Kim Davis - The Christian Rosa Parks

[brett636]

Just as Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat to a white man in defiance of an unjust law Kim Davis is waging her own battle against an unjust ruling in support of the mentally troubled(read homosexual) to wed. It is against Davis's religious views to support or participate in a same sex wedding, and it should be her right to refuse to have her name attached to one. Just as Muhammad Ali refused to sign up for the selective service based on religious grounds and was later vindicated for doing so, Kim Davis should be allowed to refuse to issue same sex marriage licenses under the same logic. Unfortunately she is getting no backup from the same judicial system that came up with the convoluted logic which led to this problem in the first place. I cannot say Kim Davis will win her battle, but I do respect her for her willingness to stand up for what she believes in.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...court-refuses-to-issue-gay-marriage-licenses/

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

How would you explain her refusal to issue any marriage licenses, straight or same sex?

While on the clock she falls under the purview of her employer and as such must set aside her personal beliefs.

I am an avid non-smoker. New York is smoke free; however, shops that sell tobacco products are exempt. I deliver to a head shop where everyone smokes. Do I have the right while on the clock to refuse to deliver to that stop?

 

[Sportello]

She is just following her closely held religious beliefs.

Not sure which sect of Christianity she follows, though.

Kim Davis became pregnant with twins by the man who became her third husband while still married to her first husband. The twins were born five months after her divorce from the first husband.

She did not marry the father of the twins after her divorce from the first husband. She married another man (Husband #2). This man adopted the twins. After about 10 years she divorced the second husband and married the father of the twins (Husband #3).

The marriage to the father (Husband #3) lasted about a year or so. She divorced him and then later remarried husband #2. This is her current husband.

 

[bottomups]

Noone is denying her right to stand up for what she believes in. All she has to do is resign her office and let someone do the job duties as required by law.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

She is just following her closely held religious beliefs.

Not sure which sect of Christianity she follows, though.

Kim Davis became pregnant with twins by the man who became her third husband while still married to her first husband. The twins were born five months after her divorce from the first husband.

She did not marry the father of the twins after her divorce from the first husband. She married another man (Husband #2). This man adopted the twins. After about 10 years she divorced the second husband and married the father of the twins (Husband #3).

The marriage to the father (Husband #3) lasted about a year or so. She divorced him and then later remarried husband #2. This is her current husband.

Father's Day must be confusing as hell for the twins.

 

[brett636]

How would you explain her refusal to issue any marriage licenses, straight or same sex?

While on the clock she falls under the purview of her employer and as such must set aside her personal beliefs.

I am an avid non-smoker. New York is smoke free; however, shops that sell tobacco products are exempt. I deliver to a head shop where everyone smokes. Do I have the right while on the clock to refuse to deliver to that stop?

Her refusal to issue any marriage license coincides with the same stance taken by Christian business owners who refuse to support same sex marriages. They have to accept all forms of government sponsored marriage or none of it. Many wedding related businesses have withdrawn from the wedding industry entirely to avoid the cost of litigating their refusal to participate in a same sex wedding. I honestly can't blame them, and it's sad this is how it has to be in this country today.

You being a non smoker doesn't qualify as a religious objection, but as a personal health objection which isn't a protected status in this country(yet). Unless you can say you are a member of an avid non smoker religion your objection carries no weight.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

You being a non smoker doesn't qualify as a religious objection, but as a personal health objection which isn't a protected status in this country(yet). Unless you can say you are a member of an avid non smoker religion your objection carries no weight.

You are right in that my status as an avid non-smoker does not qualify as a religious objection; however, you would be wrong in that it does not carry the same weight. I knowingly avoid places that I know will be smoke-filled and chastise those who insist upon making me walk through their smoke to enter a smoke-free establishment.

I mentioned earlier that I went to a local county fair with my brother and his family. One of the food vendors had a sign stating he could basically refuse service to anyone for whatever reason. Is that even legal?

BTW, in case no one has figured it out yet, I support the right of same sex couples to enjoy the same rights and privileges as those of heterosexual couples.

 

[wkmac]

Fascinating when someone who claims they want gov't limited turns around and not just defends expansion of gov't power but advocates on its behalf. If big gov't is socialism........just saying.

And the irony of someone with a poor record when it comes to marriage being the champion of the institution. I can admire a person standing against odds for a belief but not when it damages the liberty of others who are acting with no harm to person or property.

 

[bottomups]

Noone is asking her to perform a wedding. Just issue the damn licenses so someone with no religious objections can due the ceremony.

