Federal Judge Orders Immediate Release of Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Except that "Joe the plumber" was a complete fabrication. His name wasn't Joe, he wasn't a plumber, and he had no plans or ability to do what he was claiming.

I appreciate the information, yeah, I know, which was kind of part of the humor IMO, trying to sell an image more than anything, and like Mrs Davis, is going to do he imploded.

[Stormdash]

You aren't getting their motivations. This isn't about religious freedom; This is about Christian dominance. They WANT Christianity to be the dominant religion, through force of law.

Pure twaddle.

[Ragnarocket]

Repubs are being retards backing this lady. Defend religious freedoms, that is great. But as soon as it came out she's a huge hypocrite, has had 4 marriages, and committed adultery, how on earth can they take her religious beliefs claim seriously. Huckabee needs to run as fast as he can from this lady.

She wasn't a hypocrite at the time she's only been a Christian for 4 years. This is 3 years after her divorce in 2008. She wasn't a hypocrite because at the time she didn't abide by those principles!

[Paranoid Android]

Yeah, true, at least it's good bait for all the hypocrites running for the Republican party to nibble on.

So far most of the front runners such as Trump, Kasich, Fiorina have stated she should be removed for not following the law. While it may semantics for not truly supporting gay marriage. At least they are not so fringe crazy in that they say you can ignore laws you do not like.

[Jotaux]

None of the poll options appeal to me.

1.Gay couples have to get married in places where the Clerk doesn't object.
I think she should do her job or resign.

2. Obama should get involved and force the issue.
He shouldn't have to, the courts have done their job.

3. It should be a State issue to remove Mrs Davis even if they don't
States don't get to choose which laws they want to follow.

4. Expand the protection to all government employees to refuse duty that conflict with their faith.
I'm actually not sure what protection you are talking about.

[Lenonis]

As long as people can go to that office and get a license it doesn't matter to me if she is issuing them or someone on her staff.

However if she goes back to forbidding her staff from issuing them and they agree, then not only should she be tossed back in jail but so should her entire staff.

People aren't seeing the danger of allowing civic servants to block people's legal rights because they don't like the law. That shouldn't be allowed. Don't want to issue it? Fine, but have someone else in the office do so.

[Doctor Amadeus]

So far most of the front runners such as Trump, Kasich, Fiorina have stated she should be removed for not following the law. While it may semantics for not truly supporting gay marriage. At least they are not so fringe crazy in that they say you can ignore laws you do not like.

Yeah, I was speaking more specifically about Cruz and Huckabee along with a few others.

[Herecius]

All of those poll options are balls, pure balls.

Call for a snap election and remove her, she obviously can't do her job right.

[Stormdash]

No her principal job is not off the table. I bet about 0.5% of their cases involve homosexuals. I don't like this lady, think she's an idiot, and had no problem with her going to jail. But your claims were silly. She can still complete the vast majority of her work.

My position is that she should resign, even though I ultimately sympathize with her point of view on the nature/scope of a valid marriage. But a county clerk is not the unilateral remedy to a state of legal play she doesn't believe in. I have even said in other discussions that choosing to take the contempt citation was almost a form of humble-brag. She isn't Thomas More, with an absolute monarch breathing down her neck that leaving in protest would be an insult, she had a third option.

[WarFalcon1]

She just got out, and has already said she plans to defy the judge's ruling and go on not issuing license in the office she is in charge of.

Then she will get set back to jail/fined/etc. She literally cannot win in this situation.

[garethrogue]

Breaking news: We're not subject to a Christian form of Sharia law!

Nobody has the right to enforce their religious beliefs using their public office. We're not caveman cultists from ISIS controlled Iraq.

[Planeshaper]

Actually her release is contingent on her agreement not to interfere with the issuance of licenses by the staff in the clerk's office. As your article says. So why the histrionics? Is your position that she should sit in jail until she personally issues a license to a homosexual couple?

My position is that she should suffer reasonable consequences for declining to perform a specific, mandatory, duty of her public office due to a personal belief.

The duties of public officials are based on the collective decision by the public and the government that the public has put in place.

Depending on the severity of the ramifications of her actions, those consequences could indeed justifiably include jail time.

[Doctor Amadeus]

None of the poll options appeal to me.

1.Gay couples have to get married in places where the Clerk doesn't object.
I think she should do her job or resign.

