Kim David is back, and probably on her way to jail again!

[Jakexe]

Just admit you hate gays. for no reason other than you're a weak minded individual. Stop trying to justify illegal behaviour just because you like seeing gays punished. It's really petty to hide your views behind religious protection etc.

[belfpala]

Those people are unprincipled and do not belong in our government.

Whose principles?

[mvaliz]

Kentucky's Religious Freedom Restoration Act

Originally called House Bill 279 (HB279), Kentucky’s RFRA states: Government shall not substantially burden a person’s freedom of religion. The right to act or refuse to act in a manner motivated by a sincerely held religious belief may not be substantially burdened unless the government proves by clear and convincing evidence that it has a compelling governmental interest in infringing the specific act or refusal to act and has used the least restrictive means to further that interest. A “burden” shall include indirect burdens such as withholding benefits, assessing penalties, or an exclusion from programs or access to facilities


which means the state of Kentucky by law has to make reasonable accommodations to ones sincerely held religious belief and if they don't they are violating Kim Davis state granted rights

Religious "freedom" you mean.

Free to practice YOUR religion... at the expense against everybody else's?

There's no "Freedom" in that "restoration act". It's limiting others freedoms by empowering your own christian beliefs, misusing the government for your own self-interest.

She's free to practice her beliefs... so she should go work for a convent or a church or something. If you're against violence, don't take a job being the one who signs death warrants.

[Masark]

Whose principles?

Gawd's, obviously.

[Gestopft]

Having said that... I'm honestly not sure why they ever hired her back. Firing her really won't turn her into that much of a religious martyr.

She wasn't fired and can't be fired. She is an elected official and must resign or be impeached.

[belfpala]

This is a complete tangent, but here's another part of the Oath they must swear to...

I, being a citizen of this State, have not fought a duel with deadly weapons within this State nor out of it, nor have I sent or accepted a challenge to fight a duel with deadly weapons, nor have I acted as second in carrying a challenge, nor aided or assisted any person thus offending, so help me God.

I had an actual lol.

[Vyxn]

So a Jewish person can refuse to sell pork at a restaurant and is safe from job termination?

As many have mentioned, she does have a choice. Resign and continue on with her beliefs or do the job that is assigned. The government is not forcing her to change her beliefs or religion, just her job description.

yes according to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission the Jewish person sure can refuse to sell pork at a restaurant
EEOC is suing a trucking company for firing two Muslim truck drivers for their refusal to deliver alcohol stating "Failure to accommodate the religious beliefs of employees, when this can be done without undue hardship, violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion" as grounds for the law suit
http://eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-29-13.cfm

[Paulosio]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...amendment.html

Found this article very interesting. It's basically about how people use the US consitutions thing about religious freedom in cases like this but ignore the part about not forcing their own religious views on others.

Very interesting read and it's written by Mr Sulu from Star Trek which has to be worth something!

[Shadowmelded]

Learn history please.

...You're quoting the Articles of Confederation. I mean this part should have surely tipped you off:

Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

yes according to U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission the Jewish person sure can refuse to sell pork at a restaurant
EEOC is suing a trucking company for firing two Muslim truck drivers for their refusal to deliver alcohol stating "Failure to accommodate the religious beliefs of employees, when this can be done without undue hardship, violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits discrimination on the basis of religion" as grounds for the law suit
http://eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-29-13.cfm

Entirely different situations. I've highlighted the key phrase. In this situation it cannot be done without undue hardship as her office and the county's name are required to be on the forms for them to be valid. The only alternative to the accommodation already afforded to her, which she deemed lacking, is for her to not occupy her position. In the situations you mentioned, there are other drivers who could deliver alcohol and other staff (waiters or chefs, both work) to serve pork.

[Vyxn]

...You're quoting the Articles of Confederation. I mean this part should have surely tipped you off:

Entirely different situations. I've highlighted the key phrase. In this situation it cannot be done without undue hardship as her name and the county's are required to be on the forms for them to be valid. The only alternative to the accommodation already afforded to her, which she deemed lacking, is for her to not occupy her position. In the situations you mentioned, there are other drivers who could deliver alcohol and other staff (waiters or chefs, both work) to serve pork.

and it would be an undue hardship for another county clerk have his or her name instead of Kim Davis on the licenses for Gay couples and have them sent to Kim Davis office?

[Shadowmelded]

and it would be an undue hardship for another county clerk have his or her name instead of Kim Davis on the licenses for Gay couples and have them sent to Kim Davis office?

It wouldn't be, if she wasn't attempting to invalidate the licenses by removing any references to the County, the Clerk's office (which, under Kentucky law is where marriage licenses need to be authorized), the Deputy's title, the space for the Deputy's signature etc...

She isn't content with not just having her name on it, she doesn't want them issued under her authorization, but they can only be authorized by the County Clerk.

[Jakexe]

and it would be an undue hardship for another county clerk have his or her name instead of Kim Davis on the licenses for Gay couples and have them sent to Kim Davis office?

Why should someone get special adjustments to a government job because of a religious choice?

I thought you were against groups getting special rights?

[belfpala]

and it would be an undue hardship for another county clerk have his or her name instead of Kim Davis on the licenses for Gay couples and have them sent to Kim Davis office?

It looks like it's required to be signed by any clerk. A couple could go to a different county, I guess.

[Time Sage]

It looks like it's required to be signed by any clerk. A couple could go to a different county, I guess.

That's extra work they shouldn't have to go though. It's her job to do it. If no one else at her location is leagally allowed to do it she should step down and be replaced by someone who will it in her place. She gets allowances if there is someone else who can do her job for situations she does not believe in. There is not, meaning she is unfit for the job and should be removed.

[Orbitus]

It looks like it's required to be signed by any clerk. A couple could go to a different county, I guess.

Even though the Judge that threw her in jail the first time ruled that they didn't have to. So there's that.

[shadowmouse]

will faithfully execute the duties of my office without favor, affection or partiality, so help me God.

Here's the part of her oath that I find key. She swore, invoking the very God she now says she must honor by not doing her job, to do that job "without favor, affectation or partiality.

I propose Bungee's Obama Test. Imagine that Republicans get their wish, Obama wakes up one day and decides to convert to Islam. Then, he proceeds to alter his actions to be in accord with his religious beliefs. If anyone supporting Kim David's play for fame isn't cool with the Obama Test, then we need to keep Church and State separate.

If the Obama Test seems unrealistic consider these:
http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/michae...final-judgment

For those that might find the image offensive, recall that this is an example of where the various religious protections have already led, and where they must lead if they are anything more than a shell game to promote one particular religious vision.