The Kentucky clerk who is denying same-sex couples marriage licenses has been divorced 4 times


Three. #'s 2 and 4 are the same guy.

ETA: @frauenfelder, I think she’s been married four times, but only divorced three?


yeah but did they know that?


I wish they’d just levied huge fines at her to offset the loss of taxpayer revenue and, more importantly, to benefit the state from some of the boatloads of bigot cash she’ll soon be rolling in.


The GOP Christ’opo won’t like that news.


They only follow the parts of the Bible that they can use to justify their hatred of someone. If it’s a part that would affect them personally, then it doesn’t apply and can be ignored. I think she was hoping someone higher up in the state government chain would back her and take the heat off.


Too bad Jesus never mentioned same sex marriage.


This is good news, but her sanctimonious hate-mongering just got a significantly bigger platform of people terrified of being jailed for their religious convictions in the coming Liberalocalypse. She’s now got some small legitimacy to her cries of martyrdom.

She needs to be stripped of office. When’s her next election? :slight_smile:


i feel it’s a lot more complex than just calling her stupid, and telling her to do her job.

if she was defending something which more people believed in – previously signing marriage certificates, maybe, in defiance of the law – many would be calling her a hero.

and, also just think how many times people are prosecuted for “just doing their job” when that job was in fact immoral. in a general sense, it’s good for people to stand up against what they are being asked to do when they think it’s wrong.

here, this person is attempting to further bigotry and hatred. it’s a power play, where she ( and her supporters ) are trying to force society into the shape they believe it should have: one where white conservatives are on top, and in control.

her act of civil disobedience makes 100% sense – it’s her position that does not.


i think dan savage has a really good point – where proof of allegiance among conservatives is not about what you’ve done, who you are, or even really what you believe… it’s about who you hate.

as long as you hate gay people, black people, scientists, immigrants, the epa, muslims, liberals, whatever – you’re good to go. your own sins are washed free, because your hatred has made you pure.


Let her be that symbol. Idiots will think what idiots will think, but the symbol I see is a woman in jail for ignoring the rule of law. It’s her choice to rot in a cell. Let her.


That’s how violating a court order goes: jail or fine. Otherwise, there would be no enforcement mechanism. The judge argued that her fines would be paid by others so the second option is out.


I’m not trying to talk about legal procedure there. That’s just my personal opinion on the use of jails in the U.S. At the same time, I seem to remember something about judges being able to confine someone to their home instead of a jail. I suppose the enforcement mechanism could be that lovely little ankle bracelet I see on so many young ethnic men.


This is why she hates gay people - they destroyed all her traditional marriages.


Mrs. Davis is the one making the mistake.

Jailing someone for this seems draconian

Kim Davis can issue the licenses or sit in jail. The choice is hers.

She isn’t hurting anyone and she is not a danger to society.

Uh, hello? A representative of the court is defying the Supreme Court, breaking the law, and denying people their Constitutional rights.


I’ve seen them on non “ethnic” men as well. Just as much, actually. Unless by “ethnic” you mean people of any ethnicity, which, yes.


Ok, but what’s a more effective deterrent? The equivalent of sending a naughty child to its room, or a real jail cell (for a real criminal)?


How does breaking one made up rule for yourself then not letting others break it (whether the others believe it or not) and then break an actual rule make sense? It’s stupid. Writing the first sentence in a manner that made sense was hard because of how dumb it is. Living that logic out makes the person stupid, hence stupid is as stupid does.


I believe I heard on NPR this morning that she was just elected early this year, and the next election for this post isn’t scheduled until… 2018? Or thereabouts?

Turns out to be a really inconvenient bureaucratic issue.


OK, but why lock her in jail? Is she a danger to society or do you just want to punish someone? When have we locked up a congressman for violating their oath of office? Why treat her differently? Why doesn’t she receive the same protection under the law as anyone else? Is it because her crime pisses you off more than others?

You don’t use a deterrent until after someone has been found guilty. At that point she will or will not be a real criminal and the sentence can be handed out. Of course she will be found guilty that’s obvious, but until then it seems draconian to put a person in jail for what they believe as long as they are not a danger to anyone. Home confinement seems more appropriate.
No matter what you believe, as long as you don’t pose a threat, I don’t think you need to be jailed for it. How about they treat her like other clerk who doesn’t do their job to the states satisfaction?


Yes you do. The point is deterring other scofflaws.

Good luck with that logic in front of a judge.