 

[wkmac]

Her refusal to issue any marriage license coincides with the same stance taken by Christian business owners who refuse to support same sex marriages. They have to accept all forms of government sponsored marriage or none of it. Many wedding related businesses have withdrawn from the wedding industry entirely to avoid the cost of litigating their refusal to participate in a same sex wedding. I honestly can't blame them, and it's sad this is how it has to be in this country today.

You being a non smoker doesn't qualify as a religious objection, but as a personal health objection which isn't a protected status in this country(yet). Unless you can say you are a member of an avid non smoker religion your objection carries no weight.

Actually I don't equate them as equal. The private businesses are a form of voluntary action. Both parties choose voluntarily to contract or not contract with one another. Economically I think their choice was foolish to refuse service based in dogma but I defend their right of free association on the same grounds as I defend someone who chooses who and who not to let inside their home.

In the case of Kim Davis, she's acting as an agent of a compulory institution, the State, where there is no free choice or means of voluntary actions. The State creates a monopoly and then creates privileges while also creating harms that force people into submitting to gov't driven arrangements. You know, like ObamaCare!

Kim Davis is using her position of power to act in the same manner as any other jackbooted thug who manages to gain power for themselves. She works for an institution that is built on force and oppressing others for the benefit of those in privilege. She is advancing and instituting pure collectivism backed up by a religious dogma crafted from the minds of desert dwellers of 3k year ago. A dogma more and more proven to exist as a result of myth and not fact.

 

[wkmac]

Noone is asking her to perform a wedding. Just issue the damn licenses so someone with no religious objections can due the ceremony.

End the whole concept of State marriage and this whole problem disappears like a fart in the wind. Gays can marry all they want and christian preachers are under no obligation to perform the rite as gays can create their own format. But the preachers will however lose a kind of exclusivity to a customer base. Surely this has nothing to do with their continued championing of State controlled marriage!

 

[wkmac]

When conservatives speak of limited gov't (an idea I welcome) these days, it just seems to me the only thing that they want limited is anyone else in control of gov't so they can abuse the hell out of the rest of us. Collectivism is not a left party nor right party concept, it's both and equally dangerous!

Sad as I remember a limited gov't conservatism that opposed such ideas.

 

[BrownArmy]

Kim Davis is no Rosa Parks.

If she's unwilling or unable to do her job, the right thing to do would be to resign.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Maybe I should join the army then refuse to do anything based on my religious belief that killing is wrong.

 

[MrFedEx]

Just as Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat to a white man in defiance of an unjust law Kim Davis is waging her own battle against an unjust ruling in support of the mentally troubled(read homosexual) to wed. It is against Davis's religious views to support or participate in a same sex wedding, and it should be her right to refuse to have her name attached to one. Just as Muhammad Ali refused to sign up for the selective service based on religious grounds and was later vindicated for doing so, Kim Davis should be allowed to refuse to issue same sex marriage licenses under the same logic. Unfortunately she is getting no backup from the same judicial system that came up with the convoluted logic which led to this problem in the first place. I cannot say Kim Davis will win her battle, but I do respect her for her willingness to stand up for what she believes in.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...court-refuses-to-issue-gay-marriage-licenses/

She was just sentenced to jail. Hooray!! Alert, Alert!!! The USA is not a Christian theocracy. Pull your head out and realize this FACT.

You hate America. Goldwater understood you zealots perfectly. In other words, folks who think like you are dangerous.

 

[brett636]

Kim Davis is no Rosa Parks.

If she's unwilling or unable to do her job, the right thing to do would be to resign.

She is standing up against an unjust government action just like Rosa Parks, and she is going to jail for it. The parallels are astounding for both cases. Nobody should be forced to go against their religious beliefs.

 

[bottomups]

She doesn't have to go against her religious beliefs. She simply can resign her position, grab her bible and go stand in the unemployment line.
She has no right to force her religion on me or anyone else.

 

[BrownArmy]

She is standing up against an unjust government action just like Rosa Parks, and she is going to jail for it. The parallels are astounding for both cases. Nobody should be forced to go against their religious beliefs.

The parallels exist for you, but I reject your premise that homosexuality is a mental illness, or that same-sex marriage becoming legal is some sort of injustice.

We'll have to agree to disagree, once again.

 

[Jones]

What she tried to do is no different than George Wallace standing in the school house door back in 1963. Just like him she thinks she's making a stand for her beliefs but history will remember her as a symbol of ignorance and bigotry and her children will be ashamed of her.

 

[UPS4Life]

Noone is denying her right to stand up for what she believes in. All she has to do is resign her office and let someone do the job duties as required by law.

So what your saying is I should file a grievance because there are people that work for UPS with beards and they fall under the religious category when they should just resign so someone who can follow UPS' policies can behave their job?