. There are many Christian organizations who open doors to the LGBTQ community. But who don’t want to be forced to condone something that goes against their faith. There is a difference between loving someone in Christian faith – and being made to laid down your belief systems. I am by no means saying that it is perfect. But there is change.

            While from the left, Christians continue to be attacked and demonized for standing up for our Faith and saying the exact same thing you are demanding from us. You demand that we respect your right to live your life as you chose – yet you don’t give the same respect.

            We can go around in circles till the end of time. All I have said from the beginning is that it is awfully hypocritical of the author of this piece to hide behind big words and a supposed aura of “enlightened thinking” as an excuse to be an ignorant asshole.

          • mruglypig

            I have no problem with Christians having their own opinions. What I and others object to is the idea that Christians are being persecuted if they, in their capacity as public servants or in a role as purveyor of a public accommodation, should be able to pick and choose what laws to follow, and deny government or public services to gay people, based on the extremely vague, subjective and legally arbitrary concept of a “sincerely held religious belief.”

          • Nicole Austin Kirkley

            And if you go back to my original post – did my I say anything about that? NOPE.

            So you started a debate with me with a completely different argument in mind trying to catch me in your imaginary “gotcha”. You failed.

          • Quinn Harbin

            You don’t think assault and harassment is indicative of hatred? Such behavior is somehow loving the sinner? What’s interesting is that the article is calling out liberals who engage in bad behavior in regards to conservatives. Mind you, it’s taunting and insults, not physical assault and homicide. So why don’t YOU be honest about bad behavior on the conservative side? You are basically just as hypocritical as the people you call hypocrites.

          • johnackerby

            Hey Nicole, the problem is that it is YOUR PEOPLE that are causing the problem. You want to discriminate against innocent people and doing so is an injurious act. In other words, you’re injuring innocent people. Since you’re injurring innocent people those innocent people have the right to fight back. Stop discriminating against them and the whole problem goes away.

          • johnackerby

            Nicole, people like you are demanding the right to discriminate against people. That’s very ugly and hurtful. You’re hurting innocent people even if you are polite while you do so. People don’t like being hurt so of course the people you are hurting are going to get into your face. Stop hurting them and they will stop getting into your face.

            And you bigots can do all the civil disobedience you want, and hopefully the judges of our nation will like your @sses up long term for doing so.

            One thing for you and Kim Davis to think about is that if you get yourselves locked up in prison you might find yourself having to deal with sexual advances from other women. People get raped in prison. Keep that in mind. You and Kim do not want to go to prison because if you two do go to prison you two might both come out of prison married to women.

            LOL!!!

          • johnackerby

            Nicole, you’re rationalizing. The Supreme Court can’t make law but it does have the authority to declare, if a practice, policy or event is constitutional or unconstitutional. And if the Supreme Court declarers that a practice, policy, or event is unconstitutional then that practice, policy, or event has to stop. That’s the law. The Supreme Court gets to decide what is and isn’t constitutional. And if something is unconstitutional then it can not keep happening ANYWHERE IN THE USA, including Rowan County, Kentucky. Deal with it.You Christians need to obey the law.

    • johnackerby

      No Nicole, it’s you. You’re the problem. Gay people are allowed to marry. Deal with it. Just because you (and Kim Davis) disagree with gay marriage does not give you two the right to prevent gay marriage from taking place in a country where gay marriage is legal. Gay people are allowed to get married. Accept it. You can not stop it. If you do not want to authorize marriage licenses to gay people then don’t become a county clerk. If you can’t do the duties of a job then don’t ask for the job. Deal with it.

  • Duezy

    The longer this goes on the more problematic it could become for the governor of Kentucky. After all she is a representative of the people of Appalachia. Her request that her name be removed from the licenses and replaced with the Comonwealth of Kentucky is a reasonable compromise.

    • Mr. Annoying

      The question is, why did she not agree to this before she was sent to jail? The judge gave her the chance to stay out of jail if she would stop preventing her deputies from signing licenses. And, yet she refused.

      Its not hard to see why. Davis was steered into jail by the Liberty Counsel. They desperately needed a story about a Christian going to jail for his/her beliefs in order to make up for the donations they lost after the supreme court ruled on same sex marriages.

    • johnackerby

      That is not all that she wants. The governor already said OK to her removing her name and replacing it with the commonwealth of Kentucky. But now she has been doing other things to the licenses. For example, she has removed the county clerk label from the license entirely and she is having the license issued by a notary public instead of a deputy clerk. You see, the one deputy-clerk who is issuing the licenses is also a notary public and Kim Davis is making him use text indicating that he is issuing the license as a notary public rather than as a county clerk. And since a notary clerk can not authorize marriage licenses that means that it’s highly unlikely that these licenses are valid.

      Again, the governor and judge were OK with her removing her name and replacing her name with Commonwealth for Kentucky. She has gone a lot farther than that.

  • johnackerby

    Richard Lindsey, she is annoying. She’s flouting the law – the entire legal system all the way up to the Supreme Court. If she were standing up to the world for the purpose of saving people from some injustice I would feel some sympathy for her, but that’s not what she’s doing. She’s flipping the civilized world the finger and demanding her right to use the power of the government to discriminate against innocent people, and she’s doing this in defiance of the US Supreme Court. And she herself admits that she’s trying to inspire other bigots like herself to also deny citizens their lawful rights. She and her supporters are trying to inspire all aspects of government to defy the courts and do what the bible says to do instead. What about separation of church and state? This is not Iran. Their talk is the talk of sedition. Lock her up.