2. Obama should get involved and force the issue.
He shouldn't have to, the courts have done their job.

3. It should be a State issue to remove Mrs Davis even if they don't
States don't get to choose which laws they want to follow.

4. Expand the protection to all government employees to refuse duty that conflict with their faith.
I'm actually not sure what protection you are talking about.

I mean maybe we ought to create one, someone comes into get a marriage licence, and because if their beliefs the clerk says NO, force people to go somewhere else, should we start allowing liberties of say certain elected offices?

- - - Updated - - -

Then she will get set back to jail/fined/etc. She literally cannot win in this situation.

Depends on her goals, Katie Couric can find out I am sure.

[Daerio]

People aren't seeing the danger of allowing civic servants to block people's legal rights because they don't like the law. That shouldn't be allowed. Don't want to issue it? Fine, but have someone else in the office do so.

Discretion of civil servants has very few limits when you're OK with police officers killing people without cause.

And there's a lot of right-wing overlap here.

[Kujako]

Then she will get set back to jail/fined/etc. She literally cannot win in this situation.

Her goal is to be a martyr to crazy people, she's already "won". Just check her twitter feed.

[Stormdash]

All of those poll options are balls, pure balls.

Call for a snap election and remove her, she obviously can't do her job right.

Don't think a recall election of Rowan Co. voters would accomplish what you are hoping it would.

[WarFalcon1]

Her goal is to be a martyr to crazy people, she's already "won". Just check her twitter feed.

"In the land of the blind the man with one eye is king." The only people who care about being important to crazy people are crazy. I like to think I'm not crazy, so I don't care. All I care about is her breaking the law. If she is no longer doing that she can do whatever she wants, this is Merica.

[Renchard]

Repubs are being retards backing this lady. Defend religious freedoms, that is great. But as soon as it came out she's a huge hypocrite, has had 4 marriages, and committed adultery, how on earth can they take her religious beliefs claim seriously. Huckabee needs to run as fast as he can from this lady.

Here's the thing. It's completely irrelevant if she's a hypocrite. Your personal religious beliefs are absolutely allowed to be totally idiosyncratic. If you want to believe the Bible says your divorces are OK, but gay marriage is an abomination, that's fine. If you want to believe that Jesus is a green alien who's going to take you aboard his heavenly mothership, that's fine too.

The issue here is that your personal beliefs must be subordinate to acting in society's interest when you are acting in society. You can't decide not to give out liquor licenses just because you're a Muslim. You can't not do a building inspection of a Starbucks just because you're a Mormon. You can't refuse to sell gas to a butcher truck just because you're Hindu. And you can't refuse to give out paperwork as a government clerk just because you're Christian.

[Herecius]

Don't think a recall election of Rowan Co. voters would accomplish what you are hoping it would.

If the new clerk doesn't want to do their job as a government official then that one can be held in contempt, too. An official that can't get shit done should be removed wherever possible.

For the record, I also advocate removing pretty much the entirety of Congress and enforcing term limits to boot. I'm one of those kinds of people.

[ElDoorO]

Probably just legal games. Although she has stated that she will interfere with the clerks (she was offered this deal when the judge brought her back to court shortly after finding her in contempt), the judge is giving her the opportunity to defy the court again. If she does what she said she'll do (i.e. interfere with the issuing of marriage licenses), it will probably destroy her lawyers' attempts at appeals.

This right here. You are the only one who gets it.
She's basically said she WILL defy him. Judges don't like that -- so the Judge is saying "uh huh, prove it".
So now it's put up or shut up.
If there's anything a Federal Judge does not like -- it's being appealed (and basically being told the Judge was wrong). So this is him basically forcing her hand so she has no cards to play later.

Contrary to popular opinion Judges are known for giving people enough rope to hang themselves with -- ESPECIALLY on cases like this.

I'm also willing to bet that's a supervised release -- probation (you don't get parole in Federal systems anymore). So I'm willing to bet she can't drink as well as other restrictions -- such as she has to stay in the say district --- which is Eastern District of Kentucky. This would mean if she has family in Western Kentucky, she must ask her probation officer permission.

This this isn't post conviction I suspect this would fall under the pretrial area (assuming they aren't merged, I don't recall).

So yeah... I want to see her put up or shut up. I can't wait.